本文選題：行政不作為 + 可訴性��； 參考：《安徽大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：行政不作為是各國(guó)政府在行使行政職能過(guò)程中的痼疾,也是行政法學(xué)理論和實(shí)踐中歷久彌新的課題。2015年最高人民法院發(fā)布了《人民法院關(guān)于行政不作為十大案例》,并附有基本案情、裁判結(jié)果和典型意義。此外,2016年10月,中國(guó)行政法學(xué)研究會(huì)2016年年會(huì)就以"行政法重點(diǎn)問(wèn)題:行政不作為、市場(chǎng)監(jiān)督、行政檢察監(jiān)督"為主題,與會(huì)的全國(guó)行政法學(xué)專家、學(xué)者進(jìn)行了廣泛而深入的交流探討,可見(jiàn)其重要性與受到的關(guān)注度。但是與行政作為的研究深度相比,行政不作為范圍廣泛、形態(tài)各異,行政不作為研究還存在大量的空白,無(wú)論在理論或者實(shí)務(wù)中,仍然有許多復(fù)雜的問(wèn)題有待研究和解決。關(guān)于行政不作為的研究,學(xué)者們從不同角度進(jìn)行了分析和探討。有學(xué)者從利益的角度進(jìn)行類型化研究,將行政不作為分為侵犯公共利益的不作為與侵犯?jìng)�(gè)人利益的不作為。有學(xué)者以教育行政領(lǐng)域?yàn)檠芯繉?duì)象,對(duì)抽象行政行為的行政不作為進(jìn)行了研究。亦有學(xué)者從實(shí)證分析的角度,通過(guò)研究中國(guó)裁判文書(shū)網(wǎng)上的行政不作為訴訟裁判文書(shū),分析行政不作為現(xiàn)狀并提出應(yīng)對(duì)建議。治理行政不作為有許多角度,其中司法救濟(jì)無(wú)疑將發(fā)揮關(guān)鍵作用。本文以2017年《人民法院報(bào)》上的一則行政不作為案例為切入點(diǎn),對(duì)行政不作為的司法救濟(jì)進(jìn)行研究,分析原告起訴難、行政不作為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)難以界定,通過(guò)訴訟途徑難以獲得救濟(jì)等行為不作為案件進(jìn)入司法程序?qū)で缶葷?jì)難的原因,從多個(gè)方面探討了完善我國(guó)行政不作為司法救濟(jì)的路徑。文章首先論述了行政不作為的界定,我國(guó)的司法實(shí)踐現(xiàn)狀和行政不作為的判斷要件,以及如何完善我國(guó)行政不作為的司法救濟(jì)。但基于上述分析,界定和治理行政不作為違法行為具有特殊的復(fù)雜性,僅靠法律標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和法律手段很難徹底解決行政不作為違法的問(wèn)題,畢竟有大量的涉及行政不作為的問(wèn)題尚難在現(xiàn)實(shí)中通過(guò)行政訴訟和行政復(fù)議的渠道進(jìn)行處理。
[Abstract]:Administrative omission is the chronic disease of governments in the process of exercising their administrative functions. In 2015, the Supreme people's Court issued "Ten cases of Administrative omission by the people's Court", with the basic case, the result of the judgment and the typical significance. In addition, in October 2016, the annual meeting of the China Association of Administrative Law (CCAL), on the theme of "key issues of administrative law: administrative omission, market supervision, administrative procuratorial supervision", was attended by national administrative law experts. Scholars have carried out extensive and in-depth communication, which shows its importance and attention. However, compared with the depth of administrative action, administrative omission has a wide range of different forms. There are still a lot of gaps in the study of administrative omission, whether in theory or practice, there are still many complex problems to be studied and solved. Scholars have analyzed and discussed the administrative omission from different angles. From the angle of interest, some scholars have classified the administrative omission into the omission of violating the public interest and the omission of infringing the individual interest. Some scholars have studied the administrative omission of abstract administrative act. From the perspective of empirical analysis, some scholars analyze the current situation of administrative omission and put forward some suggestions by studying the administrative omission documents on the Chinese judgment documents. There are many angles to manage administrative omission, among which judicial remedy will undoubtedly play a key role. Based on a case of administrative omission reported by the people's Court in 2017, this paper studies the judicial remedy of administrative omission, analyzes the plaintiff's difficulty in suing, and the criterion of administrative omission is difficult to define. The reasons why it is difficult to obtain relief through litigation and other behavior omission cases entering the judicial procedure are discussed in this paper, and the way to perfect the judicial remedy of administrative omission in China is discussed from many aspects. The article first discusses the definition of administrative omission, the current situation of judicial practice and the judgment elements of administrative omission, and how to perfect the judicial relief of administrative omission. However, based on the above analysis, defining and managing the illegal acts of administrative omission is of special complexity. It is very difficult to solve the problem of illegal administrative omission by legal standards and legal means alone. After all, a large number of problems involving administrative omission are still difficult to deal with through administrative litigation and administrative reconsideration channels in reality.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D922.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 葉必豐;行政行為的分類:概念重構(gòu)抑或正本清源[J];政法論壇;2005年05期

2 吳偕林;關(guān)于不作為行政行為與不作為行政案件范圍的思考[J];行政法學(xué)研究;1995年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1775028