行政诉讼被告延期举证制度中“正当事由”判断路径之探析——以《行政诉讼法》第三十六条第一款为中心

Analysis the Criterion for Judgement of “Legitimate Reasons”in the Defendant Delayed Proof System of the Administrative Procedure Point Central——Take Section 1 of Article 36 of the Administrative Procedure Law as the Central Point

2014年《行政诉讼法》修改时,正式确立了行政诉讼被告延期举证制度。《行政诉讼法》及相关司法解释均未对作为被告延期举证制度之核心构成要件的"正当事由"作精细化规定,导致司法实践中"正当事由"的认定存在混乱,这根源于"正当事由"判断标准的缺失。行政诉讼被告延期举证制度中"正当事由"的准确判决应包含两点:一是一般理性人无法抗御的客观情形;二是被告尽力后也无法预见和避免。应以"自然灾害""社会突发事件"等"不可抗力"为法定免责事由,同时非被告自身原因的客观事由也可成为"正当事由",但应从严解释,以促成该制度的良性运转。

When the Administrative Procedural Law was amended in 2014, the defendant delaying proof system was formally established. But the Administrative Procedure Law and relevant judicial interpretations didn＇ t explicate the ＂legitimate reason＂ for the defendant delaying proof system completely, or lead to confusion in the judicial practice of ＂legitimate reasons＂. In a word,it＇ s owing to the absence of the criterion for judgement of ＂legitimate reason＂. The accurate judgement of the ＂legitimate reasons＂ in the defendant delaying proof system should include two points：first, the objective situation that the general rational person can not resist; second,the defendant can not foresee and avoid it when he tries his best. Based on the ＂natural disaster＂, ＂social emergencies＂ and ＂force majeure＂ for the statutory exemptions,and those objective reasons that not for the defendant＇ s own reasons can also belong to the ＂legitimate reason＂. Instead, it should be strictly interpreted, in order to facilitate the healthy functioning of the system.