调解在行政纠纷解决中的兴起及其中国式解读  

The Rise of Mediation in Administrative Dispute Resolution and Its Chinese Interpretation

作　　者：刘子婧 Liu Zijing

机构地区：[1]浙江大学光华法学院,浙江杭州310008

出　　处：《湖湘法学评论》2024年第4期100-113,共14页Huxiang Law Revie

摘　　要：近年来,将调解适用于行政纠纷解决的立法和实践趋势逐渐增强。与西方因解决“诉讼爆炸”而兴起的ADR运动不同,我国调解制度是一种承载多元社会治理目标的灵活治理工具,呈现从民间到官方,从民事纠纷解决领域到行政纠纷解决领域渐次扩张的演变脉络。有别于大陆法系传统的“公法—私法”二分思维范式和新公共管理浪潮下“合作国家”的理念,行政纠纷调解的兴起折射出我国“国家—社会”二元合一的独特社会治理理念。但是,行政纠纷调解并非没有界限,可以通过“概括+肯定列举+否定列举”的方式为其划定边界,将调解严格限定在法律容许的范围内,避免滥用调解导致对法定职责的规避和对公民合法诉权的剥夺。In recent years,mediation is more and more applied in administrative dispute resolution,which is evidenced by legislation activities and judicial practices.The inner logic of this phenomenon is different from the ADR movement in the West resulting from“litigation explosion”.Mediation in China is regarded as a flexible governance tool with multiple governance goals.It develops from folk to court,from civil dispute resolution to administrative dispute resolution.The rise of mediation in administrative disputes resolution triggers the reflection on the concept of governance and rule of law.It reflects Chinese unique“dualistic unity of state and social”paradigm,which is different from the traditional“public lawprivate law”paradigm in civil law system and“cooperative State”paradigm under the wave of new public management.However,applying mediation in the administrative disputes resolution is not limitless.It should be strictly limited to the scope permitted by law through the way of“general+positive listing+negative listing”,so as to avoid evasion of authority’s statutory duties and violation of citizens’legal rights.

关 键 词：调解 行政纠纷解决 实质性化解争议 社会治理 

分 类 号：D912.1[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学]