Research On The Identification Of Illegal Evidence In Administrative Litigation

The subject of this paper is the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence.The view is that the rules for the exclusion of illegal evidence should be applied differently for different subjects in application,and the administrative counterparts and third parties should be applied loosely.Through the collection and analysis of practical cases,it is considered that in the judicial practice,the application of the illegal evidence exclusion rules,except for the differential application,is indiscriminate.Among them,the differential application of illegal evidence exclusion rules is divided into the loose application of the administrative organs and the loose application of the relatives.However,in practice,most cases of illegal evidence-related cases tend to be illegally provided to the administrative agencies,and they are treated loosely when applying the rules for the exclusion of illegal evidence in administrative proceedings.The author mainly analyzes the possibility of applying the illegal evidence exclusion rule by the administrative counterpart and the necessity of differentiating the illegal evidence exclusion rule,and demonstrates the rationality of the differential application of the illegal evidence exclusion rule.In addition,by analyzing the function value location of the illegal evidence exclusion rule,it is considered that the loose phenomenon of the illegal evidence exclusion rule applied to the administrative agency appears in practice because the functional value orientation focuses on entity justice and administrative efficiency.In addition,the current rules for the exclusion of illegal evidence have difficulties in the application of differentiation.Significantly reflected in the relevant provisions are not clear,the reason is that the original intention of the exclusion of illegal evidence rules is to limit the violation of private rights by administrative agencies.Because of the difference between the relative person and the administrative agency,the illegal evidence exclusion rule cannot be matched exactly when it is applied to the relative person and the third person.For another reason,the current judicial resources are limited.Due to the consideration of administrative efficiency and the consideration of the actual judicial environment,no more detailed regulations have been made.As for the functional value orientation,which emphasizes substantive justice and administrative efficiency,the author believes that there are two reasons for this problem.First,the traditional thinking of national interests first.Second,the judge's understanding level faces the understanding of the extent of illegal evidence collection.In response to the above problems and causes,the author believes that relevant judicial interpretation and guidance cases should be issued,and the unclear points in the illegal evidence exclusion rules should be clarified or the judicial practice should be guided through guiding cases.However,due to the lag of legislation,the release of judicial interpretation or guidance cases is not a one-step process.Therefore,the author analyzes the improper sanctions and the standard of proof of illegal evidence,and believes that if the rules for the exclusion of illegal evidence are not yet clear,the illegal counterparts of the administrative counterparts and third parties will be dealt with separately.In addition,the issue of focusing on the value of function and the efficiency of administrative efficiency is mainly through the dialectical understanding of the relationship between national interests and citizens' interests to transform the traditional concept that national interests are absolutely higher than personal interests.