作者：程庆栋
来源：《政治与法律》2021年第5期“专论”栏目。
作者简介：
程庆栋，厦门大学法学院助理教授，硕士生导师。
摘要：新修改的我国《行政处罚法》第12条第3款首次明确肯定了地方补充性立法的法律地位，标志着国家立法机关对待行政处罚领域地方补充性立法态度的正式转变。我国《行政处罚法》的这一规定，在规范层面完善了行政处罚领域中央立法与地方立法关系的结构；在功能层面扩大了地方立法权限，提升了国家治理能力。在肯定其积极意义的同时，也应当认真对待地方补充性立法所面临的合法性困境。这一困境在诸多现实情形中有着鲜明体现，需要进行细致梳理和分析。“领域说”“事项说”“行为说”试图廓清“作出行政处罚规定”的规范含义，进而纾解这一困境，但由于它们都持有形式化的标准，只能在一定程度上起到明确地方立法权限的作用，实际效果有限。明确地方补充性立法的权力边界，应当构建一种形式标准和实质标准相统一的合法性判断标准。
关键词：地方补充性立法；行政处罚设定权；立法权限；合法性
Abstract：Article 12(3) of the newly revised Law on Administrative Punishment clearly affirms the legal status of supplementary local legislation for the first time, which marks a formal change in the attitude of the national legislature towards supplementary local legislation in the area of administrative punishment. This provision improves the structure of the relationship between the central law and the local law in the field of administrative punishment at the normative level, expands the local legislative power and improves national capability at the functional level. While affirming its positive significance, we should also take seriously the legality problem faced by supplementary local legislation. Such problem is clearly manifested in many realistic situations, which need be carefully sorted and analyzed. The theory of domain, theory of matter and theory of behavior try to clarify the normative meaning of "imposing administrative punishment" to solve such problem, however, because it is a formalization standard and thus can only play a role in clarifying the local legislative power to a certain extent, with limited actual effect. To clarify the boundary of supplementary local legislation, it is necessary to construct a legality judgment standard that integrates formal and substantive standards.
Keyword：Supplementary Local Legislation; Power of Setting Administrative Penalty; Legislative Power; Legality
