[1]郑 涛.信息公开缠讼现象的政法逻辑[J].法制与社会发展,2017,(05):24-39.
点击复制

信息公开缠讼现象的政法逻辑()
分享到:

法制与社会发展[ISSN:1006-6128/CN:22-1243/D]

卷:
期数:
2017年05期
页码:
24-39
栏目:
法治中国
出版日期:
2017-09-10

文章信息/Info

作者:
郑 涛
实证分析表明,信息公开诉讼的缠讼态势突显。信息公开缠讼并非简单的权利滥用,而是制度矛盾的集中外化。借助于诉讼便利、话语正当性和司法行政化等外部激励,信息申请者开拓出缠讼这一特殊的解纷路径。然而,当缠讼蔓延并危及司法秩序时,法院转而通过策略性“滥诉”判定将其重新纳入可控范围。尽管我国“治理型”信息公开制度建设在形式上奉行了民主参政的基本理念,但在“去政治化”的政治背景下却暴露出多维目标间、公私利益间的种种制度张力。多重张力所形构的“信息公开政治学”场域不仅导致信息公开诉讼走向“信访化”,而且使得信息公开制度在实践层面变得日益工具化。政法逻辑下信息公开缠讼的治理,不能止步于规则漏洞的技术性弥补,更须致力于相关制度目标的矫正。
Keywords:
Government Information Disclosure Vexatious Suit Judicial Game Institutional Tensions Politics of Government Information Disclosure
摘要:
信息公开;缠讼;司法博弈;制度张力;信息公开政治学
Abstract:
Empirical analysis shows that the vexatious suit in government information disclosure is growing. And it is not a simple problem of right abusing, but the concentrated externalization of relevant institutional contradictions. With the help of litigation convenience, political correctness and justices with administrative characteristic, the information applicants developed the special way of disputes settlement. When the vexatious suit spreads rapidly and endangers the judicial order, the court puts it back into control through the judgment of “vexatious proceeding”. Although the construction of government information disclosure system formally shared the basic concept of democratic participation in China, it exposed multiple tensions among different objects and interests under the political background of depoliticized. The “politics of government information disclosure”field constituted by multiple tensions not only leads to the information disclosurelitigation toward “petition”, but also makes the information disclosure system increasingly instrumental in the practical level. In order to solve the vexatious suit in political-legal logic, we can not stop the technical remedy in the gaps of rules, but also committed to the correction of relevant institutional goals.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
*武汉大学法学院助理研究员。
本文系教育部哲学社会科学研究重大课题攻关项目“完善基层社会治理机制研究”(14JZD030)的阶段性成果。感谢“第十一届全国公法学博士生论坛”会议期间中国社会科学院法学研究所卢超副研究员、清华大学政治学系于晓虹副教授、吉林大学法学院李海平教授、厦门大学法学院陈鹏副教授、中国政法大学法学院博士生孙森森、浙江大学法学院博士生胡若溟和吉林大学法学院博士生康健等师友的评议,当然,文责自负。
更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01