China News Service, February 18, according to the Supreme People's Procuratorate website, in 2020, more than 900 public hearings will be conducted on administrative litigation supervision cases, a year-on-year increase of 6.5 times, accounting for 1.2% of the total number of cases accepted.

  On February 18, the Supreme People's Procuratorate issued three typical cases of public hearings for administrative prosecutions, providing guidance for the administrative prosecution departments of procuratorial organs at all levels to strengthen public hearings and standardize case handling.

  The typical cases released this time are the land registration application supervision case of Bai Moulong in Liaoning and a county people's government, the land registration application supervision case of Huang Mouyang and others in a city with a certain city's Natural Resources and Planning Bureau, and the administrative illegal construction of Guangxi Qi Mou V. Execution supervision case.

  This batch of typical cases covers administrative litigation supervision cases, administrative dispute resolution cases, administrative non-litigation enforcement supervision cases, etc. Through public hearings, external forces are used to resolve disputes between the two parties and have a high degree of social recognition.

In addition, procuratorial organs have tried to use webcast to enhance the transparency of public hearings and expand the face-to-face communication channels between officials and citizens.

  Applicants for administrative litigation supervision cases are often knotted and difficult to resolve, and public hearings play an important role in solving this problem.

The person in charge of the Seventh Prosecutors Office of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate stated that the procuratorial organs adhere to and carry forward the "Maple Bridge Experience" of the new era, actively carry out public hearings, provide a platform for equal exchanges, dialogues, and argument analysis among all parties, and fully protect the parties’ right to know and participate. , To eliminate the doubts of the parties, interested parties and the general public about judicial case handling, untie the parties’ feelings, facilitate reconciliation, and truly realize the conclusion of the case.

  In the past 2020, the number of public hearings of administrative prosecutions has increased significantly, and significant results have been achieved. More than 900 public hearings have been carried out in administrative litigation supervision cases, a year-on-year increase of 6.5 times, accounting for 1.2% of the total number of cases accepted; in one year and two In the special activity of “Strengthening Administrative Inspection and Supervision and Promoting the Substantial Resolution of Administrative Disputes” in August, nearly 1,200 public hearings were conducted, accounting for 18.8% of the total resolved.

Typical cases of public hearing of administrative prosecution are as follows:

  Case 1 Liaoning Bai Moulong and a county people's government land registration application supervision case

  【Key words】

  Public hearings, administrative disputes and civil disputes are intertwined, protection of vulnerable groups, judicial assistance

  【gist】

  In the case of "people suing officials", the administrative counterpart has a weaker litigation ability.

The establishment of an equal dialogue platform through public hearings will help to clarify the facts of the case, reduce the complexity to simplicity, set points and stop disputes, and protect the legitimate rights and interests of vulnerable groups.

  [Basic case]

  The applicant Bai Moulong is a farmer in a certain village in a certain county in Huludao City, Liaoning Province.

Based on Bai Moulong’s neighbor’s application and the court’s administrative judgment, a county’s Land and Resources Bureau found that the actual width of Bai Moulong’s homestead was 15.85 meters and 16.88 meters, respectively, which was 18 meters in the "Collective Land Use Certificate". Inconsistent, and there is a dispute with neighbors on the ownership of the boundary wall, a settlement decision was made in January 2016, "revocation of Bai Moulong's land use certificate."

Reconsidered and maintained by the People's Government of Huludao City.

In April 2016, Bai Moulong filed an administrative lawsuit with the Intermediate People's Court of Huludao City, which was rejected by the Higher People's Court of Liaoning Province and the Supreme People's Court for a second instance.

In January 2020, Bai Moulong applied to the People's Procuratorate of Liaoning Province for supervision.

  【Public Hearing Situation】

  This case started because of a neighborhood dispute, involving Bai Moulong, his neighbors, and six parties to the administrative agency. It triggered 2 administrative litigation and 5 civil litigation including this case, a total of 7 litigations, and more than 20 people’s courts in 6 years. Trial.

Because Bai Moulong’s "Certificate of Collective Land Use Rights" was revoked, the house could not be flipped. The Bai Moulong family lived in a number of leaky and dilapidated houses, and life was very difficult.

In order to simplify the complexity and resolve the worries of the applicant as soon as possible, the procuratorate decided to hold a public hearing on August 26, 2020.

  One is to do a good job of investigation and verification before the hearing.

The People’s Procuratorate of Liaoning Province, the People’s Procuratorate of Huludao City, and the People’s Procuratorate of Jianchang County used an integrated case-handling mechanism to find out: (1) The boundary wall dispute between Bai Moulong and the neighbors has been issued by the Huludao Intermediate People’s Court in four civil judgments It was determined that: "The wall in dispute in this case is owned by Bai Moulong"; (2) A county government's unannounced decision to cancel land registration in the case is a procedural flaw.

  The second is the scientific setting of hearing issues.

Although there are procedural flaws in the administrative act in this case, the fact that the land registration does not conform to the reality objectively exists.

After a comprehensive evaluation, the work idea of ​​"putting aside the past and looking to the future" was determined, and it was decided to conduct a public hearing on the two topics of "whether there is a dispute about the land ownership involved in the case; whether the land ownership certificate can be re-applied".

  The third is to organize hearings in a standardized and orderly manner.

The hearing was presided over by the chief prosecutor of the Huludao City People’s Procuratorate, and went through the briefing of the case, the statement and defense of the parties, the questions and speeches of the hearing, the hearing review, the announcement of the review, and the summary commentary.

In the end, the administrative agency decided to re-measure and apply for the land ownership certificate for Bai Moulong in accordance with the law, and the two parties reached a settlement on the spot.

In December 2020, the Natural Resources Bureau of a county reissued the "Real Property Certificate" for Bai Moulong.

In view of the difficulties in life caused by Bai Moulong's litigation for many years, the procuratorate applied for 20,000 yuan for judicial assistance.

  [Typical significance]

  Administrative litigation supervision cases have many links, long periods, and complex and sharp contradictions. The administrative counterpart is in a weak position and is prone to "getting up and thinking."

Through the holding of public hearings, a platform for equal dialogue and communication was established for the parties. The grievances of administrative counterparts were confided and vented through public hearings, and their personality and status were fully respected, laying a good foundation for resolving disputes.

At the same time, the procuratorial organs, with the help of external forces, invite members of the public such as deputies to the National People’s Congress, CPPCC members, and people’s supervisors to participate in the hearings, give full play to the professional, independent, and objective advantages of hearings, guide the parties to seek reasonable and legal ways to resolve disputes within the scope of the law, and protect vulnerable groups Legal rights.

  Case 2 Zhejiang Huang Mouyang et al. and a certain city's natural resources and planning bureau land registration application supervision case

  【Key words】

  Public hearing, live webcast, the head of the administrative agency attended

  【gist】

  The facts of the case were ascertained through public hearings, laying a foundation for the resolution of administrative disputes.

Adopt the "webcast + attendance of the head of the administrative agency" model for public hearings to accurately find the source of disputes and enhance the credibility and supervision efficiency of public hearings.

  [Basic case]

  In the 1990s, a company (town-owned enterprise) built two commercial and residential buildings for sale. After that, it obtained the right to use certificate and the house ownership certificate (master certificate) for the 1,794.60 square meters of land (including public land) occupied by the building.

Huang Mouqi received the company's assets from a town government.

In 2001, after the house buyer paid the 947.08 square meter land use right transfer fee, he applied for a separate property certificate and land use right certificate. The remaining 847.52 square meter land use right was not confirmed and registered.

In 2016, due to land demolition and relocation, Huang Mouqi applied to re-register the right of 847.52 square meters of land, and was informed in writing by the Natural Resources and Planning Bureau of a certain city that the land use right belonged to the owners of the building.

  After a review by the administrative agency, there was no result. In May 2018, Huang Mouqi filed an administrative lawsuit on the grounds that the act was illegal.

On November 30, 2018, the court ruled to reject the prosecution on the grounds that the indicted behavior did not fall within the scope of administrative litigation.

Both the courts of second instance and retrial ruled to maintain.

After Huang Mouqi died in an accident, his legal heir Huang Mouyang and other four people applied for supervision to the People's Procuratorate of Ningbo on April 10, 2020.

Four people think that they should get more than 2 million yuan in compensation and resettlement for land acquisition of 847.52 square meters.

  【Public Hearing Situation】

  The Ningbo Municipal People's Procuratorate believes that this case involves a strong professionalism in legal issues and the applicant has low trust in the administrative agency, and decided to organize a public hearing on the morning of August 25, 2020.

  One is to build a face-to-face communication platform to enhance the quality and effectiveness of hearings.

The Ningbo Municipal People’s Procuratorate invited Chen, the legal representative and director of the Natural Resources and Planning Bureau of a certain city, to attend the hearing, and invited 5 people, including deputies to the National People’s Congress, CPPCC members, university professors, people’s supervisors, and people’s mediators, to serve as hearing members. "Outside the brain" to ensure the fairness of the hearing; through the China Procuratorial Hearing Network live broadcast the whole process, accept observation and supervision from all walks of life, to openly promote justice and win public trust.

  The second is to focus on core disputes and clarify the ownership of disputes.

The hearing focused on the nature of the notification and the ownership of the 847.52 square meters of land use rights. Through proof, cross-examination and debate, it was found that the disputed land was all public land.

The hearing members agreed that according to the "Property Law" and "Interim Regulations on the Assignment and Transfer of Urban State-owned Land Use Rights" and other relevant laws and regulations, the public land in the construction zone belongs to the owners; when the ownership of the buildings on the land is transferred, it is within the scope of occupation The right to use construction land was transferred together, so the land involved in the case belonged to all owners.

  The third is to comprehensively examine the root causes of disputes and facilitate reconciliation between the parties.

After the hearing, the People’s Procuratorate of Ningbo City communicated with both parties and a sub-district office to clarify the ownership of the land involved in the case. In view of the improper inventory of the original town government’s assets, the company involved in the transfer case was improper. Natural resources of a certain city The Planning Bureau and the Planning Bureau were inadequate in making the informed decision, and there were also faults. In the end, they coordinated with the sub-district office to compensate Huang Mouyang and other four people for 60,000 yuan, and Huang Mouyang and others withdrew the supervision application.

  [Typical significance]

  The procuratorial organs enhanced the transparency of public hearings through live webcasts; at the same time, they invited the heads of the administrative organs to participate, and they directly represented the administrative organs to express their opinions, which reflected the respect and attention to the administrative counterparts and helped smooth the face-to-face communication channels between officials and citizens; Through public hearings to ascertain the facts, on the basis of distinguishing right from wrong and clarifying responsibilities, persuading the applicant to abandon unreasonable claims, and ultimately promote reconciliation, and strengthen the important role of public hearings in promoting dispute resolution.

  Case 3 An administrative non-litigation enforcement supervision case for illegal construction in Guangxi Qi

  【Key words】

  Public hearing administrative non-litigation enforcement supervision

  【gist】

  The People’s Procuratorate handles administrative non-litigation enforcement supervision cases by inviting deputies to the National People’s Congress, CPPCC members, and people’s supervisors to participate in public hearings and conduct evaluations. This is not only conducive to extensive hearing of opinions and accurate supervision, but also conducive to promoting justice through openness and promoting the parties. We are more convinced of the results of procuratorial supervision, and the case is settled.

  [Basic case]

  In November 2012, Qi and Chen (deceased) took over the management of a dozen sand yards in Jiacun, Guilin from Wu and Zhang.

On May 27, 2014, a county Natural Resources Bureau imposed an administrative penalty on Qi, ordering to demolish the buildings, machinery and equipment on the cultivated land involved, and restore the original condition of the cultivated land and the original planting conditions. If the restoration is not completed within the time limit, a reclamation fee shall be paid 94710 Yuan, and a fine of 126,280 yuan for damage to cultivated land.

Within the specified time, Qi did not apply for administrative reconsideration or file an administrative lawsuit.

On October 17, 2014, a county's Natural Resources Bureau applied for enforcement of the administrative penalty decision, and the county's people's court ruled on November 10 to approve the enforcement.

Because the People's Court of a certain county and the Natural Resources Bureau had different opinions on whether to apply for compulsory execution again after the ruling was granted, the case has not entered the execution procedure, and the damaged farmland is in a state of continuous infringement, which triggered long-term petitions from villagers in Village B of the county.

On July 3, 2019, Qi applied to the Lingchuan County People's Procuratorate to supervise a county people's court to revoke the execution approval ruling.

On September 19, 2019, Mo XX, a villager in Village B of a certain county, believed that the People’s Court of a certain county was lazy in enforcement and also applied to the People’s Procuratorate of Lingchuan County for enforcement supervision.

  【Public Hearing Situation】

  In view of whether a county people’s court granted an enforcement ruling should revoke the determination that affected the court’s lack of enforcement, and the administrative penalty took effect without administrative reconsideration or administrative litigation, Qi Mou had a serious dispute over the facts of the case, and the Lingchuan County People’s Procuratorate It was decided to hold a hearing for Qi’s supervision application, and invited representatives of the National People’s Congress to participate in the hearing and deliberation as hearing members, allowing the parties to make full statements, defenses, cross-examination, and debate to ascertain the facts.

  One is to prepare well before the hearing.

The Lingchuan County Procuratorate grasped the basic situation of the case through on-site investigations and visits, obtained the consent of the parties to hold public hearings, and invited 9 representatives of the National People's Congress, CPPCC members, people's supervisors, law professors, and lawyer representatives as hearing officers.

  The second is to summarize the focus of the dispute, focus on the focus of the hearing, and fully listen to the opinions of all parties.

At the hearing, the People’s Procuratorate of Lingchuan County summarized the focus of the case based on the information obtained from previous investigations and visits and the opinions of both parties, and allowed the parties to make a full statement, defense, cross-examination, and debate on this matter.

  The third is that the hearing members issued their opinions and prompted Qi to approve the execution of the ruling by the people's court of a certain county.

After the hearing, the People’s Procuratorate of Lingchuan County considered the hearings’ comments and based on the hearings, and found that there is no statutory ruling forbidden to execute the administrative penalty, and the people’s court of a certain county’s decision to approve execution was legal and decided to apply for supervision of Qi. End the review and issue procuratorial recommendations to urge the court to take enforcement measures.

Qi said that he accepted the decision of the procuratorial organ. Villagers of Village B stopped petitioning and sent a pennant and a letter of thanks to the People’s Procuratorate of Lingchuan County in the name of the village group. The five-year conflict and dispute were successfully resolved.

  [Typical significance]

  For administrative actions that take effect without administrative reconsideration or administrative litigation, public hearings during the implementation supervision stage are not only conducive to all parties to fully express their appeals through presentations and debates, and further clarify the facts and legal relationships of the case, which provides a multi-angle view for the procuratorial agency Listening to opinions and achieving precise supervision lay a solid foundation. It is also conducive to promoting justice through openness, enhancing the credibility of the prosecution and justice, allowing fairness and justice to be realized in a way that is sensible, tangible and visible to the people, and wins the understanding and support of the people. Promote the parties to be more convinced of the results of procuratorial supervision, and achieve the settlement of the case.