On Participative Distribution System Of Civil Execution Process In China

Participative distribution system of civil execution process is a concrete way of dealing with cases of obligation with several creditors of petition for enforcement. Our participative distribution system is the product of our imperfect legal system of bankrupt. Although its function is similar to bankrupt law, there are many defects and mistakes in current rules and judicial interpretation of participative distribution system and it doesn't satisfy requirements of complicate social conditions. We have to improve and make it adapt to international society. The article discusses the concept, parts, institutional effectiveness and principles of execution of distribution of assets, then suggests the design of structuring new executive rules of distribution of assets.There are five parts: First Part introduces executive system of participative distribution. The author analyses concepts and constituents of it, explains particular terms in our legal rules or judicial interpretation, and compares institutional effectiveness of participative distribution system with legal system of bankrupt. Second Part introduces different destitution of assets in the world and analyses distributive principles. The author describes three legislative models, that is, the principle of preference as to assets, the principle of equal distribution or the principle of compromise distribution, then analyses causes of choosing different legislative models and introduces our special mixed legislative model. Third Part estimates our executive system of participative distribution. The author affirms rationality of current mixed model and analyses defects of it from ten aspects. Fourth Part discusses some disputes in judicial practice including participative distribution of criminal fine or administrative fine and adjudicatory jurisdiction of courts. Fifth Part is about improvement and development of our executive system of participative distribution. The author clearly indicates the direction of reforming our system is the principle of preference and advances some supporting reform measures. Finally, the author restates opinions of the paper.