| | | WTO环境下我国行政诉讼受案范围的研究
| | 法律毕业论文下载
the study of reviewable administrative actions， or the scope of judicial review of administrative actions of the people‘s republic of china， has long time been the disputes and debates of scholars as well as law practitioners of administrative litigation law. with china’s constitutional adoption of the essential state policy of “rule of law” in 1999 and her accession to wto（world trade organization） in 2001， the study of this topic has become a more heated one and enlargement of the scope of judicial review of administrative actions seems to be urgently necessary and unavoidable in china.
beginning with the original meaning the concept “reviewable administrative actions”， or “the scope of judicial review of administrative actions”， the author of this paper has first discussed the essential value and function of administrative litigation， historical development of the scope of judicial review of administrative actions in china； then he has briefly made a comparative study of the topic with reference to its equivalents in other states， which shows that the non-reviewable administrative actions in china ， such as “abstract administrative actions”， “final administrative actions” and even “inner administrative actions” can well be reviewed since judicial supervision and review for administrative actions is only the natural conclusion of the conception of “state ruled of law”， and thus the detailed listing of “reviewable administrative actions” seems to be only unnecessary and misleading； and last but not least， the author made a detailed study of the stipulations in wto rules concerning judicial review， which require that “abstract administrative actions”， “final administrative actions” ，etc.， shall fall in the jurisdiction of judicial review.
so the improvement and enlargement of the scope of judicial review of administrative actions in china is both unavoidable and clear： to make amendments to the administrative litigation law to review “abstract administrative actions”， “final administrative actions” and “inner administrative actions”；to delete detailed listing of “reviewable administrative actions” and to establish the essential rule in administrative litigation that any administrative actions shall be judicially reviewable unless the litigation is definitely forbidden by law and harmful to the principle of rule of law. meanwhile administrative case law system can be adopted by china to clarify confusions related with the scope of judicial review. 引 言
行政诉讼受案范围，或曰“可诉行政行为”（reviewable administrative actions），是行政诉讼中突出而重要的法律毕业论文下载问题 .究其实质，乃是行政相对人在自己的法律毕业论文下载合法权益遭受行政主体侵犯、或得不到行政主体的依法保护而产生行政争议以后，能否真正得到司法救济、维护自身合法权益的关键；同时，又是行政主体的行政行为（包括行政作为和行政不作为）是否被切实有效地置于司法监督之下，从而确保行政主体依法行政、实现行政法治乃至“依法治国”目标的关键。
我国现行行政诉讼受案范围存在诸多问题，如受案范围过窄、在列举方式上对不同案件类型的划分及标准不统一等 .究其原因，乃是1989年4月4日颁布、1990年10月1日施行的《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》是当时时代和法律环境下的产物。在“民告官”还为新闻、行政诉讼尚未为人们普遍了解，思想、组织、人员、经验、理论研究等等准备都十分薄弱的情况下，行政诉讼的范围不可避免地受到一定的限制。
随着行政诉讼法实施10多年以来我国法制建设的发展、行政诉讼理论研究的深入与司法实践经验的积累，特别是“中华人民共和国实行依法治国，建设社会主义法治国家” 法治原则的确立与2001年12月11日我国正式加入wto（world trade organization，世界贸易组织）新的时代背景与法律环境，都要求我国行政诉讼的受案范围不能囿于1989年颁布的、并不十分成熟的《行政诉讼法》的樊篱之中而裹足不前。扩大行政诉讼的受案范围、保障基本人权、促进依法行政、完善社会主义民主与法治，已是理论界和法律实践部门的共识。正是如此，1999年11月24日，最高人民法院审判委员会通过的《关于执行<中华人民共和国行政诉讼法>若干问题的解释》（法释[2000]8号）第1条“公民、法人或者其他组织对具有国家行政职权的机关和组织及其工作人员的行政行为不服，依法提起诉讼的，属于人民法院行政诉讼的受案范围”当中，耐人寻味地用了“行政行为”一词，而未照搬《行政诉讼法》第二条规定的“具体行政行为”一词，恐怕并非是最高人民法院作出司法解释时用词的疏忽或不慎。上述看似疏忽与不慎的用词，恰恰折射出作为国家最高审判机关在行政诉讼受案范围问题上的扩大倾向与面对立法现实的无奈。因为根据我国目前最高审判机关的司法解释的权限，最高人民法院只有依照法律和行政法规，对适用法律法规的具体问题作出解释的权力，而不能似英美判例法系国家那样“法官造法”，更不能以司法解释权侵夺国家的立法权。因此，诚如学者指出的那样，在目前《行政诉讼法》的框架内，《若干问题的解释》无论怎么作扩大解释，都不能突破这一框架 .
|
| | |
| | | | <<<<<全文未完>>>>> 全文字数约$$$zishu$$$字 | |
| | |
| |
|
教育论文中心