检察机关介入行政公益诉讼的角色探析-法学；法律硕士专业论文.docxVIP

摘要 摘要 I I 摘 要 我国现行的《行政诉讼法》并没有公益诉讼的法律规定，且对原告资格作 了限制，只允许与本案有直接利害关系的公民、法人或其他组织提起诉讼，导 致现实中损害国家利益和社会利益的行政违法行为和行政不作为不能纳入国家 诉讼程序中进行法律制裁。行政公益案件诉讼主体缺位，国家和社会公共利益 救济途径缺位，形成行政诉讼活动的盲点。本文试图对作为国家专门法律监督 机关的检察机关介入行政公益诉讼的角色认知与定位进行思考，尝试从我国目 前行政公益诉讼的困境，借鉴国外检察机关介入行政诉讼的做法，来探讨检察 机关作为行政公益诉讼程序的启动者介入行政公益诉讼的可行性，分析因介入 带来的角色困惑，引发的与自身身份及与其他权力、权利之间的冲突，以期对 建立适合我国国情的行政公益诉讼制度有所助益。 关键词：行政公益诉讼 检察机关 角色 Ab Abstract II II Abstract The traditions litigation of administration in our country has no rule concerning public litigation. And the accuser’s qualification has been limited, only allowing an individual or corporation or other social group whose direct relation on law injured to initiate prosecution. It leads the state and the social public benefits which have been infringed by the illegal activity or nonfeasance of administrator excluding the judicial review. This kind of that administration organizations break the law to be ignored. The absence of petitioner of public benefits administration’s litigation and of the way to lawing shape the blind spot of the activity of litigation of administration. This essay endeavors to quest the cognition and the orientation of the role of the prosecuting power in administration litigation. And attempts to start with the embarrassed litigation circumstances, then draw lessons from abroad, investigate the feasibility of prosecuting authority’s prosecution, analyze the puzzle and the conflict which is brought by the intervention of the prosecuting power in public benefits administration’s litigation, renew the cognition of the prosecuting. Look forward to making some contribution to set up litigation of public benefits administration according to the characteristics of our country. Key words: litigation of public benefits administration; prosecuting power; role 学位论文独创性声明 本人郑重声明： 1 、坚持以“求实、创新”的科学精神从事研究工作。 2 、本论文是我个人在导师指导下进 行的研究工作和取得的研究 成果。 3、本论文中除引文外 ，所有实验 、数据和有关材料均是真实的。 4 、本论文中除引文和致谢的内 容外，不包含其他人或其它机构 已经发表或撰写过的研究成果。 5 、其他同志对本研究所做的贡 献均已在论文中作了声明并表示 了谢意。 研究生签名：