Research On The Distribution Rules Of Objective Burden Of Proof In Administrative Litigation In China

The burden of proof is not only closely related to administrative legal norms,but also plays an extremely important role in administrative litigation,running through the whole process of administrative litigation.The burden of proof is rich in connotation.In China,the burden of proof includes the responsibility of conduct and the responsibility of result,which is equivalent to the subjective burden of proof and the objective burden of proof in the continental law system.Among them,the objective burden of proof is the most important,which is the essence of the burden of proof,and its distribution rules determine which party shall prove the facts and bear the adverse consequences when the truth is unknown.Its reasonable distribution is undoubtedly very important to China’s administrative litigation.Therefore,this paper adopts the method of empirical research,literature research and comparative research,on the basis of the basic theory of objective burden of proof,combined with the current situation of Our country and the relevant situation of foreign countries,to discuss the distribution rules of objective burden of proof in administrative litigation in China.The objective burden of proof determines the subjective burden of proof,which has distinct characteristics.Its function is to overcome the ambiguity of the truth of the case and has various distribution bases.The term "objective burden of proof" is not adopted in administrative litigation in China,but the legal concept of "burden of proof",which is equivalent to subjective burden of proof.From the in-depth analysis of the distribution of burden of proof,there are also provisions on the distribution of burden of objective proof in The Administrative Procedure Law of China.However,due to the diversity of essential ideas on which the distribution rules of objective proof burden are based,the distribution standards are not universal and the distribution rules are not clear.In China’s judicial practice,judges rarely apply the objective burden of proof to explain the law.This is due not only to the characteristics of theory itself,but also to the distribution of legislation.From the current situation of legislation and judicial practice,the reasons for the problems in the distribution of objective burden of proof in China’s administrative litigation are the lack of unified distribution basis and the lack of administrative litigation classification.By examining the burden of objective proof in Administrative litigation in Germany and the burden of persuasion in administrative litigation in the United States,this paper provides some ideas for solving the distribution basis of the burden of objective proof in China.Due to the litigation mode and institutional basis,the burden of persuasion in the United States is not suitable for China’s administrative litigation,while the allocation rules of the burden of objective proof in Germany under the guidance of "normative theory" have certain reference significance for China.Therefore,on the one hand,to the administrative functions and powers as the center,the administrative legal norms functions and powers according to party a claim is divided into form,functions and powers,functions and powers hinder norms and authority to rule out norms,and according to the adversarial relationship between these specifications,can be divided into basic standards and relative specifications,as the distribution of objective burden of proof in administrative litigation,Each party shall bear the burden of objective proof of the facts supported by the administrative legal norms they maintain.On the other hand,the distribution rules of the burden of objective proof should be established according to the litigation of formation,payment and confirmation.The combination of uniform distribution basis and litigation type is of great benefit to the effective development of the burden of proof system in China’s administrative litigation.