论答复法律询问的效力——兼论全国人大常委会法工委的机构属性

发布时间：2018-11-14 14:34

【摘要】：答复法律询问是全国人大常委会法工委的立法后职能之一,其依据是《立法法》第55条。答复理论与实践中始终存在法律性质与效力的争论,有效说、无效说和应用解释说三种观点交织,制度的未来走向不甚明朗。答复的法律性质与效力受法工委辅助性机构属性所限制。备案不能证成答复的法律效力,其也不属于应用解释。答复制度可视作是对常委会立法解释工作滞后和备案监督机制未激活的一种体制内回应,实践中发挥了重要作用,虽然目前"有分无名",但应防止其超越创设之目的,成为破坏法律体系权威性和统一性的"木马"。"无名无分"和"有名有分"的两种改革方案,都有赖于常委会、法律委员会、法工委的组织和工作制度的进一步理顺。
[Abstract]:Answering legal inquiries is one of the post-legislative functions of the legal work Committee of the standing Committee of the National people's Congress, which is based on Article 55 of the Legislative Law. In the theory and practice of reply there has always been a debate on the nature and validity of the law. In effect, the theory of invalidity and the theory of applied explanation are intertwined, and the future direction of the system is not clear. The legal nature and effectiveness of the reply are limited by the subsidiary institutional attributes of the Commission of legal work. Filing cannot prove the legal effect of a reply, nor is it an applied interpretation. The reply system can be regarded as a kind of response within the system which is lagging behind the legislative interpretation work of the standing Committee and which has not been activated by the record supervision mechanism. It has played an important role in practice. Although it is "unknown" at present, it should be prevented from exceeding the purpose of its creation. It has become a Trojan horse that undermines the authority and unity of the legal system. " Both the nameless and famous reform plans depend on the further rationalization of the organization and work system of the standing Committee, the Law Commission, and the legal work Commission.
【作者单位】：西北政法大学行政法学院;
【基金】：司法部2012年度国家法治与法学理论研究项目“健全国家权力机关组织制度问题研究”(项目编号12SFB4006) 教育部2013年度哲学社会科学重大攻关项目“中国梦的重大意义、精神实质和实践要求研究”(项目批准号:13JZD001)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D622;D920.0

【参考文献】