【作者】 孙蕾；

【导师】 彭贵才；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 宪法学与行政法学， 2013， 硕士

【摘要】 我国行政法学理论体系主要是以行政行为理论为中心构建的，行政行为又可分为行政作为与行政不作为。目前，我国行政法学界对行政行为的研究主要集中在行政作为层面，而对行政不作为则缺乏系统性的研究，在与之相应的法律制度设计上也呈现相对空白状态。但在现实生活中行政不作为现象却是大量存在，工商机关不为符合条件的申请人颁发许可证，质检部门疏于履行质量监管职责……身负法定行政作为义务的公权力主体，在具有履行该义务能力之场合,不履行相应义务的违法行政行为就是行政不作为，这种行为往往直接或间接侵犯了行政相对人的合法权利并给其造成损害。我国《国家赔偿法》规定了行政机关违法行使行政职权侵犯公民、法人和其他组织合法权益，造成损害的，受害人有取得国家赔偿的权利。不履行职权与违法行使职权产生的实质效果相同，都侵犯了行政相对人的合法权益，给其造成损失，是符合国家赔偿制度设立之条件的违法行为。然而我国法律中却并无行政相对人合法权益受到行政不作为侵害遭受损失时，能够请求国家赔偿之明确规定。这对公民、法人及其他组织权利的保护是很不利的。无论是在理论层面还是实践操作层面，确立行政不作为国家赔偿责任都是必要且具有重要意义的。第一，便于督促公权力主体积极作为、树立政府权威形象、加快服务型政府的建设；第二，能够更加全面、充分的保护行政相对人合法权益；第三，体现了宪法中国家尊重和保障人权的原则和精神，符合国家赔偿制度的发展趋势。在分析了确立行政不作为国家赔偿责任的必要性及价值后，本文对行政不作为国家赔偿责任之构成要件重点展开论述。笔者认为其构成要件主要包括以下几方面：第一，负有行政作为义务的公权力主体在能够履行该义务的前提下，客观上实施了行政不作为的违法行为。此处的主体为侵权行为主体，包括行政机关及其工作人员，法律、法规授权的组织以及受行政机关委托的组织或个人；行政作为义务指的是法定义务，不包括道德层面的义务；具有履行法定作为义务的能力，却在程序或实体上未履行具体的行政作为义务，是承担国家赔偿责任的前提。第二，行政不作为给行政相对人合法权益造成实际损害。这种损害必须是已经发生、客观存在的实际损害，且损害的必须是特定行政相对人的合法利益，如果损害的是公共利益或是非法利益，均不会引起国家赔偿责任。第三，行政不作为行为与损害之间存在因果关系。只要公权力主体未履行的义务是为保护受损利益，且若义务正常履行，损害必然不会发生或扩大，那么行政不作为行为与损害结果之间就存在因果关系，公权力主体就应当承担相应的国家赔偿责任。文章的最后，笔者试图对我国《国家赔偿法》提出几点完善建议，即在总则中明确行政不作为的国家赔偿责任；并根据行政不作为国家赔偿责任构成要件，在分则中具体规定行政不作为的赔偿范围、原则及方式。基于我国《国家赔偿法》尚未明确确立行政不作为的国家赔偿责任，笔者主要从理论层面阐述了行政不作为国家赔偿责任相关问题，进而为我国行政立法提供理论依据。相信随着社会的发展，行政不作为国家赔偿责任无论在理论、立法及实践操作中都会日渐成熟、不断完善。更多还原

【Abstract】 China’s Administrative Law system is based on the theory of administrative actsas the center. The administrative act can be divided into administrative behavior andadministrative omission. At present, the administrative act that China’s administrativelaw scholars mainly pay attention to is on administrative level. In contrast,administrative omission is lack of systematic research and shows relatively blankcorresponding to the legal system design.However, a great deal of administrative omission happens in real life. Forexample, industrial and commercial authorities do not issue licenses to eligibleapplicants, quality inspection departments do not do well in the quality supervisory asduties...... administrative omission is the illegal administrative act that publicauthorities who are burdened by administrative Laws as the obligations, do not fulfillthe corresponding obligations on the occasions that they should fulfill. This behavioroften directly or indirectly infringes on the legal rights of the administrativecounterpart and causes damage. According to China’s State Compensation Law,victims have the right to get the state compensation if the administrative authoritiesillegally use administrative powers and infringe upon the legitimate rights andinterests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations, which cause damage. Donot fulfill and illegally use administrative powers generate the same effect as aviolation of the legitimate rights and interests of the administrative counterpart, whichare violations in accordance with the State Compensation System. However, there areno clearly provisions in our law about requesting state compensation when thelegitimate rights and interests of the administrative counterpart are infringed. So it hasbad influence on protection of rights of citizens, legal persons and otherorganizations.It is necessary and of great significance to establish the state compensation foradministrative omission both at the theoretical level and the operational level. First, itis easy to supervise public authorities to behave well, to establish the authority imageof the government, and to speed up the construction of service-oriented government;Second, it helps to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the administrative counterpart more comprehensively and adequately. Third, it reflects the principles andspirit of the Constitution state in respecting and safeguarding human rights, which isin line with the trend of development of the state compensation.After the analysis of the necessity and value of establishing the statecompensation liability for administrative omission, this paper discusses the elementsof the state compensation liability for administrative omission, and the mainconstitutive elements include the following aspects: First, public authorities who areburdened by administrative Laws as the obligations objectively practiceadministrative omission offenses under the premise of that they are capable offulfilling the obligations. The authorities are the subject of violations, includingadministrative authorities and their staff, an organization authorized by the laws andregulations as well as organizations or individuals commissioned by theadministrative authorities; administrative obligations refers to the legal obligations,not including the obligation of the moral level; to be charged with the statecompensation ability is based on that they have the capacity to fulfill but fail to fulfillthe obligations of administrative behavior. Second, administrative omission causesactual damage to the administrative counterpart. Such damage must have beenoccurred, exist actual damage, and the damage is about the legitimate interests of theadministrative counterpart. If the damage is about the public interest and illegalprofits, it will not give rise to state compensation liability. Third, there is a causalrelationship between administrative omission and actual damage. As long as thefailure to fulfill the obligations of the public authorities is to protect the damagedinterests, and the normal obligations can decrease the damage or even preventdamage, there is a causal relationship between the behavior of administrativeomission and the damage result. On this occasion, the public authorities should bearstate liability.At the end of the paper, the author attempts to make a few suggestions forimprovement, including giving clearly state liability of the administrative omission inthe State Compensation Law; stipulating compensation range, principles and methodsof the administrative omission in accordance with constitutive elements of statecompensation liability in sub-rule. As China’s State Compensation Law has not been clearly established the statecompensation liability of administrative omission, the author explains related issuesabout the state compensation liability of administrative omission on theoretical level,which provides a theoretical basis for legislation. With the development of society,the theory, legislation and practice of the state compensation liability foradministrative omission will be maturing, and constantly improve.更多还原