【摘要】：行政干預(yù)司法,妨礙司法公正一直是行政訴訟中的一個(gè)“老大難”問題。自2013年1月4日起,最高人民法院發(fā)布《關(guān)于開展行政案件相對集中管轄試點(diǎn)工作的通知》》,各地積極開展對行政訴訟交叉集中管轄模式的試點(diǎn),至今為止,試點(diǎn)工作已進(jìn)行了4年有余,到目前為止,行政訴訟交叉集中管轄仍處于試點(diǎn)過程中,各地方法院試點(diǎn)的具體方案相異,全國絕大部分地方法院都沒有被選為試點(diǎn)法院,仍采用法定的地域管轄、級別管轄的行政訴訟管轄模式。一方面,各地管轄模式的不統(tǒng)一,給當(dāng)事人尋求行政司法救濟(jì)尤其是跨地區(qū)的行政司法救濟(jì)帶來困擾;另一方面,行政訴訟案件管轄制度的長期“懸而未決”,不利于司法權(quán)威的樹立和公信力的維護(hù)以及法治中國的建設(shè)。本文通過對各地試點(diǎn)法院實(shí)施的行政訴訟案件交叉集中管轄制度的特點(diǎn)進(jìn)行歸納和對比,發(fā)現(xiàn)各地方法院的試點(diǎn)可以劃分為全面試點(diǎn)和局部試點(diǎn),完全集中和相對集中,相互對應(yīng)集中模式、自我管轄集中模式以及指定管轄集中模式,總結(jié)其具體模式的特點(diǎn)及利弊,得出結(jié)論:現(xiàn)行的行政訴訟交叉集中管轄模式在一定程度上雖然消減了地方政府對司法機(jī)關(guān)的干預(yù),但仍沒有遏制住行政干預(yù)司法的源動(dòng)力,且造成了訴訟成本成倍增長以及新型行政干預(yù)司法手段的產(chǎn)生等問題。要從根本上解決司法獨(dú)立問題,完成法院人、財(cái)、物的真正獨(dú)立,應(yīng)分兩步走,第一步,實(shí)現(xiàn)行政訴訟異地交叉集中管轄;第二步,建立行政訴訟專門法院。
[Abstract]:Administrative interference in the administration of justice and obstruction of judicial justice has always been an old problem in administrative litigation. Since January 4, 2013, the Supreme people's Court has issued the Circular on the pilot work of relatively centralized jurisdiction in Administrative cases. The pilot work has been carried out for more than four years. Up to now, the cross-centralized jurisdiction of administrative proceedings is still in the process of trial, and the specific plans of the local courts are different. The vast majority of local courts in the country have not been selected as pilot courts. The administrative litigation jurisdiction mode of legal jurisdiction and level jurisdiction is still adopted. On the one hand, the disunity of jurisdiction mode in various places brings difficulties to the parties seeking administrative judicial relief, especially the administrative judicial relief across regions; on the other hand, the jurisdiction system of administrative litigation cases has been "unresolved" for a long time. It is not conducive to the establishment of judicial authority and the maintenance of public trust and the construction of China under the rule of law. By summarizing and comparing the characteristics of the cross-centralized jurisdiction system of administrative litigation cases implemented by the trial courts in various localities, this paper finds that the pilot units of the local courts can be divided into comprehensive and partial trials, complete concentration and relative concentration. This paper summarizes the characteristics, advantages and disadvantages of the corresponding centralized mode, the self-jurisdiction centralized model and the designated jurisdiction centralized mode. It is concluded that the current mode of cross-centralized jurisdiction in administrative litigation has to a certain extent reduced the local government's intervention in the judiciary, but still has not restrained the source of the administrative intervention in the judiciary. And caused the double increase of litigation cost and the emergence of new administrative intervention judicial means and so on. In order to fundamentally solve the problem of judicial independence and complete the real independence of court personnel, property and property, we should take two steps, the first step is to realize the administrative litigation in different places and centralized jurisdiction; the second step is to establish a special court of administrative litigation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣西大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.3

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 楊偉萍;行政訴訟交叉集中管轄制度研究[D];廣西大學(xué);2017年

2 付楊;論我國的行政訴訟政策[D];鄭州大學(xué);2017年

3 董曉U，

本文編號：2125722