本文選題：突發(fā)公共事件　切入點(diǎn)：應(yīng)急決策　出處：《安徽大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：突發(fā)性公共事件的爆發(fā),往往威脅一個(gè)國(guó)家或地區(qū)的公共安全,對(duì)人民群眾的生產(chǎn)和生活秩序造成極大破壞,政府必須運(yùn)用行政緊急權(quán)力采取有效緊急措施以控制和消除突發(fā)事件。應(yīng)急決策,作為具體性的行政緊急權(quán)力,是公共應(yīng)急管理的最核心環(huán)節(jié),一般是在公共危機(jī)已經(jīng)全面爆發(fā)或者即將爆發(fā)的情況下做出的。危機(jī)越是普遍或致命,有效的應(yīng)急決策就越顯得關(guān)鍵。 應(yīng)急決策相較于常規(guī)決策具有明顯的權(quán)力集中性、擴(kuò)張性等特點(diǎn)。這些特點(diǎn)使決策主體在進(jìn)行應(yīng)急決策活動(dòng)中,不可避免地可能導(dǎo)致決策主體合法性、非程序性決策等諸多的法律問題。域外英國(guó)、美國(guó)、加拿大包括日本等發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家,在危機(jī)狀態(tài)處置中就應(yīng)急決策的法律保障從實(shí)體保障到程序保障方面都積累了較為豐富的立法經(jīng)驗(yàn),而我國(guó)《突發(fā)事件應(yīng)對(duì)法》中,沒有對(duì)突發(fā)公共事件應(yīng)急決策主體的決策資格、決策范圍、決策程序等進(jìn)行詳盡的法律規(guī)定,在應(yīng)對(duì)危機(jī)中,應(yīng)急決策主體必然會(huì)因法律保障方面的缺失而表現(xiàn)出消極應(yīng)對(duì)心理,對(duì)危機(jī)的快速有效處置形成掣肘。所以,為有效防范和控制突發(fā)公共事件對(duì)國(guó)家和社會(huì)產(chǎn)生的巨大沖擊,調(diào)整在危機(jī)狀態(tài)下國(guó)家權(quán)力之間、國(guó)家權(quán)力與公民權(quán)利之間、公民權(quán)利之間的各種關(guān)系,以有效地應(yīng)對(duì)和化解公共危機(jī),使社會(huì)秩序恢復(fù)至常態(tài),就必須對(duì)我國(guó)突發(fā)公共事件中應(yīng)急決策法律保障進(jìn)行完善。 本文主要通過例證分析法和比較分析法進(jìn)行論述。文章共分為六個(gè)部分,第一部分應(yīng)急決策的法治定位與類型劃分。通過對(duì)應(yīng)急決策的概念進(jìn)行界定,并根據(jù)應(yīng)急決策在突發(fā)事件具體處置工作中所起到的不同作用進(jìn)行分類；第二部分突發(fā)公共事件應(yīng)急決策的主要法律特征。提出應(yīng)急決策作為微觀性的行政緊急權(quán)力,涉及具體行政行為,相比常規(guī)決策具有較明顯的權(quán)力優(yōu)先性、行為擴(kuò)張性等特點(diǎn),在具體運(yùn)作中必然會(huì)涉及到諸多的法律問題,那么,第三部分突發(fā)公共事件應(yīng)急決策存在的主要問題。主要指出應(yīng)急決策在具體運(yùn)行中涉及到的諸如決策主體合法性、非程序化決策和違法決策等問題,這些問題的存在在很大程度上阻礙了突發(fā)事件的有效處置；第四部分論述應(yīng)急決策的法治保障。主要對(duì)應(yīng)急決策進(jìn)行法治保障完善遵循的原則及保障內(nèi)容進(jìn)行明確；第五部分應(yīng)急決策的域外考察與借鑒。通過考察域外應(yīng)急決策法治保障方面的規(guī)定,并與我國(guó)的相關(guān)法律規(guī)定進(jìn)行分析比較。通過具體法律制度的考察和比較,反思我國(guó)應(yīng)急決策法律保障中存在的不足,這些不足必然使在應(yīng)對(duì)突發(fā)事件的應(yīng)急決策機(jī)關(guān)因缺乏法律保障而失去其處置權(quán)威性,而導(dǎo)致不能有效防范和控制突發(fā)事件發(fā)生；第六部分我國(guó)應(yīng)急決策法律保障的措施。針對(duì)我國(guó)突發(fā)事件應(yīng)急決策法律制度中的不足,并對(duì)域外發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的相關(guān)法律制度進(jìn)行吸收借鑒,提出完善我國(guó)應(yīng)急決策法治保障的具體措施,以有效應(yīng)對(duì)我國(guó)突發(fā)公共事件的發(fā)生。
[Abstract]:The sudden public events often threaten public safety in a country or region, of the people's production and living order caused great destruction, the government must use administrative emergency powers to take effective emergency measures to control and eliminate emergency. Emergency decision, as the specific nature of the administrative emergency power, is the core link of the public emergency management, is usually made in the public crisis has full-blown or imminent situation. The crisis is more general or fatal, effective emergency decision is more crucial.
Compared with the conventional emergency decision decision has a significant concentration of power, characteristics of expansive. These characteristics make the decision-making body in emergency decision-making activities, inevitably may lead to decision-making legitimacy, many legal problems of non procedural decision. The United States, Canada outside the UK, including Japan and other developed countries, in a state of crisis the disposal in emergency decision-making legal protection from the entity security to procedural safeguards has accumulated abundant legislative experience, and China's "Emergency Response Law >, no decision subject to emergency decision decision decision procedure qualification, scope, such as detail and legal provisions, in response to the crisis emergency decision subject, because of the lack of legal protection and the performance of the negative psychological, rapid and effective disposal of crisis constraints. Therefore, in order to effectively prevent and The huge impact control of public emergencies of the state and society, between the adjustment of state power under the crisis state, between state power and civil rights, the relationship between the various rights of citizens, to deal with and resolve the public crisis effectively, make the social order back to normal, it is necessary to perfect the legal protection of public emergencies emergency decision in our country.
In this paper, the main method and comparative analyzed by examples. The article is divided into six parts, the rule of law position and types of the first part of emergency decision. Through defining the concept of emergency decision-making, and classified according to the different role of emergency decision-making plays in specific emergencies disposal work; the main legal features the second part of public emergency decision-making. Put forward emergency decision as the microcosmic of administrative emergency power, relates to the specific administrative act, compared with the conventional power priority decision has obvious characteristics, such as expansive behavior, in the specific operation involves many legal issues, then the main problems of the third part of the public emergency decision. Main points of emergency decision-making in specific operation involved in the decision-making body such as legitimacy, non programmed decision and illegal means 絳栫瓑闂,榪欎簺闂鐨勫瓨鍦ㄥ湪寰堝ぇ紼嬪害涓婇樆紕嶄簡(jiǎn)紿佸彂浜嬩歡鐨勬湁鏁堝緗紱絎洓閮ㄥ垎璁鴻堪搴旀，

本文編號(hào)：1662177