Research On Separation Of Functions In US Administrative Adjudication

The Administrative Procedure Act imposes requirements concerning what the Act calls "separation of functions." The main idea behind these requirements is that members of an administrative agency's staff who investigate or prosecute should not participate in judging. It is a very important system in administrative procedure but was researched little in China.Separation of functions gained concern at beginning of 20th century. But the scattered cases in the state courts are conflicting. The useful ideas and materials on this problem lie mainly in the various official and unofficial studies of the administrative process.The Majority of the Attorney General's Committee held the point of internal separation, recommended that the problem of combined functions should be remedied by appropriate internal division of labor and independent hearing officers insulated from all phases of a case other than hearing and deciding.It was adopted in APA, and became the majority mode of administrative agencies.The Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, known as Taft-Hartley Act, made NLRB apart from all other members of the family of administrative agencies. The Taft-Hartley Act separated of NLRB functions by the establishment of the office of the General Counsel, which was independent from the committee. Critics of this change saw their fears confirmed by the sharp split that immediately developed between the first General Counsel and the Board. But it gained the confidence of citizens, and it was maintained.Internal separation concerns administrative efficiency and economy, while complete separation concerns administrative justice. It is not accurate to say which one is better, but only which one is more proper for a agency.