行政不作为诉讼应对之实证研究  

An Empirical Study on Response to Litigation against Administrative Omission

作　　者：李云霖[1] 晏赛舟 

机构地区：[1]湖南科技大学法学院,湖南湘潭411201

出　　处：《江苏行政学院学报》2016年第2期130-136,共7页The Journal of Jiangsu Administration Institute

基　　金：国家社科基金(15BFX076);中国法学会部级课题(CLS(2014)C06);湖南省社科基金(15YBA143);湖南省情与决策咨询研究课题(2015BZZ169)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：从中国裁判文书网所公开的2014年1月1日至2015年4月30日判决书为基础数据来看,现实中相当一部分相对人对行政机关履行法定职责的过程或者结果不满意,认为其存在行政不作为问题并启动诉讼程序来维护自身合法权益。在不作为行政诉讼中,被告行政机关存在拒绝履行法定职责、未全面履行法定职责、迟延履行法定职责、缺乏事实和法律依据等违法情形,而审判机关对此类问题的态度和处理方法存在一定的问题。为更好地解决新形势下的行政不作为问题,一方面应当从加强监督与问责、检察机关提起行政公益诉讼等方面入手,督促行政机关全面履行法定职责;另一方面司法机关也应针对行政不作为严格审判标准、合理行使自由裁量权以及对瑕疵行政行为提出司法建议以发挥其价值导向作用。Based on the basic data collected from verdict documents from January 1, 2014 to April 30, 2015 as disclosed by China Verdict Net, in reality, a considerable number of people are unsatisfied with the process or results of due diligence on the part of administrative units, and think there exist administrative omission, so they initiate legal proceedings to protect their legitimate rights and interests. Among these litigations, the administrative units as defendants are accused of refusing to perform their statutory duties, inability to fully perform their statutory duties, delay in performing their statutory duties, and lack of factual and legal basis. The judiciary authorities also show certain problems in their attitude and methods in handling such cases. To better address the issue of administrative omission under new circumstances, firstly, it is necessary to strengthen supervision and accountability and encourage the prosecurats to file public interest litigations, so as to urge the administrative authorities to fully perform their statutory duties; secondly, it is also necessary for the judiciary authorities to exercise strict trial against administrative omission, make reasonable exercise of discretion, and give judiciary recommendations for defective administrative acts so as to exert their value-orientation role.

关 键 词：不作为行政诉讼 行政机关 实证研究 应对 

分 类 号：D925.3[政治法律—诉讼法学]