【作者】 许炎；

【导师】 周佑勇；

【作者基本信息】 武汉大学 ， 宪法与行政法， 2004， 硕士

【摘要】 行政法上的(不)停止执行原则是行政救济制度中的一项特有原则，许多国家和地区立法中都对该原则作了规定。概括而言，主要分为两种，即以德国为代表的执行停止原则和以日本等国为代表的执行不停止原则，后者是主流。我国行政复议法和行政诉讼法确定的是复议和诉讼期间行政行为不停止执行原则。但从学理研究和行政实务看来，由于该项原则在立法规定上过于简陋，相关法律条文之间多有冲突和不调和之处，故对该原则含义的理解，以及与行政强制执行制度的关系存在各种不同解释，亟待立法完善。本文从分析不停止执行原则在我国立法规定中的内涵与外延入手，结合域外相关制度，认为(不)停止执行原则在性质上属于一种暂时权利保护措施，确定“不停止执行”和“停止执行”何为原则取决于立法者的政策考虑和价值选择。在分析我国当前行政执法和司法审判中存在问题的基础上，结合对不停止执行原则的法理思考，本文主张我国应在立法上修正该原则。尽管立法修正的重点不应再放在大多数学者所争论的何为原则、何为例外上，但从实际需要出发，仍需确定一个原则，这就是复议和诉讼期间行政行为停止执行原则。本文第四章重点就停止执行原则如何构建作了立法设计，并详细探讨了停止执行原则的核心：停止执行程序。目的在于适应社会发展的需要，从立法上解决当前不停止执行原则存在的问题，以保护当事人个人权益为基础，在公共利益、个人利益和其他人利益之间寻求一个平衡点，实现行政救济的目的。更多还原

【Abstract】 The principle of stopping or not stopping executing agency action in Administrative Law particularly exists in the administrative redress system. It is stipulated in many countries and regions’ law systems. Generally, there are two categories of the principle. One is stopping executing agency action, which is typically presented in the Germany law; the other is not stopping executing agency action, which are enforced by Japan and other countries. The latter is the mainstream in legislation. In China, the Administrative Appeal Law and the Administrative Litigation Law have established the principle of not stopping executing agency action during the period of appeal or litigation. However, from the perspective of theory study and administrative practices, there is too much inconsistency in explaining the principle and its relationship with administrative mandatory execution as a result of its simple stipulation in lawmaking. The paper, proceeding with analyzing connotation and extension of the principle in Chinese Administrative Law, and studying the concerned law systems abroad, maintains that which one is the main principle between stopping and not stopping executing agency action is determined by lawmakers. It belongs to a kind of means for rights protection in nature. Based on the present problems in practicing and studying the principle, the paper proposes that the lawmakers of China should amend the principle. Although the emphasis of amending should not put in deciding which one is the main principle, there still need a general principle for practicing. That is stopping executing agency action during the period of appeal and litigation. But what the new principle stresses is the procedure of deciding stopping executing agency action, which aims at finding a balance point between public interests, private interests and other people’s interests.更多还原