Study On The Criteria For The Determination Of Minor Violations Of Administrative Procedures

In 1989,the “Administrative Litigation Law” took "infringement of legal procedures" as one of the statutory reasons for the cancellation of judgments,which symbolized the fact that China,which is based on substantive law centralism,has begun to pay attention to the independent value of the procedure.However,since the implementation of the "Administrative Procedure Law," whether administrative actions that violate statutory procedures have been revoked have been repeatedly questioned in practice and even been denied.Under such perplexity,the new Administrative Procedure Law added the standard of judicial review of “slight violation and no actual impact on the rights of the plaintiff”,but in many cases of judicial practice it has been shown that in the judgment of the procedural violation,the court The respective review standards are not consistent.Whether the new “Administrative Procedures Law” establishes the criteria for minor violations is the best choice.Whether the case can be resolved fairly and reasonably can be tested.This article summarizes the cases in which local courts have determined that the procedure was slightly illegal during the two years after the entry into force of the new Administrative Litigation Law.The verdict of minor administrative or administrative procedures that has been searched for on the Pkulaw.cn has been applied to courts at various levels after the new law came into effect.The type and reasoning of the identified minor violations are analyzed.For a minor violation of the procedure determined by the court,technical errors should be excluded first because local courts treat them as errors that are not related to the law and should not be discussed under the scope of minor violations of the procedure.In addition,the court's arguments are centered on "whether or not there is an impact on the rights of the plaintiff." They can be divided into four categories: failure to perform statutory procedures,failure to perform statutory deadlines,missing or improper steps to perform,and improper or improper methods of performance.When analyzing these four types of issues,the court should distinguish the purpose of the establishment of the procedure.If the procedure involving the assurance of the correctness of the results of the entity is violated,even if the entity's results are not inappropriate,it should be confirmed as a procedural violation.However,in the case of illegal administrative procedures,since the new law and the newly issued judicial interpretation still do not take into consideration the factors of granting administrative action,it is also negligible for the plaintiff to request the court to perform its administrative duties and request confirmation of the administrative agency granting an administrative license to extend the deadline.The "Administrative Procedures Law" has left regrets on the establishment of procedural violation review standards.