發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-03-21 21:10

  本文選題：行政取證　切入點(diǎn)：非公開　出處：《華東政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：行政取證行為是行政法領(lǐng)域內(nèi)一個(gè)非常重要的行為環(huán)節(jié)和步驟，但是一直以來都沒有給予足夠的重視。尤其是非公開性的行政取證行為，在實(shí)際取證與執(zhí)法過程中經(jīng)常會(huì)出現(xiàn)不規(guī)范甚至違法的現(xiàn)象。2009年前后以上海某區(qū)交通部門的“釣魚執(zhí)法”事件以及深圳醫(yī)保部門醫(yī)�？ò翟L事件為導(dǎo)火索，行政非公開性的取證行為再一次進(jìn)入人們的視野。到現(xiàn)在，事件熱度雖然下降了，但行政領(lǐng)域內(nèi)的相關(guān)問題仍然沒有得到徹底的、有效的解決。筆者認(rèn)為，行政證據(jù)作為影響行政執(zhí)法、行政復(fù)議、行政訴訟的決定性因素，相關(guān)的規(guī)則、程序、界限，甚至相關(guān)行為的概念、內(nèi)涵以及外延都沒有一個(gè)公認(rèn)的、明確的通說，這必然會(huì)對(duì)我國(guó)的法治建設(shè)進(jìn)程產(chǎn)生極大的不良影響。 本文研究的目標(biāo)在于：第一，明確界定行政非公開取證行為的內(nèi)涵和外延，對(duì)類行政非公開取證的某些行為例如“釣魚執(zhí)法”、“誘惑取證”、“暗訪取證”等進(jìn)行比較，在此基礎(chǔ)上總結(jié)異同，明確概念的內(nèi)涵和外延；第二，對(duì)采取非公開手段取得的行政證據(jù)進(jìn)行效力認(rèn)定規(guī)則的建立，明確以何種方法取得的何種證據(jù)是有效的，以何種方法取得的何種證據(jù)是無效的。第三，探討建立救濟(jì)被非法行政非公開取證行為所侵害的相對(duì)人的方式與方法，分析其啟動(dòng)時(shí)機(jī)與啟動(dòng)條件。 本文以行政非公開取證的界定、啟動(dòng)與結(jié)束為脈絡(luò)，共分三個(gè)章節(jié)。第一章對(duì)行政非公開取證這一概念進(jìn)行了基本的界定。并通過與一些常見的、易與行政非公開取證行為混淆的類似取證行為，如：誘惑取證、暗訪取證等，進(jìn)行了對(duì)比。以此明確了本文所討論的行政非公開取證行為的內(nèi)涵與外延，為進(jìn)一步規(guī)制其中問題進(jìn)行了準(zhǔn)備。 第二章主要討論的是行政非公開取證行為的啟動(dòng)階段所面臨的問題。首先以必要性與合法性的角度論爭(zhēng)了行政非公開取證行為的存在基礎(chǔ)。接著以非公開取證行為的適用范圍為主題，通過分析實(shí)踐中存在的問題試著著手建立起適用案件類型的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。最后討論了非公開取證行為的主體選擇，，分析了其中亂象叢生的根本原因。 第三章分析了行政非公開取證行為的結(jié)束階段的規(guī)制問題。其中主要內(nèi)容包括：對(duì)非公開取證行為的救濟(jì)程序分為切入時(shí)機(jī)與啟動(dòng)條件進(jìn)行了分析、提出了建立證據(jù)規(guī)則的方式方法、尋求對(duì)受到了非法行政非公開取證行為的相對(duì)人進(jìn)行具體救濟(jì)的方法以及對(duì)行政非公開取證領(lǐng)域相關(guān)法律法規(guī)的完善提出了一些思路。
[Abstract]:Administrative forensics is a very important link and step in the field of administrative law, but it has not been paid enough attention to all the time. In the actual process of obtaining evidence and enforcing the law, there are often irregularities and even violations of the law. Around 2009, the incident of "fishing law enforcement" by a transportation department in a certain district of Shanghai and the accident of a medical insurance card in Shenzhen medical insurance department were cited as the trigger. The behavior of collecting evidence from the administrative non-public has once again come into people's view. Although the heat of the incident has decreased, the related problems in the administrative field have not been thoroughly solved. As a decisive factor affecting administrative law enforcement, administrative reconsideration, administrative litigation, relevant rules, procedures, boundaries, and even the concept, connotation and extension of related acts, administrative evidence has not been a universally accepted and clear general statement. This will inevitably have a great negative impact on the process of building the rule of law in our country. The purpose of this paper is: first, to define the connotation and extension of administrative non-public evidence collection, and to compare some behaviors of administrative non-public forensics, such as "fishing law enforcement", "temptation to obtain evidence", "secret interview to obtain evidence" and so on. On this basis, the similarities and differences are summarized, and the connotation and extension of the concept are clarified. Secondly, the establishment of rules for determining the effectiveness of administrative evidence obtained by non-public means, and the determination of what kind of evidence obtained by what method is effective. Third, it probes into the ways and methods of establishing relief for the counterpart who has been infringed by the illegal administrative non-public forensics, and analyzes its starting time and conditions. This paper is divided into three chapters: the definition, starting and ending of administrative non-public evidence. The first chapter gives a basic definition of the concept of administrative non-public forensics. The similar evidential behaviors which are easy to be confused with the administrative non-public forensics, such as enticement, secret interview and so on, are compared, and the connotation and extension of the administrative non-public forensics discussed in this paper are clarified. In order to further regulate the problems. The second chapter mainly discusses the problems in the starting stage of the administrative non-public forensics. Firstly, it argues the existence foundation of the administrative non-public evidence taking from the angle of necessity and legality. Then it uses the non-public evidence to collect evidence. The scope of application of the act is the subject, By analyzing the problems in practice, this paper tries to set up the judgment standard of the applicable case types. Finally, it discusses the choice of the subject of the behavior of non-public evidence collection, and analyzes the fundamental causes of the disorder. The third chapter analyzes the regulation of the end stage of the administrative non-public forensics, the main content of which includes: the relief procedure of the non-public forensics is divided into the entry time and the starting conditions. This paper puts forward the ways and means of establishing the rules of evidence, seeking the method of specific relief to the counterpart who has been subjected to illegal administrative non-public evidence collection, and puts forward some ideas for the perfection of the relevant laws and regulations in the field of administrative non-public forensics.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D922.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 張?chǎng)?;論在我國(guó)規(guī)制行政誘惑取證的設(shè)想[J];湖北經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年10期

2 金誠(chéng),王金鑫;對(duì)公安行政執(zhí)法取證方式合法性的調(diào)查與思考[J];山東公安�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2003年03期

3 楊志剛;美國(guó)誘惑偵查法理的新近發(fā)展及啟示[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)研究;2005年05期

4 謝金金;;讓行政取證戴著鐐銬跳舞——從“釣魚執(zhí)法”事件切入[J];商業(yè)文化(下半月);2011年03期

5 楊志剛;;英國(guó)誘惑偵查制度的評(píng)析與借鑒[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2006年02期

本文編號(hào)：1645555