論人民之訴訟權保障-以訴願及其前置程序為中心

文化大學機構典藏 CCUR > 法學院 > 法律學系暨法律學研究所 > 博碩士論文 > Item 987654321/29579

jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://irlib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/29579

题名:	論人民之訴訟權保障-以訴願及其前置程序為中心 The right of litigation To use administrative petition and it's prior procedures as examples
作者:	李旨揚 Lee, Tzu-Yang
贡献者:	法律學系
关键词:	訴願先行程序訴願前置程序相當訴願程序取代訴願程序異議程序訴訟權保障行政自我審查
日期:	2014-12-23
上传时间:	2015-02-02 15:44:05 (UTC+8)
摘要:	我國行政救濟制度採行政訴訟及訴願之雙軌程序，又行政訴訟法第4、5條之規定，提起「撤銷訴訟」或「課予義務訴訟」時，必須先經訴願程序後，才得提起；另訴願法第1條1項但所稱「但法律另有規定者，從其規定」。此行政訴訟法與訴願法之規定，即為訴訟前置與訴願前置原則之法源。就訴訟前置程序而言，憲法第16條既保障人民有訴訟之權，惟要求人民再提起撤銷或課與義務訴訟前必須先經訴願程序，是否合理？同理，訴願制度既為憲法所明定之制度性保障，又為何現行各專法中，有規定為訴願先行程序、訴願相當程序及訴願併行程序等規定？人民對機關之處分認有違法或不當時，訴願及行政訴訟乃為最直接也最有效之權利救濟，該權利救濟適用上之成效如何？有前置程序之訴願程式，對人民之保障究係更為縝密謹慎，亦或徒增人民救濟時效之困擾？訴願與訴訟程序最大之差異在於，訴願及其前置程序本身為行政一體概念下，由機關針對原處分所為的自我審查，而訴訟乃透過三權分立，由司法做適法性之判斷。換言之本文所稱「訴願及其前置程序」，就係將現有機關自行審查切割為數階段，而其中又有為與訴願效果相當，或為類似訴願前審級之程序等。而各該程序在自我審查又或不利益變更禁止等原則，適用上又有無差異？其中審議過程與訴願本身有何差異？本文嘗試以各機關在辦理訴願之前置程序，人民之救濟率輔以實務及學說之見解，嘗試分析現行前置程序存在之效果，再就其必要性做討論，期待釐清這錯縱複雜的救濟程序，是否與人民訴訟權保障之憲法精神相符。 The dual system of Taiwan's Administrative remedy are divided into two tracks：The administrative appeal and the administrative procedure system. Substance to Article1(1) provision clause of the Administrative appeal, a priority procedure is recommended to apply in particular cases, which multiple results might apply, including an ex ante procedure, a replacement of Administrative appeal or an parallel of both depending on its legal affect, Thus increases the complexity of the Administrative remedy system. The purpose of this article tends to discuss the problem of this complexity, whether the form of this article strengthened the protection of parties' right to fair trial or imposes troubleness. Furthermore, this article separates the discussion to estimate how the administrative appeal and ex ante procedure are divided in multiple stage, and quasi legal effect of the pre-administrative appeal procedure are being taken, considering the fact that the administrative appeal and ex ante procedure are set forth under the power of high concentration, making much difference compared with the Administrative procedure, relying on the judgment of the court. Lastly, by comparing theory and practices, this article tends to analyze the legal effect and the necessity form to take out the ex ante procedure, hoping to make a clear guidance to the complicated design and suitable proposal in increasing the protection for right to fair trial.
显示于类别:	[法律學系暨法律學研究所] 博碩士論文

文件中的档案:

档案	大小	格式	浏览次数
index.html	0Kb	HTML	218	检视/开启

在CCUR中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

数据加载中.....