行政纠纷解决的第三条路径——论行政裁判制度在我国的建立

A Third Route to the Resolution of Administrative Disputes——on the Establishment of the Administrative Adjudication System in China

法院和行政复议机关的专业性、独立性不强,从而导致行政案件难以应付日益增多的专业性、技术性较强的行政案件,因而案件的公正性、效率性受到质疑,有必要建立行政裁判制度。行政裁判是行政复议和行政诉讼外解决行政争议的第三条路径。制度上不存在障碍、行政司法实践积累了丰富的经验、西方国家成功的经验以及政策上的依据使我国设立行政裁判成为可能。我国在设立行政裁判制度时严格恪守公务分权原则、专业性原则、独立性原则、司法最终性原则。按照专业性、独立性的要求,我国行政裁判制度可考虑设立英国式的行政裁判所,但需借鉴法国的行政法官招录制度和美国的行政法官集中使用制度。行政裁判所的体制可考虑将行政裁判所定性为社会团体,业务上受中国法学会指导。

Due to their weakness in professions and lack of independence,courts and organizations for administrative review find it difficult to tackle an increasing number of administrative cases that are highly professional and technical and their fairness and efficiency are often questioned. It is,therefore,necessary to establish an administrative adjudication system,which can be a third route to the resolution of administrative disputes in addition to administrative review and administrative proceedings. Setting up the administrative adjudication is not impossible because there are no barriers systematically and there are ready experiences in administrative judicial practice,policy basis,and successful examples from Western countries. The establishment of this system should strictly follow the principles of administrative power division,professionalism,independence,and judicial final ruling. In accordance with the requirement of professionalism and independence,it is advisable to establish the British tribunals with the French administrative judge enroll system and the US central panel system. The tribunals can be defined as social organizations under the operational guidance of the Chinese Society of Law.