段启俊副教授·········在诉讼中,无论是诉讼当事人还是法院,普遍存在着将高速公路的行政管理行为视同为经营管理行为的现象。比如:清障行为到底是行政管理行为还是经营管理行为?虽然交通部的《路政管理规定》明确了清障行为是行政管理行为,但经营管理行为中有养护的职责,养护时发现路障难道不应当清除吗?因而法院往往把清障行为认定为经营管理行为。我认为,根据公路养护规范的规定,公路的日常养护主要是清扫保洁,虽然养护时发现路障也应当清除,但这并不等于清除路障成了养护的职责。因为每天养护的次数 Associate Professor Duan Qijun · · · · · · ······························································································································································································ For example: whether the conduct of the brigade was an administrative act or an operation and management act? Although the “Administrative Rules on Road Administration” of the Ministry of Communications specifies that the act of barreling off is an administrative act, the operation and management act has the responsibility of conservation. Should be cleared? Therefore, the court often identified the act of barracks as a management act. In my opinion, according to the regulations on highway maintenance, routine maintenance of roads is mainly for cleaning and cleaning. Although it is found that roadblocks should also be cleared during maintenance, this does not mean that the removal of road blocks has become the responsibility of conservation. Because of the number of daily maintenance