On The Justice Of The Procedure Of Price Hearing In China

In China, the hearing system of the administrative act established in 1996, in year of 1998, price hearing officially introduced to the government valorizing field. Thereafter, the hearing system has been applied and developed in our country for almost 20 years. People has pay close attention to the hearing system ever since, especially the price hearing. But as more hearing has been rised, black box operation and other issues appearing, the hearing gradually getting cold. People start to look on indifferently, no longer participate actively, and begin questioning the hearing system. As a democratic participation form, hearing was introduced to China in recent 20 years, but there are still a lot of problems that cause people to think about.The author first discusses the origin of the hearing, reviewed the development and evolution of the hearing system of laws and regulation in every filed of our country. Then clarifies the connotation of the hearing system, the proper value and the roles.And take the price hearing of our country as the example, step by step combed the price hearing from the preparation stage,formally convened stage and the follow-up procedure after the end.Described the discretionary power of the hearing procedure and further compared to the relatively developed hearing procedure in USA. Secondly, take the hearing convened in Xi’an as the example, combined with the current relevant laws and regulations of our country. The author raised some unfair issues which exist in the preparation procedure,the starting procedure, the convening process and other procedure after the end. These unfair issues including but not limited to, the information asymmetry,the low transparency during hearing, the supervision mechanisms are imperfect and the unfair selection process of hearing participants. To solve these problems, the author put forward corresponding countermeasures from four aspects:from the cognitive dimension of the government and citizens; to ensure citizen’s equality of opportunity; to ensure the fairness in the hearing process and to improve the effect of the hearing.