实质性解决行政争议背景下纠纷解决模式的选择  

The Choice of Dispute Resolution Model in the Context of Substantive Resolution of Administrative Disputes

作　　者：张新宇 Zhang Xinyu

机构地区：[1]北京工商大学法学院

出　　处：《法商研究》2025年第2期138-152,共15页Studies in Law and Business

摘　　要：“实质性解决行政争议”包括3个维度:在判断标准上,行政争议是否已经实质性解决应当从法律维度进行判断;在适用范围上,需要实质性解决的案件仅限于“程序空转”案件;在价值目标上,除了要进行权利保护之外,还应当对类案界限加以明晰,监督行政机关。在实质性解决行政争议背景下,目前主要有合意终结模式、实体裁决模式、融合模式、灵活适用模式等纠纷解决模式,但都存在一定缺陷。应当建立以案件类型为划分标准的纠纷解决模式,对于可能存在“程序空转”问题的案件,需要结合具体情况灵活采取实体裁决或协调化解的方式解决争议,其他案件仍应主要通过依法裁决的方式处理争议。为实现实质性解决行政争议的目标,还须建立健全审前调解、合并审理等配套制度。“Substantive resolution of administrative disputes”needs to be defined from three dimensions:from the perspective of judgment criteria,whether administrative disputes have been substantially resolved should be judged from the legal dimension;from the perspective of scope of application,cases that need to be substantially resolved should be limited to“procedural idle”cases;from the perspective of value goals,substantive resolution of administrative disputes should not only protect rights,but also clarify the boundaries of similar cases and supervise administrative agencies.In the context of substantive resolution of administrative disputes,the current dispute resolution models mainly include the consensual termination model,the substantive judgement model,the integration model,the flexible application model,and other dispute resolution models.However,each of the aforementioned models has certain defects.Different dispute resolution models should be established based on the type of case.Specifically,for cases of“procedural idleness”,the disputes should be resolved flexibly through substantive adjudication or coordinated resolution in light of the specific circumstances.Other cases should still be mainly resolved through adjudication in accordance with the law.In order to achieve the goals of substantive resolution of administrative disputes,supporting measures such as pre-trial mediation and consolidated trial are also needed.

关 键 词：行政争议 实质性解决 行政诉讼 行政复议 

分 类 号：D925.3[政治法律—诉讼法学]