Interpretation of the new supervision rules of administrative litigation (VIII): The specific situation and methods of procuratorial supervision over effective judgments Hello everyone, welcome to the

Interpretation of the new supervision rules of administrative litigation (VIII): The specific situation and methods of procuratorial supervision over effective judgments Hello everyone, welcome to the column of "Administrative Procuratorial Work with the People". In previous issues, we introduced the acceptance conditions of administrative litigation supervision cases to you. After accepting the case of administrative litigation supervision according to the application, the procuratorial organ will conduct a comprehensive review of administrative litigation activities around the reasons for applying for supervision and the focus of disputes, and finally make decisions such as lodging a protest, proposing retrial procuratorial suggestions, lodging a protest, proposing procuratorial suggestions, not supporting the application for supervision, and ending the review according to the specific circumstances of the case. under what circumstances, will the procuratorial organ supervise it by drawing a protest or retrial procuratorial suggestions? < /p > We will give you a detailed introduction of the specific ways and circumstances of the procuratorial organs' supervision over effective judgments. < /p > according to the second paragraph of article 93 of the administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China, local people's procuratorates at various levels may propose a retrial procuratorial proposal to the people's court at the same level if they find that there is a statutory retrial of a legally effective judgment, ruling or conciliation statement of the people's court at the same level, and report it to the people's procuratorate at a higher level for the record, or they may request the people's procuratorate at a higher level to lodge a protest with the people's court at the same level. Retrial procuratorial suggestions and protest are the supervision methods of the people's procuratorate at the same level. In practice, it is necessary to make clear how to distinguish between the two kinds of supervision methods: applying retrial procuratorial suggestions and filing protests. In order to give full play to the role of retrial procuratorial suggestions and reasonably distinguish the applicable cases of retrial procuratorial suggestions and protest, according to the characteristics of the two supervision methods, the new administrative litigation supervision rules distinguish the applicable situations of retrial procuratorial suggestions and protest, so as to facilitate the procuratorial organs to apply them better in practice. < /p > 1. Cases where the supervision of retrial procuratorial suggestions is applicable < /p > Local people's procuratorates at all levels may put forward retrial procuratorial suggestions to the people's courts at the same level in six cases, such as refusing to file a case or dismissing the prosecution, having new evidence enough to overturn the original judgment or ruling, finding the facts in the original judgment or ruling with insufficient evidence, without cross-examination, or being forged, and violating legal procedures may affect a fair trial. < /p > Except for the special circumstances stipulated in Article 89 of the new administrative litigation rules, the local people's procuratorates at all levels should first consider putting forward suggestions for retrial and procuratorial work to the people's courts at the same level. < /p > II. Exceptions for the application of retrial procuratorial suggestions < /p > For cases where the judgment or ruling was made after retrial by the people's court at the same level, and the judgment or ruling was made through discussion by the judicial committee of the people's court at the same level, the local people's procuratorates at various levels shall request the people's procuratorate at the next higher level to protest. < /p > III. Circumstances in which a protest should be submitted < /p > If there are mistakes in the application of laws and regulations to the original judgment or ruling, and the judges have committed acts of corruption, bribery and favoritism in the trial of the case, the local people's procuratorates at all levels shall submit them to the people's procuratorate at the next higher level for protest. < /p > iv. supervision of administrative mediation < /p > if the local people's procuratorates at various levels find that the legally effective administrative mediation written by the people's court at the same level has harmed the interests of the state or the public, they may put forward suggestions for retrial and procuratorial work to the people's court at the same level or file a protest with the people's procuratorate at the next higher level. < /p > Case 1: All the houses owned by Hu and two houses owned by Zhou are adjacent to each other in the north and south. Hu claimed that when he bought a house, there was a terrace in the south and windows on the south wall. When he checked in, he found that Zhou's house was built. In April 218, Hu sued for canceling the registration of property rights of two houses in Zhou, and the court of second instance made an administrative ruling of final appeal No.257, refusing to file a case on the grounds that the litigation request was unclear and Hu had no interest in the administrative act complained. Hu's application for retrial was rejected. In June 218, Hu filed a separate lawsuit against the house on the west side of Zhou to cancel the registration of the house. The court of second instance made an administrative ruling of final appeal No.382, and refused to file a case on the grounds of repeated prosecution. Hu's application for retrial was rejected. Hu applied to the procuratorate for supervision. < /p > after examination, the procuratorial organ believes that it is impossible to judge whether the windows on the walls of Hu's house and Zhou's house existed at the time of design and construction or were artificially dug later. According to the requirements of the filing and registration system, Hu should be deemed to have an interest in the administrative act complained of, and the court's ruling No.257 was wrong. However, the court found that ruling No.257 was wrong and revoked it in the retrial procedure initiated by itself. Therefore, the court's ruling No.382 was based on ruling No.257, and the refusal to file a case was "the legal document on which the original judgment or ruling was made was revoked or changed". After the procuratorial organ put forward the suggestion of retrial in this case, it cooperated with the people's court to carry out mediation work, which led Hu to buy the house occupied by Zhou, and the contradictions and disputes were successfully resolved. < /p > case 2: Zhang applied to the local labor and social security department for work-related injury identification, and the local labor and social security department made a decision not to identify it. Zhang refused to accept the lawsuit to the court, requested to cancel the decision not to recognize it, and ordered him to re-identify the work-related injury. The court ruled that the above-mentioned decision not to recognize was revoked, but it was not ordered to re-recognize the work-related injury. After Zhang refused to accept the appeal and was rejected, and the application for retrial was not supported by the court, he applied to the procuratorate for supervision. < /p > upon examination, the procuratorial organ believes that Zhang's claims include two claims: revoking the decision not to recognize the work-related injury and re-recognizing the work-related injury. The judgment of the court of first instance did not make a judgment on whether to re-recognize the work-related injury, which led to the omission of the claims. At the same time, the case was wrongly applied by law, so it was submitted to the people's procuratorate at the next higher level for protest. After examination by the people's procuratorate at the next higher level, a protest is lodged with the people's court at the same level. < /p > Express delivery of laws < /p > Article 88 of the Rules for Supervision of Administrative Litigation of People's Procuratorates. If local people's procuratorates at various levels find that an administrative judgment or ruling that has become legally effective by the people's court at the same level has any of the following circumstances, they may put forward suggestions for retrial and procuratorial work to the people's court at the same level: < /p > (1) There is indeed an error in refusing to file a case or rejecting the prosecution; < /p > (2) There is new evidence enough to overturn the original judgment or ruling; < /p > (3) The main evidence of the facts ascertained in the original judgment or ruling is insufficient, has not been cross-examined or is forged; < /p > (4) Violating legal proceedings, which may affect a fair trial; < /p > (5) The original judgment or ruling omits the claim; < /p > (6) The legal document on which the original judgment or ruling was made has been revoked or changed. < /p > Article 89 In case of any of the following circumstances, the local people's procuratorates at various levels shall request the people's procuratorate at the next higher level to protest: < /p > (1) The judgment or ruling was made after retrial by the people's court at the same level; < /p > (2) The judgment or ruling was made through discussion by the judicial committee of the people's court at the same level; < /p > (3) Others are not suitable for retrial and correction by the people's court at the same level. < /p > Article 9 If the local people's procuratorates at all levels find that the legally effective administrative judgment or ruling of the people's court at the same level is under any of the following circumstances, they shall submit it to the people's procuratorate at the next higher level for protest: < /p > (1) The original judgment or ruling is indeed wrong in applying laws and regulations; < /p > (2) The judge has committed acts of corruption, bribery, favoritism, and perverting the law when trying the case. < /p > The acts of corruption, bribery, favoritism, and perverting the law in the trial of this case refer to acts that have been confirmed by effective criminal legal documents or disciplinary decisions. < /p > Article 91 If the local people's procuratorates at all levels find that the legally effective administrative mediation written by the people's court at the same level has harmed the interests of the state or the public, they may put forward suggestions for retrial and procuratorial work to the people's court at the same level or file a protest with the people's procuratorate at the next higher level. < /p > (Guidance: produced by the Seventh Procuratorate of the Supreme People's Procuratorate: contributed by the Third Branch of Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate: Pinggu District People's Procuratorate of Beijing) < /p >