發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-06 12:22

  本文選題：檢察機(jī)關(guān) + 行政公益訴訟��； 參考：《寧波大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：由于行政訴訟法沒(méi)有規(guī)定行政公益訴訟,2015年7月1日,全國(guó)人大常委會(huì)通過(guò)公益訴訟試點(diǎn)授權(quán)決定。經(jīng)過(guò)一年的試點(diǎn),本文主要分三部分對(duì)檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起行政公益訴訟試點(diǎn)實(shí)踐中存在的問(wèn)題進(jìn)行理論上的研究,并在遵守現(xiàn)行法律的基礎(chǔ)上提出相關(guān)完善建議。第一部分主要論述了檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起行政公益訴訟的現(xiàn)狀。從一年的試點(diǎn)實(shí)踐來(lái)看,雖然公益訴訟的案件線索很多,但訴訟不多,而且集中在環(huán)保領(lǐng)域,對(duì)相關(guān)爭(zhēng)議問(wèn)題并未展開(kāi)討論和判定。試點(diǎn)中主要存在以下幾個(gè)問(wèn)題:一是檢察機(jī)關(guān)的職能定位與訴訟地位不明問(wèn)題,存在著借鑒刑事訴訟公訴人定位來(lái)構(gòu)建行政公益訴訟定位的問(wèn)題;二是試點(diǎn)創(chuàng)新的合法性問(wèn)題,最高檢察院頒布的實(shí)施辦法中有關(guān)檢察機(jī)關(guān)有權(quán)向行政機(jī)關(guān)及其工作人員調(diào)查取證,行政機(jī)關(guān)及其工作人員應(yīng)該配合以及以抗訴權(quán)代替上訴權(quán)的規(guī)定缺乏法律依據(jù);三是受案范圍狹窄問(wèn)題,案件集中在環(huán)保領(lǐng)域;四是程序運(yùn)行問(wèn)題,如行政機(jī)關(guān)拒絕檢察機(jī)關(guān)的調(diào)查取證的后果如何承擔(dān),以抗訴權(quán)取代上訴權(quán)與審判監(jiān)督程序中抗訴權(quán)混淆的問(wèn)題。第二部分對(duì)檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起行政公益訴訟制度進(jìn)行法理上的分析,對(duì)英美法系和大陸法系檢察機(jī)關(guān)的性質(zhì)和提起公益訴訟制度進(jìn)行了考察,其對(duì)行政公益訴訟的原告資格幾乎沒(méi)有限定。我國(guó)檢察權(quán)理論基礎(chǔ)主要是法律監(jiān)督理論、公益訴訟信托理論和訴訟擔(dān)當(dāng)理論。第三部分根據(jù)《行政訴訟法》和《關(guān)于授權(quán)最高人民檢察院在部分地區(qū)開(kāi)展公益訴訟試點(diǎn)工作的決定》等現(xiàn)行法律規(guī)范對(duì)檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起行政公益訴訟制度提出了完善建議。我國(guó)檢察權(quán)的性質(zhì)是法律監(jiān)督權(quán),檢察機(jī)關(guān)的定位是法律監(jiān)督者,在起訴前監(jiān)督行政機(jī)關(guān)依法行政;判決生效后,有權(quán)抗訴啟動(dòng)審判監(jiān)督程序。但在審理程序中,檢察機(jī)關(guān)地位就是行政訴訟原告,或公益訴訟原告。公共利益受損是受案范圍的前提,但要對(duì)一些常見(jiàn)的、重點(diǎn)的損害國(guó)家利益、社會(huì)公共利益領(lǐng)域內(nèi)的行政違法行為予以列舉。此外,對(duì)程序運(yùn)行中的訴前督促程序、案件來(lái)源、調(diào)查取證、舉證責(zé)任、訴訟后果承擔(dān)等問(wèn)題也提出了相關(guān)完善建議。
[Abstract]:As the Administrative Litigation Law does not provide for administrative public interest litigation, on July 1, 2015, the standing Committee of the National people's Congress (NPC) approved a pilot authorization for public interest litigation. After a year of pilot, this paper mainly divided into three parts to the procuratorial organs in the trial practice of administrative public interest litigation problems in theory, and in compliance with the existing laws on the basis of the relevant suggestions for improvement. The first part mainly discusses the current situation of the procuratorial organ to initiate the administrative public interest lawsuit. From the pilot practice of one year, although there are many clues in the case of public interest litigation, but there are not many litigation, and concentrated in the field of environmental protection, there is no discussion and determination of the related disputes. The main problems in the trial are as follows: first, the function orientation of the procuratorial organs and the status of litigation are unknown, there is the problem of drawing lessons from the position of the public prosecutor in criminal litigation to construct the positioning of administrative public interest litigation; second, the legitimacy of the innovation of the pilot project. In the implementing measures promulgated by the Supreme Procuratorate, the procuratorial organ has the right to investigate and collect evidence from the administrative organ and its staff, and the administrative organ and its staff should cooperate and replace the right of appeal with the right of protest. The third is the narrow scope of the case, the case is concentrated in the field of environmental protection; the fourth is the operation of the procedure, such as how the administrative organs bear the consequences of refusing the procuratorial organ to investigate and collect evidence. The confusion between the right of appeal and the right of protest in the procedure of trial supervision is replaced by the right of protest. In the second part, the author analyzes the legal principle of the procuratorial organ to initiate the administrative public interest litigation system, and investigates the nature of the procuratorial organ in the common law system and the civil law system and the institution of the public interest litigation system. There is almost no limitation on the plaintiff's qualification of administrative public interest litigation. The theoretical basis of procuratorial power in China is mainly legal supervision theory, public interest litigation trust theory and litigation responsibility theory. In the third part, according to the current laws and regulations, such as the Administrative Litigation Law and the decision to authorize the Supreme people's Procuratorate to carry out the pilot work of public interest litigation in some areas, the author puts forward some suggestions for the procuratorial organ to institute administrative public interest litigation system. The nature of procuratorial power in our country is the power of legal supervision, and the position of procuratorial organ is the legal supervisor, which supervises the administration of administrative organs according to law before prosecution; after the judgment comes into effect, the procuratorial organ has the right to protest and initiate the procedure of judicial supervision. But in the trial procedure, the procuratorial organ status is the administrative litigation plaintiff, or the public interest litigation plaintiff. The damage of public interest is the premise of the scope of the case, but it is necessary to enumerate some common and important administrative illegal acts in the field of public interest and social public interest. In addition, the author also puts forward some relevant suggestions on the procedure of pre-litigation supervision, case source, investigation and evidence collection, burden of proof, and the burden of litigation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：寧波大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.3;D926.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 朱學(xué)磊;;論行政公益訴訟的憲法基礎(chǔ)——以傳統(tǒng)行政訴訟模式的合憲性危機(jī)為線索[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2016年06期

2 秦前紅;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)參與行政公益訴訟理論與實(shí)踐的若干問(wèn)題探討[J];政治與法律;2016年11期

3 王守安;田凱;;論我國(guó)檢察權(quán)的屬性[J];國(guó)家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2016年05期

4 薛志遠(yuǎn);王敬波;;行政公益訴訟制度的新發(fā)展[J];法律適用;2016年09期

5 楊解君;李俊宏;;公益訴訟試點(diǎn)的若干重大實(shí)踐問(wèn)題探討[J];行政法學(xué)研究;2016年04期

6 林莉紅;;臺(tái)灣地區(qū)行政公益訴訟的立法與實(shí)踐——以“美麗灣案”為切入點(diǎn)[J];武漢大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2016年02期

7 朱新力;黃娟;;以社團(tuán)組織為原告的行政公益訴訟的制度進(jìn)路[J];浙江大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2016年01期

8 姜濤;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起行政公益訴訟制度:一個(gè)中國(guó)問(wèn)題的思考[J];政法論壇;2015年06期

9 湛中樂(lè);;正確厘清行政公益訴訟四個(gè)方面認(rèn)識(shí)[J];人民檢察;2015年14期

10 周艷紅;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起行政公益訴訟制度的探討[J];學(xué)習(xí)月刊;2015年12期

，

本文編號(hào)：1852296