本文選題：社會系統(tǒng)理論 + 組織性法律保留　； 參考：《上海師范大學》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：我國自改革開放以來,中央政府經(jīng)歷了七次大規(guī)模的機構(gòu)改革,行政組織逐漸趨于精簡化和彈性化。在這一過程中,組織法并沒有發(fā)揮積極的作用,也沒有對行政組織的調(diào)整作出任何回應(yīng)。但學界對組織法制的研究仍停留在對“職權(quán)法定”、“組織法定”反復的政策呼吁和盲目的立法建議上。鑒于此,本文圍繞我國中央行政組織是否需要適用法律保留、行政組織領(lǐng)域法律保留的適用范圍以及相應(yīng)的規(guī)范密度如何確定這三個核心問題,對組織性法律保留原則進行深入研究,試圖構(gòu)建一個明確的組織權(quán)限分配的制度框架。本文首先以盧曼的功能分化的社會系統(tǒng)理論作為分析工具,討論了法律與行政作為兩個功能上獨立的社會次級系統(tǒng)在共同指向行政組織時所形成的一種結(jié)構(gòu)上封閉但認知上互相開放的關(guān)系。組織性法律保留原則作為法律系統(tǒng)內(nèi)的一種反思機制,觀察著立法是否怠于行使其組織權(quán)或者過度介入行政的自主決定空間。因此,適用組織性法律保留原則對于在行政組織領(lǐng)域界分法律與行政的調(diào)控范圍有著重要意義。由于組織性法律保留原則的發(fā)展并不同步于以人權(quán)保障為核心的法律保留原則,所以很難完全采用后者的適用范圍標準。本文提出,組織性法律保留原則的適用范圍標準應(yīng)包括以保障基本權(quán)利的客觀實現(xiàn)為核心的重要性理論、民主正當性原則和功能結(jié)構(gòu)取向的判斷標準三個要素�；谠撨m用范圍標準以及對域外中央行政組織法律保留范圍的經(jīng)驗借鑒,本文認為我國中央行政組織的法律保留范圍應(yīng)至少到直屬機構(gòu)一級,即國務(wù)院、部委和直屬機構(gòu)需要明確法律保留的規(guī)定。在確定法律保留的適用范圍之后,隨之而來的是規(guī)范密度問題。規(guī)范密度包括兩個層次:一是層級化法律保留體系,二是廣義的法律明確性原則。域外規(guī)范密度共有三種基本模式:隨著組織層級的遞增規(guī)范密度逐漸遞減的德國模式、規(guī)范密度始終維持在同一水平的日本經(jīng)典模式和隨著組織層級遞增規(guī)范密度也同步遞增的臺灣改革模式�；趯ξ覈姓芾眢w制以及組織法制現(xiàn)狀的考察,本文認為目前采用組織層級越高,規(guī)范密度越大的臺灣改革模式更加適合中國國情。
[Abstract]:Since the reform and opening to the outside world, the central government has experienced seven large-scale institutional reforms, and the administrative organizations tend to be streamlined and flexible. In this process, the organic law does not play an active role, nor does it respond to any changes in the administrative organization. However, the academic research on the legal system of organization is still focused on the repeated policy appeals and blind legislative suggestions on "statutory functions and powers" and "statutory organizational laws". In view of this, this article revolves around whether the central administrative organization of our country should apply the law reservation, how to determine the applicable scope of the law reservation in the administrative organization field and how to determine the corresponding normative density. This paper makes an in-depth study on the principle of organizational legal reservation and tries to construct a clear institutional framework for the allocation of organizational jurisdiction. First of all, this paper uses Luhmann's theory of social system of functional differentiation as an analytical tool. This paper discusses the relationship between law and administration as two functionally independent social sub-systems which are structurally closed but cognitively open to administrative organizations. As a reflection mechanism in the legal system, the principle of organizational legal reservation observes whether the legislation is lazy to exercise its organizational right or to intervene in the independent decision space of administration. Therefore, the application of the principle of organizational legal reservation is of great significance to the division of law and the scope of administrative regulation in the field of administrative organization. Since the development of the principle of organizational legal reservation does not synchronize with the principle of legal reservation with human rights as the core, it is difficult to adopt the standard of the scope of application of the latter completely. This paper puts forward that the criterion of the scope of application of the principle of organizational legal reservation should include three elements: the theory of importance, the principle of democratic legitimacy and the criterion of judging the orientation of functional structure, which take the objective realization of basic rights as the core. Based on the criteria of the scope of application and the experience of the legal reservation of the extraterritorial central administrative organization, this paper holds that the scope of the legal reservation of the central administrative organization of our country should be at least to the level of the directly subordinate organization, that is, the State Council. Ministries and immediate agencies need to clarify the provisions reserved by the law. After determining the scope of application of legal reservations, the problem of normative density follows. The normative density includes two levels: one is the hierarchical legal reservation system, the other is the generalized principle of legal clarity. There are three basic patterns of extraterritorial normative density: the German model of decreasing normative density at the organizational level, The canonical density is always maintained at the same level in the Japanese classical model and the Taiwan reform model in which the normative density increases simultaneously with the increase of the organizational level. Based on the investigation of the present situation of the administrative system and the organizational legal system in China, this paper holds that the higher the organizational level and the greater the normative density, the more suitable the Taiwan reform model is for China's national conditions.
【學位授予單位】：上海師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D922.1

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 V·諾依曼;婁宇;;社會國家原則與基本權(quán)利教條學[J];比較法研究;2010年01期

2 彭江;分散化的公共治理:中國大學管理改革的新走向[J];湖南師范大學教育科學學報;2005年02期

3 任進;;我國行政組織立法的健全與完善[J];法學家;1998年06期

4 梁曉儉,宮燕明;哈特法律規(guī)則說的解釋學研究[J];法學;2003年03期

5 韓大元,王貴松;中國憲法文本中“法律”的涵義[J];法學;2005年02期

6 張浪;;論行政規(guī)定中法律保留原則的遵從[J];河北法學;2009年01期

7 鄧海娟;黃利紅;;大部制改革與行政組織法的完善[J];江西社會科學;2008年07期

8 劉誠;平衡論解構(gòu)[J];上海師范大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2004年03期

9 任進;;憲法視界下的國家機構(gòu)改革與組織法完善[J];法學論壇;2012年06期

10 周佑勇;鄧小兵;;行政裁量概念的比較觀察[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2006年04期

相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前1條

1 覃明輝;試析科層制與高校組織管理的行政化[D];吉林大學;2009年

，

本文編號：2098736