内部行政行为的可诉性分析

External Standard Analysis of Internal Administrative Action

内部行政行为在实践中一般以“不可诉为原则,可诉为例外”,随着理论和司法案件中裁判观点的逐渐转变,内部行政行为在符合一定外部化标准之下能够具备可诉性,成为共识。但在涉及内部行政行为的判断上究竟要符合什么样的标准才能被认为是产生外部化而具有可诉性,仍然存在争议。在实践中,哪一类行为归于内部,哪一类行为归于外部,没有一个泾渭分明的界限。整个行政系统存在着一个纵横交错的权利分配和运行机制,行政机关对外作出的每一个具有法律效力的决定,在作出之前通常都要经过一定的内部程序。为了保障行政决策的高效率和正当性,保障公民的基本诉权,下级机关的审查建议、上级机关下达的批复以及集体决策过程中的会议纪要和备案等内部行政行为应被纳入司法考量。

In practice, internal administrative acts generally follow the principle of "no prosecution, but prosecution as an exception". With the gradual transformation of the theory and the view of judgment in judicial cases, it has become a consensus that internal administrative acts can be litigious under certain externalized standards. However, there is still a controversy over what criteria should be met in the judgment of internal administrative acts to be considered as external and actionable. In practice, there is no clear line between what kind of behavior is internal and what kind of behavior is external. There is a crisscross right distribution and operation mechanism in the whole administrative system. Every decision made by an administrative organ with legal effect usually goes through certain internal procedures before it is made. In order to ensure the high efficiency and legitimacy of administrative decisions and protect citizens' basic right of action, internal administrative acts such as the review suggestions of lower organs, the approval replies issued by higher organs and the minutes and records of meetings in the collective decision-making process should be taken into judicial consideration.