Study On The Plaintiff Qualifications Of Public Interest Whistleblower In Administrative Litigation

In recent years,the number of cases involving reporting complaints in administrative litigation has grown extremely rapidly.Depending on the nature of the reported interest,the reporters in this category of cases can be divided into privateinterest reporters and public-interest reporters.The plaintiff's qualifications for a private interest reporter have been initially affirmed in Guiding Case No.77 issued by the Supreme People's Court.Whether the municipal welfare reporter is qualified as a plaintiff has yet to be further discussed.The academic community not attains a consensus on this,and the practice is very different.Due to the mixed use of "complaints" or "reports" in practice and the difficulty of distinguishing between "private benefits" or "public good",it is necessary to first analyze the above two concepts to define what constitutes a public good reporter in administrative litigation.For "complaint" and "reporting",the two should be distinguished as much as possible in practice,but when it is difficult to distinguish,the boundary between the two can be blurred and allowed to be mixed.For "public good" and "private benefit",the concept and characteristics need to be correctly identified in the case.When it is difficult to identify,the legal relationship in the case needs to be clarified,and the specific issues are analyzed in detail.There are 3 main approaches that public welfare reporters can qualify as plaintiffs.First,public welfare reporters may qualify as plaintiffs based on the right to report rewards.Second,a shared interest reporter may qualify as a plaintiff based on the right to report.Third,a municipal welfare reporter may qualify as a plaintiff based on procedural rights such as obtaining a response to the report.Under the first route,public welfare reporters can obtain the plaintiff's qualifications and have basically reached a consensus.When the report is established,the reporting reward requirements are met,and the clerical agency refuses to award,the public welfare reporter has the same plaintiff qualifications as the organizational counterpart who protects private interests.However,when the report is not created or the report establishment does not meet the requirements of the report rewards,it has not yet reached consensus on whether the civic welfare reporter has the qualifications of the plaintiff.The second and third paths have to be analyzed in detail.In view of the fact that the plaintiff qualifications of the public interest informant under the main path are not disputed in theory and practice,the qualifications of the plaintiff under the original path are not repeated.From the perspective of legal doctrine,a precise analysis of the subsequent path can lead to the conclusion that the public welfare reporter does not have the plaintiff qualification based on the right to report.When a public welfare reporter is an administrative counterpart,in theory,the right to report public welfare belongs to the legitimate rights and interests protected by administrative lawsuits in China,and a lawsuit based on the right to report public welfare also has the benefit of a lawsuit.The highest body of the lawsuit is extended to individuals,so the current public welfare reporter cannot obtain the plaintiff qualification based on the communal welfare reporting right.When a public welfare reporter is an interested party,the public welfare reporter does not have the qualification of a plaintiff based on the right to report because the right to report is a "supervisory right",a type of democratic political right,and not a subjective public right.Specifically analyzing the third path,public welfare reporters have the possibility of obtaining plaintiff qualifications based on procedural rights.Procedural rights are established based on specified conditions,and can be divided into procedural rights with purely procedural value and procedural rights to both procedural and physical value.When the procedural rights have both procedural and physical values,and the reporter is not explicitly a private-interest reporter or a public-interest reporter,based on the protection of possible private rights,the reporter may be in a situation where the administrative agency has “not filed the case”,Public interest reporters may qualify as plaintiffs.When the reporter is clearly a public welfare reporter,because the physical right of the public welfare reporter to report is the right of public welfare reporting,only when the procedural rights are independent of the entity rights can be sued,the public welfare reporters have procedural rights Plaintiff qualifications.Combining comparative law and China's practice,procedural rights may be able to obtain an attainability independent of substantive rights,which is also more reasonable,helps to maintain shared welfare,does not end the case,and prevents the protection of public welfare.Analyzing the above three paths,public welfare reporters can obtain plaintiff qualifications based on the right to report rewards,and have the possibility of obtaining plaintiff qualifications based on procedural rights.From the perspective of a serviceoriented government,governmental agencies should pay attention to citizens 'reports and investigate,handle,and respond to citizens' reports.At the same time,it is necessary to stop the abuse of the right of action by professional reporters and disrupt the judicial order.