|
行政复核与行政复议衔接机制探讨
|
Abstract:
《中华人民共和国行政复议法(修订草案)》第1条明确规定行政复议发挥化解行政争议的主渠道作用。在重构行政复议制度的同时,不可忽视行政复议与其他行政争议救济途径的协调。行政复核主要集中于信访事项、公务员的人事争议和事故认定等领域,是一种行政内部解决行政争议的救济途径。行政复核与行政复议联系紧密又相互区别,应明确行政复核和行政复议在行政纠纷解决机制中的功能定位。构建行政复核与行政复议衔接机制,以期发挥行政复核在行政争议的“前线”和行政复议公正的制度优势。
Article 1 of the Administrative Review Law of the People’s Republic of China (Revised draft) clearly stipulates that administrative review plays the role of the main channel for resolving administrative disputes. While reconstructing the administrative reconsideration system, the coordination between administrative reconsideration and other remedies of administrative disputes cannot be ignored. Administrative review mainly focuses on the matters of complaint reporting, civil servants’ personnel disputes and accident identification and other fields, which is a remedy way to solve administrative disputes within the administration. Administrative review and administrative review are closely related and different from each other. It is necessary to clarify the functional positioning of administrative review and administrative review in the administrative dispute settlement mechanism. Build the mechanism of administrative review and administrative review, in order to give play to the administrative review in the “front line” of administrative disputes and administrative review of justice system advantages.
[1] | 孔繁华. 作为特殊行政救济的行政复核[J]. 北方法学, 2021, 15(2): 77-88. |
[2] | 王春业. 内部行政诉讼制度的构建——以解决公务员与机关之间内部纠纷为目的[J]. 江汉论坛, 2018(10): 116-122. |
[3] | 余凌云. 道路交通事故责任认定研究[J]. 法学研究, 2016, 38(6): 126-139. |
[4] | 王万华. “化解行政争议的主渠道”定位与行政复议制度完善[J]. 法商研究, 2021, 38(5): 19-32. |
[5] | 马超. “主渠道”定位下的行政复议“司法化”反思——兼谈行政复议的改革方向[J]. 河南财经政法大学学报, 2020, 35(6): 37-45. |
[6] | 高秦伟. 行政救济中的机构独立与专业判断——美国行政法官的经验与问题[J]. 法学论坛, 2014, 29(2): 149-160. |
[7] | 章志远. 从“主渠道”到“实质性”: 行政复议解决争议功能之审视[J]. 苏州大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2021, 42(4): 95-102. |
[8] | 胡建淼. “特别权力关系”理论与中国的行政立法——以《行政诉讼法》、《国家公务员法》为例[J]. 中国法学, 2005(5): 57-65. |