规范性文件司法审查的内容抵触判断标准研究

Research on the Criteria for Judging the Con-tent Contradiction of Judicial Review of Normative Documents

行政诉讼的目标在于解决行政争议,保障公民权益,监督依法行政。因此,法院应当对被诉行政行为的合法性作出判断,而对被诉行政行为合法性的判断离不开对其所依据的规范性文件的正确审查。抵触判断标准是在规范性文件权限合法前提下的内容审查标准,在司法实务中由于区分性的内容审查手段的缺失,各法院对行政规范性文件的内容抵触的判断标准不一,或紧或松,仅进行形式字面冲突的审查,导致了抵触判断标准内涵的过度简化,极大地影响了司法对行政的监督作用。因此,本文通过对法院审查规范性文件内容抵触判断标准的运用状况进行实证分析,指出规范性文件内容合法性审查的总体效果及存在的问题,同时以最高人民法院审查规范性文件内容抵触标准认定为基础进行分析,总结经验与规律,为司法适用的统一提出改进建议。

The goal of administrative litigation is to resolve administrative disputes, protect the rights and interests of citizens, and supervise lawful administration. Therefore, the court should make a judgment on the legality of the sued administrative act, and the judgment on the legality of the sued administrative act cannot be separated from the correct examination of the normative documents on which it is based. The judgment standard for conflict is a content review standard based on the legitimate authority of normative documents. In judicial practice, due to the lack of differentiated content review methods, courts have different judgment standards for the content conflict of administrative normative documents, which are either tight or loose. Only formal and literal conflicts are reviewed, resulting in an excessive simplification of the connotation of the judgment standard for conflict, greatly affecting the judicial supervision of administration. Therefore, this article conducts empirical analysis on the application of the criteria for determining the content conflict of normative documents in court review, and points out the overall effectiveness and existing problems of the legality review of normative document content. At the same time, based on the determination of the content conflict criteria of normative documents by the Supreme People’s Court, this article summarizes experience and rules, and proposes improvement suggestions for the unity of judicial application.