行政变更判决的合宪性控制——方林富案的再探析  

Constitutional Control of Administrative Change Judgment——A Further Analysis of Fang Linfu Case

作　　者：苏升 Su Sheng(School of Administrative Law,Southwest University of Political Science and Law,Chongqing 401120,China)

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学行政法学院,重庆401120

出　　处：《政法学刊》2023年第5期120-128,共9页Journal of Political Science and Law

基　　金：中国法学会2019年度部级法学研究课题“健全中国特色宪法解释程序机制研究”[CLS(2019)C03];2022年重庆市研究生科研创新项目“地方人大常委会合宪性问题筛选标准及其适用研究”(CYB22181);西南政法大学研究生科研创新项目“我国行政判决中的援宪说理实证研究”(2021-XZXS-072)。

摘　　要：行政变更判决需要接受宪法的控制。对方林富案的现有研究关注较多的是从实质正义角度论证判决的合理性,至于裁判文书本身应当如何释法说理却未受到应有的重视,因此,有必要从裁判文书的论证形式层面再次对该案进行讨论。为了实现个案正义,行政变更判决可以偏离法定处罚幅度,但这种变更判决不仅需要法官在裁判文书中提供实质理由证明判决偏离法律的正当性,还需要裁判文书引入强有力的权威理由作为形式依据。方林富案裁判文书所依据的行政处罚法原则不足以提供足够的权威分量,法官应当引入宪法有关条文作为权威理由,以合宪性续造的方式限缩处罚条款的适用范围。当然,合宪性续造的运用不能忽视权力分工原则的基本要求,法官的法律续造行为不能取代立法机关的立法行为。Administrative change judgments need to be subject to constitutional control.In order to realize the justice on a case-by-case basis,the administrative change decision can deviate from the legal penalty range,but such change decision needs not only the judge to provide substantive reasons in the decision document to justify the deviation from the law,but also needs the decision document to introduce strong authoritative reasons as the formal basis.The principle of the administrative penalty law on which Fang Linfu's decision is based is not sufficient to provide sufficient authoritative weight,so the judge should introduce the relevant provisions of the Constitution as authoritative reasons to limit the scope of application of the penalty provisions by way of constitutional renewal.Of course,the use of constitutional renewal cannot ignore the basic requirements of the principle of division of power,and the legal renewal of judges cannot replace the legislative acts of the legislature.

关 键 词：行政变更判决 营业自由 合宪性控制 法律续造 

分 类 号：DF3[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学]