论我国公务员权利救济的路径规制

【作者】 黄迪安；

【导师】 祝小宁；

【作者基本信息】 电子科技大学 ， 宪法学与行政法学， 2009， 硕士

【摘要】 一直以来,公务员作为政府行政权的直接行使者,被视为是一个拥有特殊权力的强势群体,每当谈到其个人权利,社会总是表现出鄙夷的态度。加之我国素有重义务、轻权利的传统,与公务员权利相关的法律问题成为我国行政法学理论研究中的薄弱环节。美国著名法学家德沃金曾说:“如果政府不认真地对待权利,那么它也不能够认真地对待法律。”公务员身为普通公民的一员,其自身权利也应得到同等的对待。有权利则有救济,没有救济的权利就不是权利,当公务员的权利受到来自政府机关及其领导人员的非法侵犯时,依法得到救济是现代法治和人权理念的基本要求。2005年《中华人民共和国公务员法》颁布,我国公务员制度在规范化、法治化的道路上更进一步,肯定了申诉、控告、仲裁等基本公务员的权利救济方式,但宏观、模糊的法律条文却并未在现行僵化的公务员权利救济制度上有所突破,行政内救济难有实效、司法救济又基本被排除在外。法律形成权利、义务和权力的规则体系,而在我国的公务员代表政府依照法律行使权力进行社会管理,依照法律承担义务责任,却无法依照法律寻求到顺畅的权利救济路径使自己的权利得到保护。这种对公务员自身权利的悬置不仅是对个人权利的忽视,更是对公权力的纵容。笔者将目光投诸于我国公务员权利救济路径规制的问题上,结合域外经验和我国国情,对我国公务员权利救济路径选择及其规制进行探索。本文共分为五个部分。第一章主要是提出问题,简单介绍文章的研究意义、研究方法以及研究思路。在第二章中界定了公务员权利救济相关的核心概念,并对公务员权利救济的理论基础进行了分析,以确定研究背景,限定问题讨论的范围。第三章是对域外公务员权利救济制度的比较研究,笔者选取了英、美、日、法四个代表性国家作为研究对象,分析其救济路径的共通之处和特别设计点,以资后文选择中国路径之时有所借鉴。第四章将研究视角转回中国,梳理中国公务员权利救济路径的演变和立法现状,反思我国公务员权利救济路径的规制障碍和制度运行受阻的内部原因。最后在第五章中立足我国法治环境提出几种了可采取的路径选择方案和救济手段,并对其必要性和可行性逐一分析,探索出合适的救济路径,对选择确定的公务员权利救济路径进行规制,打通对实体和程序上的各个环节,形成切实可行的公务员权利救济路径。更多还原

【Abstract】 Civil servants, as direct government right executor are regarded as the advantaged group with special rights. When talking about individual rights, society is always showing contemptuous attitude to it, besides the Chinese tradition of duty before right makes the law relating to civil servant rights the weak links of administrative jurisprudence.Famouse American legal expert said:“if the gorvenment doesn’t take rights seriously then it can not treat law seriously.”As a member of the citizens, civil servant should be treat squarely in their rights. Where there is a right, there is a remedy. Rights can not be regarded as real rights without remedy. When the rights of civil servants are violated illegally by the government and its leaders, receiving redress according to law is the basic demand of idea of morden rule by law and rights. With the enactment of Civil Servant Law of the People’s Republic of China, civil servants system in china makes further development in the path to standardization and legalization, affirming these basic methods of civil servant rights remedy, including appeals, accusation, arbitration etc. ,but micro and vague law regulations haven’t made a break through in current ossified civil servant right remedy, causing administrative internal remedy hardly having actual effect and judicatory remedy excluded. Rights and duty system are formed by law, and in china civil servant on behalf of the government exercise rights to conduct social management according to law. They Take responsibility and conduct duty according to law but can not receive rights remedy to protect their own rights because there is no law relating to it.The suspending right of civil servant is not only a negligence of their own right but also a indulging of public rights. Thinking of Chinese civil servants remedy system constructed by the current law, I cast a perspective to the regulation of civil servant rights, combined with foreign experience and china’s situation, exploring the path chosen for Chinese civil servant remedy and it regulation.There are five chapters in this thesis. The first chapter is mainly about raising questions, presenting briefly the research meaning, method and concept of this paper. The second chapter defines the principal concept relating to civil servant rights, and analyzes theoretic basis of civil servant remedy to ascertain its research background and set the rang of discussion. The third chapter is comparative study of the foreign civil servant remedy system, I chose Britain, America , Japan and France, four of typical countries with mature regime as research objects, analyzing their commonness and differences, to use for reference of choosing Chinese path. The fourth chapter investigates the evolution of path to Chinese civil servant rights remedy and current legislation, and reviewing the regulative obstacles of the path of Chinese civil servant rights and regime running fettered by internal factors. The last chapter provides some adoptable plans for chosen path and remedy methods under Chinese legal circumstance, analyzing their feasibility and necessity, exploring a proper remedy path and regulating the chosen path of civil servant rights remedy, providing access to entity and process to form a practical and feasible path for civil servant rights remedy.更多还原