程序违法行政行为无效说之否定

Abandon the Rule of Administrative Act Invalidity due to Procedural Violations

新修订的《行政处罚法》规定:“违反法定程序构成重大且明显违法的,行政处罚无效。”哪些程序违法会导致行政处罚乃至所有行政行为无效亟待研究。通过检索裁判文书网和北大法宝的300多万份行政裁判文书,可以发现,自2000年以来我国中级以上三级人民法院以程序违法为由认定行政行为无效的仅有21份,且在其他案件中对同类的程序违法行政行为均作了截然不同的裁判,足见我国各级法院还没有发现公认的能致行政行为无效的程序违法情形。追溯“重大且明显违法”无效标准的立法渊源并从《行政诉讼法》第75条来解读,“重大且明显违法”应以“违背常理”和“维持不能”作为共同认定基准。采用这一标准并结合行政行为效力的一般原理,全面审视行政行为的所有程序瑕疵,可以看出,没有一种程序瑕疵可以达到“重大且明显违法”的无效要求从而能够导致行政行为无效。因此,应从根本上否定程序违法行政行为的无效制度。

The newly revised Administrative Penalty Law stipulates:"Administrative penalties are invalid if they are significantly and obviously illegal due to violation of legal procedures."In this context,it is urgent to study which procedural violations will lead to the invalidity of administrative penalties and all administrative actions.A search of over three million administrative judgment documents on the China Judgments Online and Pkulaw databases reveals that,since 2000,intermediate and higher-level people's courts in China have declared administrative actions invalid due to procedural violations in only 21 cases.Moreover,in other cases,similar procedural violations have received entirely different rulings,indicating that courts at various levels in China have not yet identified universally recognized procedural violations that can render administrative actions invalid.Tracing the legislative origins of the"significant and obvious illegality"invalidity standard and interpreting it in light of Article 75 of the Administrative Litigation Law,"significant and obvious illegality"should be commonly understood as"violating common sense"and"unsustainable".Applying this standard and considering the general principles of the effectiveness of administrative actions,a comprehensive review of all procedural defects in administrative actions reveals that no procedural defect meets the"significant and obvious illegality"requirement for invalidity that would lead to the invalidation of an administrative action.Therefore,the rule of invalidating administrative actions due to procedural violations should be fundamentally rejected.