Research On The Judicial Determination Of Government Dishonesty In Administrative Promise

Administrative promise is an important tool in modern administrative management.Disputes emerge in endlessly in the process of its operation.At present,the relevant legal norms and judicial cases of government integrity construction involve administrative promise,which also provides a good perspective for the study of judicial determination of government dishonesty.By sorting out the judgment documents,the dishonesty of government behavior can be summarized as subjective dishonesty and objective dishonesty.The current judicial determination of the dishonesty of government behavior has the nature of judicial supervision but is not punitive.By examining the judgment ideas of local courts,it is known that there are two review paths for administrative promise cases.One is the unilateral administrative act model : the judicial review of the administrative promise as a unilateral administrative act;the second is the contract behavior review mode : the administrative promise is regarded as a whole with the characteristics of the administrative behavior of both parties,and the judicial review of the obligation action is carried out.Under these two review modes,the applicable rules include the principle of good faith,estoppel,legitimate expectation and the principle of trust interest protection.By analyzing the existing judgment documents,there are the following problems in the judicial review of administrative promised government dishonesty : the proportion of judicial dishonesty in administrative promise cases is low,the different review modes lead to the identification standards,the focus of the review,the differences in the basis selection,and the specific rules of dishonesty are not clear.After in-depth discussion of these problems,it is concluded that the current relationship between legality,contract and trustworthiness is unclear,the scope of application of public and private legal norms is different,the lack of operability of government credit norms leads to the existence of applicable concerns in the court,and the lack of value judgment of judicial determination of administrative promised government dishonesty is an important factor causing these problems.In view of these problems,it is proposed that the relationship between breach of contract,illegality and dishonesty should be clarified in theory,and the legal standards and disciplinary measures for the determination of dishonesty of government behavior should be clarified.When he believes that the government ’s promised behavior involves breach of contract or illegality and reaches a certain degree of severity and needs to be punished by means of credit,it is included in the scope of dishonesty determination.In addition,the follow-up review technology based on the two-stage theory can make the government ’s dishonesty determination reasonably invoke civil legal norms and not exceed the jurisdiction of administrative trial.Finally,establish the principle of good faith in administrative law,improve the judicial procedure for the determination of promised dishonesty,and integrate the judgment rules for the determination of dishonesty from the two aspects of strict performance and dishonesty compensation.Therefore,it is necessary to solve the dilemma faced by the judicial review of the administrative promise government behavior,and promote the smooth operation of the administrative promise system along the track of the rule of law.