公共数据授权运营法律性质之争对第三人程序权利的影响

The Impact of the Debate over the Legal Nature of Public Data Authorized Operation on Third Parties’ Procedural Rights

摘要: 公共数据授权运营引入竞争性授权机制后，落选申请人的程序权利保障成为亟待解决的问题。然而，学界对该制度的法律性质尚未形成共识，法律定性的模糊直接导致第三人程序参与权与司法救济路径的缺位。文章首先检视了三种代表性学说，指出各自在解释公共数据授权运营时的局限。在此基础上提出公共数据授权运营兼具“许可要素”与“协议要素”的复合特征，宜将其界定为“竞争性公共资源配置行为”，并将潜在第三人界定为直接竞争者、间接竞争者与公共利益代表。最后分析得出行政许可模式在权利依据的明确性与程序保障的刚性方面更具优势，行政协议模式则在协议内容审查方面独具特色。未来立法宜采取分阶段适用的方案，以实现对第三人程序权利的全面保障。

Abstract: After the introduction of the competitive authorization mechanism in public data authorized operation, the protection of procedural rights of unsuccessful applicants has become an urgent issue to be addressed. However, the academic community has not yet reached a consensus on the legal nature of this system, and the ambiguity in legal characterization directly leads to the absence of third parties’ right to procedural participation and judicial relief channels. This paper first examines three representative doctrines and points out their respective limitations in explaining public data authorized operation. On this basis, it proposes that public data authorized operation has composite characteristics of both “licensing elements” and “agreement elements”, and should be defined as a “competitive public resource allocation act”, while potential third parties should be categorized as direct competitors, indirect competitors, and public interest representatives. Finally, the analysis concludes that the administrative licensing model has more advantages in terms of the clarity of legal basis for rights and the rigidity of procedural safeguards, while the administrative agreement model has unique features in the review of agreement contents. Future legislation should adopt a phased application scheme to achieve comprehensive protection of third parties’ procedural rights.