行政事实行为之救济途径问题——从审判实践及制度效益考量

Judicial remedy approaches of administrative factual behavior

尽管针对违法行政事实行为单独设置确认判决在技术上不存在问题,但从实证分析及制度效益的角度看:1.我国行政诉讼法及相关司法解释并未将事实行为纳入其受案范围;2.我国现行行政程序司法审查制度以及国家赔偿制度,已经起到了控制和救济违法行政事实行为的功能;3.在我国行政诉讼中设置独立的确认违法判决制度作为行政事实行为的救济之道,理论与实践依据均不充分;4.从制度效益看,也不是一种有效益的制度设计。因此,在我国现行法律框架下,行政事实行为的救济之道应是充分利用现行的行政程序司法审查制度和国家赔偿制度,而不是将行政事实行为纳入行政诉讼受案范围。

Although there are no technical problems in the confirmation of the illegal administrative facts,but from the perspective of empirical analysis and institutional benefit:(1) The administrative litigation law and relevant judicial interpretations of China do not include the facts in the scope of their cases.(2) China's current administrative procedure judicial review system and the state compensation system have provided the function of controlling and relieving the illegal administrative facts.(3) In the administrative litigation in China, the independent confirmation of the illegal sentencing system as the remedy of administrative facts is not sufficient in theory and practice.(4) From the system benefit, also is not a kind of effective system design. Therefore,under the current legal framework, administrative fact behavior way of relief should be make full use of the current administrative procedure judicial review system and the system of state compensation, rather than administrative fact behavior should be brought into the scope of accepting cases of administrative litigation.