摘要

    《行政程序法研究》一文从行政程序与诉讼程序的比较入手，在分析行政程序的特性基础上，对行政程序法进行了深入、系统的研究。论文共分八章：

第一章，行政程序与诉讼程序。笔者首先分析了行政程序的定义，认为行政程序是行政机关行使行政权力的程序，在现代社会具有双层含义，包括技术层面的行政程序和制约行政权力层面的行政程序。其次，对行政程序与诉讼程序作了比较研究，指出二者的异同及行政程序对诉讼程序的吸收、借鉴。提出行政程序不能完全司法化，只能结合行政程序自身的特点，适当吸收司法程序，在一定程度上实现司法化。

第二章，行政程序法的基础理论。笔者从批驳“程序法等于诉讼法”的观点入手，阐述了行政程序法的概念、渊源和功能。行政程序法作为程序法的一种，是指规范行政机关和相对人在行政程序中的权利义务关系的法律规范的总称，其中，又以行政机关的程序义务为规范的重点，主要规定了行政机关在行政程序中所应履行的程序义务。行政程序法的渊源包括宪法、行政程序法典、单行行政程序法律和程序与实体规范并存的单行法律文件。在现代社会，行政程序法具有以下三项功能：保证实体法正确实施、行政程序公正和实现资源优化配置、提高行政效率。

     第三章，行政程序法的历史发展。笔者分析了行政程序法产生的理论基础、现实条件和行政程序法发展的三个阶段，认为行政程序法的产生以法治理论、权力制约理论、人的主体性理论和程序正义理论为理论基础，而行政权力在现代化进程中的扩张带来的制约行政权力、提高行政效率的现实需要直接促使了行政程序法的出台。行政程序法的产生，是20世纪以来人类社会经济、政治以及法律文化深刻变革的综合产物。行政程序法的发展经历了三个阶段：第一阶段以奥地利为代表，立法的目的主要是提高行政效率；第二阶段以美国和德国为代表，这一阶段较之第一阶段，更强调对公民权利的保护；第三阶段以日本为代表，仍以促进行政的公开、透明，保护公民权利为主要内容，但立法的重心由欧美转移至亚洲。笔者最后概况总结了中国行政程序立法发展的三个阶段及相应的特点。

第四章，行政程序法的目标模式和体例模式。关于目标模式，笔者明确了目标模式的划分标准，指出目标模式的划分具有相对性，并对权利模式与效率模式进行了比较研究，提出中国未来行政程序法应该选择权利效率并重模式。关于体例模式，笔者明确了体例模式的划分标准，分析了分散规定式和统一法典式两种体例模式各自的优缺点，提出中国未来行政程序立法应选择统一法典式，但目前制定统一行政程序法典的时机尚未成熟，可以先在行政许可法、行政强制执行法中规定相应的行政程序，同时着手制定行政程序法的准备工作，等到时机成熟，不再制定单行的行政程序法律，转入制定统一的行政程序法典 。

第五章，行政程序法的适用范围、基本内容和立法架构。关于适用范围，笔者分析了适用范围的规定方式，适用行政程序法的主体和事项。关于基本内容，笔者指出行政程序法与行政法法典化的关系，认为行政程序法的基本内容可从三个方面界定：1、是否包括实体法；2、是否包括内部行政程序；3、是否包括行政复议程序。关于立法架构，笔者分析了程序与实体并存型行政程序法的立法架构和行政程序法程序性规定的立法架构，并对我国未来行政程序法的立法架构作出设想。

第六章，行政程序法的基本原则。笔者在总结我国行政程序法基本原则研究现状的基础上，首先对基本原则作了定位研究，指出：一方面，基本原则是行为准则，体现了公平、正义等法的价值追求，另一方面，基本原则又具有根本性，往往由思想原则和法律理论转化而来，需要通过具体原则和制度加以贯彻和执行，才具有可操作性；其次，对行政程序法基本原则体系作了总结，指出行政程序法基本原则与行政法的基本原则相吻合，具有两大特点：1、并不限于程序原则，还包括实体原则；2、并不限于公法原则，还包括私法原则；最后，详细论述了其中的程序性原则行政公开原则、参与原则、作出决定原则、程序及时原则。

第七章，行政程序法的核心制度──听证。本章分两部分：听证概述和正式听证制度，其中以正式听证制度为重点。因为听证在中国是一个使用非常混乱的概念，所以在听证概述部分明确了听证的含义、种类，分析了听证的功能和听证的适用范围。在正式听证部分，考虑到中国《行政处罚法》虽然规定了正式听证制度，但由于规定过于原则，给下一位阶的行政处罚程序立法和执法带来很大困难，因此，这一部分对国外正式听证制度进行了系统的比较研究，分析了国外行政程序法关于正式听证的适用范围、主体及正式听证中的各项具体制度，具有很强的实用价值。

第八章，行政程序法的法律责任机制。笔者提出行政程序权利义务的概念，指出行政机关违反行政程序义务，将承担相应的法律责任。针对行政程序违法责任要视实体是否违法而确定的观点，笔者提出行政程序不仅保证了实体法的实施，也保证了程序的公正，因此，程序并非实体的附庸，而是具有独立存在的价值，与此相对应，行政程序违法应承担独立的法律责任，不应视实体是否违法而确定。最后在分析国外关于程序违法法律后果规定的基础上，笔者提出我国应改变现行单一的行政程序违法责任机制，区别不同性质的行政程序，建立多样化的行政程序违法责任机制，论文对此提供了具体的规则。

A Study on Administrative Procedural Law

(Summary)

The book is composed of eight chapters.

    Chapter One: Administrative Procedure

First, the author analyzes the definition of administrative procedure and deems that administrative procedure is the procedure by which administrative organ enforces administrative power. In modern society, administrative procedure has dual meanings. One is from the perspective of technique. The other is from the perspective of controlling administrative power. Then, the author compares administrative procedure with judicial procedure in order to show the similarities and differences between two procedures and the experience which administrative procedure absorbs from judicial procedure.

Chapter Two: Basic Theories of APL

    Beginning with refuting the opinion that procedure law equates to judicial procedure law, the author elucidates concepts, origins and functions of administrative procedure law. As one of procedural laws, administrative procedure law regulates the rights and duties of administrative organs and individuals in enforcement of administrative power, especially the duties, which should be performed by administrative organs. The origins of administrative procedure law include constitutional law, administrative procedure code and other laws that prescribe administrative procedure. In modern society, administrative procedure law has three functions: guaranteeing enforcement of administrative substantial law, ensuring justice of administrative procedure and raising efficiency of administration.

    Chapter Three: Historical Development of APL

The author analyzes the reasons for resort to administrative procedure law. Administrative procedure law is based on the theory of rule by law, the theory of power restricting power, the theory of humanism and the theory of justice. During the process of modernization, administrative power boomed. People needed something to restrict the power and raise efficiency of administration. They found administrative procedure law. Since the birth of administrative procedure law, it has experienced three stages in its development. First, represented by Austria, administrative procedure law mainly aimed at raising efficiency of administration. Secondly, represented by USA, administrative procedure law paid more attention on individual right rather than efficiency. Thirdly, represented by Japan, administrative procedure law aimed at founding balance between protecting individual rights and raising efficiency of administration. At the third stage, administrative procedure law also focused on open and transparent administration, but the core of drafting administrative procedure law has transferred from Europe and America to Asia. In the last section of the chapter, the author summarizes legislative development of Chinese administrative procedure law.

Chapter Four: Aim Models and styles of APL

   Section one, aim models. There are two aim models in administrative procedure law------the right model and the efficiency model. The author makes comparative research on the two models and indicates that legislators should pay equal attention to individual right and efficiency of administration.

Section two, styles. There are also two styles of administrative procedure law---the law model and the code model. The law model means there is no administrative procedure code and regulations of administrative procedure are embodied in other laws. The code model means there is administrative procedure code. After analyzing the merits and demerits of two models, the author considers that although conditions for drafting Administrative Procedural Code of P. R. China have not matured, the legislators should struggle for the ideal step by step. The first step may be drafting several administrative laws such as Law of Administrative License and Law of Administrative Enforcement which consist of regulations concerning with administrative procedure. The second step may be drafting Administrative Procedure Code. Then, it may be the ripe time to draft the Code.

Chapter Five: Application Scope, Contents and Structure of APL

Section one, application scope. The author analyzes who abide by administrative procedure law and what subjects it is applied.

Section two, contents. The author explains the relationship between administrative procedure code and administrative code, and considers that contents of administrative procedure law could be analyzed by three aspects--whether or not including substantial regulations, whether or not including interior administrative procedure and whether or not including procedures of administrative review.

Section three, structure. The author analyzes the structure composed by both procedural regulations and substantial regulations and the structure composed by procedural regulations only, and then assumes the structure of China’s breeding administrative procedure law.

    Chapter Six: Principles of APL

After summarizing the present research on principles of administrative procedure law, the author defines principle of administrative procedure law firstly. On one hand, the principles are rules of action which embody the spirit of law, on the other hand the principles which always orient from ideas and theories of law are so abstract that they can not be executed without specific systems. Secondly, the author establishes a system of principles of administrative procedure law and points out they have two characteristics. One is the principles consist of not only procedural rules but also substantial rules. The other is the principles consist of not only public law rules but also private law rules. Thirdly, the author selects the procedural principles to go into details.

    Chapter Seven: Hearing--Key System of APL

    Section one, general description of hearing. Hearing is the key system of administrative procedure law, but in China, there are a lot of misunderstandings about hearing. So the author explains its concept and category and analyzes its function and application scope.

Section two, Formal hearing. Although Law of Administrative Penalty of P. R. China has regulations about formal hearing, the regulations are too general to be enforced. Moreover, the regulations have been impeding progress of legislating lower-level procedural law of administrative penalty. Thus, the author makes a lot of research on formal hearing of foreign countries and analyzes their subject, scope and specific rules. Nowadays, this research has important practical value in China.

    Chapter Eight: Liabilities of Violating APL

    If administrative organs violate administrative procedure law, they would bear legal responsibility. Liabilities of violating administrative procedure law should not rely on violating substantial laws. If administrative organs violate administrative procedure law, whether their deeds violate substantial laws or not, they should bear legal responsibility. Liability of violating administrative procedure law should exist independently. Administrative procedure law not only guarantees enforcement of administrative substantial law but also ensures procedural justice. Thus, any one who violates administrative procedure law should bear legal responsibility independently.