Study On Administrative Omission Judicial Remedy System

Being one of the time-honored legal terms,"Omission"has different meanings in different contexts, and in the field of administrative jurisprudence, has been called"Administrative Omission". As one of variety means of administrative activities, Administrative Act can be divided into two categories: Administrative Feasance and Administrative Omission. With the continuous expansion of administrative power, Administrative Act has been in many aspects affecting people's daily life. Proper exercise of the Administrative Act will effectively protect the basic rights of citizens, while abusement thereof will by all means endanger the interests of citizens and even the whole nation. Administrative Omission is one of such abusement of Administrative Acts. The judicial remedy is of the first importance among all other remedies of Administrative Omission. The author will hereby elaborate the judicial remedy system of Administrative Omission from the following four perspectives, using both comparative and empirical analysis methods.The first part shall be the foundational theories. The author has explored the concept of Administrative Omission in different contexts, foreign and domestic. When came to the definition of Administration Omission in China, there are also different voices. By development of those different theories regarding to the definition, the author concludes that the Administrative Omission shall mean failure of the Administrative Agency to perform its legal obligations within the statute of limitation, provided that such performance is possible. Other than general requirements for Administrative Act, Administrative Omission has its special requirements, including the prescriptive duties as premise, the possibility of feasance as subject requirement, and the overdue statute of limitation as object requirement. According to different classifications, the Administrative Omission can be sorted as: Administrative Omission in accordance with ex officio and application, abstract and concrete Administrative Omission, Administrative Omission infringing on private and public interests, actionable and non-actionable Administrative Omission, etc.The second part contains two topics, which are theoretical and practical bases for judicial remedies for Administrative Omission. The development of modern capitalism has experienced the conversion from freedom under rule of law to community under rule of law. During the time of freedom under rule of law, the protection of citizens'liberty right was emphasized, thus, the Administrative Agency functioned in a negative way. As a result, there is no basis for the existence of Administrative Omission. In the period of community under rule of law, there is demand for the Administrative Agency to actively protect the social rights of the citizens. The judicial remedy for Administrative Omission had been realized. As the legal status of social rights has been enhanced, the social rights of citizen have been completely protected and realized from different levels, from the legislative to the administrative, and then judiciary. The right of action in accordance with the public law was granted to citizens in the time of administrative supply with the development of the theory of rights under public law. In case of the Administrative Agency being omission, the citizens are entitled the rights to appeal to the judicial organ for protection by its ruling that requesting the Administrative Agency to perform its obligations. Shifting from direct victims to interested parties in fact, the theory of public law right has protected the right of action entitled by the third parties. The protection of legal rights has been developed to the protection of legal interests and interests as a matter of fact. On the other hand, the theory of public law right has in procedure achieved the judgment in form of assuming obligation, providing a theoretical basis for Administrative Omission Judiciary Relieve entitled by citizens. In socialist nation such as our country, the Constitutional Law has entitled to citizens the comprehensive basic rights which are protected from all levels. The advanced theory of right of action has established the protection system for both the third party and legal interest at the beginning of the formation of administrative proceedings. In fact, there are certain reliable legal bases for Administrative Omission Judicial Remedy accompanied by the improvement of State Compensation as a way of remedy.The third part shall be the analysis of current status. In accordance with the valid laws and regulations in current China, the author believes that there are certain defects in the Administrative Omission Judicial Remedy System. Not clearly stated by law, Administrative Omission Judicial Remedy has been stipulated by the Administrative Law based on the protection of Administrative Feasance. The function of Administrative Omission Judicial Remedy System is vulnerable for the Court only has the power to examine the Administrative Omission in procedure. The Court's decision regarding non-performance often reverts to the Administrative Agency itself, which at times results in waste of judicial resources. Thus, the counterpart's legal rights and interests are not substantially protected. Also, the narrow scope of Administrative Omission Litigation cases and the limitation on plaintiff's competency are the barriers for the protection of such counterpart's legal rights and interests. Further regarding the way of judgment, namely, the compensation ruling, one of the most important ways of recovering the losses suffered by the counterpart, has not been explicitly stipulated by law and merely protected in form of judicial interpretation in certain areas. All those facts listed above are defects of current Administrative Proceeding System in our country.The fourth part is dealing with the improvements of Administrative Omission Judicial Remedy System. Based on the analysis above, many defects of Administrative Omission Judicial Remedy System need to be further refined and the followings are selected: The scope of Administrative Omission Litigation cases shall be enlarged step by step and the abstract Administrative Omission Judicial Remedy System needs to be established. Accompanied by the development of legal system, the counterpart, the social group, the procuratorial organ shall be counted as competency plaintiff in the administrative proceedings regarding public welfare, based on which the administrative counterparts are able to be completely protected. The time limit for commencement of action shall apply the Administrative Ripeness Principle, that is, the administrative proceeding can only be instituted when the administrative procedure has developed to a certain degree. Specifically speaking, the time limit for commencement of such action shall be determined as Three (3) months upon the ripeness period expires, provided that the counterpart has no knowledge about the right to action, or such time limit shall not exceed Two (2) years. The defendant shall bear the burden of proof, which shall not release the plaintiff from the obligations to providing evidences. The form of Administrative Omission judgment shall refer to the successful experiences of civil law counties to make further progress. The Court shall be entitled certain power of discretion regarding the specific performance, such as determining the content and time limit of such specific performance by Administrative Agency. The illegal confirmation judgment shall be issued when performance is nonsense or impossible. To proper guide the administrative counterpart in administrative proceedings, the specific performance judgment shall be prior to the confirmation judgment. It is greatly suggested that we further consummate our State Compensation Law and clearly approve the Administrative Omission Judgment as a way of compensation to better protect the legal rights and interests of the administrative counterpart.