【摘要】：十八屆三中全會決定指出：“緊緊圍繞使市場在資源配置中起決定作用深化經(jīng)濟體制改革，要進一步處理好政府和市場的關系，使市場在資源配置中起決定作用和更好地發(fā)揮政府的作用”。這是我國經(jīng)濟體制改革的核心，也是市場經(jīng)濟自由公平競爭的客觀要求。而作為阻礙市場經(jīng)濟自由、平等、公平、有序發(fā)展的“宿敵”——行政壟斷一直是市場規(guī)制所要解決的頑癥。實現(xiàn)對行政壟斷的有效規(guī)制一直是學術界研究的重點，也是競爭法所要解決的難點。由于行政壟斷先天的復雜性、專業(yè)性、政策性和法律性使得實現(xiàn)對其有效規(guī)制變得愈加困難。從其產(chǎn)生至今，學術界提出了各種規(guī)制理論，無論是“政治體制改革論”、“綜合治理論”還是“法律規(guī)制論”都力求使得行政壟斷能得到有效控制。但實踐證明，行政壟斷在過去的幾年里不但沒有得到有效的規(guī)制，反而變本加厲。因此，，實現(xiàn)對行政壟斷的有效控制需要尋求一種的新的規(guī)制方法，新的制度突破，那就是司法控制，利用司法救濟制度實現(xiàn)對行政壟斷的有效規(guī)制。 本文緊緊圍繞“司法權(quán)對行政壟斷的規(guī)制”，采用理論研究方法和比較分析方法，從四個部分對行政壟斷和構(gòu)建反行政壟斷司法救濟制度問題進行探討。 第一部分簡要分析行政壟斷和反行政壟斷司法救濟制度。在簡述學界對行政壟斷概念界定不同的基礎上，提出行政壟斷是行政主體（國務院除外）濫用行政權(quán)力，排除、限制競爭的一種違法行為。理解該概念實質(zhì)時需要把握兩點，一是行政壟斷實施的主體是除了國務院以外的行政主體，其與行政權(quán)力具有天然的聯(lián)系；二是行政主體實施的排除、限制競爭的違法行為更多表現(xiàn)在抽象行政行為，也就是抽象行政壟斷，這也是司法救濟制度所要規(guī)制的重點。接著，從反行政壟斷司法救濟制度的概念分析出發(fā)，剖析其法律基礎并回顧學術界和現(xiàn)行法律制度關于規(guī)制行政壟斷的相關理論制度，分析它們存在的不足，提出用“司法救濟制度制約行政壟斷”實現(xiàn)對行政壟斷的有效控制這一制度突破。 第二部分集中介紹分析域外構(gòu)建反行政壟斷司法救濟制度的實踐及啟示。分別從市場經(jīng)濟發(fā)達國家和經(jīng)濟轉(zhuǎn)型國家兩個側(cè)面來闡述域外反行政壟斷司法救濟制度構(gòu)建的實踐經(jīng)驗，提出我國在構(gòu)建反壟斷司法救濟制度時應該借鑒的理論和實踐成果。 第三部分主要論述我國構(gòu)建反行政壟斷司法救濟制度的現(xiàn)實性。該部分立足我國國情及理論實際，從構(gòu)建中面臨的問題、構(gòu)建的必要性、構(gòu)建的可行性三個方面闡釋該制度建立所要解決的主要問題及其構(gòu)建的條件基礎，提出當前構(gòu)建反行政壟斷具有現(xiàn)實的必要性和實現(xiàn)的可能性。 第四部分重點探討構(gòu)建反行政壟斷司法救濟制度的路徑。訴訟的一般邏輯過程是起訴—審理——執(zhí)行—監(jiān)督。反行政壟斷司法救濟制度的設計也必須要遵循訴訟的邏輯架構(gòu)，因此，在這一部分首先提出要明確反行政壟斷的原被告范圍及賦予其直接“司法權(quán)利”，這是救濟制度的基石。其次，要確定反行政壟斷的訴訟模式及案件的審查標準，這是法院受理及審判的前提。接著要確立案件的法院管轄和執(zhí)行監(jiān)督，這是權(quán)利實現(xiàn)的最后保障。最后要建立配套可行的公益經(jīng)濟訴訟機制和對應的國家賠償制度，以更好地實現(xiàn)權(quán)利救濟。 沒有最好的理論，只有更好制度，對行政壟斷的有效規(guī)制不是一個靜態(tài)的墨守成規(guī)，而是一個動態(tài)的與時俱進。因此，反壟斷司法救濟制度的構(gòu)建不是一勞永逸，一蹴而就的，它也是一個不斷發(fā)展完善的動態(tài)理論制度，需要學界仁人志士的上下而求索。
[Abstract]:In the third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee, the decision pointed out: "tightly around the market in the allocation of resources to play a decisive role in deepening the economic system reform, to further deal with the relationship between the government and the market, to make the market play a decisive role in the allocation of resources and to better play the role of the government." this is the core of China's economic system reform, but also the market economy. The objective requirement of the fair and fair competition of the economy is the "old enemy" which hinders the free, equal, fair and orderly development of the market economy. The administrative monopoly has always been a stubborn problem to be solved by the market regulation. The effective regulation of administrative monopoly has always been the focus of the academic research and the difficulty to be solved by the competition law. The innate complexity, professionalism, policy and legality have made it more difficult to regulate it effectively. Since its emergence, the academic circles have put forward various rules and regulations, whether it is "the theory of political system reform", "comprehensive treatment theory" or "legal regulation theory" all strive to make the administrative monopoly effective control. It is proved that the administrative monopoly has not been effectively regulated in the past few years, but it has intensified. Therefore, to realize the effective control of administrative monopoly, a new regulation method should be sought, and the new system breakthroughs, that is, judicial control, and the effective regulation of administrative monopoly by the judicial relief system.
This paper, focusing on "the regulation of judicial power to administrative monopoly", adopts the theoretical research method and comparative analysis method, and discusses the administrative monopoly and the construction of the anti administrative monopoly judicial relief system from four parts.
The first part is a brief analysis of the administrative monopoly and the anti administrative monopoly judicial relief system. On the basis of the different definition of the concept of administrative monopoly, the author puts forward that administrative monopoly is an illegal act of abusing administrative power, excluding the administrative power, excluding, and restricting competition. The main body of monopolistic implementation is the administrative subject other than the State Council, which has a natural connection with the administrative power; two is the exclusion of the administrative subject, and the illegal act restricting the competition is more manifested in the abstract administrative act, that is, the abstract administrative monopoly, which is the key point to be regulated by the judicial relief system. Then, from the anti administrative ridge. On the basis of the conceptual analysis of the system of judicial relief, it analyzes its legal basis and reviews the relevant theoretical systems of the academic circles and the current legal system on the regulation of administrative monopoly, analyzes the shortcomings of their existence, and puts forward the breakthrough of the system of effective control of administrative monopoly by "judicial relief system restricts administrative monopoly".
The second part focuses on the introduction and analysis of the practice and Enlightenment of the construction of the anti administrative monopoly judicial relief system outside the region. From the two aspects of the developed market economy and the economic transition countries, the practical experience of the construction of the judicial relief system for anti administrative monopoly is expounded respectively, and the reason that China should be used for reference in the construction of the antitrust judicial relief system is put forward. The results of the theory and practice.
The third part mainly discusses the reality of building anti administrative monopoly judicial relief system in our country. This part is based on the national conditions and theoretical reality of our country, the necessity of construction in the construction and the feasibility of construction in three aspects to explain the main questions to be solved and the basis for the construction of the system, and put forward the current construction counter. Administrative monopoly has realistic necessity and possibility.
The fourth part focuses on the path of constructing the anti administrative monopoly judicial relief system. The general logic process of the lawsuit is the prosecution trial execution supervision. The design of the anti administrative monopoly judicial relief system must also follow the logical structure of the lawsuit. Therefore, in this part, we first put forward to clear the scope of the original defendant's scope against administrative monopoly. And endow it with the direct "judicial rights", which is the cornerstone of the relief system. Secondly, it is necessary to determine the litigation mode of anti administrative monopoly and the examination standard of the case. This is the premise of the court admissibility and trial. Then, the court jurisdiction and supervision of the cases should be established, which is the final guarantee of the realization of the rights. The economic litigation mechanism and the corresponding state compensation system can better realize the right relief.
There is no best theory, only a better system, the effective regulation of administrative monopoly is not a static rule, but a dynamic pace of keeping pace with the times. Therefore, the construction of the antitrust judicial relief system is not once and for all, and it is also a dynamic and dynamic theoretical system, which needs the academic circles and people with lofty ideals. Go up and down and ask for it.
【學位授予單位】：廣東財經(jīng)大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D922.294;D925.3

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前1條

1 王仁富;;我國行政壟斷的可訴性探析[J];經(jīng)濟法論叢;2009年02期

本文編號：2143321