行政裁量行为的合理性审查研究  

Research on the Rationality Judicial Review of the Administrative Discretion Actions

作　　者：王东伟 WA NG Dongwei(Law School,Jianghan University,Wuhan Hubei 450056,China)

机构地区：[1]江汉大学法学院,湖北武汉430056

出　　处：《北京理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2018年第6期147-152,共6页Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology：Social Sciences Edition

基　　金：湖北省教育厅人文社会科学研究青年项目"行政诉讼中行政行为的合理性审查研究"(18Q104)

摘　　要：2014年修订的《行政诉讼法》增加了行政行为"明显不当"的审查标准,与原有的"滥用职权"共同构成了对行政裁量行为的合理性审查标准。在现行审查标准体系下,"滥用职权"主要适用于审查行政机关具有主观恶性的行政行为,而"明显不当"主要适用于审查未考虑相关因素或违反一般法律原则等的行政行为。在司法实践中存在"明显不当"标准与其他审查标准混用、"明显不当"的具体判断标准难以法定化、客观化等问题。中国对行政裁量行为合理性审查制度的重构,应当在明确行政裁量行为范围的基础上,将"明显不当"的审查标准客观化、法定化,并将"滥用职权"和"明显不当"标准与其他审查标准区分开来。The Administrative Litigation Law in 2014 added provisions of the criteria of judicial review of ＂obvious inappropriateness＂, which, together with the original ＂abuse of power standard＂, constitutes the criteria of rationality review of the administrative discretion actions. Under the current review standards system ,the ＂abuse of power＂criteria is mainly applied to the review of administrative organs＇ subjective vicious actions, and the ＂obvious inappropriateness＂ standard is mainly used in the administrative actions which do not consider the relevant factors or violate the general principle of law. However, in judicial practice, there are problems such as the mixture of ＂obvious inappropriateness＂standard with other standards of examination, and the specific judgment standards of ＂obvious inappropriateness＂ are difficult to be determined and objectified, etc. When China builds the system of judicial review of administrative discretion behaviors, it should clarify the scope of the administrative discretion, stipulate the general law principles in the administrative procedure law, and distinguish the ＂abuse of power＇and ＂obvious inappropriateness＂ standards from other review standards.

关 键 词：行政裁量行为 行政合法性 行政合理性 滥用职权 合理性审查 

分 类 号：DF74[政治法律—诉讼法学]