行政國家의 槪念 規定 : 行政學的 視角에서 = Definition of the Administrative State

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

1. Preface
Some scholars criticize modern administrative state as a neo-Fascism ruled by antidemocratic class of bureaucrats, and some scholars appraise it as a scientific rational state for the social welfare without concerning to any type of political power structure. Above two views should be equaly criticized respectively, because the former can not contribute to political development for the welfare state, and the later may incompetently be reconciled with a new type of tyrany.
Definition of the administrative state should be a tool to see, through it, the reality of politics in the modern complex society and to keep democracy.
2. What factors cause the administrative state?
1) Complexity of modern industrialized society.
2) Institutional defects of the classical democratic power structure in the complex society.
(1) logical contradicion of separation of powers to the principle of popular sovereignty.
(2) weakness of legalism in relation to the planocracy.
(3) inadaptiblity of the principle of cheap government (Nacht wa¨chterstaat) for the control of socioeconomic problems.
3) Insufficiency of organizational professionality of the legislature.
These factors necessitate the modification of classical democratic power structure.
3. Review of definitions.
Most important definitions of the administrative state are reviewed. However, they are extraneous of the subject except following two kinds of definitions of it.
1) the definition as the state that is ruled by facts themselves or scientific rationality and technology.
2) the definition as the state that is ruled by the new authoritatrian anti-democratic class of bureaucrats on the pretext of technology.
But these two definitions also have to be criticized. Namely, the former places overemphasis on the rationality of policy making processes of administrative bureaucracy and ignores the dominant values of ideologies of the political parties. The later, adhering to old credo, deny the policy making function of the executive which is inevitable in the modern complex society.
It is necessary to mitigate and coordinate these two definitions, and in one hand we must accept the policy making function of the, executive, and on the other hand we must try to set up the appropriate apparatus to check and cope with the aggrandizement of the excutive.
4. New types of the checking apparatus of the executive.
Classical types of checking apparatus is the system of separation of powers which means mainly the dichotomy between the power of decision (the legislative) and that of execution (the executive).
However this system is not workable in the modern administrative state in which the executive should make the policy inevitably.
Stimulated this situation, there have arised the new theories for the checking apparatus of the executive.
1) Pluralism in separation of powers; e.g. check and balance between the representative body of culture, economy and citizens, or between the multiple political parties, church of catholic, church of protestant and the labor union.
These theories are too complicated and not easy to organize those plural interests respectively as an institution.
2) dichotomy between the integrated body of the politics-administration and the judiciary.
As for this theory, we can hardly believe that the judiciary is able to check effectively the stronger power of tht integrated body of the politics-administration.
3) theory of division of functions.
This theory see politics and administration as a continuing process and not a separate one. The executive is responsible for the major plan and its execution, and the legislature retains the right of auditing, investigating and vetoing them.
Following this theory, though not enough, we may be able to check the power of the executive and get rid of logical contradiction between popular sovereighty and separation of powers.
5. Conclusin
With all the above analysis, we can reach the final definition of the administrative state in which the executive is responsible for the policy decision and its execution for the social welfare under over-all and ultimate control of the legislature. In it, administrative bureaucracy mainly represents the value of scientific rationality, and the legislature represents the value of dominant political ideologies under the control of the citizens through the parties. And finally these two values are coordinated by the cooperative division of functions between the executive and the legislature.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 序論
• Ⅱ. 行政國家化 要因
• 1. 社會的 要因
• 2. 制度的 要因
• 1) 國民主權主義와 權力分立主義의 矛盾
• 2) 法治主義原理의 脆弱性
• 3) 夜警國家原理의 虛構性
• 3. 專門組織的 要因
• Ⅲ. 從來의 槪念, 批判,
• 1. 行政裁判制度에 따른 槪念
• 2. 近代모든 國家가 行政國家라는 槪念
• 3. 外形上의 類似性에 따른 槪念
• 4. 行政府의 經濟社會的 機能이나 業務의 量的增大에 따른 槪念
• 5. 行政官理體制를 過信하는 槪念
• 6. 反行政國家的 行政國家槪念
• 7. 國會監督權 强化를 前提로 하는 槪念
• Ⅳ. 權力分立의 再編成
• 1. 多元的 分權論
• 2. 新二權論
• Ⅴ. 結論