【作者】 张磊；

【导师】 程雁雷；

【作者基本信息】 安徽大学 ， 法律（非法学）（专业学位）， 2024， 硕士

【摘要】 乡镇政府作为地方政府体系中最基层的一级,在政策执行、社会稳定以及经济发展等方面肩负着重大职责。随着乡村振兴战略的深入推进,乡镇政府的作用和影响力日益凸显。自党的十八大以来,全国各地积极探索优化行政执法体制,将更多权力下放至基层单位,以更好地满足不同地区的管理需求。2021年修订后的《中华人民共和国行政处罚法》第24条授权省级地方政府根据当地实际需要,决定是否赋予乡镇政府承接基层治理所必要的行政处罚权。这一举措是在全面推动行政执法体制改革背景下的重要探索,对于完善基层治理体系、提升乡镇政府行政执法能力具有重要意义。但在实践过程中,乡镇政府在行使新的处罚权时,仍面临着法律适用、执法能力建设、缺乏有效监督等一系列的现实问题,这些问题制约了乡镇政府行政处罚权的规范行使,亟需引起高度重视并采取针对性措施加以解决。除引言与结语之外,本文分四个部分对乡镇政府的行政处罚权进行了探讨。第一部分,对乡镇政府行政处罚权的基本概念进行了梳理。首先分析乡镇政府的职权与职能;其次,从行政处罚的概念及特征界定入手,理解行政处罚权的深刻内涵与规范,为正确把握权力界限奠定了基础;最后,对乡镇行政权力下放的重要性进行了论述,主要表现为:提升基层治理能力、重塑行政执法体系、维持社会的和谐与稳定等方面。第二部分,聚焦于乡镇一级政府的行政处罚权,通过综合运用文献调研、查阅政府官网等多种方式,深入剖析了乡镇政府在行使处罚权过程中所呈现出的实践图景,了解我国各个省份下放行政处罚权的现状,搜集到部分具有代表性的省份为推动行政处罚权下放所作的不同的规定,分析这些规定的共同之处;又从乡镇政府承接行政处罚权的模式探索等视角,阐述了部分地区乡镇政府接受和行使行政处罚权的基本状况,总结其共同的特点。第三部分基于以上研究,了解目前乡镇政府在行使行政处罚权过程中所遭遇的现实困境,从四个角度深入剖析了制约基层行政处罚权有效实施的因素:一是乡镇政府行政处罚权的下放由省级决定,对赋权主体究竟是省级政府还是省级人大存在困惑;二是乡镇政府承接行政处罚权需要的前提为基层急需,然而在实践中会出现有些省份会将目前不适宜乡镇政府做出行政处罚的权力一并下放,对乡镇政府的工作造成了巨大的负担,不符合现实情况;三是乡镇政府由于自身条件问题,不能有效承接省级下放的行政处罚权,难以对执法能力进行提升;四是对乡镇政府行使行政处罚权监督不充分的问题。第四部分提出了优化乡镇政府行政处罚权的对策建议。一是进一步明确相关法律条文的释义,确定行政处罚权的下放主体应当是哪个机关以及面临适用冲突时如何进行权衡;二是省级地方在下放行政处罚权前应展开调研,了解基层所需,不应一刀切的下放所有县级机关工作部门的行政处罚权,而应有所保留的予以赋权,稳步推进放权步伐;三是通过多种途径加强乡镇政府的执法能力建设,让乡镇政府能够有效的承接行政处罚权;四是在对乡镇政府行权的监督层面,优化行政体制的内部监督与考核机制,并改善人大、司法机关和社会对其的外部监督,才能确保基层行政处罚权在法治的轨道上有序运转。更多还原

【Abstract】 Township governments,at the grassroots level of the local authority system,have a stake in the execution of polices,social stability and economic development.As the strategy of rural revitalisation advances,the role and influence of township governments are becoming more and more prominent.Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China(CPC),the country has been actively exploring the optimum systems of political enforcement and decentralize more rights to grass-roots entities,to better meet the management needs of different regions.2021 Article 24 of the revised Administrative Penalty Law of the People’s Republic of China empowers local governments at the provincial level to decide whether or not to give township and village governments the power to take over the administrative penalties necessary for grass-roots governance in accordance with the actual needs of the local community.This initiative is an important exploration in the context of comprehensively pushing forward the rebuilding of the executive law enforcement regime,which is of vital meaning in improving the grassroots governance system and enhancing the administrative law enforcement capacity of township governments.However,in the process of practice,when exercising the new penalty power,the township government still faces a series of practical problems such as the application of law,the construction of law enforcement capacity,and the lack of effective supervision,which constrain the standardised exercise of the township government’s administrative penalty power,and urgently need to pay great attention to it and take targeted measures to solve it.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,this paper addresses the authority of the township government to issue executive citations in four parts.In the first part,the essential notions of the executive punitive authority of the township halls were clarified.Firstly,it analyses the powers and functions of the township government;secondly,it starts from the definition of the concept of administrative penalty to understand the profound connotation and norms of the administrative penalty power,which lays the foundation for correctly grasping the boundaries of the power;lastly,it discusses the importance of the decentralisation of the township’s administrative power,which mainly manifests itself in the aspects of enhancing the grass-roots level’s ability of governance,reshaping the system of administrative law enforcement,and maintaining the harmony and stability of the society.In part two,the spotlight is on the right to impose executive sanctions at the commune level of government,through the comprehensive use of literature research,checking the official website of the government and other ways,we analyse the practice picture of the township government in the process of exercising the penalty power,learn about the present status of devolved executive authority to impose penalties of each province in our country,and collect the different regulations made by some representative provinces to promote the decentralisation of the administrative penalty power,and analyze the common features of these regulations;and from the township government to the township government to promote the decentralisation of the administrative penalty power.common features;and from the perspective of exploring the mode of accepting the authority to impose criminal penalties in rural government,the general condition of receiving and practicing the authority to impose chemical penalties by the rural people’s governments in some areas is elaborated,and their common features are summarized.Based on the above empirical research,the third part understands the practical difficulties encountered by the township government in the process of applying executive punishment,and analyses the key factors restricting the effective implementation of grassroots administrative punishment from four perspectives:firstly,decrease of authority to penalize rural government operations is subject to a provincial decision,and there are confusions about whether the main body of the authority is the provincial government or the provincial people’s congress;secondly,the prerequisite for township governments to take over the right to impose administrative penalties is an urgent need at the grass-roots,however,it is the provincial government that has the authority of the administrative punishment.However,in practice,some provinces will delegate the power to impose administrative penalties that are currently not suitable for the township government,which imposes a huge burden on the work of the township government and is not in line with the reality;thirdly,due to their own conditions,inability to effectively carry out provincial decentralized executive penalty powers,and it is difficult to improve their law enforcement capacity;fourthly,ineffective oversight of the practice of the rural government in exercising the right to apply administrative penalties.The fourth part puts forward countermeasures and suggestions to optimise the administrative penalty power of township governments.Firstly,the interpretation of the relevant legal provisions should be further clarified to determine which organ should be the subject of administrative punishment and how to make trade-offs in the face of conflicting applications;secondly,the provincial-level localities should carry out research and study before delegating the right to administrative punishment to understand the needs of the grassroots,and should not delegate across the board to all county organ work departments the right to administrative punishment,instead,they should be given the right to do it with some reservations,and steadily push forward the pace of delegating the right Thirdly,through a variety of ways to strengthen the township government’s law enforcement capacity building,so that the rural governments can effectively assume executive penalties;Fourth,At the level of supervision of the exercise of power by township governments,it is only by optimizing the internal supervision and assessment mechanisms of the administrative system and improving the external supervision by the National People’s Congress,the judiciary and society that we can ensure that grass-roots administrative punishment power operates in an orderly manner on the track of the rule of law.更多还原