【摘要】 依据《行政诉讼法》第52条、第53条和《立法法》第79条,指导案例5号确立了"不予适用"规则。但是,这两类依据之间存在冲突与紧张关系:前者在整体上否定法官在法律规范冲突中的选择适用权;后者全面肯定法官对不同效力位阶的法律规范冲突的选择适用权。在这两种态度的背后,存在着对法源的强制约束力、人民代表大会制度以及报请裁决机制的理论认知的根本性对立。这一不可调和的矛盾,导致"不予适用"规则的参照运用范围模糊不清,影响指导性案例的功能发挥。根据最高人民法院以往在批复、座谈会纪要等规范性文件中的表述及其所显示的立场,指导案例5号意欲确立的"不予适用"规则的依据只能是《立法法》第79条,同时把《行政诉讼法》第52条、第53条作为依据,是由于没有明确意识到这两类依据之间的冲突而犯下的错误。因此,根据指导案例5号确立的规则,法院可以普遍地对违反上位法的下位法不予适用,以维护法制的统一,保证司法活动的独立与效率。更多还原

【Abstract】 Based on the articles 52, 53 of the "Administrative Procedural Law" and the article 79 of "Legislative Law", the No. 5 guiding case of the Supreme People’s Court established the rule of "inadmissibility". Nevertheless, these articles are in conflicts with each other. The articles 52, 53 of the "Administrative Procedural Law" generally negates judge’s power to choose the applicable law, while the article 79 of "Legislative Law" on a whole empowers the judge’s choice of law when facing the conflicts of legal norms with different hierarchy. The contradiction reflects the essential conflicts of the theoretical cognition of the binding force of the law sources, the system of people’s congress and the award system of the court. It leads to the vague application scope of the "inadmissibility" rule, and affects the functions of guiding cases. According to the position embodied in such regulatory documents as the replies and the symposium records of the Supreme People’s Court, the basis of the "inadmissibility" rule in No. 5 guiding case can only be article 79 of the "Legislative Law", and considering the articles 52, 53 of the "Administrative Procedural Law" as the basis indicates a mistake of not noticing the conflicts between the two bases. Therefore, based on the No. 5 guiding case, the court can generally deny the admissibility of the law which is in conflict with that at a higher level to maintain the unity of the legal system, and ensure the independence and efficiency of judicial activities.更多还原