行政裁决:地方政府的制度推力

在统计时间内有效的行政裁决制度共有16项,分布在自然资源和环境、知识产权以及民间纠纷三大领域,均为中央政府的法律、行政法规和部门规章所设定.但行政裁决设定的领域范围在逐步退缩,已设定的行政裁决被纷纷废止,新的法律更倾向规定调解或仲裁.行政裁决实施性规定多集中于与土地有关的行政裁决,其中绝大多数系由地方政府所制定.地方政府不仅做出了细密规定,而且纷纷制定了专门性规定.但在矿权、环境、知识产权和民间纠纷领域,地方政府并未充分发挥出细化法律、行政法规和部门规章中行政裁决条款的作用,更没有制定专门的行政裁决规定.有关行政裁决的行政规范性文件高度集中于征地补偿裁决、拆迁补偿裁决和林地权属裁决.其中,林地权属裁决的中央行政规范性文件较多,征地补偿裁决和拆迁补偿裁决的地方行政规范性文件较多.这些行政规范性文件的内容,集中在纠纷的化解而非行政裁决制度本身.从行政裁决引发的诉讼案件反观行政裁决制度,征地补偿裁决、拆迁补偿裁决和林地权属裁决都在运行,其他行政裁决制度都没有运行.其中,拆迁补偿裁决的运行异常活跃,征地补偿裁决的运行却极为低迷.统计发现的耦合是:凡地方政府对行政裁决制定了专门性实施规定的,行政裁决制度都在运行,否则都已停滞；地方行政规范性文件被用作行政裁决依据的多少,与该行政裁决的活跃程度成正比.当然,上述发现的证成或证伪,有待于另一项研究.

Administrative Adjudication: A Systematic Push from Local Governments

The 16 effective administrative adjudication systems in the counting time are distributed mainly in three fields,which are natural resources and environment,intellectual property,and civil disputes.They are all created by the laws,administrative regulations and ministry rules of the central government.However,the sphere of administrative adjudication is gradually diminishing.Those created administrative adjudications are abolished one after the other,and new laws prefer to stipulate mediation or arbitration.Implementary rules of administrative adjudication mainly focus on adjudications involved in land,most of which are enacted by the local governments.The local governments not only make numerous implementary rules,but also specific ones.But in fields such as mineral rights,environment,intellectual property and civil disputes,the local governments do not play their part of detailing administrative adjudication systems stipulated by law,administrative regulations and ministry rules,let alone enact specific rules.Documents on administrative norms of administrative adjudication highly concentrate on land compensation,demolition compensation and woodland property.Among these adjudications,there are more documents on administrative norms concerning woodland property from the central government,and more documents on administrative norms concerning land compensation and demolition compensation from the local governments.The contents of these documents focus on disputes resolution instead of the adjudication system itself.In retrospection of the litigations invoked by administrative adjudication,the adjudication systems of land compensation,demolition compensation and woodland property are all in operation,while other types of adjudication systems are hardly in operation.Among these three domains,the adjudication of demolition compensation is exceedingly active,but the adjudication of land compensation is very inactive.The statistic coupling is that,when the local governments enact specific implementary rules,the administrative adjudication systems are in operation.Otherwise,they would have stagnated.The frequency of being applied for local documents of administrative norms as the authority of an administrative adjudication system is proportional to the activeness of the administrative adjudication.Undoubtedly,the justification or falsification of this conclusion is subject to another research.