社会矛盾在现代法治化进程的过程中呈现出复杂化的趋势,纠纷类型化特征对纠纷解决机制多样化提出了更迫切的需求。行政裁决是经过外国司法实践所证实的一种能够有效弥补司法资源不足的替代性纠纷解决方式。当前我国行政裁决制度还存在...社会矛盾在现代法治化进程的过程中呈现出复杂化的趋势,纠纷类型化特征对纠纷解决机制多样化提出了更迫切的需求。行政裁决是经过外国司法实践所证实的一种能够有效弥补司法资源不足的替代性纠纷解决方式。当前我国行政裁决制度还存在许多有待完善的地方,例如行政裁决主体缺乏独立性,程序性规则不够严格,救济体系难以彻底解决纠纷,且在法律称谓上没有统一形式,易导致司法实践混乱等。英美行政裁决制度可为我国行政裁决制度的改革提供经验和借鉴,我国应当进一步明确行政裁决的法律称谓,确保法律适用的严谨性和权威性;根据裁决受理量大小,设置相对独立的裁决机构,确保裁决公正性和独立性;在救济体系上,应重视行政裁决司法变更权的健全,以有效解决行政裁决当前面临的问题,推动行政裁决制度的更新与完善。Social contradictions have shown a trend of complexity in the process of modern rule of law construction. The typological characteristics of disputes have put forward more urgent demands for the diversification of dispute resolution mechanisms. Administrative adjudication is an alternative dispute resolution method that has been proven effective in foreign judicial practice to make up for the insufficiency of judicial resources. Currently, there are still many areas in need of improvement in China’s administrative adjudication system, such as the lack of independence of the adjudication subjects, insufficiently strict procedural rules, an inadequate relief system that fails to thoroughly resolve disputes, and the absence of a unified legal term, which can lead to confusion in judicial practice. The administrative adjudication systems of the UK and the US can provide experience and reference for the reform of China’s administrative adjudication system. China should further clarify the legal term of administrative adjudication to ensure the rigor and authority of legal application;set up relatively independent adjudication institutions based on the volume of cases accepted to ensure the fairness and independence of the adjudication;and in the relief system, attach importance to the improvement of the judicial power to change administrative adjudication to effectively solve the current problems faced by administrative adjudication and promote the renewal and improvement of the administrative adjudication system.展开更多
文摘社会矛盾在现代法治化进程的过程中呈现出复杂化的趋势,纠纷类型化特征对纠纷解决机制多样化提出了更迫切的需求。行政裁决是经过外国司法实践所证实的一种能够有效弥补司法资源不足的替代性纠纷解决方式。当前我国行政裁决制度还存在许多有待完善的地方,例如行政裁决主体缺乏独立性,程序性规则不够严格,救济体系难以彻底解决纠纷,且在法律称谓上没有统一形式,易导致司法实践混乱等。英美行政裁决制度可为我国行政裁决制度的改革提供经验和借鉴,我国应当进一步明确行政裁决的法律称谓,确保法律适用的严谨性和权威性;根据裁决受理量大小,设置相对独立的裁决机构,确保裁决公正性和独立性;在救济体系上,应重视行政裁决司法变更权的健全,以有效解决行政裁决当前面临的问题,推动行政裁决制度的更新与完善。Social contradictions have shown a trend of complexity in the process of modern rule of law construction. The typological characteristics of disputes have put forward more urgent demands for the diversification of dispute resolution mechanisms. Administrative adjudication is an alternative dispute resolution method that has been proven effective in foreign judicial practice to make up for the insufficiency of judicial resources. Currently, there are still many areas in need of improvement in China’s administrative adjudication system, such as the lack of independence of the adjudication subjects, insufficiently strict procedural rules, an inadequate relief system that fails to thoroughly resolve disputes, and the absence of a unified legal term, which can lead to confusion in judicial practice. The administrative adjudication systems of the UK and the US can provide experience and reference for the reform of China’s administrative adjudication system. China should further clarify the legal term of administrative adjudication to ensure the rigor and authority of legal application;set up relatively independent adjudication institutions based on the volume of cases accepted to ensure the fairness and independence of the adjudication;and in the relief system, attach importance to the improvement of the judicial power to change administrative adjudication to effectively solve the current problems faced by administrative adjudication and promote the renewal and improvement of the administrative adjudication system.
