本文選題：城管執(zhí)法權(quán)　切入點：城管執(zhí)法的法治化　出處：《中國政法大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文

【摘要】： 隨著我國社會經(jīng)濟的持續(xù)迅猛發(fā)展,我國的工業(yè)化與城市化的進程在不斷加快,與此同時,城市在自身的發(fā)展中,國際化、現(xiàn)代化進程不斷深化,環(huán)境、交通等城市管理問題不斷涌現(xiàn),矛盾也更加集中和尖銳。因此,不斷提高城市管理水平不僅是當(dāng)前一項緊迫的任務(wù),也將是國家在現(xiàn)代化進程中一個長期的重要課題。 城管行政執(zhí)法的法治化則是政府提高城市管理水平的核心要素。目前城管執(zhí)法處于社會矛盾的最前沿,承受著政府執(zhí)法職能中最艱難的部分,同時也突顯出很多問題。本文通過援引湖北天門市城市管理局多名執(zhí)法人員群毆魏文華致死事件和北京的崔英杰案,提出城管執(zhí)法法治化的問題。對城市管理權(quán)、城管執(zhí)法權(quán)、城管執(zhí)法的法治化、城管處罰權(quán)、城管綜合執(zhí)法等概念加以界定,明確城市管理權(quán)、城管執(zhí)法權(quán)、城管處罰權(quán)三者間在邏輯結(jié)構(gòu)上的順位種屬概念關(guān)系,即前者順位包容后者,后者逆向成為前者的下位概念。指出城管執(zhí)法行為是城市管理權(quán)運行的核心環(huán)節(jié),而城管行政處罰權(quán)則成為城管行政執(zhí)法行為是否公正最主要的參照。 因行政執(zhí)法的價值取向直接影響甚至決定執(zhí)法的態(tài)度、執(zhí)法方式和執(zhí)法效果,故在明析概念的基礎(chǔ)上,首先對法治化城管體制應(yīng)有的價值取向做出定位。強調(diào)“以人為本、公民權(quán)利優(yōu)先”,使城管執(zhí)法成為保障公民實現(xiàn)人權(quán)的武器,而非侵犯私權(quán)的工具,提倡“人性化”執(zhí)法。將建立良好的城市管理秩序、避免城管執(zhí)法過程中行政權(quán)力的交叉、提高城市管理效率、保障城市公眾權(quán)利的實現(xiàn)作為城管執(zhí)法法治化的直接價值目標(biāo)。其次以行政法理學(xué)的角度從精神和實體兩方面對城管執(zhí)法法治化的構(gòu)成要件予以闡述。 通過對我國現(xiàn)存的兩種城管執(zhí)法運行機制(既傳統(tǒng)的專門行政執(zhí)法和綜合行政執(zhí)法模式)的比較,著重論述綜合行政執(zhí)法機制產(chǎn)生、現(xiàn)狀、特征及理想狀態(tài)。進而總結(jié)兩種城管執(zhí)法運行模式在行政執(zhí)法過程中普遍存在的執(zhí)法不規(guī)范、侵權(quán)行為頻發(fā)、越權(quán)執(zhí)法現(xiàn)象嚴重等問題,分析問題產(chǎn)生的原因,找出癥結(jié)所在。提出城管執(zhí)法法治化的前瞻性建議:對相關(guān)法律法規(guī)進行修訂或重新立法,解決城管執(zhí)法過程中存在的法律法規(guī)依據(jù)不足、職能劃分不清、執(zhí)法主體不明等問題;在城管執(zhí)法機構(gòu)內(nèi)部實行職能分離,以解決目前執(zhí)法機構(gòu)集行政檢查權(quán)、行政處罰權(quán)和行政強制執(zhí)行權(quán)于一身的危險狀況;加強城管執(zhí)法隊伍建設(shè),建立全國統(tǒng)一的城管行政執(zhí)法隊伍,加強對執(zhí)法人員的培訓(xùn),提高其法律意識和執(zhí)法水平;加大對城管執(zhí)法的法律監(jiān)督力度,完善司法監(jiān)督機制和媒體監(jiān)督機制等。
[Abstract]:With the sustained and rapid development of China's social economy, the process of industrialization and urbanization in our country is speeding up. At the same time, cities in their own development, internationalization, modernization process is deepening, the environment, Therefore, it is not only an urgent task to continuously improve the level of urban management, but also a long-term important subject in the process of modernization. At present, urban management law enforcement is at the forefront of social contradictions and bears the most difficult part of the government's law enforcement function. At the same time, it also highlights a lot of problems. By citing the death of Wei Wenhua and the Cui Yingjie case in Beijing by several law enforcement officers of Hubei Tianmen City Administration, this paper raises the question of the legalization of urban management law enforcement. To the city management power, the city management law enforcement power, the urban management law enforcement power, The legal system of urban management, the power of chengguan punishment, the comprehensive law enforcement of chengguan, and so on, are defined, and the relationship between urban management power, chengmang law enforcement power and chengguan punishment power in logical structure is defined, that is, the former includes the latter sequentially. The latter converse becomes the lower concept of the former, pointing out that urban management law enforcement is the core link of the operation of urban management power, and the chengguan administrative punishment right is the most important reference whether the urban management administrative law enforcement behavior is fair or not. Because the value orientation of administrative law enforcement directly influences and even determines the attitude, method and effect of law enforcement, on the basis of analyzing the concept of law enforcement, the orientation of the value orientation due to the legal system of urban management is first made. The priority of civil rights is to make urban management law enforcement a weapon to protect citizens' realization of human rights, rather than a tool for violating private rights, and to advocate "humanized" law enforcement. It will establish a good urban management order and avoid the overlapping of administrative powers in the process of urban management law enforcement. To improve the efficiency of urban management and to ensure the realization of urban public rights is the direct value goal of urban management law enforcement. Secondly, from the perspective of administrative jurisprudence, this paper expounds the constitutive elements of urban management law enforcement legalization from the perspective of spirit and entity. Through the comparison of two existing urban management law enforcement operating mechanisms (i.e. traditional specialized administrative law enforcement and comprehensive administrative law enforcement mode), this paper focuses on the emergence and present situation of comprehensive administrative law enforcement mechanism. The characteristics and ideal state of the law enforcement are summarized, and the causes of the problems, such as non-standard law enforcement, frequent infringement, serious phenomenon of ultra vires law enforcement and so on, are summarized, and the causes of the problems are analyzed. To find out the crux of the problem. To put forward forward-looking suggestions on the legalization of urban management law enforcement: to amend or re-legislate the relevant laws and regulations, to resolve the insufficiency of the legal basis and the unclear division of functions in the process of urban management law enforcement. Problems such as unclear subject of law enforcement, separation of functions within urban management law enforcement agencies in order to solve the current dangerous situation of law enforcement agencies integrating the power of administrative inspection, the power of administrative punishment and the power of administrative enforcement, and the strengthening of the construction of urban management law enforcement teams, To establish a unified national team of urban management administrative law enforcement, to strengthen the training of law enforcement personnel, to improve their legal awareness and law enforcement level, to strengthen the legal supervision of urban management law enforcement, to improve the judicial supervision mechanism and the media supervision mechanism, etc.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D922.1

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 章志遠;;相對集中行政處罰權(quán)改革之評述[J];中共長春市委黨校學(xué)報;2006年01期

2 張軍;朱菲菲;;論人性化執(zhí)法的合理定位[J];廣西大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2007年05期

3 蘇萬壽;論我國行政處罰法的公民權(quán)利保障機制[J];河南教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1999年03期

4 韓大元;國家人權(quán)保護義務(wù)與國家人權(quán)機構(gòu)的功能[J];法學(xué)論壇;2005年06期

5 汪永清;對改革現(xiàn)行行政執(zhí)法體制的幾點思考[J];中國法學(xué);2000年01期

6 肖金明;論政府執(zhí)法方式及其變革[J];行政法學(xué)研究;2004年04期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 劉健;城管機關(guān)執(zhí)法中的暴力抗法問題研究[D];中央民族大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號：1654179