【摘要】：證據(jù)制度是訴訟制度的核心,沒有證據(jù)支持的訴訟都是無根之木,無源之水。在證據(jù)制度中,舉證責(zé)任制度又居于核心地位,可以說所有的證據(jù)規(guī)則均是圍繞著舉證責(zé)任展開的。為了凸顯舉證責(zé)任在訴訟中的重要地位,有學(xué)者形象地將舉證責(zé)任稱為訴訟的脊柱。1989年我國《行政訴訟法》首次提出了“舉證責(zé)任”這一概念。遺憾的是,只規(guī)定了行政訴訟中被告負(fù)舉證責(zé)任,對(duì)原告負(fù)舉證責(zé)任并沒有規(guī)定。由于法律上對(duì)原告承擔(dān)舉證責(zé)任有關(guān)規(guī)定的缺失,導(dǎo)致在理論界和實(shí)務(wù)界對(duì)原告舉證責(zé)任的承擔(dān)并沒有引起足夠重視,這給行政司法實(shí)踐的發(fā)展帶來了困擾,在一定程度上阻礙了行政訴訟發(fā)展的步伐。為了滿足司法實(shí)踐發(fā)展的需要,1999年通過的《最高人民法院關(guān)于執(zhí)行中華人民共和國行政訴訟法若干問題的解釋》(下文簡稱,《若干解釋》),第一次明確提出了“原告舉證責(zé)任”的概念,并對(duì)原告承擔(dān)舉證責(zé)任有所規(guī)定。2002年通過的《最高人民法院關(guān)于行政訴訟證據(jù)若干問題的規(guī)定》(下文簡稱《證據(jù)規(guī)定》)進(jìn)一步細(xì)化了原告舉證責(zé)任的承擔(dān)。此外,新《行政訴訟法》也對(duì)原告承擔(dān)舉證責(zé)任進(jìn)行了規(guī)定。可見,原告在行政訴訟中承擔(dān)舉證責(zé)任是不容忽視的。為了更好地研究我國行政訴訟原告舉證責(zé)任制度,是需要對(duì)原告承擔(dān)舉證責(zé)任的理論基礎(chǔ)有所了解,認(rèn)識(shí)到原告在行政訴訟中承擔(dān)舉證責(zé)任的必要性,促使原告在請(qǐng)求法院受理其訴訟階段以及具體類型案件中承擔(dān)應(yīng)當(dāng)承擔(dān)的舉證責(zé)任,以便更好地實(shí)現(xiàn)原告通過訴訟途徑維護(hù)自己合法權(quán)益的目的。此外,也需要從思想上加強(qiáng)對(duì)原告舉證責(zé)任的認(rèn)識(shí),立法上加強(qiáng)對(duì)原告舉證責(zé)任的保障,在實(shí)踐上加強(qiáng)對(duì)原告舉證責(zé)任的宣傳和指引。
[Abstract]:Evidence system is the core of litigation system. In the system of evidence, the system of burden of proof occupies the core position, it can be said that all the rules of evidence revolve around the burden of proof. In order to highlight the important position of burden of proof in litigation, some scholars vividly refer to the burden of proof as the backbone of litigation. In 1989, the concept of "burden of proof" was put forward for the first time in our country's Administrative Litigation Law. Unfortunately, the burden of proof for the defendant in administrative proceedings is not the burden of proof for the plaintiff. Due to the lack of legal provisions on the burden of proof for the plaintiff, the assumption of the burden of proof for the plaintiff has not attracted sufficient attention in the theoretical and practical circles, which has troubled the development of the administrative judicial practice. To some extent, it hinders the development of administrative litigation. In order to meet the needs of the development of judicial practice, the Supreme people's Court's interpretation on the implementation of the Administrative procedure Law of the people's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "some interpretations") was adopted in 1999. For the first time, the concept of "burden of proof for the plaintiff" was explicitly put forward, The provisions of the Supreme people's Court on the evidence of Administrative Litigation passed in 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the provisions of evidence") further refine the burden of proof for the plaintiff. In addition, the new Administrative procedure Law also provides for the plaintiff to bear the burden of proof. Visible, the plaintiff in the administrative proceedings bear the burden of proof is not to be ignored. In order to better study the system of burden of proof of plaintiff in administrative litigation in our country, it is necessary to understand the theoretical basis of the burden of proof for plaintiff, and realize the necessity for plaintiff to bear the burden of proof in administrative litigation. It urges the plaintiff to bear the burden of proof in requesting the court to accept its litigation stage and specific types of cases, so as to better realize the purpose of the plaintiff to safeguard his legitimate rights and interests through the way of litigation. In addition, we also need to strengthen the understanding of the burden of proof of the plaintiff, strengthen the protection of the burden of proof for the plaintiff in legislation, and strengthen the publicity and guidance on the burden of proof of the plaintiff in practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：鄭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 鄧剛宏;;行政訴訟舉證責(zé)任分配的邏輯及其制度構(gòu)建[J];政治與法律;2017年03期

2 張栩;;行政訴訟舉證責(zé)任制度的問題與完善[J];法制博覽;2017年03期

3 陳珊珊;;論行政訴訟中原被告的舉證責(zé)任[J];法制與社會(huì);2016年29期

4 薛莉;;論行政訴訟法原告的舉證責(zé)任[J];法制博覽;2016年17期

5 張步洪;;行政訴訟舉證規(guī)則的體系解釋[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2015年04期

6 劉新娟;;行政訴訟舉證責(zé)任分配問題分析[J];法制與社會(huì);2014年07期

7 徐學(xué)東;;論我國行政訴訟舉證責(zé)任的特點(diǎn)[J];四川行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年05期

8 董晶晶;;試論行政訴訟中的駁回起訴[J];內(nèi)蒙古電大學(xué)刊;2008年09期

9 高新華;葉建東;;論強(qiáng)化行政訴訟原告的舉證地位[J];河北科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年04期

10 蔡小雪;;行政訴訟原告承擔(dān)舉證責(zé)任的范圍[J];人民司法;2005年11期

，

本文編號(hào)：2379432