日韩午夜精品视频,欧美私密网站,国产一区二区三区四区,国产主播一区二区三区四区

--- SEARCH ---
WEATHER
CHINA
INTERNATIONAL
BUSINESS
CULTURE
GOVERNMENT
SCI-TECH
ENVIRONMENT
LIFE
PEOPLE
TRAVEL
WEEKLY REVIEW
Learning Chinese
Learn to Cook Chinese Dishes
Exchange Rates


Hot Links
China Development Gateway
Chinese Embassies

Placing Parameters on Administrative Justice

The Supreme People's Court this week issued a notice requiring local courts to maintain impartiality in hearing administrative cases.

It orders local courts to avoid pampering government departments and resist any local powers' attempts to influence administrative litigation.

The text sounds like a statement of the obvious, yet it points to problems that have long troubled many judges chairing administrative tribunals.

Unlike criminal cases and civil disputes, administrative cases provide citizens the chance to reclaim rights and interests allegedly revoked by administrative agencies' activities, such as fines, detention or confiscation of property.

The nature of administrative litigation prescribes the role of administrative departments as defendants, and in that capacity they must face citizens' charges and, in many cases, accept unfavorable rulings.

Problems are therefore inevitable. The most frequent hindrance of judicial work in these cases is when some departments dare challenge the rulings by refusing to accept unfavorable results.

Some officials do not even bother to represent their agencies in court because it could sap their "image."

Rather than glossifying reality, the Supreme Court's notice is a reminder of the nagging problems that erode justice.

The current administrative and legal systems do not provide many means for citizens to get relief when their rights are infringed upon by powerful departments. Complaints to upper-level authorities often take months or even years to be resolved, with barely satisfactory outcome.

Litigation thus becomes many citizens' last hope for challenging administrative departments' wrongdoings.

Despite the nominal equality between plaintiffs and defendants, citizens are often in a disadvantaged position in administrative cases, considering the asymmetry of power and burden of proof.

It is particularly important for the court to resist pressure from local authorities to safeguard justice.

The Supreme Court's notice comes at a time when public demand for limited administration and more efficient judicature is rising.

In addition to repeated calls for respect for the Constitution and the law, the central leadership recently required local governments to improve the handling of public complaints to strengthen public supervision.

The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress has also planned to revise the law on administrative procedure, as well as civil and criminal procedures, to enhance judicial work.

These changes have cultivated a favorable atmosphere for the judicature to assume a more powerful and independent role and parry outside intervention.

To give full play to the judicature, however, more substantial reforms are needed.

Currently, local courts are elected by and report to local people's congresses, and they are funded by local governments. Such a situation inevitably makes the court vulnerable to administrative intervention.

To cut the connection completely, the country should initiate a sweeping reform of the court system -- a scenario that is not likely to come in the short term.

(China Daily April 1, 2004)

Litigants Guaranteed Right to Know
Chief Justice: Human Rights Better Protected in Administering Justice
Alternative to Litigation
Beijing Courts to Intensify Adjudicative Work
Print This Page
|
Email This Page
About Us SiteMap Feedback
Copyright © China Internet Information Center. All Rights Reserved
E-mail: webmaster@china.org.cn Tel: 86-10-68326688
主站蜘蛛池模板: 敦煌市| 随州市| 临颍县| 青神县| 介休市| 永登县| 鄂伦春自治旗| 光山县| 商城县| 大渡口区| 界首市| 太保市| 吉水县| 二手房| 乌苏市| 黄平县| 永平县| 岳阳市| 肥西县| 萨迦县| 常山县| 洛南县| 冀州市| 白河县| 满洲里市| 深圳市| 通榆县| 佛冈县| 吉首市| 酒泉市| 永昌县| 福建省| 蕲春县| 惠来县| 鄂尔多斯市| 营口市| 旬邑县| 肇州县| 景宁| 婺源县| 达尔|