实体、程序并重—公共利益的双维度界定

发布时间：2018-06-27 00:59

本文选题：公共利益 + 实体标准　；参考：《扬州大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：无论是在法学理论中还是在规范性法律文件中,“公共利益”都是一个使用极其频繁的概念。公共利益是一个和私人利益相对的概念,公共利益的合理界定直接关系到私人利益的保护问题。公共利益和私人利益的关系,本质上是一个公权力和私权利的关系问题。其在公法领域和私法领域具有迥异的价值取向。①这种分裂的价值取向使得公共利益成为一个异常复杂的问题：过分地保护公共利益很容易造成公权力的滥用,但对公共利益保护不足又会对私人利益造成损害。究竟何为“公共利益”,又该如何适度把握公共利益,我国相关法律都没有给出明确的界定和规则,因而也给实践中行政执法和司法审判造成了难题。如果公共利益界定不明确,公权力完全可以借公共利益之名侵犯私人利益。公共利益的模糊性决定了公权力部门极其容易借公共利益之名侵犯私人利益,最为典型的就是在城市房屋拆迁过程中,地方政府出于土地财政的需要,为商业开发披上公共利益之名,拆迁民房,侵害私人利益。公共利益的界定直接关系到公民私人利益,因此公共利益的界定应该允许利益受影响的民众参与,让民众通过行政程序和司法程序,对公共意义的形成发挥影响甚至决定性作用。2011年颁布实施的《国有土地上房屋征收与补偿条例》(以下简称《新条例》)对被拆迁对象的参与作了相应的程序性规定。通过完善征收程序,扩大公众参与,禁止建设单位参与搬迁,取消行政机关自行强制拆迁的规定,加强和改进群众工作,把强制减到最少。受此启发,本文尝试对公共利益的界定程序加以研究。公共利益的程序界定的出发点和落脚点在于公共利益界定过程中私权利对公权力的制约,在于私权利的保护。公共利益的程序界定,使得公共利益的形成过程是一个“看得见的正义”的过程。由于程序的“作茧自缚”效果,公民参与形成的公共利益增强了公共利益的民众“可接受性”,即使自己的利益可能受损,也能让民众从心底里接受政府关于公共利益的决定。本文的研究目的：一是通过分析传统法律从实体角度对公共利益的界定及其弊端,引入程序性保障,使无法从实体上明确的公共利益,转向从实体和程序两个角度加以规制。二是通过从程序方面对公共利益的界定,恢复程序正义,再结合实体正义,将公共利益的“假冒形态”逐出公共利益的范围,维护个人的合法权益,防止假借“公共利益”肆意侵犯私人利益行为的出现,防止公共利益泛化问题,充分保障公民权利。本文的研究方法：传统理论的超越需要借助科学的研究方法。研究方法的科学性是研究结论科学性的重要保障,正如马克思所说：“不仅探讨的结果应当是合乎真理的,而目.引向结果的途径也应当是合乎真理的。真理探讨本身应当是合乎真理的,合乎真理的探讨就是扩展了真理。”①基于对上述方法论的理解,基于学术界关于公共利益的探讨,笔者认为要在公共利益的研究上有所突破首先要找出为什么公共利益会成为一个“问题”,通过列举当前立法现状,找到公共利益与其他事物的关系,进而转换我们研究的思维方式。在沿用旧的实体研究进路——企图通过下定义的方式来简单地解决公共利益这一有着复杂内涵的问题——是行不通的,应尝试从程序的角度进行。因此,笔者提出利用听证程序、信息公开程序和司法程序中扩大司法审判范围等具体的制度来实现公共利益。以上主要采取理论研究和实证分析相结合的方法进行。需要说明的是,通过程序来界定公共利益并不否定实体研究的价值。实体方面的界定主要是从合理性原则、诚信原则等出发。在这样一个规则下才能更好地引出程序方面的内容。这里主要采取比较各国的立法例即比较分析的方法进行。笔者的研究思路全面表述为：概念—原则—程序。以此来保障公共利益的实现。实质上,这既采用了实体的方式,也采用的了程序的方式。本文的研究成果：通过分析从实体方面界定公共利益的现实困境,借鉴中外学者关于公共利益复杂内涵的研究成果,总结出了判定公共利益的实体标准。同时探索出了从程序来界定和规制公共利益的可行性,并设计了从程序方面界定公共利益的途径,分别从行政、司法程序界定和规制公共利益。本文分绪言、正文和结语三个部分。绪论部分简述了研究现状和研究价值。正文的基本框架如下：第一部分阐述了公共利益实体的界定及存在的问题。在本部分中列举了我国各部法律中对“公共利益”的规定,提出了各不相同的公共利益实现路径面临的困境。这些不仅是公共利益观念的重要组成部分,也为笔者研究国内对公共利益的界定提供了基础素材。第二部分分析了行政法上程序正义的相关理论,论述了程序正义与实体正义的关系,通过各国的立法例和司法实践,展现程序的独立价值和其对界定公共利益的重要意义。第三部分提出了重构公共利益的方法即要实体、程序并重,从实体和程序两个维度来界定公共利益。在合理原则和诚信原则的指导下,实体上着重强调界定的标准,程序上着重进行行政程序和司法程序的构建。并且尝试在私权领域对公共利益的界定进行探讨,利用公共利益界定这一工具性手段,达到使公共利益的实现过程符合法治社会基本要求的目的。最后为本文的结语。本部分重申了从实体和程序两个方面界定公共利益的必要性。通过正当程序的设置,以期保障合法、公正、准确地界定公共利益的目标最终能够得以实现,以期真正保障公权力介入的正当性与合法性,在公权力之下更好地保障公民的私人利益。
[Abstract]:Public interest is one of the most frequently used concepts . Public interest is the relation between public interests and private interests .

The definition of public interest is directly related to the private interests of the citizens , so the definition of public interest should allow the people affected to participate in the public interest , so that the public can play an even decisive role in the formation of public interest through administrative procedures and judicial procedures .

The definition of public interest is the restriction of public interest in the definition of public interest , which is the protection of public interest . The procedure of public interest is defined by the procedure of " visible justice " .

The purpose of this paper is to introduce procedural safeguard by analyzing the definition of public interest from the entity angle of traditional law , and to regulate them from two angles of entity and procedure .

Based on the understanding of the above methodology and the discussion of the public interest , the author thinks that it is necessary to find out the relationship between public interest and other things .

The research results of this paper : By analyzing the realistic predicament of defining the public interest from the entity aspect , we draw lessons from the research results of the Chinese and foreign scholars on the complex connotation of public interest , and conclude the entity standard for judging the public interest . At the same time , the feasibility of defining and regulating the public interest from the program is explored , and the ways to define the public interest from the procedural aspects are designed , and the public interest is defined and regulated separately from the administrative and judicial process .

This paper is divided into three parts : introduction , text and conclusion .

The introduction part briefly describes the research situation and the research value .

The basic framework of the text is as follows :

In the first part , the definition and existing problems of public interest entities are expounded . In this part , the article lists the provisions of the " public interest " in the laws of our country , and puts forward the difficulties that different public interests realize the path . These are not only the important part of the public interest concept , but also the basic material for the author to study the definition of public interest in China .

The second part analyzes the relevant theories of procedural justice in administrative law , discusses the relationship between procedural justice and entity justice , demonstrates the independent value of the procedure and its significance to define the public interest through the legislative and judicial practice of all countries .

The third part puts forward the method of reconstructing the public interest , namely , the entity , the procedure and the two dimensions of the entity and procedure to define the public interest . Under the guidance of the reasonable principle and the good faith principle , the definition of the public interest is emphasized on the entity , and the definition of the public interest in the area of the private right is discussed , and the purpose of making the realization process of the public interest accord with the basic requirements of the rule of law society is achieved .

Finally , this part reiterates the necessity of defining the public interest from both the entity and the procedure . Through the establishment of due process , in order to guarantee the legality , justice and accurately define the public interest , it can finally be realized , in order to guarantee the legitimacy and legality of the intervention of the public power , and to guarantee the private interests of the citizens better under the public power .
【学位授予单位】：扬州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D920.4

【参考文献】