如何监督监督者--兼谈对监察委员会的诉讼监督问题  

How to Supervise Supervisor?——A Question about Litigation Supervision to Supervisory Committee

作　　者：王锴[1] 王心阳 

机构地区：[1]北京航空航天大学法学院,教授博士生导师北京100191 [2]北京航空大学法学院

出　　处：《浙江社会科学》2017年第8期14-22,共9页Zhejiang Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社科基金青年项目《我国宪法总纲条款的规范属性与实施机制研究》(12CFX016)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：监察委员会的权限包括针对违纪和职务违法行为的监察权以及针对职务犯罪行为的侦查、移送起诉权两种。前者带有行政权的性质,可以纳入行政诉讼的受案范围;后者带有刑事司法权的性质,无法对其提起行政诉讼。公职人员对监察委员会提起行政诉讼的理论难题在于特别权力关系理论,但该理论在国内外都有消解的迹象,无法继续作为排除对监察行为进行行政诉讼的理由。同时,我国过去的司法实践中,存在136个以行政监察机关为被告且法院受理的行政诉讼案件,98.5%的案件是公民为了维护自己的控告检举权和知情权对行政监察机关提起的。此次的监察体制改革如果排除对监察委员会提起行政诉讼的可能,将导致改革对公民权利救济更为不利的后果。The powers of Supervisory Committee include two kinds of supervision and the transfer of the right of prosecution against crimes of official duty. The former is with the nature of administrative power and can be included in the scope of administrative litigation; the latter has the nature of criminal jurisdiction and cannot bring an administrative lawsuit against it. The theoretical problem of public officials in administrative litigation against Supervisory Committee is special power relation theory, but this theory has signs of withering away at home and abroad, so is unable to as a reason against administrative litigation against Supervisory Committee. At the same time, the judicial practice of our country in the past, there are 136 cases of administrative supervisory organs as defendants, in 98.5% cases of which the courts accept that citizens have accusing rights against administrative supervisory organs. This reform of supervision system, if excluding the possibility of administrative proceedings against Supervisory Committee, will lead to a consequence of citizens' rights worse than before the reform.

关 键 词：诉讼监督 行政诉讼 监察权 特别权力关系 内部行政行为 

分 类 号：D922.1[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学]