作者：刘权
作者介绍：中央财经大学法学院副教授，法学博士、 中央财经大学青年“龙马学者”
出版日期：2019年6月9日
内容提要 通过分析比例原则适用第一案后20年间的典型案例可以发现，比例原则在我国的适用已从行政处罚扩张到多种行政行为领域。比例原则已成为法院评判行政行为实质合法性的重要准则。法院可以根据“滥用职权”和“明显不当”标准，对行政行为进行合比例性审查。对于目的正当性和手段的适当性、必要性、均衡性的规范认识还存在一定的分歧，审查标准并不统一。在合比例性举证责任上，一些案件并没有完全遵循行政诉讼举证责任倒置规则。在合比例性审查强度上，似乎大多是宽松审查或低密度审查。对于行政行为是否符合比例原则，法官在个案中有着巨大的裁量空间，但大多数判决论证说理还较为简单。作为人权保障利剑的比例原则，势必在我国得到更加广泛地适用，合比例性分析方法与技术有待进一步提高，其未来适用应注意确定性与灵活性的平衡。
关键词 比例原则 行政判决 审查标准 举证责任 审查强度
Abstract: By analyzing the typical cases in the past 20 years, the application of the Proportionality Principle in China has expanded from administrative punishment to multiple domains of administrative actions. The Proportionality Principle has become an important criterion for Chinese courts to judge the substantive legitimacy of administrative actions. The courts may conduct a proportional examination of administrative actions based on the criteria of 'abuse of power' and 'obviously unreasonable' • There are still some differences in understanding the legitimacy of purpose and the appropriateness, necessity, and balance of means normatively, and the review criteria are not uniform. As for the burden of proof of the Proportionality Principle, certain cases have not fully adhered to the rules of inversion of the burden of proof in administrative litigation. As for the review intensity, it seems that most cases are leniently reviewed or reviewed with low-density. The judges have a very large discretion space to determine whether the administrative action conforms to the Proportionality Principle in an individual case. However, most of the argument parts of judicial decisions are relatively simple. As a sword to protect human rights, the Proportionality Principle is bound to be more widely applied in China, so the methods and techniques for proportional analysis need to be further improved. The court should pay more attention to the balance of flexibility and certainty in the future.