| The types of administrative penalties in the external law norms of the Administrative Penalties Law,together with the types listed in Article 9 of the Administrative Penalties Law,assume the functions of protecting the legal rights and interests of administrative counterparts and maintaining the rule of law and order of the state.Based on the analysis of the conceptual provisions of Article 2 and the provisions of Articles 9 to 14 of the Administrative Penalties Law,this paper examines the issues related to the setting of administrative penalties in the external law norms of the Administrative Penalties Law.The types of administrative penalties in the extralegal norms of the Administrative Penalties Law are collectively referred to as the types of administrative penalties set by individual laws and regulations other than the Administrative Penalties Law.In order to explore penalty-related issues in depth,it is necessary to organize and analyze the new types of penalties created by administrative organs in practice.Based on the formalism standard,this paper classifies the new types of behaviors similar to the existing ones in the chapter of "Legal Liability" or "Penalties" in the external law norms of the Administrative Penalty Law,and the types created by legal norms of different levels of effectiveness.The types of legal norms created at different levels of effectiveness are classified and summarized in order.Through the study of the legal documents and judicial cases in the Judicial Documents Website,it can be found that the administrative penalties in the external legal norms of the Administrative Penalties Law reflect some problems that need to be clarified and solved,such as the lack of implementation of the review standard for the authority of setting the types of administrative penalties,the lack of a perfect system for setting the types of administrative penalties in the external legal norms of the Administrative Penalties Law,and the lack of the standard for determining the nature of controversial acts.The criteria for determining the nature of controversial acts are not clear enough,etc.The reasons for this are that the legislature does not strictly distinguish the power of creation from the power of stipulation,the setting of categories does not effectively combine the principle and necessity of legal norms,the criteria for determining the nature of similar punishments are different,and the lagging and innovation of legislation are not fully balanced.In view of the above-mentioned problems,we should start from three levels of authority,identification and regulation,firstly,clarify the dimensions of the consideration of the types of punishment in the creation of the external law norms of the Administrative Penalty Law,and ensure the effective limitation of the legislative authority under the principle of legal reservation and legal priority.Second,to clarify the criteria for defining the types of administrative penalties,to take the provisions of the concept of administrative penalties as the central axis,to sort out and integrate the criteria that have appeared before,to analyze and characterize the controversial behaviors under the comprehensive identification criteria,and to integrate the types of penalties in the extralegal norms of the Administrative Penalties Law by improving the form of expression of administrative penalties stipulated in Article 9 of the Administrative Penalties Law and by using the way of positive qualification and negative exclusion.Thirdly,it is to provide a path for the regulation and adjustment of administrative penalty types in the external law norms of the Administrative Penalty Law in terms of pre-regulation,process regulation and result regulation,to establish an effective evaluation system for setting authority before the procedure is initiated,to regulate the legislative amendment procedure for setting penalty types,and to conduct all-round supervision on the setting and application of penalty types. |