The focus of public hearing of administrative public interest litigation

2022-04-29 0 By

Points to read when the administrative public interest litigation public hearings need to solve the problem may be clearly cause damage to the facts and the responsibilities of the administrative organs or identify improvement scheme, or evaluation of the rectification, when come from all walks of life the hearing officer present in the hearing of the collision of ideas in the field of interdisciplinary, cross, will guide the case is dealt with to more dimensions, deeper exploration.Does procuratorial organs in the hearing in this paper, the relevant laws and regulations, judicial interpretation, judicial policy, guiding cases, etc., and connecting with the main body of the relevant to administrative organs, and the hearing officer’s question, listen to each other in multilateral mutual card in the process of gradually told the parties to clarify the facts of cases, through the law, synchronization to carry out the “who’s who law enforcement the franco-prussian” responsibility.Since 2020, public interest litigation departments of procuratorial organs across the country have carried out public interest litigation hearings, playing an important role in finding out the facts of cases, urging administrative organs to perform their duties, enhancing procuratorial credibility and improving the effectiveness of social governance.However, in practice, taking the public hearing of administrative public interest litigation as an example, there are still some problems such as unclear scope of application of hearing, insufficient hearing capacity and insufficient hearing effect.In this regard, the author discusses a few thoughts, in order to better play the public hearing to promote the healthy development of the procuratorial work of administrative public interest litigation.I. Scope of cases applicable to public hearing of administrative public interest Litigation The author believes that, on the basis of adhering to the principle of “hearing as much as possible”, it is advisable to focus on the following four types of administrative public interest litigation cases into the scope of public hearing.(1) Administrative public interest litigation cases involving the collaborative performance of duties by multiple departments are prone to the regulatory loophole of “Kowloon Water control”, which is an “old and difficult” problem requiring joint management in the fields of ecological environment, resource protection and production safety.In handling such duty involves many departments, need more than one department common regulation of administrative public interest litigation cases, public hearings to procuratorial organs and administrative organs at the same platform, to the case without concern for the hearing officer to listen to their opinions, to help clarify the departments responsibility boundary, facilitate do their job, strengthen cooperation and coordination.(2) Administrative public interest litigation cases involving trans-regional governance are restricted by law enforcement and judicial jurisdiction in administrative regions. Trans-regional environmental governance has always been a difficult problem in ecological environmental protection. In addition, multiple law-breaking subjects and scattered governance subjects have led to the long-term failure of timely and effective prevention of trans-regional environmental violations.In recent years, procuratorial organs have effectively used the integrated case-handling mechanism to handle a number of public interest litigation cases with whole-basin and trans-regional protection.In handling such cases, it is helpful to integrate public hearings and organize multiple regulatory departments in different regions to hold a joint meeting with the hearing staff, so as to seek measures and approaches for trans-regional ecological and environmental protection.(3) Administrative public interest Litigation cases involving new fields For network infringement, public health, biosafety and other public interest litigation fields, in terms of whether “two interests” damage and whether administrative organs fully perform their duties, due to the lack of standardized identification, it is difficult to define, become the blocking point for handling such cases.Therefore, in exploring and handling public interest litigation cases in fields other than “etc”, public figures such as NPC deputies, CPPCC members, people’s supervisors and lawyers are selected as hearers to hear with administrative organs from specific fields and industries as independent third parties, so as to build a benign communication platform for all parties.It can effectively assist the procuratorial organ to judge whether the problem reflected by the case clue in a new field is really serious damage to the public interest and whether it is necessary to start the procuratorial procedure of public interest litigation.(4) Administrative public interest litigation cases involving professional issues With the continuous extension of the scope of public interest litigation cases from the traditional field to other fields, more and more difficult and complex professional problems have emerged in the field of handling cases such as cultural relic protection, network infringement and barrier-free environment construction.In handling administrative public interest litigation cases involving disciplinary and professional issues, it makes full use of the “outside brain” wisdom to invite experts and scholars with professional knowledge as hearing officers to give professional opinions on the facts of public interest damage, the determination of administrative organs’ performance of duties, the feasibility of administrative organs’ rectification plans and other aspects.It will help make procuratorial public interest litigation more scientific, accurate and effective.(1) Investigation and verification after filing is the most core link in handling administrative public interest litigation cases, which can best reflect the new functional characteristics of public interest litigation initiative.Article 71 of the Rules of the People’s Procuratorate for Handling Public Interest Litigation (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) stipulates that after filing administrative public interest litigation cases,Investigation and verification shall be carried out on “the fact that state interests or social public interests have been infringed upon, the supervision and management duties of administrative organs, the failure of administrative organs to perform their duties according to law, and the connection between the failure of administrative organs to perform their duties according to law and the infringement of state interests or social public interests”.At the same time, the Rules for Handling cases clearly stipulates public hearings in the “General Provisions” of Chapter I.The fact that when there is a public welfare damage is not clear, the supervision of the administrative public interest litigation object is difficult to determine, administrative organs of the regulatory role of an unknown or functions, such as by the parties in the state of hearing, the hearing officer questions, review process, gradually to strengthen the judicial transparency, judicial improved visibility, help the procuratorial organs verify the regulatory objects and its legal responsibility,And whether public welfare is harmed and the extent, effectively solve the difficulties encountered in the application of law.In addition, the procuratorial organs and administrative organs is the presence of illegal exercise their functions and powers or inaction, the consequences of public welfare are violated, the rectification scheme of consultations, also can play a public hearings communication, remind, supervise and urge the comprehensive function, improve the administrative authority of administrative public interest litigation supervision, acceptance, recognition, lay a good foundation for the following consultation closed.(2) The follow-up investigation suggested by the procurator before the lawsuit solves the unnecessary complaint of illegal acts to the court, which is an important difference between administrative public interest litigation and ordinary administrative litigation.In handling administrative public interest litigation cases, the procuratorial organs should establish the concept of “continuous follow-up supervision”, especially after the issuance of procuratorial suggestions should take effective measures to urge and promote the administrative organs to self-correction, administration according to law, so that the vast majority of problems can be solved in the link before the lawsuit.”Follow-up investigation” has been clearly stipulated in Article 77 of the Rules for Handling cases.Therefore, when administrative organs have a positive and active willingness to rectify, but the problems involved in the rectification are complex, involving a wide range of issues, intense conflicts and disputes, and high social concern, leading to “difficult rectification”, procuratorial organs can organize public hearings to fully listen to the objective difficulties existing in the rectification of administrative organs.To promote administrative organs to correctly understand their statutory duties so as to take the initiative and timely perform their duties according to law;At the same time, the public participation will be expanded. Through hearings on the scientificity and feasibility of the rectification plan, the public interest protection of all parties will work together to solve the rectification problems, and achieve good results in case handling by promoting justice and winning public trust through openness.(3) Evaluation of the effectiveness of procuratorial suggestions before litigation On the effectiveness of the procuratorial suggestions before litigation of administrative public interest litigation, the conclusion is to make a decision to close the case or file an administrative public interest lawsuit, these final rulings are closed, it is difficult to be subject to external supervision.The Development Plan for Procuratorial Work during the 14th Five-Year Plan period issued by the Supreme People’s Procuratorate clearly stated that “to explore a third-party evaluation mechanism for the implementation of procuratorial suggestions and rectification of judgments in public interest litigation”.Against an administrative organ is comprehensive, fully and sulk in place in accordance with the law, whether an overhaul of the content of the procuratorial advice before litigation supervision in place, the damaged public interest whether get effective protection in time, using the public hearings to evaluate the rectification of the procuratorial advice before litigation, to evaluate the effect of administrative public interest litigation case,To objectively determine whether the pre-litigation procedure of administrative public interest litigation meets the conditions for the conclusion of the case has realized the ultimate judicial goal of putting equal emphasis on substantive justice and procedural openness.In addition, in the process of “looking back” on the implementation of the procuratorial recommendations, public hearings can also help win public approval.First of all, the hearers should be extensive and professional.Administrative public interest litigation public hearings need to solve the problem may be clearly cause damage to the facts and the responsibilities of the administrative organs or identify improvement scheme, or evaluation of the rectification, when come from all walks of life the hearing officer present in the hearing of the collision of ideas in the field of interdisciplinary, cross, will guide the case is dealt with to more dimensions, the deeper exploration,It can also provide more diversified solutions to hearing problems.Therefore, on the basis of insisting on universality, we should select the hearing officer pertinently.In handling cases of special concern to NPC deputies, they shall be invited to attend hearings;In handling cases involving professional fields, experts and scholars should actively make use of their disciplinary advantages to explain specialized issues, express professional identification opinions, and eliminate the confusion and doubts of the parties.In addition, the talent pool of administrative public interest litigation hearers can be gradually established according to the different categories of experts, NPC deputies, CPPCC members and people’s supervisors by drawing lessons from the selection procedure of people’s supervisors.Real hearing (2) do to prepare for the first, should fully consider the particularity of administrative public interest litigation supervision administrative authority to run, the comments of the focus on the phases of the case, the opinions of the parties involved to conduct a hearing, the hearing to solve, the main problems of effect, risks, and hearing cases, the evaluation of public opinion, etc, to carry out the necessity of the hearing before the review,Hearings should be subject to strict examination and approval at the beginning of the process, so as to avoid unfavorable hearing process and unsatisfactory results due to insufficient advance judgment.Second, the hearing should focus on the focus of the hearing, formulate the hearing plan in a scientific way, and pay special attention to adequate communication with all parties to the hearing. The parties should not only fully understand the facts of the case, relevant evidence and relevant laws and regulations, but should not provide biased opinions, and ensure the hearing status of independent evaluation of hearing officers.Third, for major and complex administrative public interest litigation cases involving trans-regional protection and many administrative agencies involved, it can be explored to convene pre-hearing meetings for all parties to confirm facts and evidence that all parties have no objection in advance and to sort out the focus issues of the hearing so as to improve the efficiency of the hearing.Fourth, for administrative public interest litigation cases of ecological environment protection, the procuratorial organ may invite the hearing staff and the administrative organs involved to inspect the site of ecological environment destruction, damage and restoration before the hearing, so as to form a more intuitive impression.3. Ensuring the quality of hearings comes first and strengthening evidence presentation.On the purpose of the administrative public interest litigation public hearing, with the convenience and benefit “for the principle, by using JianWu wisdom, adopt multimedia card, uav video playback, the investigation for the ecological environment of the damage, the food and drug abuse, and other areas of the image data, expert opinion, the new public damaged public opinion public opinion analysis data such as important evidence,Fully present and restore the case to the participants of the hearing.Second, integrate into legal publicity.Procuratorial organs in the hearing in this paper, the relevant laws and regulations, judicial interpretation, judicial policy, guiding cases, etc., and connecting with the main body of the relevant to administrative organs, and the hearing officer’s question, listen to each other in multilateral mutual card in the process of gradually told the parties to clarify the facts of cases, through the law, synchronization to carry out the “who’s who law enforcement the franco-prussian” responsibility.Third, we need to resolve conflicts.When the protection of public interests may conflict with the normal life of the masses (such as the contradiction between the rectification of cigarette selling points around the campus and the needs of the masses for operation), the public hearing, as the connection point between the procuratorial organ and the society, helps to contact legal professional community personnel, social groups and volunteers to participate in the resolution of conflicts and disputes.We will comprehensively solve the social governance problems behind administrative public interest litigation cases.First of all, the advantages of live hearing and on-the-spot hearing should be effectively utilized, and different hearing methods should be adopted as appropriate.For administrative public interest litigation cases that have a large social impact and a wide range of stakeholders, online simultaneous live broadcasting of hearings can expand the degree of hearing awareness and improve the quality and efficiency of procuratorial supervision.Of the masses feel strongly about ecological environment and social attention in the field of protection of cultural relics, the red culture resources in the field of administrative public interest litigation cases, upon the approval of the attorney general, can be at the location of the repair of governance, cultural relics and red resources such as place to hold public hearings, and warning education, party history education, combining the rule of law education, and so on,To strengthen the public’s awareness of public welfare protection with vivid public welfare litigation cases.Secondly, the fundamental purpose of the public hearing is to “conclude”, and we should continue to do a good job in the “second half” of the hearing.Hearing about whether the procuratorial organs after the launch of public supervision procedures, administrative organs of the improvement scheme is put into execution, the damaged public interest whether as a result, the effective maintenance case processing to continue follow-up supervision, insist on tracking efficiencies, timely feedback to the hearing officer, and extend the procuratorial functions and carry out relevant disputes resolve and social governance.(The author’s units are Respectively guizhou Provincial People’s Procuratorate and Anshun Provincial People’s Procuratorate) Source: Procuratorial Daily