【作者】 王迪；

【导师】 刘松山；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 法学， 2025， 硕士

【摘要】 行政复议制度是法治政府建设进程中实质性化解行政争议、监督行政权和保障公民合法权益的法律制度。行政复议受案范围作为行政复议的“入口关”,不仅影响行政复议主渠道作用的发挥,而且影响行政监督和权利救济功能的实现。从历史沿革来看,行政复议受案范围呈现不断扩大的趋势,然而2023年新修订的《行政复议法》关于受案范围的规定仍然存在不足。首先,在有关受案范围的规范性表述中,立法部门将“具体行政行为”修改为“行政行为”,造成法律条文缺乏融贯性;由于“行政行为”的法律概念界定模糊,给实务部门带来了一定的困扰。其次,此次受案范围的扩大幅度有限,部分行政争议仍然被排除在受案范围之外,无法满足行政复议化解绝大多数行政争议的需要。再次,修改后的复议受案范围与诉讼受案范围在衔接方面出现了衔接不畅和同质化的难题。这些问题影响了行政复议制度的正常运行,因此必须加以解决。为了解决上述问题,本文剖析了造成这些问题的原因,主要有三个方面:其一,行政复议受案范围在修改时过于依赖行政诉讼受案范围的相关规定;其二,一直沿用下来的混合式立法模式存在弊端,这是影响受案范围扩大幅度的重要因素,也是影响复议和诉讼相衔接的重要因素;其三,当前无论是理论界还是实务界均未对行政复议受案范围的边界形成共识,所以对其完善仍然存在诸多值得探讨的空间。基于上述问题和原因,本文建议借鉴域外行政复议受案范围的相关经验,结合我国国情,以“‘主渠道’的数量优先”和“应收尽收”为原则,进一步明确“行政行为”的法律概念和受案范围的判断标准,为实务部门提供明确的指引;通过采用“肯定式概括+否定式列举”的立法模式和将部分内部行政行为以及部分抽象行政行为直接纳入行政复议受案范围的方式增加受案范围的扩大幅度,以期解决更多的行政争议。同时,还要建立健全相关配套机制,为行政复议受案范围的大幅度扩大提供支撑。更多还原

【Abstract】 The administrative reconsideration system serves as a legal mechanism in the construction of a law-based government,enabling the substantive resolution of administrative disputes,supervising administrative power,and safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of citizens.The scope of acceptable cases in administrative reconsideration,acting as the"gateway" to the system,not only influences the effectiveness of administrative reconsideration as a "primary channel" for dispute resolution but also determines the realization of its dual functions—administrative supervision and rights relief.Historically,the scope of acceptable cases in administrative reconsideration has shown a trend of gradual expansion.However,the provisions on this scope in the newly revised Administrative Reconsideration Law of 2023 still exhibit deficiencies.First,in the normative expressions defining acceptable cases,the legislative shift from "specific administrative acts"to "administrative acts" has resulted in a lack of coherence in legal provisions.Additionally,the ambiguous legal definition of "administrative acts" has caused confusion in practical application.Second,the expansion of the scope remains limited,with certain administrative disputes still excluded,failing to meet the demand for resolving the majority of administrative conflicts through reconsideration.Third,the revised scope of cases accepted for reconsideration and the scope of cases accepted for litigation have encountered problems of poor connection and homogenization in terms of their interface.These issues undermine the effective functioning of the administrative reconsideration system and must be addressed.To resolve these problems,this paper analyzes their root causes,which primarily include three aspects:First,the revision process overly relied on provisions related to the scope of administrative litigation.Second,the longstanding hybrid legislative model has inherent flaws,which not only restrict the expansion of acceptable cases but also hinder coordination between reconsideration and litigation.Third,neither academia nor practitioners have reached a consensus on the boundaries of the scope of acceptable cases,leaving significant room for improvement.In light of these issues and their causes,this paper proposes recommendations informed by international experiences in administrative reconsideration,tailored to China’s context.Guided by the principles of "prioritizing quantity as the primary channel" and"inclusive coverage,"it suggests clarifying the legal concept of "administrative acts"and establishing clear criteria for determining acceptable cases to provide practical guidance.By adopting an"affirmative generalization+negative enumeration" legislative model and explicitly incorporating certain internal and abstract administrative acts into the scope,the system could resolve a broader range of disputes.Concurrently,supporting mechanisms should be established to facilitate the substantial expansion of the scope of acceptable cases,ensuring robust implementation.更多还原