法学研究
法學研究
법학연구
Cass Journal of Law
2014年
2期
46~60
,共null页
行政许可标准 裁量基准 规范冲突
行政許可標準 裁量基準 規範遲突
행정허가표준 재량기준 규범충돌
standard of administrative licensing, criteria of discretion, normative conflict
行政许可标准,是对行政许可的法定条件,程序的解释和细化,在学理上属于许可的裁量基准,在功能上构成了许可获得的限制性条件,在形式上表现为一个自上而下的“阶梯式”规范体系。在相对集中行政许可视角下,市场准入过程往往是多个单一许可组成的复合许可过程,由此产生了不同部门问实体和程序标准的冲突现象。其发生的内在机理是行政权及许可背后的部门利益与家长主义规制,外在形式则表现为复数机关参与的异位规范间的冲突,性质上多属经验冲突而非逻辑冲突。由此,解决的路径在于:一是现行行政服务中心基础上不断修正的行政协调模式;二是具有共性效力之协调技术的提炼;三是通过基准制定和公布义务的规则治理。
行政許可標準,是對行政許可的法定條件,程序的解釋和細化,在學理上屬于許可的裁量基準,在功能上構成瞭許可穫得的限製性條件,在形式上錶現為一箇自上而下的“階梯式”規範體繫。在相對集中行政許可視角下,市場準入過程往往是多箇單一許可組成的複閤許可過程,由此產生瞭不同部門問實體和程序標準的遲突現象。其髮生的內在機理是行政權及許可揹後的部門利益與傢長主義規製,外在形式則錶現為複數機關參與的異位規範間的遲突,性質上多屬經驗遲突而非邏輯遲突。由此,解決的路徑在于:一是現行行政服務中心基礎上不斷脩正的行政協調模式;二是具有共性效力之協調技術的提煉;三是通過基準製定和公佈義務的規則治理。
행정허가표준,시대행정허가적법정조건,정서적해석화세화,재학리상속우허가적재량기준,재공능상구성료허가획득적한제성조건,재형식상표현위일개자상이하적“계제식”규범체계。재상대집중행정허가시각하,시장준입과정왕왕시다개단일허가조성적복합허가과정,유차산생료불동부문문실체화정서표준적충돌현상。기발생적내재궤리시행정권급허가배후적부문이익여가장주의규제,외재형식칙표현위복수궤관삼여적이위규범간적충돌,성질상다속경험충돌이비라집충돌。유차,해결적로경재우:일시현행행정복무중심기출상불단수정적행정협조모식;이시구유공성효력지협조기술적제련;삼시통과기준제정화공포의무적규칙치리。
Administrative licensing standard is the interpretation and elaboration of the statutory conditions and procedures of administrative licensing. Theoretically it belongs to the criteria of discretion in administrative licensing, functionally it constitutes the sum of all restrictive conditions for obtaining a license, and formally it is manifested in a top-down "ladder-structure" norm system. From the perspective of relatively concentrated administrative licensing, the market access process is often a complex licensing process consisting of more than one single licensing, resulting in conflicts between substantive and procedural licensing standards adopted by different government departments. The internal causes for such conflicts are departmental interests behind the power of administrative licensing and paternalistic mode of regulation, the external manifestations of such conflicts are the conflicts between different levels of legal norms adopted by different administrative agencies, and most of them are em- pirical, rather than logical conflicts. There are three main solutions to these conflicts, i.e. , continu- ously improvement of the current mode of administrative coordination, development of general coordination techniques through the summarization of individual cases, and adoption and promulgation of a comprehensive standard on administrative discretion.