本文選題：國兩制 + 中央與地方關(guān)系��； 參考：《河北師范大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：無論是在古代國家還是在現(xiàn)代國家,也無論是在單一制還是在聯(lián)邦制國家,中央與地方關(guān)系的處理都是國之要務(wù)。其關(guān)系的實(shí)質(zhì)是二者之間權(quán)力、責(zé)任的分配。從歷史角度看,中央與地方權(quán)力關(guān)系處理得好,經(jīng)濟(jì)社會因兩級權(quán)力分工明確、守土有責(zé)得以持續(xù)發(fā)展;處理不好,先不論經(jīng)濟(jì)有大起大落的風(fēng)險,即使是國家統(tǒng)一和社會長治久安也可能無法確保。 現(xiàn)代國家以法治的方法對政府權(quán)力進(jìn)行嚴(yán)格規(guī)訓(xùn)。中央與地方關(guān)系博弈中,兩者關(guān)系處理的法治化,也就是權(quán)力分配的法治化問題隨之顯現(xiàn)。具體而言,在行政、立法、司法等領(lǐng)域厘清中央與地方關(guān)系至關(guān)重要。上述關(guān)系的定位是否合理,必將長久制約雙方的政治活動。這在體量巨大、地區(qū)差異明顯的單一制國家中尤為迫切。中國就是這樣的地域?qū)拸V、人口眾多、資源不均的超大型單一制國家。 “一國兩制”制度,對我國處理新形勢下的中央與地方關(guān)系提供了寶貴的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。早在“回歸”之前,中央與特別行政區(qū)的權(quán)力關(guān)系就納入了法治化軌道。兩者關(guān)系的處理機(jī)制基本敲定后,相關(guān)議題的協(xié)商討論公開透明化,不因任何事、任何人而受到干擾。 首先,特別行政區(qū)握有的高度自治權(quán)力來源是明確的——權(quán)力基于中央授權(quán)而獲得。特別行政區(qū)與我國其他普通行政區(qū)在權(quán)力來源這一點(diǎn)上是一樣的,區(qū)別只在于權(quán)力種類和數(shù)量的多寡。特別行政區(qū)雖享有較大程度的自治權(quán),但其自治權(quán)力不是本身固有的,更沒有將權(quán)力讓渡給中央。這符合單一制國家的基本特征。相似的權(quán)力基礎(chǔ)成為采取不同制度的行政區(qū)之間相互參照借鑒的基礎(chǔ)。 其次,在行政權(quán)上,特別行政區(qū)“回歸”之前的行政主導(dǎo)制得以延續(xù)。特別行政區(qū)在基本法起草過程中,有人提出按西方三權(quán)分立模式搭建特區(qū)的治理框架。但這一提議最終被否決。特區(qū)政治體制最終定為“行政主導(dǎo)制”�！靶姓鲗�(dǎo)制”下的權(quán)力配置中,行政機(jī)構(gòu)享有極大的權(quán)力。行政區(qū)首腦在特區(qū)整體運(yùn)作中居于首要地位,肩負(fù)區(qū)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人和區(qū)政府首長的雙重職責(zé)。需要指出的是,香港、澳門的行政主導(dǎo)不是說行政權(quán)是無限的,而是受到多重約束的。 再次,在立法權(quán)上,特區(qū)立法機(jī)構(gòu)獨(dú)立享有法律制定權(quán)。在與憲法和基本法不發(fā)生沖突的情況下,立法機(jī)構(gòu)可以自行制定只在本行政區(qū)內(nèi)施行的法律。從“回歸”以來的若干影響深遠(yuǎn)的案例看,特區(qū)的立法權(quán)對行政權(quán)形成了強(qiáng)有力的制約。 最后,特別行政區(qū)的司法權(quán)是高度獨(dú)立的,最高司法機(jī)構(gòu)則享有終審權(quán)。在法治國家,司法機(jī)關(guān)的作用是最為特殊的。因居于中立地位,司法機(jī)關(guān)作出的判決是有公信力的。相關(guān)各方往往尋求法院定紛止?fàn)�。所有的訴訟都由法院依法進(jìn)行裁決,即便是中央和地方政府之間發(fā)生訴訟也不例外。 不能忽略的是,自兩個特別行政區(qū)在其依法治運(yùn)行的過程中時有摩擦和爭議。上述摩擦、爭議不能簡單以對錯區(qū)分,它們反映的是不同主體對“一國兩制”、基本法的理解不同。摩擦、爭議不但沒有動搖“一國兩制”的基礎(chǔ),相反卻使得中央和特區(qū)逐步摸索各自權(quán)力邊界,從而完善相應(yīng)爭議的解決機(jī)制。 “一國兩制”制度實(shí)施十幾年來的現(xiàn)實(shí)表明,法治化的手段使得中央與特區(qū)之間集權(quán)與分權(quán)相結(jié)合,這既維護(hù)中央權(quán)威又給予特區(qū)充分的自治權(quán)。區(qū)域性的憲政安排大大提升了特區(qū)的經(jīng)濟(jì)、社會、民主化發(fā)展水平。特別行政區(qū)所涉的上述權(quán)力分配格局,對全國范圍內(nèi)的中央與地方關(guān)系的處理頗具借鑒意義。
[Abstract]:Whether in ancient countries or in modern countries , the processing of central and local relations is the priority of the State . The essence of the relationship is the distribution of power and responsibility . From the historical perspective , the relationship between the central and local authorities is well handled , and the economic and social relations are well handled in a two - level division of power .


With the rule of law , the modern state strictly regulates the government ' s power . In the game of central and local relations , the law of the relationship between the two countries is very important . In particular , it is very urgent to clarify the relationship between the central and the local relations in the fields of administration , legislation , justice and so on .


The system of " one country , two systems " has provided valuable experience to the central and local relations under the new situation . Before the " return " , the power relations between the central and the special administrative regions have been incorporated into the law governing track . After the processing mechanism of the two relations is basically finalized , the consultation discussion on the related topics is open and transparent , and no one is disturbed by any matter .


First of all , the source of the high degree of autonomy of the Special Administrative Region is clear : the power is obtained based on the central authority . The special administrative region is the same as that of other ordinary administrative regions of our country in the power source . The difference lies only in the number of powers and the quantity of power . The special administrative region enjoys a greater degree of autonomy , but its autonomy is not inherent in itself , and it does not transfer power to the center . This is in line with the basic characteristics of the single country . The similar power base becomes the basis for reference for reference between the administrative regions of different systems .


Secondly , in the administrative right , the administrative control system before the " return " of the Special Administrative Region is extended . In the process of the drafting of the Basic Law , the Special Administrative Region has proposed the establishment of the governance framework of the Special Administrative Region according to the three separate modes of Western powers . However , this proposal is ultimately rejected . The political system of the HKSAR is ultimately the " administrative dominant system " . The administrative authority of the SAR in the whole operation of the Special Administrative Region is a dual duty of the head of the district and the government . It should be noted that the administration of Hong Kong and Macao is not to say that the administrative right is unlimited , but is subject to multiple constraints .


Thirdly , in the absence of a conflict between the Constitution and the Basic Law , the legislature may enact legislation that is only in force in the region . In the case of a number of far - reaching cases since the " return " , the legislative power of the HKSAR has a strong constraint on the executive power .


Finally , the judicial power of the Special Administrative Region is highly independent and the supreme judicial body has the ultimate right . In the country of law of law , the role of the judiciary is the most special . In the country of the rule of law , the judiciary has the most special role .


It is not easy to ignore that there are friction and dispute between the two Special Administrative Regions when they run in accordance with the law . The above - mentioned friction and disputes cannot simply be distinguished by mistake . They reflect the different understanding of the basic law of " one country , two systems " and the basic law . However , the dispute not only does not shake the foundation of " one country , two systems " , but instead makes the central and special zones gradually grope the respective power boundary so as to perfect the settlement mechanism of the corresponding dispute .


The practice of " one country , two systems " system has shown that the means of legalization combine the centralization and decentralization between the central authority and the special zone , which not only maintains the central authority but also gives the special zone full autonomy . The regional constitutional arrangement greatly improves the economic , social and democratic development level of the SAR . The above - mentioned power distribution pattern in the special administrative region has great significance for the treatment of the central and local relations within the country .

【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D920.0

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王小能;劉德恒;;中國內(nèi)地與香港兩法域私法沖突與應(yīng)對[J];北大法律評論;2000年02期

2 廖中武;;當(dāng)前兩岸政治困局的理論闡釋——從“球體國家理論”的基本內(nèi)涵說起[J];重慶社會主義學(xué)院學(xué)報;2010年02期

3 肖蔚云;關(guān)于香港特別行政區(qū)基本法的幾個問題[J];法學(xué)雜志;2005年02期

4 程潔;;中央管治權(quán)與特區(qū)高度自治——以基本法規(guī)定的授權(quán)關(guān)系為框架[J];法學(xué);2007年08期

5 許崇德;;“一國兩制”是我國的基本政治制度[J];法學(xué);2008年12期

6 程潔;;香港憲制發(fā)展與行政主導(dǎo)體制[J];法學(xué);2009年01期

7 焦洪昌;;香港基本法解釋沖突之原因分析——以居港權(quán)系列案件的討論為例[J];廣東社會科學(xué);2008年03期

8 孫代堯;;“一國兩制”之“澳門模式”芻議[J];廣東社會科學(xué);2009年04期

9 楊允中;;論澳門特區(qū)憲政發(fā)展與“一國兩制”成功實(shí)踐[J];廣東社會科學(xué);2009年06期

10 李研;;香港與內(nèi)地法律文化沖突之我見[J];廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué)學(xué)報;2008年04期

，

本文編號：1866807