行政行为瑕疵的指正  

Correction of Administrative Acts'Defects

作　　者：梁君瑜 LIANG Jun-yu

机构地区：[1]武汉大学法学院

出　　处：《北方法学》2024年第1期125-140,共16页Northern Legal Science

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目“行政程序瑕疵的类型化及其司法审查研究”(18CFX019)的阶段性研究成果。

摘　　要：对行政行为瑕疵仅予以指正并驳回诉讼请求,已成为我国法院惯用的处理方式。实践中,指正存在被泛化适用的现象。基于对行政效率、诉讼经济的考虑,法官对违反程序的行政行为往往表现出较高的宽容度,这为行政行为程序瑕疵的指正提供了正当性基础。但可指正的程序瑕疵范围仍应限于轻微的程序不当。指正可超越诉讼请求,但不应适用于行政行为的实体瑕疵、显然错误与行政不作为。对指正的适用应首先判断实质条件,即所针对的程序瑕疵在观念上须比“程序轻微违法”更轻微,但因操作层面上的“轻微”与“更轻微”之分界线无法被划定,故达到“程序轻微违法”的程度便可转入下一步;其次判断程序条件,即行政主体必须自行实施了有意义的补正。Merely correcting defects in administrative acts and rejecting litigation claims has become a common method of handling them in Chinese courts.In practice,there is a phenomenon of generalized application of correction.Based on the consideration of administrative efficiency and litigation economy,judges often show a high degree of tolerance for administrative acts that violate procedures,which pro-vides a legitimate basis for the correction of procedural flaws in administrative acts.However,the scope of correctable procedural defects should still be limited to minor procedural irregularities.Rectification may go beyond litigation claims,but should not apply to substantive defects,manifest errors and admin-istrative omissions of administrative acts.The application of the correction should follow two steps:first,to determine the substantive conditions,that is,the procedural defect targeted must be conceptually less minor than the"minor procedural violation",but since the dividing line between"minor"and"more minor"at the operational level cannot be demarcated,reaching the level of"minor procedural violation'can be moved to the next step;Second,the procedural conditions are judged,that is,the administra-tive entity must have implemented meaningful corrections on its own.

关 键 词：行政行为瑕疵 指正 驳回诉讼请求 轻微的程序不当 有意义的补正 

分 类 号：D922.1[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学]