發(fā)布時間：2018-05-13 17:13

  本文選題：行政公益訴訟 + 法律監(jiān)督　； 參考：《重慶大學學報(社會科學版)》2017年06期

【摘要】：近10余年來,無論是學界還是實務界皆對公益訴訟這個命題關注有加,尤其是對行政公訴,大量研究成果系統(tǒng)性地介紹了西方國家的行政公訴機制。但是,中國的檢察機關從權力性質上講是司法機關,從功能定位上說是憲法所專門規(guī)設的法律監(jiān)督機關。如果置法治語境于不顧,強行賦予檢察機關以不符憲法定位的公益訴訟人身份,不僅存在著難以克服的濫訴風險,而且由此帶入行政公益訴訟程序中還會引發(fā)訴訟本身的異變,繼而生成一系列不利于公益保護的負面效應。然而這并非檢察機關刻意為之,歸根到底還是法律監(jiān)督疲軟無力的問題。所以,為了行政公益訴訟的良好實施還需回到原點,在司法改革的背景下進一步完善法律監(jiān)督機制及其運行架構。
[Abstract]:In the past 10 years, both academic and practical circles have paid more attention to the proposition of public interest litigation, especially to administrative public prosecution. A large number of research results have systematically introduced the mechanism of administrative prosecution in western countries. However, the procuratorial organ in China is the judicial organ in terms of its power nature, and the legal supervision organ specially stipulated by the Constitution in terms of its function. If we ignore the context of the rule of law and impose upon the procuratorial organs the status of public interest litigants that are not in accordance with the constitutional orientation, there is not only the insurmountable risk of overcharging, but also the different changes of the litigation itself brought into the administrative public interest litigation proceedings. Then produce a series of negative effects that are not conducive to public welfare protection. But this is not a deliberate prosecution, in the final analysis is weak legal supervision. Therefore, in order to implement the administrative public interest litigation well, we should go back to the origin, and further improve the legal supervision mechanism and its operating structure under the background of judicial reform.
【作者單位】： 南京大學法學院;
【基金】：最高人民檢察院檢察理論研究課題“檢察獨立與懲戒機制法治化研究”(GJ2015C31) 江蘇省灌云縣人民檢察院委托研究課題“檢察機關對行政執(zhí)法的監(jiān)督”
【分類號】：D925.3

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 裘t，

本文編號：1884079