行政补偿范围研究

【作者】 王红跃；

【导师】 李俊清；

【作者基本信息】 中央民族大学 ， 民族地区公共行政管理， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 当今之中国正处于转型跨越发展时期。这一时期,利益格局的调整导致社会矛盾加剧,冲突多发,不稳定因素增多,而行政补偿的范围狭窄是造成这些现象的重要诱因。然而,令人遗憾的是,就我国目前的理论研究状况来看,学者们对行政补偿制度关注的热情要么仅停留于定义、理论基础等基本层面,要么仅停留于宏观层面,对行政补偿范围进行专门细致研究的学者甚少。实践中,由于理论研究的滞后或者不周延,导致因行政补偿的范围过窄、标准过低而引发的纠纷大量发生,有的纠纷甚至演变为危及社会稳定的群体性事件。本文正是基于行政补偿范围在理论层面的研究不足以及现实层面的纠纷尴尬,对其进行深入探讨,希望能对我国行政补偿范围的合理确定起到助推作用。第一章中,本文认为,行政补偿的范围是行政补偿制度的一个子系统,要对其进行研究,首先应以行政补偿制度为其逻辑起点,基于此,本文在梳理现存主流观点的基础上对行政补偿的涵义进行了理性界定。同时,为了从理论层面为行政补偿范围的合理确定提供支撑,本文探寻了行政补偿制度的理论基础。经过论证,本文认为将人权保障理论、特别牺牲理论和公共负担平等理论按照一定路径有机结合作为行政补偿的理论基础,更加具有说服力,其合理的因子更加浓厚一些。最后,本文结合上述基础理论,在分析现存主流观点的基础上,将我国行政补偿的范围确定为：行为范围、权益范围、损失范围和深度范围。第二章中,本文从内部因素和外部因素两个维度探讨了行政补偿理论的发展、公共利益的评判标准、国家对私权的重视程度、国家的经济发展水平、法治发展水平以及公民维权意识的强弱等等对我国行政补偿范围的影响。经过论证,本文认为,上述因素与我国行政补偿范围的确定呈正相关关系,即有关行政补偿范围的理论发展越完备,其行政补偿范围的确定就越合理；有关公共利益的评判标准越宽泛,其补偿的范围也就相应宽泛,反之,如有关国家的公益评判标准较窄,其行政补偿的范围也就相应狭窄；同理,国家对私权的重视程度、国家的经济发展水平、法治发展水平和公民的维权意识越高或者越强,其行政补偿的范围也就越宽,反之亦然。第三章中,本文对英美法系的经典代表英国、美国,对大陆法系的经典代表法国、德国、日本以及我国台湾地区的行政补偿范围进行了简要介绍,并在此基础上分析总结了这些国家值得我国学习和借鉴的地方,希望能对完善我国的行政补偿范围有所裨益。第四章中,本文首先对我国行政补偿的行为范围和权益范围现状进行了简要介绍,并对我国目前存在争议的抽象行政行为补偿、行政合同行为补偿、行政指导行为补偿、见义勇为行为补偿等等进行了相关论证。最后,在上述介绍和论证的基础上,本文认为我国行政补偿的行为范围应当包括：征收补偿、征用补偿、信赖补偿、公权力附随效果补偿、对财产权限制的补偿、无因管理补偿和人身权损害补偿等等；权益范围应当包括财产权损害补偿和人身权损害补偿。第五章中,本文在对目前我国行政补偿的深度范围和损害范围现状进行介绍的基础上,得出我国目前的行政补偿深度范围和损害范围仍存在以下不足：宪法中缺失有关行政补偿标准的指导性原则、单行法中补偿标准缺失现象严重、现有的补偿标准不统一且违法规定补偿标准的现象严重、现有的补偿标准低且缺乏可操作性等等。本文认为,造成上述不足的原因主要有：重公益轻私益的传统影响、缺乏统一立法、现有的法律规范模糊且缺乏可操作性、私权保护体制不健全、有关行政补偿标准的理论研究匮乏等等。此后,本文在充分论证的基础上认为,将我国行政补偿的深度范围确定为“以完全补偿为原则,以适当补偿为例外”较为妥当。与之相应,我国行政补偿的损害范围不仅应包括直接损害,而且还应包括间接损害；不仅应包括物质性损害,还应包括精神性损害。更多还原

【Abstract】 Nowadays, China is in the period of transformation and leap-forward development. During this period, the adjustment of interest pattern causes the intensifying social contradiction, frequently-occurring social conflicts, and increasing instable factors, while one of the most important reasons for those phenomena is the narrow scope of administrative compensation. Unfortunately, there are few scholars focusing on the specific detailed studies on the administrative compensation system, and the existing studies are either staying in the basic levels, such as introducing the definition or theoretical foundations, or staying in the macro level. In practice, due to the lagged theoretical studies which lead to the unscientific confirmation scope of administrative compensation, a large amount of disputes occur and some even are evolved into mass incidents threatening social stability. Based on the deficient theoretical research on the scope of administrative compensation and the practical disputes, this study probes into it and hopes to booster the reasonable confirmation of the system.In Chapter One, this study concerns the administrative compensation as the logic start, during which the scope of administrative compensation is a subsystem. On this basis, this study makes a rational definition of the administrative compensation based on the analysis of existing mainstream views on the connotation of it. At the same time, in order to provide reasonable support from the theoretical level, this paper explores the theoretical basis of administrative system. The discussion shows that it is more convincing and reasonable to combine the theory of the protection of human rights, the theory of special sacrifice and the theory of public burden according to certain procedures. This chapter concludes by defining the scopes of administrative compensation:behaviour scope, rights scope, loss scope and depth scope.From both the internal and external factors, Chapter Two discusses some effects on the scope of administrative compensation, such as the development of its theory, the adjudgement criteria of public interest, the country’s focus on the private rights, the country’s economic development, the legal development, civil rights awareness. The discussion shows that the above-mentioned factors are in a positive relation with the confirmation of the administrative compensation, i.e. the more complete the theory of administrative compensation scope is, the more reasonable its confirmation is, and vice versa.Chapter Three gives a brief introduction to the scope of administrative compensation in Britain, America, France, Germany, Japan and Taiwan in our country. By the introduction, it provides the valuable references, which are hoped to benefit the perfection of the scope of administrative compensation. Chapter Four starts with the brief introduction of the behaviour scope and right scope of our administrative compensation system, and the discussion of some current controversial issues, such as abstract behaviour compensation, administrative contract behaviour compensation, administrative guidance behaviour compensation and the behaviour compensation for good Samaritan acts. On this basis, this chapter proposes that the behaviour scopes of our administrative compensation should include:compensation for expropriation, requisition compensation, compensation for trust, public power collateral effects compensation, compensation for restrictions on property rights, necessary management compensation, and compensation for personal rights damage, etc. The scope for rights should include the compensation for the damage of both property rights and personal rights.Chapter Five inquires into the deficiencies of the current administrative compensation system in our country both in depth scope and damage scope, such as the lack of guiding principles in constitution, the serious loss of compensation criteria in separate law, the disunity, illegality, low standard and lack of operability in the existing compensation system. The reasons for these deficiencies can be generalized as:the traditional influence of more focus on public interests, the lack of unified law-making and the lack of operability, underdeveloped privacy protection system and the superficial studies on it. Finally, this chapter concludes that the scope of our administrative compensation should obey the principle of "with the complete compensation as principle, with the appropriate compensation as exception". The damage scope of the administration compensation in our country should include not only the direct damage, but also the indirect damage; not only the material damage, but also the spiritual damage.更多还原