华东师范大学学报(教育科学版)

华东师范大学学报(教育科学版) ›› 2020, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (2): 1-18.doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2020.02.001

• 特稿 •    下一篇

我国教育行政争议及其解决的回顾与前瞻——以“推动教育法治进程十大行政争议案件”为例

湛中乐1,2, 靳澜涛1   

  1. 1. 北京大学法学院, 北京 100871;
    2. 石河子大学政法学院, 新疆石河子 832003
  • 出版日期:2020-02-20 发布日期:2020-01-21
  • 基金资助:
    教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目“公法争议与公法救济研究”（16JJD820001）

Retrospect and Prospect of Educational Administrative Disputes and Their Resolution in China—Taking “Top Ten Administrative Disputes in Promoting the Rule of Law in Education” as Examples

Zhan Zhongle1,2, Jin Lantao1   

  1. 1. Law School, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China;
    2. Institute of Politics and Law, Shihezi University, Shihezi 832003, Xinjiang, China
  • Online:2020-02-20 Published:2020-01-21

RichHTML

536

PDF

966

摘要： 《行政诉讼法》颁行三十年以来，教育行政纠纷呈现出类型多样化、主体多元化、案情复杂化等特点。相应地，包括校内申诉、校外申诉、行政复议、行政诉讼在内的多元化纠纷解决机制也初步形成，这也渗透着教育行政争议调处的法治化需求。同时，司法实践逐步明确了正当程序原则、比例原则、自主办学原则、权益保护原则，彰显出难得而可贵的司法能动主义立场，有力地推动了教育法治的建设进程。但是，与多样化法律纠纷和多元化权利诉求相比，相关制度设计和司法实践仍有较大提升空间，集中表现为纠纷解决方式实效性和衔接性薄弱、正当程序原则缺乏实定法依据支撑、司法审查范围相对狭窄且强度相对较弱，等等。欲有效预防和妥善化解教育行政争议，实现教育领域的良法善治，应该提升行政过程的正当性与可接受度，建立基于知识理性的学术评审机制，尊重教育规律以及不同学科的本体特点，促使学术评价回归学术逻辑，并加强教育领域的行政程序立法工作，规范教育行政管理行为。同时，必须对不同的教育行政纠纷解决机制进行有效整合，厘清学校自治与司法审查的边界，使权利诉求能够通过制度化渠道正常表达，进而妥善地化解矛盾纠纷。

关键词: 教育行政争议, 教育行政诉讼, 办学自主权, 正当程序, 司法审查, 教育法治

Abstract: The Administrative Procedure Law has been enacted for 30 years, and educational administrative disputes are characterized by diversified types, diversified subjects and complicated cases. Correspondingly, a multi-disciplinary dispute resolution mechanism including intra-school appeals, off-campus appeals, administrative reconsideration and administrative litigation has also taken shape. At the same time, judicial practice has gradually established the principles of due process, proportionality, self-sponsorship and rights protection, highlighting judicial activism. However, compared with various legal disputes and multiple claims for rights, there is still room for improvement in the design of relevant systems and judicial practice. This involves weak effectiveness and cohesion of dispute resolution, lack of legal basis for due process principle. Also, the scope of judicial review is relatively narrow and its intensity is relatively weak. In order to effectively prevent and properly resolve the administrative disputes in education, we should establish an academic review mechanism that returns to knowledge rationality, respects the law of education and the ontological characteristics of different disciplines, promotes the academic evaluation back to academic logic and strengthens the administrative procedure legislation in the field of education. At the same time, it is necessary to effectively integrate different educational administrative dispute resolution mechanisms, clarify the boundaries between school autonomy and judicial review, and enable rights claims to be expressed through institutionalized, standardized, and rule of law channels, so as to properly resolve conflicts.

Key words: educational administrative disputes, educational administrative litigation, school autonomy, due process, judicial review, rule of law of education