论行政公诉
|
摘要
本文是针对行政公诉问题的理论研究。文章参考英美法系和大陆法系国家的成熟理论,从宪政视角展开,以权力制衡理论、权利救济理论、权利制约权力理论为依据,结合国内目前的法律环境论证了其必要性和可行性,提出了相关具体的制度构想。正文共分为五章。
第一章首先界定了行政公诉的概念与特征,通过对公益诉讼、行政公益诉讼和行政公诉；公诉与自诉两组概念进行对比剖析,得出本文对行政公诉所下的定义,即人民检察院代表国家,针对损害国家利益和社会公共利益的违法行政行为或行政不作为,向人民法院起诉,要求法院予以审判的行政诉讼行为。
第二章论述了行政公诉的法理基础。这一部分从权力制衡理论、公民权利救济理论、国家权力制约理论三方面论证了我国建立行政公诉的法理基础。权力制衡理论强调了检察机关的法律监督权,体现了司法权对现实中日益膨胀的行政权的制约,有力弥补了个体弱小诉权与庞大行政权之间对抗的不均衡；公民权利救济理论从公民权利的角度出发,无救济则无权利,有权利必有救济。权利受侵害者都应当享有申请救济的资格,为保障起诉权,行政公诉确有必要；国家权力制约理论基于“以权制权却制不了权”,“人民群众是自身利益的最佳判断者”这两个事实提出：行政机关只是权力的行使者而并非所有者,司法制度是为了公民而设置,而不是为国家及法官设置的,公民有权通过法律监督机关提起司法审查,以此来制约行政权。
第三章介绍了国外行政公诉相关理论。尽管不同国家行政公诉制度各有其特点,但从检察制度的发展沿革来看,检察官公益代表人的定位是催生行政公诉制度产生的主要因素,所以本部分首先对检察官公益代表人作以介绍；而后分别对英美法系国家和大陆法系国家行政公诉制度的适用作以分析,列举了英国、美国、法国和德国的具体适用方式,这些做法和经验可以为我国建立和完善行政公诉制度提供借鉴和启示。
第四章主要论证建立行政公诉制度的必要性和可行性。由于现行的监督机制、现有的行政诉讼制度对于维护公益已经显示出了一定的局限性,而且行政公诉制度的确立对于减少社会资源的浪费、敦促政府部门依法行政都具有积极作用,所以建立行政公诉确有必要；对于其是否可行,本文认为我国现行刑事诉讼、刑事附带民事诉讼的开展为行政公诉奠定了制度基础、《行政诉讼法》的立法目的、基本原则以及抗诉制度为其提供了相关的法律依据、目前行政公诉相关理论也积累了一定的研究成果、近年来层出不穷的公益诉讼案件也为我国建立行政公诉奠定了现实依据,所以行政公诉制度势在必行。
第五章针对行政公诉的具体程序进行论述,包括行政公诉的诉讼前置程序、管辖、受理和立案、案件调查、证明责任的承担、诉讼费用的承担、行政公诉的撤诉、调解与和解等。行政公诉的诉讼前置程序比较具有现实意义和价值,对于防止滥诉,节约司法资源,以及利用非诉形式解决社会矛盾,促进社会和谐都具有良好的作用；行政公诉的受案范围也比较特别,主要针对与公共利益关联紧密的公共资源利益、公有财产利益以及各种环境利益等。
文章侧重论述检察院的公诉职能对于构建行政公诉制度的重要性,笔者撰写的目的在于强调司法权对行政权的制约,在行政权日益扩张的形势下,行政公诉制度的构建具有一定的现实意义。
The thesis focused on the theory of public administrative prosecution. It refer to the mature theory of common law and civil law countries, start from the constitutional perspective, based on the power balance theory, right relief theory, right restriction theory, combined with current legal environment demonstrates the necessity and feasibility of public administrative prosecution. Then put forward specific ideas. The text is divided into five chapters.
The first chapter defines the concept and characteristics of public administrative prosecution, by the comparison of commonweal litigation, administrative public interest litigation and public administrative prosecution; public prosecution and private prosecution, we can get the definition of public administrative prosecution:on behalf of the State, people's procuratorate sue to the people's court for trial on illegal administrative acts or administrative omission harming national interests or public interests.
The second chapter discusses the legal basis of public administrative prosecution by talking about the balance of powers, civil rights relief, state power constraints. The balance of powers emphasizes the legal supervision of prosecution, reflects the constraints to expansion of executive power by judicial power, effectively made up for weak right of appeal; civil rights relief theory views from the civil rights, no rights without remedies, rights come with relief. Damage of individual rights should have qualified for relief, on protection of right to appeal, public administrative prosecution is necessary; state power constraints theory is based on "one power to restrain another but is of no use", "people are the best judge of its own interests, "the two facts show that administrative authority is only the manager of power but not the owner, the judicial system is set up for citizens rather than a judge, citizens have the right to institute legal supervision by judicial review, in order to restrain executive power.
The third chapter describes the theory of foreign public administrative prosecution. Although public administrative prosecution in different countries have their own characteristics, view from history and development of the prosecution system, the main fact produce public administrative prosecution is community representative. Then discuss the application in common law countries and civil law countries, the application in England, the United States, France and Germany can improve China's Public Prosecution System.
The fourth chapter argued the necessity and feasibility of public administrative prosecution. Because of the existing monitoring mechanism, the existing administrative system has shown some limitations on the maintenance of public interest, and the establishment of public administrative prosecution can play a key role in saving resources, promoting government to administrate according to law, so the establishment of public administrative prosecution is necessary; for its feasibility, China's current criminal procedure, supplementary civil action in criminal procedure have played the institutional foundation, the legislative purpose, basic principles of "the Administrative Procedure Law, " and protest system provided Legal basis, current public administrative prosecution also accumulated a certain amount of research results, recent years'public interest litigation cases establish reality basis, so Public administrative Prosecution is imperative.
The fifth chapter discussed the specific procedures, including procedure before appeal, jurisdiction, receiving, filing, case investigation, prove responsibility, litigation expenses, withdrawal, mediation, reconciliation and other sectors. Procedure before appeal is of practical significance, for it has a good effect on the prevention of abuse complaints, saving judicial resources and the use of non-appeal form to resolve social conflicts and promote social harmony; the scope of public administrative prosecution is special for it associate closely with public resources, public property interests, and environmental benefits.
The thesis focused on the importance of Procuratorate function, the purpose of the author is to emphasize judicial constraints on executive power, in the situation of increasing expansion of executive power, public administrative prosecution system is of certain practical significance.
第一章首先界定了行政公诉的概念与特征,通过对公益诉讼、行政公益诉讼和行政公诉；公诉与自诉两组概念进行对比剖析,得出本文对行政公诉所下的定义,即人民检察院代表国家,针对损害国家利益和社会公共利益的违法行政行为或行政不作为,向人民法院起诉,要求法院予以审判的行政诉讼行为。
第二章论述了行政公诉的法理基础。这一部分从权力制衡理论、公民权利救济理论、国家权力制约理论三方面论证了我国建立行政公诉的法理基础。权力制衡理论强调了检察机关的法律监督权,体现了司法权对现实中日益膨胀的行政权的制约,有力弥补了个体弱小诉权与庞大行政权之间对抗的不均衡；公民权利救济理论从公民权利的角度出发,无救济则无权利,有权利必有救济。权利受侵害者都应当享有申请救济的资格,为保障起诉权,行政公诉确有必要；国家权力制约理论基于“以权制权却制不了权”,“人民群众是自身利益的最佳判断者”这两个事实提出：行政机关只是权力的行使者而并非所有者,司法制度是为了公民而设置,而不是为国家及法官设置的,公民有权通过法律监督机关提起司法审查,以此来制约行政权。
第三章介绍了国外行政公诉相关理论。尽管不同国家行政公诉制度各有其特点,但从检察制度的发展沿革来看,检察官公益代表人的定位是催生行政公诉制度产生的主要因素,所以本部分首先对检察官公益代表人作以介绍；而后分别对英美法系国家和大陆法系国家行政公诉制度的适用作以分析,列举了英国、美国、法国和德国的具体适用方式,这些做法和经验可以为我国建立和完善行政公诉制度提供借鉴和启示。
第四章主要论证建立行政公诉制度的必要性和可行性。由于现行的监督机制、现有的行政诉讼制度对于维护公益已经显示出了一定的局限性,而且行政公诉制度的确立对于减少社会资源的浪费、敦促政府部门依法行政都具有积极作用,所以建立行政公诉确有必要；对于其是否可行,本文认为我国现行刑事诉讼、刑事附带民事诉讼的开展为行政公诉奠定了制度基础、《行政诉讼法》的立法目的、基本原则以及抗诉制度为其提供了相关的法律依据、目前行政公诉相关理论也积累了一定的研究成果、近年来层出不穷的公益诉讼案件也为我国建立行政公诉奠定了现实依据,所以行政公诉制度势在必行。
第五章针对行政公诉的具体程序进行论述,包括行政公诉的诉讼前置程序、管辖、受理和立案、案件调查、证明责任的承担、诉讼费用的承担、行政公诉的撤诉、调解与和解等。行政公诉的诉讼前置程序比较具有现实意义和价值,对于防止滥诉,节约司法资源,以及利用非诉形式解决社会矛盾,促进社会和谐都具有良好的作用；行政公诉的受案范围也比较特别,主要针对与公共利益关联紧密的公共资源利益、公有财产利益以及各种环境利益等。
文章侧重论述检察院的公诉职能对于构建行政公诉制度的重要性,笔者撰写的目的在于强调司法权对行政权的制约,在行政权日益扩张的形势下,行政公诉制度的构建具有一定的现实意义。
The thesis focused on the theory of public administrative prosecution. It refer to the mature theory of common law and civil law countries, start from the constitutional perspective, based on the power balance theory, right relief theory, right restriction theory, combined with current legal environment demonstrates the necessity and feasibility of public administrative prosecution. Then put forward specific ideas. The text is divided into five chapters.
The first chapter defines the concept and characteristics of public administrative prosecution, by the comparison of commonweal litigation, administrative public interest litigation and public administrative prosecution; public prosecution and private prosecution, we can get the definition of public administrative prosecution:on behalf of the State, people's procuratorate sue to the people's court for trial on illegal administrative acts or administrative omission harming national interests or public interests.
The second chapter discusses the legal basis of public administrative prosecution by talking about the balance of powers, civil rights relief, state power constraints. The balance of powers emphasizes the legal supervision of prosecution, reflects the constraints to expansion of executive power by judicial power, effectively made up for weak right of appeal; civil rights relief theory views from the civil rights, no rights without remedies, rights come with relief. Damage of individual rights should have qualified for relief, on protection of right to appeal, public administrative prosecution is necessary; state power constraints theory is based on "one power to restrain another but is of no use", "people are the best judge of its own interests, "the two facts show that administrative authority is only the manager of power but not the owner, the judicial system is set up for citizens rather than a judge, citizens have the right to institute legal supervision by judicial review, in order to restrain executive power.
The third chapter describes the theory of foreign public administrative prosecution. Although public administrative prosecution in different countries have their own characteristics, view from history and development of the prosecution system, the main fact produce public administrative prosecution is community representative. Then discuss the application in common law countries and civil law countries, the application in England, the United States, France and Germany can improve China's Public Prosecution System.
The fourth chapter argued the necessity and feasibility of public administrative prosecution. Because of the existing monitoring mechanism, the existing administrative system has shown some limitations on the maintenance of public interest, and the establishment of public administrative prosecution can play a key role in saving resources, promoting government to administrate according to law, so the establishment of public administrative prosecution is necessary; for its feasibility, China's current criminal procedure, supplementary civil action in criminal procedure have played the institutional foundation, the legislative purpose, basic principles of "the Administrative Procedure Law, " and protest system provided Legal basis, current public administrative prosecution also accumulated a certain amount of research results, recent years'public interest litigation cases establish reality basis, so Public administrative Prosecution is imperative.
The fifth chapter discussed the specific procedures, including procedure before appeal, jurisdiction, receiving, filing, case investigation, prove responsibility, litigation expenses, withdrawal, mediation, reconciliation and other sectors. Procedure before appeal is of practical significance, for it has a good effect on the prevention of abuse complaints, saving judicial resources and the use of non-appeal form to resolve social conflicts and promote social harmony; the scope of public administrative prosecution is special for it associate closely with public resources, public property interests, and environmental benefits.
The thesis focused on the importance of Procuratorate function, the purpose of the author is to emphasize judicial constraints on executive power, in the situation of increasing expansion of executive power, public administrative prosecution system is of certain practical significance.
引文
1 兰石.公理与法理之战——一起原告没有主体诉讼资格的民告官案[EB/OL].:中国报道周刊,2001-5-22：
2 李娇云.对公益诉讼内涵的分析思考[J].法制与社会,2009，(9)：354.
3 蔡虹,梁远.也论行政公益诉讼[J].法学评论,2002,(3)：100.
4 台湾地区行政诉讼法第9条,北大法意网,http://www.lawyee.net/Act/Act_Other_TW_Display.asp?ChannelID=1040000&KeyWord=&RID=1183.
5 何文燕.略论检察机关民事公诉权[J].河南省政法管理干部学院学报,2005,(3)：106.
6 刘海年.人权与宪政[M].中国法制出版社,1999：192.
7 [美]博登海默.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].邓正来译,北京：中国政法大学出版社,1999：399.
8 赵正群.行政诉权在中国大陆的生成及其面临的挑战[J].诉讼法论丛,法律出版社,2001(6)772.
9 左卫民,朱桐辉.公民诉讼权：宪法与司法保障研究[J].法学,2001,(4)：3.
10 [美]博登海默.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1999：344.
11 林莉红,龚雄艳.一个神圣的字眼——监督权力的权利[J].法学评论,2001,(3)：159.
12 左卫民,朱桐辉.公民诉讼权：宪法与司法保障研究[J].法学,2001,(4)：7.
13 日本法务省刑事局.日本检察讲义[M].北京：中国检察出版社,1981：2.
14 黄东熊.中外检察制度之比较[M].台北：文物供应社,1986：13.
15 威廉·韦德.行政法[M].徐炳译,北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1997：379.
16 金明焕.比较检察官制度概论[M].北京：中国检察出版社,1993：278.
17 江伟,刘家辉.美国民事诉讼法[M].北京：法律出版社,1983：36.
18 王名扬.法国行政法[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1988：667-681.
19 胡锦光,韩大元.当代人权保障制度[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993：275.
20 韩志红,阮大强.新型诉讼—经济公益诉讼的理论与实践[M].北京：法律出版社,1999：251.
21 姜明安.行政诉讼中的检察监督与行政公益诉讼[J].法学杂志,2006,(2)：27.
22 蔡益军.维护公共利益如何启动“司法救济”[J].检察日报,2001,(3)：6.
23 左卫民,朱桐辉.公民诉讼权：宪法与司法保障研究[J].法学,2001,(4)：7.
24 吕林建.权力错位与监控[M].北京：中国方正出版社,1996：112.
25 王太高.论行政公益诉讼[J].法学研究,2002,(5)：45.
26 莫若·卡佩莱蒂.福利国家与接近正义[M].北京：法律出版社,2000：67.
27 顾培东,王莹文,郭明忠.经济诉讼理论与实践[M].成都：四川人民出版社,1988：10.
28 薛勇秀.高法公布两个行政诉讼司法解释体现保护弱者追求平等精神[J].人民法院报,2008,(1)：4.
29 江伟.证据法学[M].北京：法律出版社,1999：243.
[1](英)丹宁.法律的训诫[M].北京：法律出版社,2000.
[2][英]洛克.政府论(下篇)[M].叶启芳,瞿菊农译,北京：商务印书馆,1964.
[3](美)E·博登海默.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].邓正来译.北京：中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[4][英]威廉·韦德.行政法[M].徐炳等译,北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1997.
[5]谢佑平.检察监督与政治生态的关系及其发展方向[J].东方法学,2008,(2)：63-69.
[6]姜明安.外国行政法教程[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1998.
[7]吴光裕.积极探索公益诉讼机制[N].检察日报,2002,8(12)：27.
[8]江伟,刘家辉.美国民事诉讼法[M].北京：法律出版社,1983.
[9]吕林建.权力错位与监控[M],北京：中国方正出版社,1996.
[10]杨建顺.日本行政法通论[M].北京：中国法制出版社,1998.
[11]谢佑平.检察监督与政府权力[J].中国检察官,2009,(5)：75.
[12]颜运秋.公益诉讼理念研究[M].北京：中国检察出版社,2003.
[13]王名扬.法国行政法[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1997.
[14]应松年.行政诉讼法[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1994.
[15]谢佑平,陈奋.权力制约机理与我国检察监督的优越性[J].河北法学,2009,27(10),51-54.
[16]梁彗星.关于公益诉讼[A].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.
[17]强雨,周刚.构建我国行政公益诉讼的理论思考[J].人民司法,2002,(9)：54-57.
[18]王太高.论行政公益诉讼[J].法学研究,2002,(5).
[19]林莉红,龚雄艳.一个神圣的字眼——监督权力的权利[J].法学评论,2001,(3)：159.
[20]胡锦光,王丛虎.论行政诉讼原告资格[A].诉讼法论丛,北京：法律出版社,2000.
[21]陈云生. 宪法视野和宪政界域中的公益诉讼[J].法学研究,2006,(6)：150-151.
[22]左卫民,朱桐辉.公民诉讼权：宪法与司法保障研究[J].法学,2001,(4)：7.
[23]韩志红,阮大强.新型诉讼—经济公益诉讼的理论与实践[M].北京：法律出版社,1999.
[24]姜明安.行政诉讼中的检察监督与行政公益诉讼[J].法学杂志,2006,(2)：27.
2 李娇云.对公益诉讼内涵的分析思考[J].法制与社会,2009，(9)：354.
3 蔡虹,梁远.也论行政公益诉讼[J].法学评论,2002,(3)：100.
4 台湾地区行政诉讼法第9条,北大法意网,http://www.lawyee.net/Act/Act_Other_TW_Display.asp?ChannelID=1040000&KeyWord=&RID=1183.
5 何文燕.略论检察机关民事公诉权[J].河南省政法管理干部学院学报,2005,(3)：106.
6 刘海年.人权与宪政[M].中国法制出版社,1999：192.
7 [美]博登海默.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].邓正来译,北京：中国政法大学出版社,1999：399.
8 赵正群.行政诉权在中国大陆的生成及其面临的挑战[J].诉讼法论丛,法律出版社,2001(6)772.
9 左卫民,朱桐辉.公民诉讼权：宪法与司法保障研究[J].法学,2001,(4)：3.
10 [美]博登海默.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1999：344.
11 林莉红,龚雄艳.一个神圣的字眼——监督权力的权利[J].法学评论,2001,(3)：159.
12 左卫民,朱桐辉.公民诉讼权：宪法与司法保障研究[J].法学,2001,(4)：7.
13 日本法务省刑事局.日本检察讲义[M].北京：中国检察出版社,1981：2.
14 黄东熊.中外检察制度之比较[M].台北：文物供应社,1986：13.
15 威廉·韦德.行政法[M].徐炳译,北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1997：379.
16 金明焕.比较检察官制度概论[M].北京：中国检察出版社,1993：278.
17 江伟,刘家辉.美国民事诉讼法[M].北京：法律出版社,1983：36.
18 王名扬.法国行政法[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1988：667-681.
19 胡锦光,韩大元.当代人权保障制度[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1993：275.
20 韩志红,阮大强.新型诉讼—经济公益诉讼的理论与实践[M].北京：法律出版社,1999：251.
21 姜明安.行政诉讼中的检察监督与行政公益诉讼[J].法学杂志,2006,(2)：27.
22 蔡益军.维护公共利益如何启动“司法救济”[J].检察日报,2001,(3)：6.
23 左卫民,朱桐辉.公民诉讼权：宪法与司法保障研究[J].法学,2001,(4)：7.
24 吕林建.权力错位与监控[M].北京：中国方正出版社,1996：112.
25 王太高.论行政公益诉讼[J].法学研究,2002,(5)：45.
26 莫若·卡佩莱蒂.福利国家与接近正义[M].北京：法律出版社,2000：67.
27 顾培东,王莹文,郭明忠.经济诉讼理论与实践[M].成都：四川人民出版社,1988：10.
28 薛勇秀.高法公布两个行政诉讼司法解释体现保护弱者追求平等精神[J].人民法院报,2008,(1)：4.
29 江伟.证据法学[M].北京：法律出版社,1999：243.
[1](英)丹宁.法律的训诫[M].北京：法律出版社,2000.
[2][英]洛克.政府论(下篇)[M].叶启芳,瞿菊农译,北京：商务印书馆,1964.
[3](美)E·博登海默.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].邓正来译.北京：中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[4][英]威廉·韦德.行政法[M].徐炳等译,北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1997.
[5]谢佑平.检察监督与政治生态的关系及其发展方向[J].东方法学,2008,(2)：63-69.
[6]姜明安.外国行政法教程[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1998.
[7]吴光裕.积极探索公益诉讼机制[N].检察日报,2002,8(12)：27.
[8]江伟,刘家辉.美国民事诉讼法[M].北京：法律出版社,1983.
[9]吕林建.权力错位与监控[M],北京：中国方正出版社,1996.
[10]杨建顺.日本行政法通论[M].北京：中国法制出版社,1998.
[11]谢佑平.检察监督与政府权力[J].中国检察官,2009,(5)：75.
[12]颜运秋.公益诉讼理念研究[M].北京：中国检察出版社,2003.
[13]王名扬.法国行政法[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1997.
[14]应松年.行政诉讼法[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社,1994.
[15]谢佑平,陈奋.权力制约机理与我国检察监督的优越性[J].河北法学,2009,27(10),51-54.
[16]梁彗星.关于公益诉讼[A].北京：中国政法大学出版社,2002.
[17]强雨,周刚.构建我国行政公益诉讼的理论思考[J].人民司法,2002,(9)：54-57.
[18]王太高.论行政公益诉讼[J].法学研究,2002,(5).
[19]林莉红,龚雄艳.一个神圣的字眼——监督权力的权利[J].法学评论,2001,(3)：159.
[20]胡锦光,王丛虎.论行政诉讼原告资格[A].诉讼法论丛,北京：法律出版社,2000.
[21]陈云生. 宪法视野和宪政界域中的公益诉讼[J].法学研究,2006,(6)：150-151.
[22]左卫民,朱桐辉.公民诉讼权：宪法与司法保障研究[J].法学,2001,(4)：7.
[23]韩志红,阮大强.新型诉讼—经济公益诉讼的理论与实践[M].北京：法律出版社,1999.
[24]姜明安.行政诉讼中的检察监督与行政公益诉讼[J].法学杂志,2006,(2)：27.