论行政诉讼原告资格的审慎审查义务——基于行政协议第三人诉讼的省思

On the Obligation of Prudential Review of Plaintiff Qualification in Administrative Litigation:Reflections on Third Party Litigation Based on Administrative Agreement

现有关于行政诉讼原告资格的探讨多集中于实体标准,而忽略了程序维度的标准。行政协议第三人诉讼实践表明,实体标准无法保证法官裁判时的审慎性。常见的行政协议第三人类型有集体成员型、承租人型、继承人型、债权人型、抵押权人型等,实践中人民法院对各类型第三人原告资格的审查并不充分。利害关系条款为起诉人原告资格的获得保留着最后可能,对利害关系的否定性裁断必须是审慎考量所有利害关系可能性之后的判断。于原告诉请范围内,人民法院对原告资格的审查态度应由消极证否到积极证成转变,审查路径应由分别对行政相对人身份、特殊规定、利害关系审查的分散扁平化路径向从行政相对人身份到特殊规定再到利害关系审查的纵向递进式路径转变。

Existing discussions on plaintiff qualification in administrative litigation mostly focus on substantive criteria, but neglect procedural dimension criteria. The practice of third party litigation in administrative agreement shows that substantive standards cannot guarantee the judgment prudence of judges. In practice, the third-party plaintiffs of administrative agreement are collective member plaintiff, lessee plaintiff, heir plaintiff, creditor plaintiff, mortgage plaintiff, etc. In practice, the court’s review of the qualifications of various types of plaintiffs is insufficient. Interest clause reserves the final possibility for the acquisition of plaintiff qualification. Negative adjudication of interest should be judged after careful consideration of all the possibilities of interest. Within the scope of the plaintiff’s request, the court’s attitude towards the review of plaintiff’s qualification should be changed from negative evidence to positive evidence. The review path should be changed from the horizontal flattening of the review of the identity of the administrative counterpart, special provisions and interests of the parties to the agreement to the vertical progressive path from the identity of the administrative counterpart to the special provisions and then to the review of interests.