问题 问答题

某县城镇居民张某和李某因宅基地使用产生纠纷,1992年4月土地局将该宗争议的宅基地确权给李某使用,双方纠纷暂时平息,事隔一个月,张某觉得自己吃了亏,遂要求县土地局重新处理此事,将宅基地确权给自己。1992年7月,县土地局答复张某,称该问题已经处理过,原处理行为合法有效,张某继续四处 * * 申诉。1996年张某到市土地局申诉,要求市土地局撤销县土地局于1992年颁发给李某的土地使用证。市土地局经审查答复张某,县土地局颁发给李某的土地使用证正确,应予维持,驳回了张某要求撤证的请求。 问题:(1)县土地局1992年4月的确权行为,1992年7月对张某的答复行为以及1996年市土地局的答复行为中,哪个行为是可诉的具体行政行为?原因何在? (2)在1992年7月县土地局答复张某以后,原宅基地确权行为的诉讼时效如何计算? (3)如果1996年市土地局撤销了县土地局1992年发给李某的土地使用证,该撤销行为是否具有可诉性?理由何在?

答案

参考答案:

解析:(1)只有1992年4月县土地局的确权行为具有可诉性。原因是:①该行为是行政确认行为,根据《行政诉讼法》第2条第11款的规定,行政确认行为引发的争议属于行政诉讼的受案范围。②后两个行为均是重复处理行为,依据《行诉若干解释》第1条第2款第(5)项的规定,由这种行为引发的争议不属于行政诉讼的受案范围。 重复处理行为是指,行政主体以原已存在的行政行为为基础,并为实现或加强原行政行为所设定的权利义务关系而再次实施的行为。其特征有:①重复处理行为以原有的行政行为为基础。②重复处理行为的引起,一般基于行政相对人对原有行政行为不服而申请复议、申诉,或基于相对人对原有行政处罚不自觉履行。③目的在于实现或加强既存之权利、义务关系,并不能创设新的权利义务关系。驳回当事人对行政行为提起申诉的重复处理行为,是行政机关对当事人就原已生效的行政行为提出的申诉给予驳回的行为,实际上是对原有生效行政行为的再次肯定,没形成新的权利义务关系。所以不可诉。 (2)起诉期间仍从1992年4月起算。因为只有第一个行政行为可诉,所以起诉时效就应从县土地局确权行为作出后起算。 (3)具有可诉性。李某认为撤销行为侵犯自己的财产权而提起行政诉讼,人民法院应该受理。如果市土地局撤销了县土地局的决定,那么这就是一个新的行政行为,张某针对新作出的行政行为不服当然可以提起诉讼。

单项选择题
单项选择题

Almost every day the media discovers an African American community fighting some form of environmental threat from land fills, garbage dumps, petrochemical plants, refineries, bus depots, and the list goes on. For years, residents watched helplessly as their communities became dumping grounds.

But citizens didn’t remain silent for long. Local activists have been organizing under the mantle of environmental justice since as far back as 1968. More than three decades ago, the concept of environmental justice had not registered on the radar screens of many environmental or civil rights groups. But environmental justice fits squarely under the civil rights umbrella. It should not be forgotten that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. went to Memphis on an environmental and economic justice mission in 1968, seeking support for striking garbage workers who were underpaid and whose basic duties exposed them to environmentally hazardous conditions.

In 1979, a landmark environmental discrimination lawsuit filed in Houston, followed by similar litigation efforts in the 1980s, rallied activists to stand up to corporations and demand government intervention.

In 1991, a new breed of environmental activists gathered in Washington, D.C., to bring national attention to pollution problems threatening low-income and minority communities. Leaders introduced the concept of environmental justice, protesting that Black, poor and working-class communities often received less environmental protection than White or more affluent communities. The first National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit effectively broadened what "the environment" was understood to mean. It expanded the definition to include where we live, work, play, worship and go to school, as well as the physical and natural world. In the process, the environmental justice movement changed the way environmentalism is practiced in the United States and, ultimately, worldwide.

Because many issues identified at the inaugural summit remain unaddressed, the second National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit was convened in Washington, D. C., this past October. The second summit was planned for 500 delegates; but more than 1,400 people attended the four-day gathering.

"We are pleased that the Summit II was able to attract a record number of grassroots activists, academicians, students, researchers, planners, policy analysts and government officials. We proved to the world that our movement is alive and well, and growing. "says Beverly Wright, chair of the summit. The meeting produced two dozen policy papers that show powerful environmental and health disparities between people of color and Whites.

In Paragraph 1, the word "residents" refers to () in particular.

A. ethnic groups in the U. S.

B. the American general public

C. African Americans

D. the U. S. working-class