Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)aaapublished in(发表于) 2013/12/24 8:44:31 Law proposed overhaul： enforcement of judgements may not have been detained Government officials
Xinhuanet, Beijing, December 23 (reporters Huo Xiaoguang and and Chen Fei and and Yang Weihan and and Shi Jingnan)-as a movie called "mingaoguan" law promulgation and implementation of the administrative procedure law faced the first overhaul after more than 20 years. 23rd, draft amendments to the administrative procedure law submitted to the national people's Congress. Experts said the modification of administrative procedure law excluding China's current "mingaoguan" of legal obstacles and difficulties, guaranteeing smooth governmental and private dispute resolution legal channels will play an important role.
Executive authorities must not interfere with, impede a court case
In September 2013, a hotel worker in Henan province administrative litigation in the courts, through legal channels to local industrial and commercial administrative departments beg to say. And the Court has made "leaders said no case of" let them eat on the cold shoulder.
Currently, the administrative litigation in our country faced "hard case, tried hard, difficult to enforce" issue, the "case" must make efforts to crack. Citizens, legal persons or other organizations and Government agencies and their staff has the dispute, administrative body than when the defendant, the Court would not accept, led to many disputes should be resolved through litigation into channels of complaint letters and visits, in some places the emergence of the "petition do not believe law".
Free entrance of the administrative proceedings, and stated for the first time the draft amendment adds clear courts should prosecute rights the protection of citizens, legal persons or other organizations, should be inadmissible admissible according to the law of administrative cases. Administrative organs must not interfere with or hinder the Court in administrative cases. Executive complained to law with the suit.
"In practice, executive interference, obstruction cases before administrative court more, particularly relating to the prosecution of cases involving house demolition and land expropriation. "Director Jiang Mingan, Constitution and administrative law research center of Peking University said that due to the limitations of time, rules established by the administrative procedure law, institutions and ideas and present democratic rule of law and the realities of reform and development in China are not fit, triggering all kinds of ills.
For the "Office", draft amendments to strengthen the court proceedings, adds: the people's Court shall register it after receiving a complaint on the spot, and issue a written document with date. Writs content lacking or if there are other errors, should provide guidance and clarification, and ready to follow through at once inform the party concerned. Shall not, without the guidance and clarification to the prosecution does not meet the criteria will not be accepted. The draft amendments also clarified the responsibility of courts, additional requirements: do not receive writs, the party may make a complaint to a higher court, the superior court ordered corrective action and responsibility take disciplinary measures against the persons.
"This law defined the principles and purposes of the fair administration of Justice, administration, defined the general thrust of the administrative litigation due to make it return legal standard, is a highlight of this amendment. "Shen Kui, a professor at Peking University law school said.
Expansion of the scope of accepting cases, verbal prosecution
For many to consider, when formulating administrative procedural law, the scope of accepting cases in administrative litigation was made more stringent restrictions.
Jiang Mingan introduced, many administrative acts, as abstract administrative acts, internal administrative acts, involves citizens political, and labor right, and by education right, administrative acts, even violations citizens, and corporate or other organization of lawful rights and interests of, due to existing administrative procedure clear will its excluded in administrative litigation by case range zhiwai or is not will its clear included administrative litigation by case range within, victims also cannot to Court brought administrative litigation.
To further protect the person standing, the draft amendment further expanded the scope of accepting cases of administrative litigation cases. Relating to land ownership or use of natural resources, rural land contracting, dispute over payment of subsistence benefits, the Government and the people, included in the scope of administrative litigation.
"The expansion of the scope of accepting cases is the general trend. "The China University of political science and law professor Wang Jingbo believes that further defined the draft lists specific administrative act, can avoid the courts excuse, there is no explicit legal provision is inadmissible.
"But due to the fact that the scope of accepting cases only be accepted against the personal rights and property rights, right of participation of the citizens, legal persons and other organizations, the right to such rights cannot be protected. New administrative actions such as administrative contracts, payment administration is not listing a comprehensive, result in accepting and hearing disorders. "Wang Jingbo recommended administrative disputes are included in the scope of administrative litigation, administrative acts or administrative dispute as a standard.
To facilitate the exercise of the right of the parties, draft amendments had also identified "oral prosecuted": the prosecution should be submitted to the Court indictment, written complaint is difficult, can sue oral, recorded by the Court, dated a written document issued by, and inform the other party.
"High education level not many people prefer using oral prosecution. Such an approach in practice and operationally strong. However, whether oral or written, the prosecution must meet conditions, such as clear, basic facts, the accused. "Shen kui said.
Offsite, and reduce administrative intervention trial
On June 3 this year, Shandong zaozhuang city people's Court for trial, 23 villagers in common cause with some people's Government fails to open information statutory responsibilities of administrative litigation cases. This is the concentration of administrative litigation jurisdiction of Shandong province since the pilot, the first long-distance hearing cases of administrative litigation.
Existing administrative procedure law, the basic people's Court jurisdiction as courts of first instance over administrative cases. In order to solve the administrative case difficult questions and reduce local government intervention in the administrative trial, draft amendments added provisions: first, the High Court may determine the number of cross-administrative jurisdiction as courts of first instance over administrative cases in lower courts. Second, local governments above the county level case made by a specific administrative act, by the intermediate people's Court jurisdiction.
Wang Jingbo believes that existing administrative procedural law provisions on jurisdiction, territorial jurisdiction and the General standard, in varying degrees, to the old provisions of the civil jurisdiction. However, administrative litigation and civil litigation in many ways, with variations, of the administration of Justice, localized impact on the administrative litigation is very large, affect the fair exercise of administrative jurisdiction.
"This change, for administrative intervention trial out of place, are important to achieve the independent exercise of administrative jurisdiction. "Jiang Mingan modified while also noted that only this initiative is unlikely to completely resolve the problem of local interventions also need for judiciary reform of personnel management system and the reform of the justice system.
Experts also pointed out that, currently the vast majority of grass-roots courts dealing with administrative cases is relatively small. Suggested that the primary jurisdiction of the jurisdiction of the Court of first instance administrative cases to the intermediate people's Court. This could be better could get rid of intervention, the effects of local administrative authorities, focusing the trial on the other hand the power to hear the case.
No enforcement of court decisions, detention administrators
Population, gaoguan difficult to win lawsuits, performing more difficult. Current administrative authorities not to implement court decisions stand out.
"Relative finally won the case, the Court revoke unlawful administrative acts, or ordered to perform the statutory duties of the executive authorities, private party in compensation for the loss, the Executive is not the execution of judgements, who won, but spent a lot of time and money from the Court to obtain a judgment just a piece of paper can never be cashed cheques. "Jiang Mingan admits.
In response to the Executive, the draft amendment adds: refused to comply with the judgement, determination, mediation, social influence, the executive authorities can be directly responsible and other persons directly responsible shall be detained. Administrative authorities refused to carry out judgments or orders, the conciliation statement shall be published.
"The provision for the promotion of implementation is still relatively strong, although there are ' bad social impact ' limited, in practice this means may be used with caution, but detention also have a certain deterrent effect. "Wang Jingbo said.
Jiang Mingan believes that because detention involving citizens ' personal freedom, applied have to be very careful, to take other measures to ensure compliance would try not to apply detention. Is limited to "social influence" is appropriate.
"All in all, many provisions of the existing administrative procedural law outdated and unreasonable, not adapted to the needs of the modern market economy and the development of democratic politics, their potentials must amend, inevitable. "Jiang Mingan stressed.
新华网北京12月23日电（记者霍小光、陈菲、杨维汉、史竞男）作为一部被称为“民告官”的法律，行政诉讼法在颁布实施20多年之后面临首次大修。23日，行政诉讼法修正案草案提请全国人大常委会审议。专家表示，行政诉讼法的修改对于排除我国目前“民告官”的种种法律障碍和困难，保障官民争议解决法律渠道的顺畅将发挥重要作用。
行政机关不得干预、阻碍法院立案
2013年9月，河南一家酒店的职工向法院提起行政诉讼，希望通过法律途径向当地工商行政部门讨要个说法。而法院却以“领导说不立案”为由让他们吃了闭门羹。
当前，我国行政诉讼面临“立案难、审理难、执行难”的问题，“立案难”，须着力破解。公民、法人或者其他组织与政府机关及其工作人员产生纠纷，行政机关不愿当被告，法院不愿受理，导致许多应当通过诉讼解决的纠纷进入信访渠道，在一些地方出现了“信访不信法”的情况。
为畅通行政诉讼的入口，修正案草案开宗明义首次增加规定，明确法院应当保障公民、法人或者其他组织的起诉权利，对应当受理的行政案件依法受理。行政机关不得干预、阻碍法院受理行政案件。被诉行政机关应当依法应诉。
“实践中，行政机关干预、阻碍法院受理行政案件的情况较多，特别是对涉及房屋拆迁、土地征收等案件的起诉。”北京大学宪法与行政法研究中心主任姜明安指出，由于时代的局限，行政诉讼法当时确立的规则、制度以及理念与我国当下民主法治和改革发展的现实多有不适应之处，引发种种弊端。
针对“立案难”，修正案草案强化了法院受理程序约束，增加规定：人民法院应当在接到起诉状时当场予以登记，并出具注明日期的书面凭证。起诉状内容欠缺或者有其他错误的，应当给予指导和释明，并一次性告知当事人补正。不得未经指导和释明即以起诉不符合条件为由不受理。修正案草案还明确了法院的相应责任，增加规定：不接收起诉状的，当事人可向上级法院投诉，上级法院应责令改正，并对责任人员依法给予处分。
“此次法律修改明确了公正司法、监督行政的原则和宗旨，明确了行政诉讼应有的要义，使其回归法律本位，是这次修改的一个亮点。”北京大学法学院教授沈岿说。
扩大受案范围，可口头起诉
出于多方面考虑，我国在制定行政诉讼法时，对行政诉讼的受案范围作了较为严格的限制。
姜明安介绍，许多行政行为，如抽象行政行为，内部行政行为，涉及公民政治权利、劳动权、受教育权等行政行为，即使侵犯公民、法人或者其他组织的合法权益，因现行行政诉讼法明确将其排除在行政诉讼受案范围之外或未将其明确列入行政诉讼受案范围之内，受害人也不能向法院提起行政诉讼。
为进一步保障当事人起诉权，修正案草案进一步扩大了行政诉讼案件的受案范围。将涉及土地等自然资源所有权或者使用权，农村土地承包经营权，支付最低生活保障待遇等官民纠纷，纳入行政诉讼受案范围。
“扩大受案范围是总体趋势。”中国政法大学教授王敬波认为，草案进一步明确列举具体行政行为的情形，可以避免法院借口法律没有明确规定而不予受理。
“但由于目前的受案范围只限于受理侵害人身权、财产权的情形，公民、法人和其他组织的参与权、知情权等权利无法获得保护。行政合同、给付行政等新型的行政行为也没有列举全面，造成受理和审理的障碍。”王敬波建议将行政争议都纳入行政诉讼范围，以行政行为或者行政争议作为受案标准。
为方便当事人行使诉权，修正案草案还明确了可以“口头起诉”：起诉应当向法院递交起诉状，书写起诉状确有困难的，可以口头起诉，由法院记入笔录，出具注明日期的书面凭证，并告知对方当事人。
“很多文化程度不高的老百姓更希望采用口头方式起诉。这种做法在实践中操作性较强。但不论是口头还是书面，起诉都要符合条件，如有明确被告、基本事实等。”沈岿说。
异地管辖，减少行政机关干预审判
今年6月3日，山东枣庄市市中区人民法院开庭审理了一起23名村民共同诉某人民政府不履行信息公开法定职责的行政诉讼案件。这是山东省开展行政诉讼案件集中管辖试点工作以来，首起异地审理的行政诉讼案件。
现行行政诉讼法规定，基层人民法院管辖第一审行政案件。为了解决行政案件审理难问题，减少地方政府对行政审判的干预，修正案草案增加了规定：一是高级人民法院可以确定若干基层法院跨行政区域管辖第一审行政案件。二是对县级以上地方政府所作的具体行政行为提起诉讼的案件，由中级法院管辖。
王敬波认为，现行行政诉讼法关于级别管辖、地域管辖等一般标准的规定，不同程度地沿袭了民事诉讼管辖的规定。然而，行政诉讼与民事诉讼在诸多方面存在着差异，司法行政化、地方化对行政诉讼的影响很大，影响了行政审判权的公正行使。
“这一修改，对于行政审判摆脱地方干预，实现独立行使行政审判权具有重要意义。”姜明安在肯定修改的同时还指出，仅有这一举措是不可能完全解决地方干预问题的，还必须进行司法机关人财物管理体制的改革以及法官制度的改革。
还有专家指出，目前绝大多数基层法院审理的行政案件比较少。建议将基层法院行政案件一审管辖权交给中级人民法院管辖。这样一方面可以更好能摆脱地方行政机关的干预、影响，另一方面能集中审判力量去审理案件。
不执行法院判决，可拘留行政官员
对老百姓来说，告官难，打赢了官司，执行更难。当前行政机关不执行法院判决的问题较为突出。
“相对人好不容易把官司打赢了，法院判决撤销违法行政行为，或者责令行政机关履行法定职责，赔偿相对人损失等，行政机关就是不执行判决，相对人虽然胜诉，但其耗费大量时间、财力从法院获得的一纸判决书只是一张无法兑现的空头支票。”姜明安坦言。
针对执行难，修正案草案增加规定：拒不履行判决、裁定、调解书，社会影响恶劣的，可以对该行政机关直接负责的主管人员和其他直接责任人员予以拘留。将行政机关拒绝履行判决、裁定、调解书的情况予以公告。
“这一规定对于促进执行还是比较有力的，虽然有‘社会影响恶劣’的限制，实践中可能会慎重使用这个手段，但是拘留还是有一定威慑力的。”王敬波说。
姜明安认为，因为拘留涉及公民人身自由，适用一定要非常慎重，能够采取其他措施保证执行的就尽量不要适用拘留。因此仅限于“社会影响恶劣的”情形也是适当的。
“总之，现行行政诉讼法中许多规定过时、不合理，不适应现代市场经济和民主政治发展的需要，其修改势所必须，势所必然。”姜明安强调。
赞