行政檢察建議研究
[Abstract]:Administrative procuratorial suggestion is a way for procuratorial organs to use procuratorial power to supervise administrative actions and to prevent and reduce administrative illegal acts. As a means of procuratorial supervision, administrative procuratorial suggestions can be divided into administrative procuratorial suggestions for the prevention of job-related crimes, administrative procuratorial suggestions for legal supervision and administrative procuratorial suggestions for litigation participation. The existence of administrative procuratorial suggestion system has some legitimacy. Theoretically, the theory of power restriction requires that the operation of administrative power should be balanced by other power systems, so as to prevent the unlimited expansion or abuse of administrative power in the course of operation. The theory of procuratorial supervision requires the procuratorial organ as the specialized legal supervision organ to shoulder the whole process of supervising the operation of administrative power. From the current law point of view, the constitution, the law, the judicial interpretation, the local regulations and the normative legal documents are all related to the system of administrative procuratorial proposals. There are some general regulations on the problems and flow of administrative procuratorial suggestion in the process of implementation, which indicates that the system of administrative procuratorial suggestion has legitimacy. Judging from the reality, the procuratorial organ, as a special legal supervision organ, mainly realizes the supervision of administrative law enforcement behavior through protest. This kind of supervision method is too single to satisfy the procuratorial organ's legal supervision function. Only the supervision of administrative law enforcement behavior is limited to ex post supervision, which reduces the scope of procuratorial supervision and affects the efficiency of legal supervision. Administrative procuratorial suggestion system has gone through a process of establishment, disappearance and reconstruction. After analyzing the practice of the administrative procuratorial suggestion system in recent years, it is found that the administrative procuratorial suggestion has made great achievements in the local procuratorial practice: the number of administrative procuratorial suggestions has increased year by year. The response rate of the suggested organs to the administrative procuratorial suggestions is high, which has played a positive role in standardizing the law enforcement behavior of the administrative organs, perfecting the internal policies and systems of the organs, and preventing the job-related crimes. However, as there is no unified law to standardize the administrative procuratorial proposal system, local procuratorial organs issue administrative procuratorial proposals according to the working rules formulated locally, or even according to the subjective ideas of the procuratorial staff. As a result, the proposal in the format is not standardized, supervision effect can not be guaranteed. As the legal supervision mode of the procuratorial organ, the administrative procuratorial suggestion lacks the corresponding supporting mechanism and can't form a complete supervision system with other administrative supervision methods. Therefore, to carry out the administrative procuratorial suggestion system and ensure the implementation effect of the administrative procuratorial suggestion, we must perfect the relevant laws and provide a unified and operable legal basis for the administrative procuratorial suggestion system. Standardizing the scope of application, procedure and content format of administrative procuratorial proposals, perfecting the filing system and responsibility system, establishing a supporting mechanism for administrative procuratorial proposals, organically combining administrative procuratorial supervision with other administrative supervision methods, In order to achieve the goal of standardizing administrative law enforcement.
【學(xué)位授予單位】:上海師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】:碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】:2014
【分類號】:D925.3;D926.3
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 萬毅;李小東;;權(quán)力的邊界:檢察建議的實(shí)證分析[J];東方法學(xué);2008年01期
2 鄧楚開;;實(shí)在法視野下的檢察權(quán)性質(zhì)與地位[J];法治研究;2010年07期
3 劉利寧;張俊鋒;;再審檢察建議若干問題的探索[J];檢察實(shí)踐;2005年06期
4 馬旭光;劉紅麗;;提高檢察建議預(yù)防功能的幾點(diǎn)思考[J];中國檢察官;2010年13期
5 ;檢察建議實(shí)施過程中存在的問題與對策[J];人民檢察;2008年18期
6 陳國慶;;《人民檢察院檢察建議工作規(guī)定(試行)》解讀[J];人民檢察;2010年01期
7 石少俠;論我國檢察權(quán)的性質(zhì)——定位于法律監(jiān)督權(quán)的檢察權(quán)[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;2005年03期
8 ;淺議檢察建議工作現(xiàn)狀及對策[J];天津市政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;2008年S1期
9 劉鐵流;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)檢察建議實(shí)施情況調(diào)研[J];人民檢察;2011年02期
10 王立;;檢察建議約談制度研究——以北京市朝陽區(qū)人民檢察院的實(shí)踐探索為視角[J];人民檢察;2010年19期
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 呂濤;檢察建議法制化研究[D];山東大學(xué);2010年
本文編號:2177747
本文鏈接:http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/susongfa/2177747.html