摘要
从运行实践观之,法规审查制度存在两大悖论。其一,审查请求权配置不平衡遭遇激励失灵的窘境。立法者所偏爱的重要机关并未行使审查请求权。与之相反,公民、其他组织等成为审查建议的主要提出主体。其二,申请资格门槛低与审查实体要求高之间存在张力。同时,成功的审查个案表明,该制度初步显现出由抽象审查向准附带性审查转化的迹象。为了破解悖论一,立法机关应当慎重评估赋权重要机关的必要性,以避免因长期虚置影响审查制度的权威。更有效的方案是将法律询问答复制度与常委会主动审查进行嫁接。解决悖论二的长远之计应当包括建立审查建议筛选机制等,但近期不宜建立过于严密的筛选机制,以免造成审查制度本身动力不足。
There are two types of dilemmas arising from the operation of the review system of regula tions. On the one hand, the imbalanced, discriminatory empowerment model for initiating the review process fails to meet its original goals. Important state organs-the legislature＇s favorites-have never ex ercised the initiating right. On the contrary, citizens and other entities become the major initiators. On the other hand, there exists a tension between the loose requirements on initiating thresholds and the rig id substantive standards for having the challenged regulations annulled. In the meantime, successful cases indicate that the review system is transforming itself from an abstract review to a controversy--based, concrete review model. To overcome the first dilemma, the article submits that the NPC shall reevaluate the necessity of granting the initiating power to state organs. An alternative is to integrate the NPCSC＇s ex officio review power with the enquiry-response system. The long-term solution for the second di lemma includes establishing comprehensive threshold requirements for review applications. Currently, however, too rigid threshold requirements will prevent the review system from thriving
出处
《中外法学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2018年第4期937-954,共18页
Peking University Law Journal
基金
上海市2016年“曙光计划”项目“宪法监督制度的体系化构建”(项目编号：16SG12)的阶段性成果.
关键词
法规审查
双重悖论
运行实效
完善对策
The Regulation Review System
Dual Dilemmas
Practical Effects
Reform Proposals
