Research On Judicial Review Of Administrative Promise

In the early 1990s,Yantai,Shandong Province,took the lead in piloting the "social service commitment system" in the local construction committee in order to improve the quality of government services,which was the first time for administrative promises to appear in China.In 2004,the Supreme Court issued the "Notice on the Regulation of Administrative Causes",administrative promises as specific administrative acts,alongside with administrative compulsory and administrative permits,were stipulated as second-tier causes,and officially appeared in the official documents.2020,the Supreme People’s Court "Interim Provisions on the Causes of Administrative Cases" not only did not remove administrative promises from the causes of cases,but also added the cashing bonus and the two tertiary causes of action of cashing out concessions.It can be seen that with the continuous development of society,administrative promises have not faded from the public’s view but are more and more frequently used in administrative practice.This is also well reflected by the increasing number of administrative promise cases in the Judgment Document Network.The construction of the rule of law plays a pivotal role in the construction of a modern socialist country in China,and thus the construction of the rule of law is listed as a separate chapter in the report of the 20 th Party Congress,which puts forward clearer requirements for the relevant work.And the "Outline for the Implementation of the Rule of Law Government Construction(2021-2025)" clearly points out that in the process of building the rule of law government,we should accelerate the construction of government integrity and improve the mechanism for the government to keep its promises.For the government’s breach of trust in the supervision and pursuit of responsibility put forward specific initiatives.Thus,administrative organs should make administrative promises legally and reasonably and fulfill them actively,so that the administrative promise system can play a role in the construction of governmental integrity.However,there are almost no specific regulations on administrative promises,which makes illegal promises and promises not fulfilled occur from time to time.As a result,the judicial review of administrative promises is not uniform in terms of review principles,mixed with other administrative acts,mixed with procedural review and substantive review,and there are differences in the scope of review.In order to make the administrative act like administrative promise play its role better and add to the construction of rule of law government in China.We should clarify the concept of administrative promise and its constituent elements to solve the problem of inaccurate judgment of both in judicial review,and at the same time we make use of the double-order theory in German administrative law to vertically divide the composite administrative act of administrative promise into multiple stages,and formulate corresponding review rules for different stages in order to solve the existing problems and further clarify the judicial review rules of administrative promise.The rules of judicial review of administrative promise are clarified.As the most important remedy for administrative promise,judicial review is a powerful weapon to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the relator.It should be able to substantially resolve disputes,so that the administrative promise is widely accepted and play its role to promote the construction of the rule of law government...