The Rationality Of Civil Protest System And Supervisory Objects

This paper focuses on the studies on the rationality and the supervisory objects of civil protest system. The author attempts to indirectly testify the rationality of the protest system of the distinct Chinese characteristics by refuting the theories of negating the protest, and argues that the supervisory objects of civil protest should be shifted from substantive to procedure under the direction of the argument of rationality and the principle of procedural justice. Combined with the practical experience, the paper also lists the specific supervisory objects in light of the relationship between the procedural justice and substantive justice.The paper has two integrated sections. The first section focuses the rationality of civil protest system and the second on supervisory objects. In the first section, the author firstly examines the rationality and its criterion from philosophy.1 .After verbal-analyzing the meanings of rationality and reason, the author argues that they have the same meaning, which implies the cause and argument;2. While the absolutism and essentialism on rationality are criticized with the reasons of the paradox between the belief and the causes and the absolute of human ignorance, the relativism and nihilism on the issue also are refuted on the grounds of human natural instincts in pursuing order. The criteria of the rationality may be constant, however, there are still criteria of both universally applicable and generally accepted during a specified period of time;3.whether be of rational or not shall be measured by the human basic values such as justice, security etc, the final criteria. The role of the criteria shall be the ultimatepremise of the rationality argument and the basis of empiric judgement.Then the author argue the rationality of civil protest system specifically, by refuting the theory of negation of the civil protest system as follows:1. whether civil protest supervision invades the independent jurisdiction of the court;2. whether civil protest supervision unduly intervene the discretion of the parties;3. whether civil protest supervision should undermine the power of final adjudication;In the second section, the author clarifies the supervisory objects of civil protest supervision:Several current drawbacks which civil protest system emphasize the substantive while neglect the procedure are cited ,such as contradiction to the function of the procuratorate as legal supervision agency, entangling in the litigation dilemma because of stress on the substantive respects of cases, and mixing up legal supervision power and juridiction . Civil protest supervision object should be shifted from the juridiction outcome to the process, ie., from the substantive to the procedure.The author argues that the above shift is based on the independence of procedural justice. Justice equals to the rationality of distribution, while the rationality of distribution result is substantive justice and that of methods and process of distribution is procedural justice, which is not only the sole path to substantive justice, but also the criterion to judge the justice of the substantive result. Thus , the objects of civil protest system supervision should be juridiction procedure.The specific objects of civil protest system supervision are discussed in the paper, the objects of civil protest supervision are the civil procedure , which includes the visible juridiction process and the invisible argument process. The visible supervision focuses on the judicial organs and the court trials, while the invisible supervision on confirmed facts and the instruction and applicability of regulations.