Legal Analysis Of The Charging Case Of The Phoenix

The transformation of the government functions to service administration, requesting theact of the authority transfer the target to promote the public welfare, to protect theadministrative relative person’s legitimate rights and interests. Administrative behavior, inparticular to the administrative relative person’s rights, should be guided by the concept ofadministration according to the law, legal and reasonable, and be able to address the variousissues that arise in the development of the society. In context of administration according tolaw, to strengthen the construction of the service-oriented Government, this paper focuses onthe administrative organs in the whole process of the specific operation, which formexercising of the body’s legality, the rationality of the behavior and the specific procedures ofthe administrative act,in the order to objective observing and analyzing the administrativeaction to the distance of administration according to law and to provide feasible way forimproving the quality of service administration.Adopting the mode of "one vote" charge, including the ancient city of phoenix whichdose not in the scope of charge the tickets originally is Fenghuang Government in order tostandardize the order of the local tourism market, intensify protection of environmentmeasures taken. In the case of the phoenix charges in which charge ticket acts includedecisions to collect the tickets, formulate a "one vote" charges, administrative fee and otheradministrative acts. In this case, in the whole process of administrative subject for decision toimplement the administrative fees, there is much controversy about its legitimacy andrationality. Current dispute focused on attribution of the scenic spots, legitimacy of theadministrative charge subject, the rationality of the fees and make the fees due process thesethree questions.Within the framework of the theory of public property, the administrative organ to chargeis the exercise of public property management of scenic spot, should by the body of the legalbasis for proper program. At the same time, to have public properties and public welfarenature materials generally used are public rights, property management rules is a generalrestriction of the right of the public, based on this, the public should be involved. This articlefirst dialysis in the first part of the case and clarify this article aims at studying the legaldispute, namely Phoenix property, pay the principal on the legality and rationality of theancient town, charges of the regularity. The second part specific analysis of the ownership of the scenic spot, combined with the theory of property on scenic area administration body onmanagement of public property and public property rights, later about the legality andrationality analysis for providing theoretical basis. Third and fourth part combined with theanalysis of the current laws and regulations charge main problems of legitimacy andrationality of the fees. From the angle of administrative participation of administrative feesand charges, the fifth decided to propose several thinking, for example, the concreteimplementation of the hearings on investigation of public participation system, decides theoperation of several considerations, such as the practical implementation of publicparticipation, information disclosure, investigation procedures, such as hearings, and in duecourse make reasonable compensation to better protect the interests of the people, promote therationality of administrative actions. Based on administrative organs can be used for limit thepublic property of the general public interest, but received tickets in order to increase theintensity of scenic protection, even disguised fare increases are not the management andprotection of the scenic long-term as well. Administration according to law, serviceadministrative concept, under the guidance of rationality should not only consider itslegitimate administrative charges should also be a manifestation of democracy; makingcharging decisions should consider their due process, which was given to administrative lawacademics in this case the most deep and serious thinking and innovation of this paper.