The Research On The Responsibility Of Proof In Administrative Procedure Of China

The major objective of administrative lawsuit depends on whether or not legal to administration behavior, and resolves the disputes between the interested parties. The court is hit by what was firmly believed that fact in legal action, was went by the history fact, in fact was that the judge reappears in owing to that all evidence material uses history fact's according to evidence regulation in substance. But because of evidence data, it's hard to avoid ambiguous state that having no way to firmly believe that or there existing in fact happened unavoidably, making the law have no way to apply to. But, the court must make a judge to the disputes between the interested parties. Under this situation, it is inevitably disadvantageous to the litigants, this disadvantageous exertion can not be satisfy from free judge heart certificate, but ought to stipulate that from law. According to this kind of stipulation, even if it's difficult to firmly believe, it's also not bad for the messenger court to ascertain who is able to win the lawsuit, who will lose the lawsuit, this is onus probandi. The responsibility of Proof in administrative procedure is an important part of the rule of administrative evidence. It has great benefits in the protection of the legal rights of the plaintiff, and the Promotion of the responsibility of the administrative organ in their administration according to law, as a result, to realize the legal supervision to the administration activities. Onus probandi system is established by administrative appeal law, it has the active meaning, Also is beneficial to urge an administrative organ to perform official duties according to law. But, coming from actual judicial practice, this one system is hit by the place esteeming existence which leaves much to be desired in being put into effect, it needs investigation and discussion to go a step further and to improve and to be perfect. Our country administrative lawsuit system started later, The first time promulgating in 1989 ,making the system have stipulated the administrative lawsuit onus probandi clearly, .Making an administrative lawsuit have one package evidence system of self characteristic in big legal action have formed three. Administrative lawsuit of our country onus probandi system is embodying the administrative lawsuit characteristic and is protecting the weakers , go after in substance equal spirit of law. Analysing onus probandi in our country administrative lawsuit system, the lawful rights and interests which is protecting the relative people of administration sufficient , effective, superintends , supports an administrative organ to further perfect our country administrative lawsuit system, to perform official duties according to law. The main body of a book is studied trying to comply with much bearing, many visual angles, many individuations to probe out our country administrative lawsuit onus probandi route.The first part introduces administrative lawsuit onus probandi system mainly. Origin from the administrative lawsuit, the fundamental law country of department fixes to two to conceptual boundary of onus probandi, and to conceptually take issue with of in the homeland onus probandi briefing, concept and characteristic reaching administrative lawsuit onus probandi , thereby, composing the quarrel having introduced that theory , differences are that duty or responsibility says , right duty says , risk duty says , law consequence says , law assumes or the law deduces that at the same time also about six kinds of onus probandi character judging that regulation says. And by theory boundary discussion and valuation to onus probandi character, the characteristic summarizing out onus probandi system, drawing fort the main body of a book priority location administrative lawsuit onus probandi thereby.The second part analysis our country administrative lawsuit onus probandi value mainly, through administrative lawsuit onus probandi concept and characteristic. And the pattern and the connection testifying responsibility, contrasting with legal action, concluding the analysis to the value of administrative lawsuit onus probandi, Administrative Appeal Law's regulation about onus probandi, the benefit have balanced administration legal relation both sides', Now that benefit beneficial to defending self when the relative administration people beneficial to perform official duties according to law method, is infringed upon in right.The third part introduces and analyses the current situation and hiatus of our country administrative lawsuit onus probandi system legislation go along the factor has been in progress to each that the onus probandi affecting our country administrative lawsuit assigns in culture which has four items analytical, mainly , is that the administrative lawsuit structure , onus probandi in administration procedure , the administrative lawsuit judicial review nature and one side of advocating rights , advocating active fact to bear onus probandi. Briefing once our country administrative lawsuit onus probandi condition to stipulate that in Administrative Appeal Law in our country.And about that regulation, regulation sketches principle and legislation middle that the administrative lawsuit act certificate assigns. And legislation currently in effect's defect about above-mentioned several contents about administrative lawsuit onus probandi system in middle existence gives the condition and upper defects of legislation being the defendants. Plaintiffs pass an imperial examinations to the third people to bear onus probandi expound mainly.The fourth part talks about theonus probandi system of our country administrative lawsuit how to improve and be perfect. Firstly, is to draw lessons to civil law and some onus probandi theory of abroad, relevance about country administrative lawsuit onus probandi system introducing abroad is stipulated, including the British judicial review act certificate shares responsibility rule mainly, British judicial review puts to the proof sharing regulation, whose base is "who advocates that who puts to the proof, owe to the country and the citizens, if the corporation mentions an administrative lawsuit, onus probandi shifts to the defendants after furnish evidence first testifying an administrative organ to break the law or encroach on whose lawful rights and interests , plaintiffs put to the proof. Comparing with USA judicial review system regulation, United Kingdom is somewhat similar, and from Japan to France , Germany administrative lawsuit onus probandi shares regulation, France and Germany pursue authority of office doctrine legal action structure, France and the Germany administration judge may lean on authority of office investigation of evidence equally , onus probandi of the interested party eases off relatively. And it has introduced the theory pushing forward responsibility and persuading responsibility of this two kinds mainly, it has reached a few perfect administrative lawsuits onus probandi conclusion finally: Administrative lawsuit onus probandi assigns principle is "who advocates that who puts to the proof naturally; The plaintiff ought to share onus probandi in administrative lawsuit rationally ,forbids its behavior to be born onus probandi by plaintiff, if the plaintiff advocates that the defendant makes the law; It not only having made regulation to the third legislation of people in onus probandi currently in effect of administrative lawsuit ,supplementing to respond here; The defendant lifts the clause that certificate responsibility assigns excessively generally ,should be thinly melt; In the administration case, the defendant ought what onus probandi to bear, Administrative Appeal Law has not assumed clear stipulation. Being not the trend that law case has to increase step by step as one kind of administration case. Be inclined to plaintiff not being the law case face to face in Administrative Appeal Law because of the onus probandi, In bringing about actual judicial practice, corresponding condition such as appealing should not to remain inactive as law case or not to put to the proof of defendant appears. To the defendant, the condition being overdue is putting to the proof or is not putting to the proof ought to deal with different people in different ways.