【作者】 赵勇；

【导师】 王学辉；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 宪法与行政法学， 2012， 博士

【副题名】基于平政院裁决书的分析

【摘要】 平政院制度是民国初年北京政府创设的一项极具特色的制度。平政院有两项基本职能：一为纠弹（即监察）职能；二为行政诉讼职能。作为行政诉讼制度在中国的第一次实践，平政院时代的行政诉讼制度对今天中国行政诉讼制度的发展与改革具有重要的借鉴与参考价值。但目前学术界对于平政院研究的成果都是从历史学的视角，通过分析有关平政院的法律规定对这一制度的内容、功能等方面进行介绍与说明。本文则希望通过对平政院裁决书的分析，从行政诉讼法的角度研究平政院时代行政诉讼制度的实际运行，评价这一制度取得的成绩与存在的问题。本文内容共有八个部分。前言部分主要论述了本文选题的目的与意义、对文章的一些关键词进行了界定，包括：行政诉讼、行政裁判、行政审判、诉愿、行政处分、行政组织、行政机关、行政官署等等；界定了本文研究的对象与范围；对国内外研究现状进行了分析；说明了研究所采用的方法。第一章“平政院的职能、地位与性质”分别从立法与实践两个方面阐述了平政院的纠弹与行政诉讼职能；辨明了平政院的性质与地位：隶属于大总统的特别行政机关。首先，根据《平政院编制令》的规定，平政院是隶属于大总统的机关，实践中平政院向大总统呈报裁决结果也证明了平政院的这一地位；其次，从《临时约法》和《中华民国约法》的规定、北京政府时期“法院”的范围、平政院对原行政处分的处理方式及《平政院编制令》的制定颁布方式判断平政院并不属于司法机关，而应属于行政机关。最后，从平政院职权、成员任职资格、成员任用程序及成员身份保障等方面得出平政院是特别行政机关的结论。第二章“行政诉讼主体分析”,首先从法律规定的角度对行政诉讼中的主体如原告、被告、参加人、诉讼代理人、审判组织及评事等在行政诉讼中的地位、权利、义务等方面进行了分析。其次从实践角度对裁决书中反映的各类主体的实际情况进行了统计,特别对《行政诉讼法》规定的临时审判庭的立法规定与实践情况进行了分析。最后，对平政院评事、各庭庭长以及院长的更替与任职时间进行了梳理，并详细列出了各成员的简历。第三章“诉讼过程分析”主要论述了行政诉讼的受案范围、行政诉讼提起的程序、行政诉讼审理过程、裁决的执行、行政诉讼的审级、裁判的法律依据及行政诉讼的证据等问题。本部分对行政诉讼的受案范围进行了详细分析，《行政诉讼法》将行政诉讼受理范围规定为侵害人民权益的违法行政处分，针对这一限制，平政院在实践中作了灵活的处理。首先，扩大了“法”的范围，将法律、命令、地方自治法规、行政命令、前清法令及法律原则等都归入了“法”的范围。其次，限制了行政裁量的范围，将违反比例原则的行政处分也划处违法处分范围。再次，扩大了行政处分的范围，将行政契约、行政命令、行政内部行为乃至行政私法行为都纳入到行政处分的范围。最后，放宽了权益受损害的限制。允许人民就公共利益和他人利益的损害提起诉讼。在第四章“行政诉讼案件类型分析”一章中，通过对行政诉讼裁决书的分析，对平政院所受理的案件进行了分类。首先根据行政诉讼的类型将行政诉讼案件分为撤销诉讼案件与给付诉讼案件；其次，根据案件所涉及的行政官署行政处分的类型，将诉讼案件分为行政处罚案件、征收案件、行政内部行为案件、行政许可案件、行政确认案件、行政裁决案件、行政契约案件、私经济行政行为案件及行政命令案件。最后，从原告被侵害的权利的性质角度将行政诉讼案件分为土地房产、营业、人事、矿产、税捐、水利、盐务、教育、选举、交通、产权、其他十二类。第五章“诉讼结果分析”一章首先分析了行政诉讼的裁判形式，根据法律规定，驳回当事人起诉平政院可以使用批的形式；案件经过审理之后应当以裁决的形式作出裁判。其次，通过分析行政诉讼裁决书，对平政院行政诉讼裁决类型进行了分类研究：变更裁决、取消裁决与维持裁决；对席裁决与缺席裁决。其中重点分析了变更裁决、取消裁决与维持裁决的适用条件，以及变更裁决对原行政处分的变更程度。最后，分析了行政诉讼裁决的效力，认为行政诉讼裁决具有羁束力、确定力、形成力、拘束力及执行力五种效力。第六章“行政法治的追求与实践：行政诉讼目的与行政审判的独立性”一章中着重分析论证了平政院时代行政诉讼的目的，认为行政诉讼具有双重目的：保障行政活动的合法性与救济人民权益。1916年6月之前，保障行政活动合法性的目的占主导地位，之后，救济人民权益的目的占主导地位。此外，本章还分析了平政院行政审判是否具有独立性。通过分析院长、庭长、其他机关和个人对评事的影响，得出评事在行政诉讼审判活动中具有独立地位的结论。就平政院组织的独立性而言，虽然从法律地位上看其隶属于大总统，但事实上并未发现大总统干预审判的事例，而且，“祝书元等因该部总长违反法令擅退部员陈诉内务部案”的审判经过也说明了平政院在行政诉讼审判方面不受其他机关干预，具有独立的地位。“结语”部分对民初北京政府行政诉讼制度的成效进行了总体评价，总结了平政院时代行政诉讼制度的成绩：证明了特别行政裁判机关模式在中国实施的可行性；增强了国民的法治意识；保障了公民权利，约束了行政权力。北京政府行政诉讼制度虽然取得了显著的成绩，但在诉讼实践中也暴露出一些缺陷：一方面，单一裁判机关的体制大大影响了平政院受理案件的数量，削弱了其行政诉讼功能的发挥；另一方面，平政院隶属于大总统的性质定位从形式上削弱了其独立性。虽然存在一些缺陷，但平政院时代行政诉讼制度的成功运作仍然能够为我们今天的行政诉讼改革提供一些参考与借鉴：独立行政裁判机关；完善的评事身份保障制度；评事任职期间活动的限制；肃政厅提起行政诉讼；概括式的行政诉讼受理范围。更多还原

【Abstract】 Pingzhengyuan is a special institution in the BeiJing government of the Republicof China. This organ has two basic functions: supervising officials and hearing theadministrative litigation cases. As the first practice of the administrative litigation inChina, the administrative litigation in Pengzhengyuan era is useful to the developmentand reform of the today’s administrative litigation. But the studies of thePingZhengYuang are mostly introduce and explain this institution from theperspective of history. This dissertation attempts to study the practice ofadministrative litigation and evaluate achievement and prombles of thePingzhengyuan and the administrative litigation system.The dissertation consist of eight parts. In the preface, discusses the purpose andthe value of this study,and defines some keywords in the dissertation, such as theadiministrative litigation, administrative judgement(xingzhengcaipan,行政裁判；xingzhengshengpan,行政审判), the administrative appeal(suyuan,诉愿),administrative action(xingzhengcufen,行政处分), the administrativeorganization(xingzhengzuzhi,行政组织), the administrative agency(xingzhengjiguan,行政机关),the administrative department(xingzhengguanshu,行政官署). Defines theobject and scope of the study; analyses the present study of PingZhengYuan andadministrative litigation in BeiJing Gvoerment of the Republic of China; explainsresearch methods.In chapter one:“Judicial Organ of the Administrative Litigation:Pingzhengyuan’s Functions, Status and Nature”, the dissertation expounds thesupervise official function and hear administrative litigation case function, identifiesPingzhengyuan’s status and nature: a special administrative organ attached to thepresident, from legislation and practice two aspects. Firstly, according to article1of the Regulation on the Establishment of the Pingzhengyuan(Pingzhengyuanbianzhiling,平政院编制令), Pingzhengyuan attached to the president, and thelitigation practice that the Pingzhengyuan submitted the decision to the president alsoproved the Pingzhengyuan’s status. Secondly, based on the provision of theProvisional Constitution of the Republic of China and the Constitution of theRepublic of China(1914), the scope of the court in the period of the BeiJinggovernment, and the Pingzhengyuan’s authority in the litigation, we can conclude thatthe Pingzhengyuan is not a judical organ but a administrative organ. And lastly, thedissertation concludes that the Pingzhengyuan is a special administrative organ,because it’s function, qualification, select and appoint procedure and statusguarantee of it’s judge (Pingshi评事) are all different with other administrativeorgans.In chapter2:“Study of the Subject of the Administrative Litigation”, firstly, thedissertation analies the status, rights and obligations of the subject in theadministrative litigation. Secondly, analies these subjects in the Pingzhengyuanjudgement. Lastly, lists the changes of judges (pingshi评事), the president of thecourt, and the president of the Pingzhengyuan, and their resume.In chapter3:“Study of the Admiinistrative Litigation Procedure”, thedissertation discusses the scope of the accepting cases, sue procedure, hear procedure,enforcement of the judgement, level of trail of the administrative litigation, legal basisof the judgement and administrative litigation evidence,etc. This chapter speciallydiscusses the scope of the accepting cases in detail. In the Administrative LitigationLaw (Xingzhengsusongfa行政诉讼法), the scope of the accepting cases was limitedto the administrative action that is illegal and infringed the people’s rights andinterests. In practice,Pingzhengyuan firstly enlarged the scope of the law; secondly,restricted the scope of the administrative discretion; thirdly, enlarged the scope of theadministrative actions; lastly, eased the restriction that rights and interests must beinfringed.In chapter4:“Study of the Classfication of the Litigation”, the dissertationclassifies the administrative litigation through analyzing Pingzhengyuan’s verdicts. Firstly, classifies the administrative litigation in theory; secondly, classifies the casesby the administrative action; and lastly, classifies the cases from the platiff’s infringedrights.In chapter5:“Analysis of the Administrative Litigation Judgement”, firstly, thedisserctation discusses the form of the judgement： reject the suit by “pi”(批) andmake judgement by verdict (caijue裁决) after case hearing. Secondly, classifies thejudgement of the Pingzhengyuan’s verdict through analyzing the verdicts. Lastly,analyses validities of the Pingzhengyuan’s judgement.In chapter6:“the Pursue and Practice of the Rule of Admininstrative Law: thePurpose of the Administrative Litigation and the Independence of the AdministrativeAdjudication”, analyes the purpose of the administrative litigation in BeijingGoverment, concludes that there are two purposes: guarantee the validity of theadministrative action and remedy the rights. Befor june,1916, the first purposepredominated, after Suzhengting was repealed, the second purpose predominated. Inaddition, the chapter also analyes independence of the Pingzhengyuan inadministration adjudication and draw a conclusion that both the judge and thePingzhengyuan are independent, without interference from other organ and people.In last part:“Epilogue”, the dissertation evaluates the results of theadministrative litigation of the Beijing Government in early the Republic of China:proved that the special administrative litigation organ can stably operate; strengthedthe consciousness of rule of law of citizen; protected the citizen’s right; restrainedthe administrative power. Although the administrative litigation system had achievedsignificant success, it also exposed some defects: one side, sole judicial organ systemreduced the quantity of the administrative litigation cases, weaken the functions of theadministrative litigation; other side, the statu that the Pingzhengyuan attached to thepresident weaken its independence. Although it has these defects, the administrativelitigation in the Pingzhengyuan era still can provide many references for today’sadministrative litigation reform: independent judicial organ; thorough status guaranteeof the judge; restrict the activity to guarantee the just of the judgement; Suzhengshi(肃政史) instituted administrative action; general-style provision aboutscope of accepting cases, etc.更多还原