裁量基准的制度定位:理由的规范化

《行政处罚法》的新规并未直接揭示裁量基准的制度定位,学界目前依然存在着“依据论”与“理由论”两种观点。实际上,依据裁量基准的形式外观与现行立法的规范用语并不能证明裁量基准属于裁量行为的“依据”,相反,根据权源性标准和拘束性标准,可以得知裁量基准并非“依据”。同时,通过对裁量基准与裁量理由的实质分析,可以发现二者之间不仅有着理论上的同质性,而且存在着内容上的同构性。不仅如此,裁量基准的运行机制也进一步验证了裁量基准属于“理由”的判断。不过,裁量基准绝不是“理由”的等同概念,而是“理由”的一种规范化表达,“规范”的形式赋予了裁量基准独立的制度定位。

The System Position of the Discretion Benchmark:The Normalization of Reason

The new regulation of the Administrative Punishment Law does not reveal the system position of the discretion benchmark,and there is a dispute between“basis theory”and“reason theory”.In fact,the nominal appearance of the discretion benchmark and the normative terms of the current legislation can not support the status of the discretion benchmark as the basis of discretary action.On the contrary,according to the criteria of source of power and the binding effect,we can conclude that the discretion benchmark can not be the basis.At the same time,through the substantive analysis of the discretionary benchmark and the reason-giving,it can be found that there is not only the theoretical homogeneity between the two concepts,but also the isomorphism of their contents.Moreover,the operation machanism of the discretion benchmark could also validate the judgment that the discretionary benchmark belongs to“reason”.However,the discretionary benchmark is not the equivalent concept of the“reason”,but the normalized expression of“resaon”.The form of“norm”endows the discretionary benchmark with independent system position.