As an important part of legal sanction system, administrative punishment is one of the basic categories of administrative law in China. The existing theoretical research and legislation has failed to provide an effective identification criterion for the accurate definition of administrative punishment. There are more or less limitations in the judgment of "what is administrative punishment" according to the three criteria of external formalism, intrinsic essential requirements and functional considerations, which lead to some kinds of legal punishment falling into difficulties in interpretation, the boundary of "other administrative punishment" being blurred, and legal attribute of a large number of new types of supervision difficult to define. Under the dual coercion of theory and norm, the essential requirements criterion can be consistent with legislative system, law enforcement demand, judicial environment and citizens' cognition, and its rational return is the best way to reshape the category of administrative punishment. The revision of the essential requirements criterion should be based on the screening of basic requirements and the clarification of core requirements. In order to enhance the operability of the essential requirements criterion which has been amended, the revision of the Law on Administrative Punishment in the future should readjust the classification mode of administrative punishment and strictly control the right to set administrative punishment.%作为法律制裁体系的重要组成部分,行政处罚是我国行政法学的基本范畴之一.现有的学理研究和规范设计未能为准确界定行政处罚提供有效的识别标准,外观形式主义、内在实质要件和功能性考量三种标准在判断"何为行政处罚"时都存在或多或少的局限性,导致某些法定处罚种类在解释时陷入困境,"其他行政处罚"的边界模糊,大量新型监管方式的法律属性难以界定.在学理和规范的双重裹挟之下,实质要件标准大体上能够与立法体系、执法需求、司法环境以及公民认知相契合,其理性回归是重塑行政处罚范畴的最佳路径.实质要件标准的修正需立足于基础性构成要件的筛选与核心性构成要件的澄清.为增强修正的实质要件标准的可操作性,未来行政处罚法的修订应当在重新调整行政处罚分类模式的基础上严格规范行政处罚设定权.
展开▼
