On The Standard Of Justiciability Of Procedural Administrative Act

Generally speaking,the litigability issues of administrative actions we are discussing are focused on the discussion of "substantial results",and the series of procedures implemented before the entity results are made,such as investigations,notifications,and other actions generated in the procedures.,Often play the role of "supporting role",only as an aspect of considering the legitimacy of the final entity’s behavior.However,in reality,there has always been research on the suitability of procedural administrative acts.The Guiding Case No.69 issued by the Supreme Court in 2016 further pointed out the direction for the trial of procedural administrative acts.The problem of suitability has once again caused Hot discussion.The first part of the article first clarifies the related concepts of procedural administrative behavior.Procedural administrative acts are made in a legal form,the general term for auxiliary measures that stipulate the methods and methods of the exercise of administrative powers,which have the specificity of the implementation subject,the preparatory and auxiliary nature of the content,the legality,and the influence on the legal relationship of the final entity The indirectness and other characteristics.There are certain connections and differences between procedural administrative actions and internal administrative actions and other related similar concepts.Judging from the existing legal norms,both foreign and Chinese laws provide a normative basis for the litigability of procedural administrative acts.The second part of the article cuts in from a theoretical perspective,focusing on the theoretical background of the litigability standard of procedural administrative acts.The maturity principle of administrative behavior and the principle of final administrative behavior are the theoretical basis of the suitability of procedural administrative behavior.From the perspective of the principle of maturity,the Supreme People’s Court tried to clarify by issuing guidance cases and other methods,and appropriately adapted the “final stage completion of administrative procedures”standard,that is,in principle,procedural administrative actions are not justiciable,and under exceptional circumstances,the People’s rights and obligations are in the litigable category when they have actual effects,and the characteristics of administrative actions that need to be completed through a series of procedures also determine the necessity of the existence of the principle of administrative final actions.In addition,the benign interaction mechanism between administrative power and judicial power also provides a theoretical basis for the suitability of procedural administrative actions.In the third part of the article,from the perspective of the empirical investigation of the litigability standards of procedural administrative actions,1000 samples are selected as the analysis objects.There are four main situations of procedural administrative actions in the current judicial review,namely,supplementary material notification,land acquisition announcement,public security organ summons,and entrusted evaluation.The court mainly uses the behavior to affect rights and obligations,behavior development status,and behavior.Dependency and other aspects to determine whether it can be sued or not.Of course,when the court adopts a single or composite standard for review,there are also problems such as inconsistent litigability standards,unclear judgments,excessive reliance on sub-clauses,and inconsistent remedy positions of different courts.These issues need to be targeted in a timely manner.deal with.The fourth part of the article starts with the improvement of the litigability standard of procedural administrative acts.In order to prevent administrative efficiency from being affected,it is necessary to clarify that procedural administrative acts are not justiciable in principle.Under exceptional circumstances,when procedural administrative acts meet the standards of rights and obligations,finality standards,independence standards,and violations of legal procedures,the entity decides When the standard was revoked,its limited litigability was recognized.