检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:王湘淑
机构地区:[1]贵州大学法学院,贵州 贵阳
出 处:《法学(汉斯)》2024年第3期1750-1755,共6页Open Journal of Legal Science
摘 要:在2021年1月22日第三次修订的《中华人民共和国行政处罚法》中首次增加了限制从业这一行政处罚种类,限制从业成为法定行政处罚方式,这一修订为在实践中适用限制从业提供了法律依据。该制度虽成为法定行政处罚方式,得到行政机关的广泛运用,但行政处罚法并未对限制从业的性质以及适用等具体问题作出明确的规定,从而导致了限制从业的滥用。为了保护行政相对人的合法权益,避免其遭受不应有的侵害,为在实践中合法合理适用限制从业,有必要对限制从业进行更加深入的研究。On 22 January, the third revision of the “Law of the People’s Republic of China on Administrative Punishment” 2021 for the first time added the category of administrative punishment of restricting one’s employment, making it a statutory form of administrative punishment, this revision provides a legal basis for the application of the restriction in practice. Although the system has become a statutory form of administrative punishment and is widely used by the executive branch, the Law on administrative punishment does not specify specific issues such as the nature and application of restrictions on employment, which leads to the abuse of restricted employment. In order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the private party and avoid the undeserved infringement, it is necessary to conduct more in-depth research on the restricted employment.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.13