我國實定法從未以某種一般性標準統合行政訴訟原告資格的所有情形。當前理論界和實務界傾向於寬泛地理解“利害關係”標準的適用範圍，但將該標準適用於某些類型的案件，頗有錯位之感，且易使該標準的解釋走向混亂。從當前實定法出發，應將行政訴訟原告資格區分為三個層次，即行政相對人的原告資格、行政行為相關人的原告資格以及基於客觀訴訟契機的特殊情形。行政相對人通常具有原告資格，但對於不履行法定職責的案件，應區分不同情況；行政行為相關人的原告資格可以以利害關係標準為基石，借助保護規範理論予以判斷；原告資格轉移、行政公益訴訟以及受害人訴訟，則更適於作為客觀訴訟加以把握，但對於何種案件屬於受害人訴訟的認定不應過於寬泛。

The statutory law in China has never consolidated all the circumstances of the plaintiff qualification in administrative litigation by a general standard, At present, the applicable scope of the 'interests' criterion tends to be broadly understood both in theory and in practice. Nevertheless, it is quite dislocated to apply such criterion to some types of cases, and the broad understanding will lead the interpretation of such criterion to chaos. From the current statutory law perspective, the plaintiff qualification in administrative litigation should be comprehended from three levels, that is, the qualification of administrative counterparts, the qualification of related parties of administrative actions, and some special situations based on the mechanism of objective litigation. Although administrative counterparts are usually qualified to sue, for the cases of non- performance of statutory duties, courts should differentiate between situations due to judicial policy. The qualification of related parties of administrative actions should be judged via the theory of protective norms based on the criterion of interest. The transfer of the plaintiff qualification, administrative litigation about public interests, and victim litigation are more suitable for comprehending as objective litigation. Still, the identification of the scope of victim litigation should not be unduly broad.