论行政惯例的规范性质

学界关于行政惯例的规范性质存在争议.在进入司法程序之前,行政惯例是行政机关基于自我认同所建构的直接行为规则.行政惯例的外在方面,是行政机关长期统一一致的行为;行政惯例的内在方面,是行政机关成员的认同.行政惯例通常不直接调整行政相对人的行为,但行政机关基于行政惯例作出的行政行为对相对人具有直接拘束力;行政机关的权威会催化行政惯例的规范性质,行政机关违反行政惯例时相对人可以主张信赖利益保护.对司法审查来说,行政惯例的存在首先是一个事实问题;经审查认定后的行政惯例可作为裁判理由而非裁判依据,从这一意义上说,行政惯例并非法官法源.

On the Normativity of Administrative Conventions

There are disputes about the normativity of administrative conventions in academic circles. Before entering the judicial process administrative conventions are rules constructed by administrative organs based on self-identification. The external aspect of administrative conventions is the long-term unified behavior of officials and the internal aspect is the approval of officials. Administrative conventions usually do not directly regulate the behaviors of administrative officials but the officials could be bound by the administrative act based on the administrative conventions. The authority of the administrative organ will catalyze the normativity of the administrative conventions. When the administrative organ goes against the administrative conventions the administrative officials can claim the reliance interest protection. For judicial review the existence of administrative conventions is first a matter of fact they can be used as juridical reasons rather than judgement rules. In this sense administrative conventions are not the sources of law for judges.