规范性文件的权威性与司法审查的不同层次

Authority of Normative Document and Levels of Judicial Review

新《行政诉讼法》的出台,正式确认了法院对于行政规范性文件的审查权。在司法实践中,存在有狭义合法性审查与广义合法性审查两种不同强度的审查模式。我国法院目前对于不同深度的审查标准的运用较为随意,缺乏客观化的标准,导致在审查上位法依据不明确的规范性文件时司法与行政权界限的模糊。在理论上,能够影响法院对于规范性文件审查强度的因素包括规范性文件的上位法授权、功能、政治责任、形成方式和规范领域等等。这些因素可以通过包括制度权威和理论权威在内的权威性概念获得解释并被赋予合法性的内涵。基于这一"权威性"的理论框架,有关司法审查规范性文件不同层次的模式可以得到初步建立。

The new Administrative Litigation Law formally confirms the court＇s reviewing power on administrative normative documents. In judicial practice, there are two types of review, including the review of legitimacy and the review of the legality. However, application of different standards is not regulated by any objective criteria, leading to a blurred line between executive and judicial power. Theoretically, factors that impact different levels of review by courts on normative documents consist of the documents＇ authority from the higher-level law, their function, political liability, forming mode and regulation fields, etc. These factors can be explained and justified through the concept of authority including both institutional authority and theoretical authority. Based on this theoretical framework of ＇authority＇, a preliminary pattern of different levels＇ review of normative documents can be established.