On The Distribution Of The Burden Of Proof In Administrative Public Interest Litigation In China

Since the Fourth Plenary Session of the Eighteenth Central Committee,China has continuously explored the procuratorial organs' filing of administrative public interest litigation systems,implemented the protection of national interests and social public interests,and the administrative public welfare litigation system is written into the law.In July 2017,China's newly revised "Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" clearly stipulated that the procuratorial organ shall be the prosecutor of administrative public interest litigation.There is a difference between the prosecution subject of administrative public interest litigation and the plaintiff in general administrative litigation.The plaintiff in general administrative litigation is the party of the administrative counterpart who suffered damage to a specific administrative act.Supervisory organs exercise the power of legal supervision and are independent of the administrative powers of administrative organs,so administrative public interest litigation differs from ordinary administrative litigation in the distribution of burden of proof.The distribution of burden of proof is the most critical step in administrative public interest litigation.Its distribution rules not only affect the determination of the facts of the entire case,but also relate to the outcome of the trial and even the design of the system.However,research on the distribution of burden of proof in administrative public interest litigation in China is still in progress.At the initial stage,the academic community has not given a general opinion,so what kind of rules for the distribution of the burden of proof and how to reasonably allocate the burden of proof in administrative public interest litigation will become the focus of this article.As a new litigation system,the procuratorial organ filed an administrative public interest litigation.Although it has gone through a two-year pilot,there are still many problems in legislation and practice.This article mainly adopts literature research method,comparative analysis method and empirical analysis method to start the argument.By comparing the differences in the distribution rules of the burden of proof for administrative public interest litigation at home and abroad,as well as the differences in the distribution of the burden of proof between the administrative public interest litigation in China and the general administrative litigation and civil public interest litigation,we explore the particularity of the distribution of the burden of proof in administrative public interest litigation;Through the collation analysis and summary of 178 standard administrative public interest litigation cases in the Chinese Judgment Document Network,the problems in the distribution of burden of proof in administrative public interest litigation are viewed from the perspective of judicial cases,including uneven distribution of burden of proof and distribution of burden of proof in administrative public interest litigation Issues such as unclear commitments,lack of compulsory investigation power in administrative public interest litigation and insufficient social responsibility of appraisal institutions have resulted in high cost of proof and limit the burden of proof,and put forward suggestions for corresponding issues.Through case-type research,optimize the rules for the distribution of burden of proof in administrative public interest litigation,and propose the construction of a comprehensive burden of proof burden distribution rule combining "who advocate,who the burden of proof" and "inversion of burden of proof";Attach importance to the work of procuratorial advice and standardize the exercise of administrative power;by granting compulsory investigation power to administrative public interest litigation prosecutors,it is convenient for procuratorial organs to collect evidence,and urge the administrative organs to exercise their legal duties according to law;To reduce the cost of the procuratorial organs' burden of proof,broaden the scope of administrative public interest litigation,and effectively protect the national and social public interests.