公安机关论文公安机关行政自由裁量权研究.docx

公安机关论文公安机关行政自由裁量权研究.docx

《公安机关论文公安机关行政自由裁量权研究.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《公安机关论文公安机关行政自由裁量权研究.docx（5页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

公安机关论文公安机关行政自由裁量权研究

公安机关论文：

公安机关行政自由裁量权研究

【中文摘要】行政自由裁量权是现代行政法的核心问题,它就像一把“双刃剑”,用的得当,能够实现个案正义；用的不得当,就会极大的侵害相对人的合法权益。

这种强大的行政权,一方面,对公安机关是行政执法工作的巨大优势,即公安机关行政自由裁量权的运行起到了维护公共利益、维护公共秩序、提高行政效率、实现国家统治的作用；另一方面,容易对行政相对人的正当权益造成损害。

为了防止公安机关滥用行政自由裁量权,很多地方行政机关都在摸索制定一些裁量基准,从事前、事中的角度进行控制。

法院也在探索如何从事后的角度、从司法审查的角度有效地控制行政自由裁量权的滥用。

但是,《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》中规定的一些审查标准,如滥用职权、显失公正,只是原则性的规定,至今缺少详细的司法解释。

这不便于各级法院在行政审判中准确地适用上述法律规定,在审判实践中也容易发生偏颇。

这种现状与行政法理论研究在这方面还没有完全展开有关系。

本文希望通过对公安机关自由裁量权产生的背景、理论进行分析,全面阐述公安机关执法中滥用自由裁量权的来龙去脉。

针对现实中存在的自由裁量权滥用问题,提出切实可行的对策,为防止公安机关自由裁量权滥用提供参考。

【英文摘要】Administrativediscretionplaysanirreplaceableroleoftheneedofmodernadministration,theimprovementofadministrativeefficiency,theachievementoftheruleoflaw,andtheneedoftheincreasinglychangingsociety.Butontheotherhand,Administrativediscretionisadouble-edgedsword,itmaybeabuseofexecutiveauthority,directlyagainstthelegitimateinterestsoftheexecutiverelative,alienationofthechiefofpowerandcorruption,andthusposeaseriousthreattotheruleoflaw.Inmyopinion,thepublicsecurityorganforadministrativediscretionandmaybewidespreadabuseofthefacts,shallincludetheestablishmentofalegislativecontrol,administrativesupervision,judicialreview,thatisafullrangeoflegalcontrolsystem.Theaimisthatstrictcontrolofadministrativediscretioninthelawsenactedbythelegislaturewithinthescopeofexecutiveauthoritytoensurethelegitimacyoftheexerciseofdiscretion.Thiscontrolmodelforthecoordinationofadministrativediscretionandtheruleoflawandrelationsistoensurestrictadministrativediscretionissubjecttotheruleoflaw,whichhasanimportantrole.Thispaperarguesthattobuilda“harmoniousenforcement”oftheenvironmentisnecessarytorapiddevelopmentofChina’ssocialstabilityandeconomicbackground.Constitutea“harmoniouslawenforcement”mustbeatwo-way,oneatthepublicsecurityorganstomakepunishmentforviolations,accordingtolawregulations,legalprocedures,takingintoaccountfactorsrelevantfactorsmakereasonablediscretion.Thesecondistheobjectofpunishmentispunishmentwasnoreasontoresist.Itwouldappearthatthepublicsecurityorgansinordertopreventtheabuseofdiscretion,weneedtobuildacomprehensivemeansofcontrol,namelythroughthecombinationofinternalandexternalcontrolmeans,andbyimprovingthesystemofadministrativereviewandlitigationofpublicsecurityinthemisuseofadministrativediscretioncontrol.Thefirstsectionofthearticle,mainlyanalysisinthedefinitionofthepublicsecurityorgansdiscretion,thediscretionofthepublicsecurityorgansandtheclassificationofgeneralcharacteristicsofthenarrative,thepublicsecurityorgansdiscussedtheexistenceofadministrativediscretionbasis.Publicsecurityorgansaccordingtotheexerciseofexecutivepowersubjecttotheavailabilityofadministrativeflexibilityintheapplicationoflegalnormsasthestandard,thepublicsecurityorgansoftherestrictionstherecanbedividedintoadministrativeactionanddiscretionoftheadministrativeaction.Publicsecurityorgansofadministrativeactiontherestrictionsthereisthepublicsecurityorgansandtheirstaffontheapplicationofadministrativelawdidnotregulatetheflexibilityofadministrativeaction,administrativeactionisdiscretionarypublicsecurityorgansandtheirstaffontheadministrativelawnormsapplicabletoflexibleAdministrativebehavior.Thereasontomakesucharequirementisbecauseofthefactthatcertainlawscanbemadeinlegislation,uniformregulations,andthefactthatcertainlawscannotmakeuniformregulations,publicsecurityorgansandtheirstaffneedtheselegalfactsofthespecificfactorsdecidedtoapplythelaw.ThesecondsectionofthearticleanalysesthestatusofadministrativediscretionofpublicsecurityorgansinChina.Publicsecurityorgansintheexerciseofadministrativediscretion,ifexercisedcorrectlywillbeabletoplaythepublicinterest,maintainpublicorder,theroleofadministrativeefficiency,butiftheabuseofadministrativediscretion,contrarytothepurposesauthorizedbylawandwill,itiseasyinterferenceanddamagethesocialorder,butalsorelativelyeasytodamagethelegitimaterightsandinterests.Inpractice,thepublicsecurityadministrativediscretionisabused,thereistwomajormanifestations,namely,abuseofpowerandisobviouslyunfair.Policeabuseofpowerthattheexecutiveauthoritiesintheexerciseofadministrativefunctions,althoughtheformoflegal,butcontrarytothepublicsecuritylawsandregulationstogivethepurposeoftheexecutivepowers,andgenerallyisintentionallysubjective;obviouslyunfair,generallyconfinedtotheChiefofPoliceAdministrativeorganspenaltiesareinthisarea,thatarelegitimateformsofadministrativeaction,butactsasanobviousinjusticetograspthedegreeofpunishmentattheexpenseofthelegitimaterightsandinterestsoftherelative,subjectiveandgenerallyoutoftheirnegligence,butalsowithsignificantlossofimpartialityontheresultsofelements,ifthesubjectiveintenttocausesignificantlossofimpartialityontheresults,allbelongtothescopeofabuseofpower.PublicSecurityOrgansabuseofadministrativediscretionmainreasonsare:

inadequatelegislation,differentstandardsofdiscretion,thelawenforcementbodyisnotstrongawarenessoflawenforcement,supervisionofadministrativediscretionisnotinplace,lackofjudicialreviewsystem,andmanyotherissues.Thethirdmainsectionofthearticleisabuseofdiscretionofthepublicsecurityorgan,makingrelevantmeansofcontrol.Includinginternalcontrolandexternalcontrol,theinternalcontrolfirstofall,istostrengthentheenforcementofpoliceforcebuilding,throughthedevelopmentofanumberofregulationstorestricttheleveloflawenforcementbypublicsecurityofficers,andsecondly,tostrengthentheadministrativepracticeofthepublicsecurityorgansofadministrativediscretion,administrativepracticeisontheadministrativemattersofthesameorhavethesame,afteralong-term,general,continuedorrepeatedforthepurposes,thentoadministrativemeasuresthathavebecomethegeneralpracticeofgeneralpracticecanberegardedassuchanadministrativepracticeAdministrativepracticescanlimitthearbitrarydiscretion,topreventco-varysentence,therelativedamagetopeople’sinterests.Finally,detailedreferencetotheadministrativediscretiontopunishthepublicsecurityorgansinamorereasonabletimescale.Administrativereviewisthelegitimacyoftherighttoexercisereasonablesupervisionof,butonlythelegalityofadministrativelitigationsupervision.Combinedwiththepracticeofadministrativereview,recommendationsshouldbeconsideredsuitableforChinatograduallyestablish“administrativejudges”systemtoenhancetheadministrativereviewbodyandreviewtheindependenceofstaff,reduceadministrativeauthoritiesorotherpersonsinterferingin,andenhancesupervisionoftheadministrativereviewperformance.Publicsecurityorgansmustbebasedaccordingtolaw,thepurposeofstrengtheningthepolicecontingent,fullyawareofthepublicsecurityadministrativereconsiderationoftheimportanceofinstitution-building,fromtheorganizationandthecomprehensivepromotionprofessionalswithboththeconstructionofpublicsecurityadministrativereview.PublicconstructionworkofadministrativereconsiderationistheexecutiveleveloflawenforcementPoliceembodiment,alsourgedthepublicsecurityadministrativeorgansaccordingtolawaneffectiveway.Externalcontrol,firstofall,thepremiseoflegislationisthecontrolofpublicsecurityadministrativediscretionandtoimprovethequalityoflegislationtostrengthenthelegaloperational,asmuchaspossibletoreducethemagnitudeandbreadthofdiscretion.Improvetheprocedurallegislation,proceduresforadministrativeaction.ChiefAdministrativeProcedureActisanimportantcomplementtothesubstantivelawistosuppressthepublicsecurityadministrativediscretionanimportantmeans,whichrestrictstheexerciseofexecutivepower,tomaintainthecorrectoperationoftheexecutivepower,isalsoofgreatsignificancetoimproveadministrativeefficiency.Socialcontrol,ourcountryshouldspeeduptheimprovementinthecurrentpetitionsystem,andclearthewaycitizencomplaintsandappeals,whilestrengtheningthesocialnormsandthesupervisoryroleofadministrativediscretiontothesupervisionofthestatethroughlegalchannelstotransferthesupervision.Althoughsocietydoesnothavedirectsupervisionofmandatoryandbinding,butitplaysanirreplaceableroleintheprocessofdiscretionofcontroloftheexecutive.AdministrativeLitigationinChina,becauseofthewiderangeofpublicsecurityorgansofadministrativediscretionhasfeatureswithgreaterelasticity.Therefore,thepublicsecurityorgansabuseofadministrativediscretion,veryeasytodamagetheinterestsoftherelative,andnow,thepublicsecurityorgansabuseofdiscretion,mostofthemaredressedlegitimacy.Therefore,judicialreviewofthecurrentlimitations,weneedamoreeffectivemeansofreview,nodoubttheintroductionof“theprincipleofrationality”isaneffectivemeansofjudicialreviewis“theprincipleoflegality”asasupplement.Mediationistheadministrativeproceedingsintheadministrativeproceedings,thepartiesrecognizedinthepeople’scourtortheparticipationofsomeofthedisputedadministrativeactonavoluntarybasis,throughcommunication,toreachaconsensus,soastosolvedisputesandlitigationactivitiesofaclosedway.Accordingtotheprovisions