Research On The Justiciability Of Procedural Administrative Act

Under the current system in China,whether procedural administrative actions are included in the scope of administrative litigation has been the focus of controversy in the theoretical world.Especially in recent years,the frequency of procedural actions by administrative agencies has increased.Because these actions are closely related to the lives of the parties,people’s awareness of the legitimacy of administrative procedures has gradually increased,and more and more disputes over procedural administrative actions have been prosecuted.Court.For the purpose of improving administrative efficiency,saving judicial resources,and protecting the rights of administrative counterparts,we need to clarify the suitability of procedural administrative acts.Due to the lack of due process clauses in China’s constitution,the legislation of administrative procedures is still blank.The rules on administrative procedures are mainly scattered in some articles of departmental law,but these articles are full of loopholes.For example,although the Administrative Punishment Law provides for a hearing procedure,it does not stipulate that administrative punishment decisions need to be made based on the hearing record;a larger amount of fine requires a hearing,but there is no hearing requirement for a penalty that restricts personal freedom.The Administrative Reconsideration Law stipulates that the reconsideration shall be based on a written trial,but does not stipulate that the reconsideration agency must notify the interested third party.With regard to disputes over peasants’ land acquisition and house demolition,the decision-making procedures are extremely simple.In this context,it is of great practical significance to study the procedural nature of procedural administrative actions through judicial practice.This paper intends to summarize the typical cases in practice,sort out the review ideas of the court,and analyze the problems in conjunction with the theoretical research.The main body of this article consists of four parts.The first part is the question.Taking the Guiding Case No.69 issued by the Supreme Court as the starting point,the basic case,judgment results and reasons of the case are introduced and analyzed,and the necessity and urgency of procedural administrative action research are pointed out.The second part is the definition of procedural administrative behavior.The scope of procedural administrative actions is mainly defined from the definition and extension of its behavior itself.In terms of definition,the subject,object and nature of procedural administrative actions are clarified.In the aspect of extension,the relations between procedural administrative actions and quasi-administrative actions,administrative factual actions,multi-stage administrative actions and internal administrative actions are explored.The third part is the justification of procedural administrative behavior.This part mainly deals with reasoning from three aspects.The first is the legal basis of the procedural nature of procedural administrative actions.It involves the principle of decentralization,the principle of administrative rule of law,and the principle of basic human rights.The second is the basic position of the administrative procedure law.It mainly discusses from the legislative purpose of administrative procedure law,the evolution of judicial interpretation and the development law of administrative procedure system.Finally,an overview of judicial practice.This part explores the typical court’s attitude to the procedural administrative behavior in judicial practice through a review of several typical cases.The fourth part is the typed combing of actionable procedural administrative actions.This part mainly sorts out the actionable procedural administrative actions,and builds a general actionable standard based on this.First introduce the case samples,clarify the selection and selection criteria of the case samples,and analyze the case samples.Visual chart analysis is performed from the court level,the trial process,the case classification and the court decision results.These data reflect the general overview of the review of procedural administrative behavior in judicial practice,and provide a typical sample for the discussion of the standard of actionable procedural administrative behavior below.Secondly,by reviewing the cases that the court considers procedural administrative actions to be actionable,and combining with the academic theories,in addition to meeting the prosecution conditions stipulated in the Basic Administrative Procedure Law,a summary of the procedural administrative action’s review Standards,that is,the standards of actual adverse effects,the standards of externalization of internal procedures,the standards of violations of legal procedures,and the need for separate prosecution.These four standards are intended to provide the courts with clear judgments in subsequent case trials,thereby better protecting the rights of administrative counterparts and supervising administrative organs in accordance with the law.