本文選題：行政復(fù)議 + 不利變更禁止�。� 參考：《內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：2007年8月1日開(kāi)始實(shí)行的《行政復(fù)議法實(shí)施條例》第51條正式將不利變更禁止原則引入行政復(fù)議制度,這是我國(guó)行政復(fù)議制度的一大進(jìn)步,對(duì)于行政復(fù)議制度發(fā)揮其對(duì)行政相對(duì)人的救濟(jì)功能,具有十分重要的意義。由于不利變更禁止原則引入我國(guó)行政復(fù)議制度時(shí)間不久,沒(méi)有對(duì)該原則作較為深入的研究,一些問(wèn)題的具體適用也沒(méi)有明確規(guī)定。因此,其在確立后面臨著理論和實(shí)踐的雙重考驗(yàn),一些矛盾和沖突不斷的涌現(xiàn)出來(lái)。第一,不利變更禁止原則作為行政救濟(jì)制度的重要原則,與傳統(tǒng)的行政內(nèi)部監(jiān)督理念存在諸多沖突,復(fù)議機(jī)關(guān)只強(qiáng)調(diào)復(fù)議制度的內(nèi)部監(jiān)督功能,忽視對(duì)復(fù)議申請(qǐng)人權(quán)利的保護(hù)。第二,依法行政原則從理論上看似很有力的限制了國(guó)家公權(quán)力,可以有效保護(hù)公民的合法權(quán)利,可是在實(shí)踐中卻經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)行政復(fù)議機(jī)關(guān)確實(shí)嚴(yán)格遵照依法行政原則依法辦事了,但是行政復(fù)議申請(qǐng)人的權(quán)利卻沒(méi)有得到很好的保護(hù),反而作出了對(duì)被申請(qǐng)人更為不利的決定,這與不利變更禁止原則是存在明顯沖突的。第三,當(dāng)原行政行為處理不當(dāng)或存在瑕疵的情況下,由于禁止不利變更原則的規(guī)定,復(fù)議機(jī)關(guān)不能直接作出對(duì)復(fù)議申請(qǐng)人更為不利的決定。因此復(fù)議機(jī)關(guān)只能撤銷(xiāo)原具體行政行為,責(zé)令原行政機(jī)關(guān)重做。其處理方式與效率原則的精神相悖,不利于問(wèn)題的高效解決。第四,現(xiàn)有行政復(fù)議制度的行政化體制是阻礙不利變更禁止原則實(shí)施、發(fā)揮其應(yīng)有作用的最大障礙。單靠一個(gè)小小的不利變更禁止原則是難以彌補(bǔ)強(qiáng)大的制度缺陷的。第五,由于不利變更禁止原則缺乏具體適用規(guī)則的規(guī)定給不利變更禁止原則的實(shí)施帶來(lái)了很大困難。分析其原因在于行政復(fù)議制度理念轉(zhuǎn)變不徹底,行政復(fù)議制度功能不健全,不利變更禁止原則適用規(guī)則的立法缺失。因此,對(duì)不利變更禁止原則的完善,我們不僅要從原則本身出發(fā)完善具體的實(shí)施規(guī)則,更應(yīng)該從整個(gè)行政復(fù)議制度出發(fā),通過(guò)行政復(fù)議制度的不斷完善,建立與不利變更禁止原則配套的制度理念與體制,來(lái)切實(shí)保障該原則落到實(shí)處。第一,轉(zhuǎn)變行政復(fù)議制度理念,確立行政救濟(jì)為行政復(fù)議制度的唯一理念,把保障人權(quán)作為行政復(fù)議制度的最終目的。第二,完善行政復(fù)議制度的救濟(jì)功能,確立行政復(fù)議機(jī)關(guān)的獨(dú)立地位,加強(qiáng)行政復(fù)議程序的司法化。第三,關(guān)于行政復(fù)議制度中不利變更禁止原則具體規(guī)則的補(bǔ)充,借鑒不利變更禁止原則在訴訟領(lǐng)域具體規(guī)則的適用。
[Abstract]:Article 51 of the regulations on the implementation of the Administrative Review Law, which began to be implemented on August 1, 2007, formally introduces the principle of prohibition of adverse changes into the administrative review system, which is a great progress of the administrative review system in China. It is of great significance for the administrative reconsideration system to exert its relief function to the administrative counterpart. Because the principle of adverse change prohibition was introduced into the administrative reconsideration system of our country for a short time, the principle has not been studied in depth, and some problems have not been clearly stipulated in its application. Therefore, after its establishment, it faces the double test of theory and practice, and some contradictions and conflicts emerge constantly. First, as an important principle of administrative relief system, the principle of adverse change prohibition has many conflicts with the traditional concept of internal administrative supervision. The review organ only emphasizes the internal supervisory function of the review system and neglects the protection of the right of the applicant for reconsideration. Second, the principle of administration by law seems in theory to be very powerful in restricting the public power of the state and can effectively protect the legitimate rights of citizens. However, in practice, however, administrative reconsideration organs often act in strict accordance with the principle of administration according to law. However, the right of the applicant for administrative reconsideration has not been well protected, on the contrary, he has made a more disadvantageous decision to the respondent, which is obviously in conflict with the principle of adverse change of prohibition. Third, when the original administrative conduct is handled improperly or there are defects, due to the prohibition of adverse change principle, the review organ can not directly make a more disadvantageous decision to the applicant for reconsideration. Therefore, the review organ can only revoke the original specific administrative act and order the former administrative organ to do it again. Its handling method is contrary to the spirit of efficiency principle and is not conducive to the efficient solution of the problem. Fourthly, the administrative system of the present administrative reconsideration system is the biggest obstacle that hinders the implementation of the prohibition principle of unfavorable change and plays its due role. A small unfavorable prohibition principle alone cannot make up for a strong institutional flaw. Fifth, the unfavorable change prohibition principle has brought great difficulties to the implementation of adverse change prohibition principle because of the lack of specific applicable rules. The reasons are that the concept of administrative review system is not completely changed, the function of administrative review system is not perfect, and the legislative deficiency of unfavorable alteration of the applicable rules of prohibition principle. Therefore, for the perfection of the prohibition principle of adverse change, we should not only perfect the concrete implementation rules from the principle itself, but also proceed from the whole administrative reconsideration system and continue to perfect the administrative reconsideration system. Set up the system idea and system matching with the principle of adverse change prohibition to ensure the implementation of the principle. First, we should change the concept of administrative reconsideration system, establish administrative relief as the only idea of administrative reconsideration system, and take the protection of human rights as the ultimate goal of administrative reconsideration system. Second, perfect the relief function of administrative reconsideration system, establish the independent status of administrative reconsideration organ, and strengthen the judicature of administrative reconsideration procedure. Third, the supplement of the specific rules of the prohibition principle of adverse change in the administrative review system, and the application of the principle of the prohibition of adverse change to the specific rules in the field of litigation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D922.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 羅豪才;現(xiàn)代行政法制的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)[J];國(guó)家行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2001年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：2019367