《Global Vision Research》

The application of the principle of proportionality in
administrative emergency measures
Chen Xinya
Southwest Minzu University ,Chengdu China,610041;
Abstract:Administrative emergency is the core mechanism for the country to respond to emergencies and maintain public
safety. However, under the tension of power expansion and civil rights reduction, how to ensure the legitimacy and rationality
of emergency measures has become a key issue. As the “emperor clause” of administrative law, the principle of proportionality
provides a normative framework for the exercise of emergency administrative power through the three-stage review of "appropriateness, necessity and balance." Based on the theory and case, this paper aims to explore the specific application path, practical challenges and optimization direction of the principle of proportionality in administrative emergency. Keywords:major emergency; administrative emergency; proportional principle; administrative emergency behavior DOI:10.69979/3041-0843.25.02.001
1 The concept and basic requirements of the principle of proportionality
1.1 Concept of the principle of proportionality
The basic meaning of the principle of proportionality is that the implementation of administrative actions by
administrative organs should take into account the realization of administrative objectives and the protection of
the rights and interests of the counterpart. If the realization of administrative objectives may have some advers
e impact on the rights and interests of the counterpart, this adverse impact should be limited to the smallest p
ossible range and limit, and the two should be kept in an appropriate proportion. Its core idea is to prevent ex
cessive intervention of state power in private interests. 1.2 Basic requirements of the principle of proportionality
The generalized principle of proportionality mainly has the following three requirements :
First, the principle of appropriateness, which emphasizes that the exercise of national public power to imple
ment corresponding measures should ensure that the measures are closely related to the expected goals and fu
nctions, and pay attention to the ' goal consistency ' of the measures. There should be a reasonable and close relationship between the means of restriction and the intended pu
rpose, so as to ensure that the selected means can effectively serve the realization of the goal, so as to build
a pattern of matching means and purpose. This principle is conducive to the restriction of motivation by admini
strative organs in the exercise of power, effectively avoiding the occurrence of some illegal acts, and realizing su
bstantive justice. Secondly, the principle of necessity, the core of which is that in the face of diversified paths to achieve ad
ministrative goals, administrative organs should select programs with the lowest degree of restriction on individu
al rights and interests and the least negative impact. This principle not only reflects the prudence and restraint
of the administrative organs in the use of power, but also highlights the firm position of the principle of propor
tionality in safeguarding basic human rights. Third, the principle of balance, that is, the principle of proportionality in a narrow sense. This principle focu
ses on the need for a balance between public welfare and private interests. The government's administrative be
havior can neither violate the administrative purpose nor allow citizens to bear excessive burdens. The two must
be balanced. As the saying goes, killing chickens with a cow knife expresses this idea.