论文部分内容阅读
本文以行政诉讼法修改中更好体现理论成果,完善现有立法技术为初衷,以行政诉讼受案范围立法技术为研究对象,认为应当从两方面把握其内涵:宏观上在法律体系中何种效力等级的规范性法律文件中规定受案范围,不同效力等级的法律的规定区别、衔接以及逻辑起点的选择;微观上法律条文本身逻辑体系(以何为受案范围确立的基本范畴)、表述方式(肯定式还是否定式)的甄别使用。在比较和分析了域外行政诉讼受案范围立法技术的前提下,认为我国行政诉讼的受案范围立法技术应当从两个方面完善:宏观上首先在宪法中明确司法机关对行政行为的审查权,明确司法是行政争议最终解决途径(最终裁决权),以确认和保障相对人诉权为逻辑前提,在不同效力层级之法律规范性文件中分别确立;微观上应以行政争议为基本范畴,在宪法、行政诉讼法以及其他法律中甄别使用肯定式和否定式。
This article takes administrative law revision of law to better reflect the theoretical results, improve the existing legislative technology as the original intention, take the legislative technology of the scope of administrative litigation as the object of study, and holds that the connotation should be grasped from two aspects: what is macroscopic in legal system The normative legal documents of the validity level stipulate the differences between the scope of acceptance and the law of different levels of effectiveness, the connection and the choice of logical starting point; the logic system of the legal provisions at the micro level (the basic category for establishing the scope of the case) Way (positive or negative) screening use. Under the premise of comparing and analyzing the legislative technology of the administrative litigation scope of extraterritorial jurisdiction, it is considered that the legislative technology should be perfected in two aspects: First, in the macroeconomic, it is necessary to clarify the judicial power of the judiciary in examining the administrative act, Clarifying that justice is the ultimate solution to administrative disputes (the final arbitration power) is based on the logical premise of confirming and safeguarding the right of relative persons to be established in legal normative documents at different levels of effectiveness. At the micro level, administrative disputes should be regarded as the basic category, , Administrative litigation law and other laws to use positive and negative screening.