本文選題：行政決策 + 司法監(jiān)督　； 參考：《煙臺(tái)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：行政決策作為一種普遍存在的行政行為,其涉及的群體之廣,處置的利益之大,對(duì)社會(huì)發(fā)展的影響之長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn),都決定了其不能處于法律規(guī)范監(jiān)督的灰色地帶。如何有效規(guī)范行政決策已受到黨和國家的高度關(guān)注。當(dāng)前各地政府相繼以立法的形式建立起各自的行政決策合法性審查制度,在一定程度上起到了規(guī)范行政決策的作用。但應(yīng)該看到,此類審查制度強(qiáng)調(diào)審查的內(nèi)部性,忽視了行政權(quán)力自我規(guī)制的弊端。在外部監(jiān)督上,現(xiàn)有監(jiān)督制度沒有考慮我國國家權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu)設(shè)計(jì)和權(quán)力運(yùn)作在實(shí)踐中的特點(diǎn),在無形之中弱化了外部監(jiān)督對(duì)行政決策的制約。并且,現(xiàn)有行政決策外部監(jiān)督制度大多將司法機(jī)關(guān)排除在外,或者僅僅作了簡(jiǎn)單強(qiáng)調(diào)。天然具有監(jiān)督性質(zhì)的司法機(jī)關(guān)被排除在行政決策的監(jiān)督主體范圍之外,不僅不利于全面有效的監(jiān)督行政決策,也忽視了憲法對(duì)司法機(jī)關(guān)職責(zé)的規(guī)定,與我國當(dāng)前重視加強(qiáng)司法機(jī)關(guān)地位和作用的形勢(shì)和政策相違背。本文從行政決策實(shí)施中存在的問題以及現(xiàn)有監(jiān)督體系的不足出發(fā),通過分析憲法和法律的規(guī)定,結(jié)合司法機(jī)關(guān)在監(jiān)督行政決策中的優(yōu)勢(shì),得出司法機(jī)關(guān)監(jiān)督行政決策的法律依據(jù)。在以上法律依據(jù)的基礎(chǔ)上,本文著重對(duì)司法機(jī)關(guān)如何監(jiān)督行政決策作出制度設(shè)計(jì),以期為行政決策的司法監(jiān)督提供新的路徑和參考。
[Abstract]:As a common administrative behavior, administrative decision-making involves a wide range of groups, the large interests of disposal, and the long-term impact on social development, all of which determine that administrative decision-making cannot be in the gray area where legal norms can not be supervised.How to effectively standardize the administrative decision has been highly concerned by the Party and the state.At present, local governments have established their own legitimacy examination system in the form of legislation, which to a certain extent has played a role in standardizing administrative decision-making.However, it should be seen that this kind of review system emphasizes the internality of review and ignores the malpractice of self-regulation of administrative power.In terms of external supervision, the existing supervision system does not take into account the characteristics of the design of national power structure and the operation of power in practice, and weakens the restriction of external supervision on administrative decision-making.Moreover, the existing administrative decision-making external supervision system mostly excludes the judicial organs, or only makes a simple emphasis.Naturally, the judicial organs with the nature of supervision are excluded from the scope of supervision of administrative decision-making, which is not only unfavorable to the comprehensive and effective supervision of administrative decisions, but also ignores the provisions of the Constitution on the duties of the judicial organs.Contrary to the current situation and policy of strengthening the position and role of the judiciary in our country.Starting from the problems existing in the implementation of administrative decision-making and the deficiencies of the existing supervisory system, this paper analyzes the provisions of the Constitution and the law, and combines the advantages of the judicial organs in the supervision of administrative decisions.The legal basis for judicial supervision of administrative decisions is obtained.On the basis of the above legal basis, this paper focuses on how the judicial organs supervise the administrative decision making system design, in order to provide a new path and reference for the judicial supervision of administrative decision-making.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：煙臺(tái)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10條

1 李龍;李慧敏;;政策與法律的互補(bǔ)諧變關(guān)系探析[J];理論與改革;2017年01期

2 葉必豐;;行政決策的法律表達(dá)[J];法商研究;2016年02期

3 張力;;行政法學(xué)與加快法治政府建設(shè)——中國行政法學(xué)研究會(huì)2015年年會(huì)綜述[J];行政法學(xué)研究;2016年01期

4 尹奎杰;王箭;;重大行政決策行為的性質(zhì)與認(rèn)定[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2016年01期

5 熊樟林;;重大行政決策概念證偽及其補(bǔ)正[J];中國法學(xué);2015年03期

6 袁本樸;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起行政公益訴訟芻議[J];人民檢察;2015年03期

7 劉素梅;;行政層級(jí)監(jiān)督法制化建設(shè)存在的問題及其完善路徑[J];湖北社會(huì)科學(xué);2014年12期

8 楊尚東;;行政決策合法性追問的個(gè)案解讀——以高速公路節(jié)假日免費(fèi)的行政決策為分析樣本[J];政治與法律;2013年07期

9 朱海波;;地方政府重大行政決策程序立法及其完善[J];廣東社會(huì)科學(xué);2013年04期

10 陳光中;;比較法視野下的中國特色司法獨(dú)立原則[J];比較法研究;2013年02期

，

本文編號(hào)：1748603