Study On The Trial Of Administrative Organs Not Fulfilling Their Statutory Duties

In administrative litigation,the number of cases of non-fulfilment of statutory duties has soared.The general feature is that administrative counterparts request relevant administrative agencies to perform their duties of protecting individual rights and property rights,internal supervision and investigation duties,complaints,etc.,in accordance with relevant laws and regulations,regulatory documents,etc.Investigation and handling of responsibilities,etc.Looking at the existing academic research,most of the theorists show obvious semantic analysis preferences,and focus on the theoretical connotation,constituent elements and expressions of non-fulfilment of statutory duties from the perspective of conceptual interpretation.The forms of non-fulfillment in practice have also become more diverse and complex,making the existence of non-fulfilment of statutory duties more difficult to identify.Many practical problems in judicial practice,it is difficult to find uniform and clear qualitative concepts and expressions from the existing normative legal documents in China.Therefore,the article focuses on the current judicial practice.Through the empirical analysis of Henan's normative legal documents and court judgment cases,the main review steps of the people's courts on cases of non-compliance with statutory duties are summarized,and the main review of the non-compliance of statutory duties at the current stage of the court is obtained.The idea is to explore the concept of non-fulfilment of statutory duties,the form of existence,and the court's judicial judgment on such cases,to explore the elements of non-compliance with statutory duties,the ways to refine the review criteria,and to guide the specific discretionary standards of cases.The direction of the review is more standardized.The article begins with the academic arguments of not fulfilling the statutory duties,sums up the main points of the dispute,analyzes the connotation and manifestation of non-fulfilment of statutory duties from the laws and regulations,regulations and the following normative legal documents,and refuses to perform in the norms.Failure to respond,delay in performance,delay in behavior(incomplete performance)is a failure to perform,and the boundaries between “promotion of dereliction of duty”,“dereliction of duty”,“dereliction of duty” and non-performance are unclear.In the second part of the article,through the 80 cases of the referee process and the referee's results of the Henan Provincial High Court,the court trial perspective is focused on the three sources of “statutory responsibility source”,“performance possibility” and “whether actual performance”.It gradually compensated for the single-sided form of statutory duties,and analyzed the various elements under the logic of non-compliance with the statutory duty review.The internal review of the three elements has a strength inconsistency,and it is expected to improve the review criteria for non-compliance with statutory duties.Point,more expectation of judicial practice to promote the theorization of the review model,solve complex and volatile case trial problems.The third part of the article combines the results of the previous paragraphs to analyze the shortcomings of the judicial review mode of non-fulfilment of statutory duties in China.It is concerned that there are differences in the reasonableness of the court's trial benchmark,that is,the court is involved in the statutory duty relief basis.The extension of the extension and the gradual consideration of the actual possibility of the performance of the administrative organs,such as the degree of discretion,should promote the judicial review standards,increase the authority to review the rationality of administrative actions,and make up for the court's legality of non-fulfilment of statutory duties.Rationality examines the compression of discretionary space.