行政诉讼撤销重作判决的司法适用研究

On the Judicial Application of Revocation and Redoing Judgment in Administrative Litigation

《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》(以下简称《行政诉讼法》)第70条将撤销重作判决规定为法定的判决方式,表明其存在的必要性获得立法确认。可以从规范主义视角下撤销重作判决立法严谨、功能主义视角下撤销重作判决功能彰显、系统论视角下撤销重作判决定位清晰等维度对行政诉讼撤销重作判决运行的正当性进行法治逻辑诠释。近年来法院适用撤销重作判决的数据说明司法实践对该种判决方式具有较多期待。然而,撤销重作判决在实践适用中尚存在对重作必要性标准理解存在偏差、重复责令重作对当事人救济无益、监督行政的实际效果与预设相去甚远、行政事项与判决特征匹配度不高等亟待解决的问题。因此,应当加深重作必要性标准的领悟、限缩撤销重作判决适用情形、准确把握监督行政尺度范围和科学区分匹配相应行政事项,为实质性解决行政争议提供保障。

Article 70 of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China(hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Procedure Law)stipulates the revocation and redoing judgment as a statutory judgment method,indicating that the necessity of its existence has been confirmed by legislation.From the perspective of normalism,the legislation of revocation and redoing judgement is rigorous;from the perspective of functionalism,the function of revocation and redoing judgement could be manifested;and from the perspective of system theory,the position of revocation and redoing judgement is clear.These aspects could interpret the legal logic of the legitimacy of the operation of revocation and redoing judgement in administrative litigation.In recent years,the data of the court's application of revocation and redoing judgment show that judicial practice has more expectations for this kind of judgment.However,in practice,there are still some problems that need to be solved:there is still deviation about the understanding of the necessity criteria of redoing,repeated order of redoing offers useless relief for the involved parties,the actual effect of supervisory administration is far from the expected,and the matching degree of administrative matters and judgment characteristics is not high.Therefore,we should deepen the understanding of the necessity criteria for redoing,limit the application of revocation and redoing judgment,accurately grasp the scope of supervisory administration and scientifically distinguish and match corresponding administrative matters,so as to provide guarantee for the substantive settlement of administrative disputes.