Study On The Justiciability Of Response Actions Of Report By Administrative Departments

The maintenance of national law and order depends on the active enforcement of administrative agencies.However,due to the limited resources of administrative agencies,the reporting system can supplement the inadequate enforcement capabilities of administrative agencies,curb the occurrence or expansion of harm,and play a role in maintaining public safety and order.But as reports become an important way for the public to participate in administrative management,in practice,administrative authorities often fail to respond to citizens' reports,delay their responses,or the responses do not match the reports.Administrative lawsuits raised by reporters are in rapid growth in practice.Although China's "Administrative Procedural Law" and "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the" Administrative Procedural Law of the People's Republic of China "stipulate that if a party lodges a complaint with an administrative agency in order to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests,the administrative agency that has the responsibility to handle the complaint has made or failed to handle,then the party should be allowed to initiate administrative lawsuits in response to reports by administrative agencies,but the author has observed in recent years that the People 's Court has repeated certain administrative proceedings regarding whether the reporter can conduct an administrative lawsuit in response to the report.The act does not fall within the scope of the case" or "the complainant has no plaintiff qualifications " as a reason to deny the party's right of administrative action.At the same time,at the level of theory,there are similar views on supporting and opposing the use of the "protection norm theory" to regulate complaints filed by reporters,and their arguments and analyses have their own advantages.Therefore,this article will analyze and study this issue from the two aspects,the scope of the case and the plaintiff's qualifications,combined with the "interest of litigation".On the one hand,this article focuses on whether the report response behavior should be included in the scope of the administrative litigation case.The author argues that the general point of view dividing the report response behavior into procedural responses and entity responses has some problems,and then criticize the opinions of some scholars,and based on the study of Taiwan doctrine and judicial rulings the author affirms that the second-order distinction between "procedures and entities" is positive,and point out that the "protection norm theory" needs to be combined with the issues involved in reporting whether the response to "procedural significance" includes the interpretation and analysis of the subjective public rights of the complainant,and the articles should not be limited to the legal interpretation of the procedural provisions of the report response,and the report response behavior of "substantive significance" should be considered as an administrative factual act of concept notification,and then the possibility of filing an administrative lawsuit by the complainant and the reporter should be examined from the viewpoint of whether the complainant have an interest on the report handling behavior.At the same time,the author pointed out that whether a private-interest whistleblower filed an administrative lawsuit with "procedural interest" in response to a "procedural significance" report response action needs to be examined in particular.For those who do not have the "interest of litigation",even if it is for their own legitimate rights and interests,"Procedural significance" Reporting and responding to an administrative lawsuit should still limit his or her right to sue.On the other hand,the author focuses on whether the complainant and the "substantial significance" report response behavior,that is,the report processing behavior,is of interest.First of all,the author affirmed that it is positive to change the related research from "definition and constitution of plaintiff qualifications" to "how to judge plaintiff qualifications",and believed that "protection norm theory" has the value of legal interpretation in judging plaintiff qualifications in administrative litigation.But at the same time,we need to pay attention to the openness and uncertainty it brings.Secondly,by introducing two cases of the Supreme Court's analysis of typical cases involving the "protection norm theory",the author clearly affirmed that when we use the "protection norm theory" in China's judicial practice to determine the legal norms,we should involved the articles as much as possible.In addition,the author analyzes the complainant's qualifications in such administrative cases from the two dimensions of vertical time and horizontal space.On the one hand,the author found through case retrieval that before and after the introduction of "protection norm theory" in China's judicial practice,the people's courts presented different judgment paths for the complainant's qualifications as a plaintiff.On the other hand,the author conducts type analysis,and selects six major areas,including government information disclosure,consumer rights protection,land use rights disputes,environmental rights disputes,competition rights disputes,labor rights disputes,and victim type complaints in public security management.The "Protection Norm Theory" provides legal interpretation of the legal norms that may be involved in complaints in various fields,and then judges whether the complainant is eligible for the plaintiff.In the conclusion of the last chapter of the article,the author focuses on whether the reporter can exercise his democratic supervision power through other channels,with a view to finding relief paths other than judicial relief.The author also believes that the People's Procuratorate receiving reports from citizens in the protection of ecological environment and resources,food and drug safety falls into the category of "fulfilling their duties." The author believes that the People's Procuratorate can apply the existing norms and include reporting behavior in administrative public interest litigation into the "People's Procuratorate Reporting Work Regulations." While adjusting the scope,we will also innovate related systems and establish an administrative public interest litigation reporting system and a public welfare damage observer system.