论文部分内容阅读
黑格尔早在1830年时便指出:“在我们当下的时代,一个重要的转捩就是,人们不再牵强附会的盲从和迷信权威,他们凭借自身的理性,独立的确信及肯认投身于各自的事业当中去。”这一恒亘岁月的理性洞见将引导本文的第一章——理由说明义务的历史沿革及概念明晰。论文的第二章着重讨论德国及中国现行法律中有关理由说明义务的实体规范。德国法方面最重要的规定出自《德国联邦行政程序法》第39条第一款:“书面或由书面证实的行政行为须以书面说明理由。其中必须说明行政机关在作出决定时所考虑的重要事实和法律基础。属于裁量决定,应说明行政机关行使其裁量权时依据的出发点。”在中国,该原则的落实散见于1989年《示威游行法》第9条第二款,1996年《行政处罚法》第31条,41条,2003年《行政许可法》第38条第二款,及2008年10月1日起开始实施的《湖南省行政程序规定》第78条,为行政行为的做出应当遵循的理由说明义务提供了法律依据。在国家行为的作出时,尤其是本文的研究对象——行政行为决定作出时,理由说明的贯彻将带来“被说服的服从(berzeugten Gehorsam)”;同时该原则将有助于行政当局作出理性的决议,并为上级机关的监督提供可能和便利。它防止了行政当局的臆断专行;它保障了公民在遭遇一个行政行为,尤其是负担性的行政行为时的知情权,并采用恰切有效的法律救济方式来主张权利。这以上内容即本文的第三章——理由说明义务的功能。鉴于行政实践中复杂多样的个案情形,以及对行政自由裁量权的尊重,德国司法界及学界在划定理由说明的内容及细密程度上的共识将成为本文的第四章和第五章即该原则在日常行政实践中应注意的几个方面及司法个案审查的范围。出于对程序经济的考量,德国的立法者通过《德国联邦行政程序法》第39条第2款、第45条第1款的第2项、第46条,及《行政法院组织法》第44条修正案对行政当局违反该原则的后果进行了规制和限制,学界一片哗然。认为这些规定无疑为行政机关无视该义务提供了托词,而公民的程序权利也将因此被大大弱化,甚至被架空。这是本文的第六章,理由说明义务瑕疵的补正。
As early as 1830, Hegel pointed out: “In our present era, one of the important transitions is that people no longer obsess over blind obedience and superstition authority. They rely on their own rationality, independence and conviction to commit themselves In their own careers. ”“ This permanent intellectual insight will guide the first chapter of this article - justification for the historical evolution and conceptual clarity of obligations. The second chapter of the dissertation focuses on the substantive norms of the obligation of explanation in the current laws of Germany and China. The most important German law provisions come from the first paragraph of Article 39 of the German Federal Administrative Procedure Act: ”Any written or written confirmation of an administrative act shall be justified in writing, which must state what the administrative organ is taking into account in making the decision Important facts and legal basis.It belongs to the discretionary decision and should indicate the starting point on which the executive organ exercises its discretion. “In China, the implementation of this principle is found in Article 9, paragraph 2, of the 1989 Demonstration Paragraphs Act, Article 31 and Article 41 of the Law on Administrative Penalties, Article 38 Paragraph 2 of the Administrative Licensing Law of 2003 and Article 78 of the Regulations on Administrative Procedures of Hunan Province which came into force on October 1, 2008, are administrative acts Provide the legal basis for the obligation to explain the reasons that should be followed. At the time of the act of state, especially the object of this study, the deci- sion of the act of administration, the implementation of the statement of reason will lead to the ”berzeugten Gehorsam“ ”; at the same time, the principle will contribute to the administration Authorities make rational resolutions and provide the possibility for supervision of superior organs and facilities. It prevents the executive authorities from assuming the exclusive right; it guarantees citizens the right to know when they encounter an administrative act, especially a burden of administrative act, and adopts the right and effective legal remedies to claim their rights. The above content is the third chapter of this article - the reason explains the function of obligation. In view of the complicated and varied cases in administrative practice and the respect for the administrative discretion, the consensus of German judiciary and academic circles in delineating the reasons and preciseness will become the fourth and fifth chapters of the article Principles in the daily administrative practice should pay attention to several aspects and judicial review of the scope of the case. Due to the economic considerations of the proceedings, the German legislators passed the “German Federal Administrative Procedure Act” Article 39, paragraph 2, Article 45, paragraph 1, paragraphs 2, 46, and the Constitution of Administrative Court The 44 Amendments regulate and limit the consequences of the administrations violating the principle, and the academic community is in an uproar. They consider that these provisions undoubtedly provide an excuse for the administrative authorities to ignore this obligation and the procedural rights of citizens will therefore be greatly weakened and even be aerialized. This is the sixth chapter of this article, justification for defects in the amendment of obligations.