论文部分内容阅读
现有地方政府规章对重大行政决策事项范围的规定,不仅存有差异,甚而相互冲突,加之过于原则与抽象而缺乏可操作性。其纠偏路径在于,应该在制定地方政府规章时规定行政决策涉及的资金达到政府财政收入的一个适度的具体比值,而不是直接规定行政决策涉及资金的具体数值;对基本权利的界定应以宪法文本为标准,但有必要对宪法文本中基本权利作一种体系化的诠释。所以,应按照法治的基本精神,将“重大行政决策”的具体范围限定为:当行政决策是具体行政行为时,其涉及的资金达到本级人民政府财政收入的适当比例时就是重大行政决策;当行政决策是抽象行政行为时,只要其涉及公民基本权利时就属于重大行政决策。前者从数量的角度对重大行政决策进行限定是数学理性影响下法律形式化的必然要求;后者从基本权利的角度对重大行政决策进行限定是权利作为法的基石范畴的应然要求。
The provisions of the existing local government regulations on the scope of major administrative decision-making matters are not only different but even conflicting. In addition, the principle and abstraction of the local government lacks maneuverability. The way of rectification lies in that it should stipulate that the funds involved in administrative decision-making reach an appropriate specific ratio of government revenue when formulating local government regulations instead of directly specifying the specific value of funds involved in administrative decision-making. The definition of basic rights should be based on the constitutional text As the standard, it is necessary to make a systematic interpretation of the basic rights in the constitutional texts. Therefore, in accordance with the basic spirit of the rule of law, the specific scope of “major administrative decision-making” should be limited to: when the administrative decision-making is a specific administrative act, when the funds involved reach an appropriate proportion of the fiscal revenue of the people’s government at the corresponding level, Decision-making; When the administrative decision-making is an abstract administrative act, as long as it involves the basic rights of citizens, it belongs to a major administrative decision-making. The former limited the number of major administrative decisions is the inevitable requirement of legal formalization under the influence of mathematical rationality. The latter limits the major administrative decision-making from the perspective of basic rights, which should be the natural requirement of right as the cornerstone of law.