《行政复议法》正在讨论修改，修法的主要目标就是要将行政复议建设成为解决行政争议的主渠道，而扩大调解的范围则是其中的一项措施。司法部2020年11月公布的修订征求意见稿中，第43条规定复议决定作出前可以按照合法、自愿的原则进行调解。这是首次想要以法律的形式将调解确立为办案原则，主张对行政复议案件应调尽调。但是，尽管扩大调解已成为共识，然而是否所有进入行政复议程序的案件都可以或应当进行调解仍有待商榷。征求意见稿所拟定的调解条款在数量上仅此一条且属于原则性规定，未能分别说明“应当调解”和“不应当调解”的判断标准或具体情形，不足以指导复议调解实践，存在可进一步优化的空间。由于调解本身所特有的灵活性特点，为避免在实践中出现调解的泛化而削弱行政复议多元功能和违背调解原则的局面，需通过立法体系的完善来进行防范。 本文通过考察梳理我国中央复议制度立法和地方配套制度中有关复议调解范围的制度变迁，指出当前复议调解范围过窄所面临的现实困境，进而对征求意见稿将调解作为复议办案原则的主张进行综合分析，为构建合理的复议调解范围方案提供思路。在综合考虑我国立法历史、复议实践活动、本轮修订主张和国外制度经验启示等因素之后，本文认为行政复议中的调解应当是一种有限调解，可以将调解作为复议办案原则以最大化发挥调解的优势，但有必要划定调解的边界，仍然需要兼顾行政复议的监督纠错功能和受到调解自愿、合法原则的内在限制。目前的修订主张存在体系性疏漏，应当做进一步的完善。 正在酝酿修订的《行政复议法》除了应吸纳《行政复议法实施条例》规定的可调解类型和想办法尽量扩大复议调解的适用范围之外，还应当同时通过“负面清单”的模式明确列举排除调解的情形，同时设置兜底条款，以防止调解的泛滥，更好的发挥复议调解的制度优势。

The Administrative Reconsideration Law is under discussion. The main goal of the revision is to make administrative reconsideration the main channel to resolve administrative disputes, and one of the measures is to expand the scope of mediation. In the revised draft for comment released by the Ministry of Justice in November 2020, Article 43 provides that mediation may be conducted on the basis of legality and voluntariness before a reconsideration decision is made. This is the first time that mediation is established as a principle in the form of law, advocating that administrative reconsideration cases should be mediated. However, although there has been a consensus to expand mediation, it is still open to question whether all cases entering the administrative reconsideration process can or should be mediated. The mediation clause drafted in the draft for comment is only this one and a principle stipulation. It fails to explain the judgment standard or specific situation of "should not be mediated" and "should not be mediated", which is not enough to guide the practice of mediation in administrative reconsideration, and there is room for further optimization. Because of the unique flexibility of mediation, in order to avoid the situation of weakening the pluralistic function of administrative reconsideration and violating the principle of mediation, we need to improve the legislative system to prevent it. By reviewing the changes of the scope of mediation for reconsideration in China, this paper points out the practical predicament of the scope of mediation for reconsideration is too narrow, and then analyzes the proposition of mediation as the principle of handling reconsideration cases in the draft for comment. After considering the legislative history, the practice of administrative reconsideration, this round of revision and foreign system experience, this paper holds that mediation in administrative reconsideration should be a kind of limited mediation. But it is necessary to delineate the boundary of mediation, we still need to take into account the function of supervision and correction of administrative reconsideration and be restricted by the principle of voluntariness and legality. There are systematic omissions in the current revision, which should be further improved. Besides absorbing the types of mediation stipulated in the Regulations on the Implementation of Administrative Reconsideration Law and trying to widen the scope of application of mediation in administrative reconsideration, we should also list clearly the situations of exclusion of mediation through the model of "negative list" and set up the miscellaneous clause to prevent the overflow of mediation and give full play to the advantage of mediation in administrative reconsideration.