论行政公益诉讼检察建议中监督管理职责的判断标准

Judgment Criteria for Supervisory and Management Duties in Administrative Public Interest Litigation

摘要: 检察建议为主的诉前程序在行政公益诉讼中发挥着举足轻重的角色，其中涉及两次对行政机关监督管理职责的判断。首先检察机关在发布检察建议之前需要确定行政机关并判断是否履行监督管理职责，其次在发布检察建议之后需要审查行政机关是否积极履行职责从而决定是否提起诉讼。制发检察建议需要明确主体，判断行政机关是否享有监督管理职责不能仅以法律、行政法规为依据，还需要全面考量行政机关的监管情况。制发检察建议后需要从实质上判断行政机关是否履行职责，并以公共利益脱离损害状态判断职责履职是否全面。在此基础上，检察机关决定是否对行政机关提起公益诉讼。厘清监督管理职责的判断标准，可以更好发挥诉前程序的作用，节约司法资源，推动实质性解决公共利益损害的问题。

Abstract: The pre-litigation procedure centered on procuratorial recommendations plays a pivotal role in administrative public interest litigation, involving a twofold determination of administrative organs’ supervisory and managerial responsibilities. First, prior to issuing a procuratorial recommendation, the procuratorial organ must identify the relevant administrative authority and determine whether it has fulfilled its supervisory and managerial duties. Second, after issuing the recommendation, the procuratorial organ must review whether the administrative organ has actively performed its duties to decide whether to initiate litigation. The issuance of a procuratorial recommendation requires clear identification of the responsible entity. In determining whether an administrative organ possesses supervisory and managerial authority, reliance shall not be based solely on laws and administrative regulations; a comprehensive assessment of the administrative organ’s actual regulatory practices must also be conducted. Following the issuance of the recommendation, a substantive evaluation must be undertaken to determine whether the administrative organ has fulfilled its duties. This evaluation shall focus on whether public interests have been disengaged from a state of impairment to assess the completeness of duty performance. Based on this determination, the procuratorial organ decides whether to initiate public interest litigation against the administrative organ. Clarifying the standards for adjudicating supervisory and managerial responsibilities enhances the efficacy of pre-litigation procedures, conserves judicial resources, and promotes the substantive resolution of public interest impairments.