我国行政听证制度缺陷研究
摘要
听证,目前已成为各国行政程序法一项共同的且颇具重要意义的制度。行政听证是行政机关为获得某些信息而采取的一种听取相关人陈述的活动。行政听证的价值既指行政听证制度在具体运转过程中所要实现的公正与效率的价值目标,又指人们用是否实现公正与效率的价值目标来评价和判断行政听证制度是否正当合理的价值标准。作为现代民主社会政府行使公共权力的重要程序设计,行政听证将会对整个社会的民主政治建设产生十分重要的影响。行政听证制度体系的建构和实施将最终实现行政听证的价值,而行政听证价值的实现程度如何则与行政听证制度体系是否合理紧密相关。建构合理的行政听证制度、实现行政听证目标。与西方相比,我国的行政听证制度的确立较晚,尚存在不少问题。推动我国行政听证的制度建构,将行政听证的价值追求转化为现实价值的实现,应从内外两个方面努力:一方面,要营造一个良好的民主政治氛围,为行政听证的制度建构创造良好的外部环境,这是建构和实施行政听证制度、实现行政听证价值的外在条件;另一方面,要建构一套合理的行政听证制度体系,这是实现行政听证价值的关键。
本文运用规范分析法、文献分析法等相关理论手段,从听证制度产生的必然性和合理性入手,分析我国现行听证制度存在的问题和产生的原因,探讨健全和完善我国听证制度的路径和对策。本文按照“提出问题、分析问题、解决问题”的思路,分为四个部分,文章着重提出了我国听证制度的几个方面的局限性并且探讨了完善我国听证制度的路径与措施,具体包括进一步扩大听证的适用范围;进一步扩大听证参与人的范围;建立健全听证主持人制度;确认听证笔录的效力;赋予听证会实际的决策效力;完善信息公开制度,保障听证权利的实现;健全相关的救济制度,等等。
The hearing has already become a common system of having much important meaning of administrative procedure laws of various countries at present. Administrative hearing is a process which administration department admits people to put forward their opinions and discuss about the special items before they work out decisions. The valuation of administrative hearing is not only the aim of justness and efficiency, but also the standard that people value the rationality of the administrative hearing. Administrative hearing is an important design that government exerts public rights in modern democratic sociality and will bring about tremendous changes in the democracy of the whole society. To design the rational administrative hearing system and realize the value of the administrative hearing, we must manage the contradiction of the justness and efficiency and take the fine combination of the justness and efficiency as the essential aim. Some effective measures must be adopted to improve the build of the rational administrative hearing system and realize the aim of the administrative hearing. On one hand, it should be a good democratic atmosphere that is the outside condition .On the other hand the design of the rational administrative hearing system is the key of realizing the value of the administrative hearing.
This text is standardized by analytic approach, document analytic approach ,etc. relevant theory means start with from hearing certainty and rationality that system produce to use, analyze current situation and reason of production of question these, attempt to analyze and solve breach and countermeasure of problem of these to find to analyze. This text, according to the thinking of "proposing the problem, analyzing the problem, solving the problem", is divided into four parts. The article has proposed the limitation of several respects of the system of hearing of our country emphatically. The fourth part of the article and the third part are key contents of the full text in the lump, to several question that previous part appear, this text direct against every kind of question, put forward corresponding countermeasure think, including expand the scope of application of the hearing further one by one; Range expanding the hearing and participating in people further; Establish and improve system of hearing host; Confirm the effect put down in hearing; Give the decision effect with real hearing; Perfect the open information system, ensure the realization of the hearing right; Perfect relevant relief systems, etc.
本文运用规范分析法、文献分析法等相关理论手段,从听证制度产生的必然性和合理性入手,分析我国现行听证制度存在的问题和产生的原因,探讨健全和完善我国听证制度的路径和对策。本文按照“提出问题、分析问题、解决问题”的思路,分为四个部分,文章着重提出了我国听证制度的几个方面的局限性并且探讨了完善我国听证制度的路径与措施,具体包括进一步扩大听证的适用范围;进一步扩大听证参与人的范围;建立健全听证主持人制度;确认听证笔录的效力;赋予听证会实际的决策效力;完善信息公开制度,保障听证权利的实现;健全相关的救济制度,等等。
The hearing has already become a common system of having much important meaning of administrative procedure laws of various countries at present. Administrative hearing is a process which administration department admits people to put forward their opinions and discuss about the special items before they work out decisions. The valuation of administrative hearing is not only the aim of justness and efficiency, but also the standard that people value the rationality of the administrative hearing. Administrative hearing is an important design that government exerts public rights in modern democratic sociality and will bring about tremendous changes in the democracy of the whole society. To design the rational administrative hearing system and realize the value of the administrative hearing, we must manage the contradiction of the justness and efficiency and take the fine combination of the justness and efficiency as the essential aim. Some effective measures must be adopted to improve the build of the rational administrative hearing system and realize the aim of the administrative hearing. On one hand, it should be a good democratic atmosphere that is the outside condition .On the other hand the design of the rational administrative hearing system is the key of realizing the value of the administrative hearing.
This text is standardized by analytic approach, document analytic approach ,etc. relevant theory means start with from hearing certainty and rationality that system produce to use, analyze current situation and reason of production of question these, attempt to analyze and solve breach and countermeasure of problem of these to find to analyze. This text, according to the thinking of "proposing the problem, analyzing the problem, solving the problem", is divided into four parts. The article has proposed the limitation of several respects of the system of hearing of our country emphatically. The fourth part of the article and the third part are key contents of the full text in the lump, to several question that previous part appear, this text direct against every kind of question, put forward corresponding countermeasure think, including expand the scope of application of the hearing further one by one; Range expanding the hearing and participating in people further; Establish and improve system of hearing host; Confirm the effect put down in hearing; Give the decision effect with real hearing; Perfect the open information system, ensure the realization of the hearing right; Perfect relevant relief systems, etc.
引文
[1]参见《行政处罚及司法审查大全》,中国人民公安大学出版社1996年版,第246页
[1]章剑生.行政程序法原理[M].北京.中国政法大学出版社.1994.122.
[2][35][58][59]王名扬.美国行政法[M].北京.中国法制出版社.1995.382、437、434、109.
[3][4][英]韦德著.行政法[M].徐炳等译.北京.中国大百科全书出版.1997.131、159.
[5]杨海坤、刘洋林.关于行政听证制度的讨论[J].江苏公安专科学校学报.2000(2).77
[6][8][10][12][34]王克稳.略论行政听证[J].中国法学.1996(5).27、29、29、27、28.
[7]郭曰君.论程序权利[J].郑州大学学报2000(6).19
[9][37]王锡锌.程序正义之基本要求解释.以行政程序为例[C].行政法论丛.第3卷.301.
[11]应松年.行政程序法律制度[OL].中国法律网.
[13]湛中乐.现代行政过程论[M].北京.北京大学出版社.2005.30.
[14]孙国华.法的形成与运作原理[M].北京.法律出版社.2003.27-32.
[15][台]汤德宗:行政程序法论[M].台北.台湾元照出版公司.2000.9.
[16]王名扬著.英国行政法[M].北京.中国政法大学出版社.1987.156.
[17][美]伯纳德·施瓦茨.韦德所著<行政法>第七版与英国行政法的发展[J].中外法学1977(3)
[18]吴大英.任允正.李林.比较立法制度[M].北京.群众出版社.1992.506.
[19][20]王名扬著.美国行政法[M].北京.中国法制出版.1995.384、410
[21]罗豪才.行政法论丛(第2卷)[M].北京.法律出版社.1999.96.
[22]王名扬.法国行政法[M].北京.中国政法大学出版社.1988.163.
[23][65]杨海坤.关于行政听证制度若干问题的研讨[J].江苏社会科学.1998(1).76、81.
[24][台]罗传贤.行政程序法基础理论[M].台湾.台湾五南图书出版公司.1993.229.
[25][27]刘勉义.行政听证程序价值内涵研究[J].行政法学研究.1998(1).51、47
[26]马怀德.行政程序立法研究[M].北京.法律出版社.2005.2.
[28]应松年.刘莘.行政处罚法理论与实务[M].北京.中国社会出版社.1996.144.
[29]薛刚凌.殷志诚.公听代表人制度研究[J].法商研究.2003(2).60.
[30]莫于川.公民合法权益保护优先是行政诉讼立法的重要原则[J].中国人民大学学报.2005(4).7.
[31]马怀德.行政程序立法研究[M].北京.法律出版社.2005.74.
[32]姜明安.我国行政程序立法模式选择[J].中国法学.1995(6).42-47.
[33]王周户.柯阳友.行政听证的制度的功能分析[J].甘肃政法学院学报.1997(2).
[36]应松年.行政法学新论[M].北京.中国方正出版社.2004.524.
[38]王万华.中国行政程序法立法研究[M].北京.中国法制出版社.2005.233.
[39]王名扬.美国行政法[M].北京.中国法制出版社.2005.430.
[40]张树义.行政程序法教程[M].北京.中国政法大学出版社.2005.20.
[41]刘勉义.蒋勇:行政听证程序研究与适用[M].北京.警官教育出版社.1997.119.
[42][60]杨惠基.听证程序理论与实务[M].上海.上海人民出版社.1997.59、180-181.
[43][44]胡锦光.刘飞宇.行政处罚听证程序研究[M].北京.法律出版社.2004.336.
[45]应松年.行政程序法立法研究[M].北京.中国法制出版社.2001.
[46[62]]石佑启.行政听证笔录的法律效力分析[J].法学.2004(4).51、53.
[47]杨建顺.日本行政法通论[M].北京.中国法制出版社.1998.850.
[48]马怀德.论听证程序的适用范围[J].中外法学.1998(2).10-11.
[49]Margaret Allars.Introduction to Australian Administrative Law[M].Butterworths.1990.242
[50][54]王名扬.美国行政法(上册)[M].北京.中国法制出版社.1995.424、425.
[51][53]William F.Fox Jr.Understanding Administrative Law[M].Forth Edition.LEXIS Publishing.146、251-252.
[52]杨惠基.试论听证主持人[J].行政法学研究.1998(2).57.
[55][56]王万华.行政程序法研究[M].北京.中国法制出版社.2000.86、106.
[57]姜明安.我国行政程序立法模式选择[J].中国法学.1995(6).
[61]姜明安.行政许可法条文精释与案例解析[M].北京.人民法院出版社.2003.157.
[63][美]伯纳德·施瓦茨.行政法[M].北京.群众出版社.1986.329.
[64][台]罗传贤.行政程序法基础理论[M].台湾.台湾五南图书出版公司.1990.252.
[1]章剑生.行政程序法原理[M].北京.中国政法大学出版社.1994.122.
[2][35][58][59]王名扬.美国行政法[M].北京.中国法制出版社.1995.382、437、434、109.
[3][4][英]韦德著.行政法[M].徐炳等译.北京.中国大百科全书出版.1997.131、159.
[5]杨海坤、刘洋林.关于行政听证制度的讨论[J].江苏公安专科学校学报.2000(2).77
[6][8][10][12][34]王克稳.略论行政听证[J].中国法学.1996(5).27、29、29、27、28.
[7]郭曰君.论程序权利[J].郑州大学学报2000(6).19
[9][37]王锡锌.程序正义之基本要求解释.以行政程序为例[C].行政法论丛.第3卷.301.
[11]应松年.行政程序法律制度[OL].中国法律网.
[13]湛中乐.现代行政过程论[M].北京.北京大学出版社.2005.30.
[14]孙国华.法的形成与运作原理[M].北京.法律出版社.2003.27-32.
[15][台]汤德宗:行政程序法论[M].台北.台湾元照出版公司.2000.9.
[16]王名扬著.英国行政法[M].北京.中国政法大学出版社.1987.156.
[17][美]伯纳德·施瓦茨.韦德所著<行政法>第七版与英国行政法的发展[J].中外法学1977(3)
[18]吴大英.任允正.李林.比较立法制度[M].北京.群众出版社.1992.506.
[19][20]王名扬著.美国行政法[M].北京.中国法制出版.1995.384、410
[21]罗豪才.行政法论丛(第2卷)[M].北京.法律出版社.1999.96.
[22]王名扬.法国行政法[M].北京.中国政法大学出版社.1988.163.
[23][65]杨海坤.关于行政听证制度若干问题的研讨[J].江苏社会科学.1998(1).76、81.
[24][台]罗传贤.行政程序法基础理论[M].台湾.台湾五南图书出版公司.1993.229.
[25][27]刘勉义.行政听证程序价值内涵研究[J].行政法学研究.1998(1).51、47
[26]马怀德.行政程序立法研究[M].北京.法律出版社.2005.2.
[28]应松年.刘莘.行政处罚法理论与实务[M].北京.中国社会出版社.1996.144.
[29]薛刚凌.殷志诚.公听代表人制度研究[J].法商研究.2003(2).60.
[30]莫于川.公民合法权益保护优先是行政诉讼立法的重要原则[J].中国人民大学学报.2005(4).7.
[31]马怀德.行政程序立法研究[M].北京.法律出版社.2005.74.
[32]姜明安.我国行政程序立法模式选择[J].中国法学.1995(6).42-47.
[33]王周户.柯阳友.行政听证的制度的功能分析[J].甘肃政法学院学报.1997(2).
[36]应松年.行政法学新论[M].北京.中国方正出版社.2004.524.
[38]王万华.中国行政程序法立法研究[M].北京.中国法制出版社.2005.233.
[39]王名扬.美国行政法[M].北京.中国法制出版社.2005.430.
[40]张树义.行政程序法教程[M].北京.中国政法大学出版社.2005.20.
[41]刘勉义.蒋勇:行政听证程序研究与适用[M].北京.警官教育出版社.1997.119.
[42][60]杨惠基.听证程序理论与实务[M].上海.上海人民出版社.1997.59、180-181.
[43][44]胡锦光.刘飞宇.行政处罚听证程序研究[M].北京.法律出版社.2004.336.
[45]应松年.行政程序法立法研究[M].北京.中国法制出版社.2001.
[46[62]]石佑启.行政听证笔录的法律效力分析[J].法学.2004(4).51、53.
[47]杨建顺.日本行政法通论[M].北京.中国法制出版社.1998.850.
[48]马怀德.论听证程序的适用范围[J].中外法学.1998(2).10-11.
[49]Margaret Allars.Introduction to Australian Administrative Law[M].Butterworths.1990.242
[50][54]王名扬.美国行政法(上册)[M].北京.中国法制出版社.1995.424、425.
[51][53]William F.Fox Jr.Understanding Administrative Law[M].Forth Edition.LEXIS Publishing.146、251-252.
[52]杨惠基.试论听证主持人[J].行政法学研究.1998(2).57.
[55][56]王万华.行政程序法研究[M].北京.中国法制出版社.2000.86、106.
[57]姜明安.我国行政程序立法模式选择[J].中国法学.1995(6).
[61]姜明安.行政许可法条文精释与案例解析[M].北京.人民法院出版社.2003.157.
[63][美]伯纳德·施瓦茨.行政法[M].北京.群众出版社.1986.329.
[64][台]罗传贤.行政程序法基础理论[M].台湾.台湾五南图书出版公司.1990.252.