Substantive resolution of administrative disputes, protection of rights and interests to achieve a win-win situation

　　□ Our reporter Zhou Xiaopeng

　　Administrative disputes refer to disputes between administrative agencies and administrative counterparts and interested parties in administrative management activities.

The substantive resolution of administrative disputes means that administrative disputes can be resolved thoroughly, effectively and properly through various means.

　　In recent years, the Hebei Court has actively promoted the establishment of a platform for the resolution of administrative disputes by the government and the establishment of a substantive resolution mechanism for administrative disputes before litigation.

In 2020, new administrative litigation cases received by Hebei courts decreased by 12.7% year-on-year, and new administrative non-litigation cases received decreased by 33.7% year-on-year. The work of substantive resolution of administrative disputes has achieved groundbreaking progress with remarkable results.

A reporter from the "Rules of Law Daily" learned from the Hebei Provincial Higher People's Court of many typical cases of property rights protection successfully resolved by the provincial administrative dispute resolution platform. Many problems of "people suing officials" have been successfully resolved through this approach.

Forced to move the car and cause losses

　　Pay fines according to law

　　In July 2019, the Supervision Office under the People's Government of Quyang County, Baoding City, Hebei Province, seized a suspected overloaded heavy-duty semi-trailer truck. The vehicle was locked and the owner was not found.

The personnel of the Supervision Office took administrative enforcement measures against the vehicle, unlocked the car and hired a driver to guide the overloaded vehicle to the Supervision Office.

On the way, the vehicle involved in the case rolled over, causing damage to the vehicle and the cargo on the vehicle.

　　Since then, Zhichao Office has repeatedly negotiated with Wang Moumou, the actual right holder of the vehicle involved, but the negotiation was not successful due to the relatively large dispute between the two parties on the compensation issue.

Wang Moumou filed an administrative lawsuit, requesting a ruling of the Quyang County Government to return the vehicle and compensate for the losses caused by the illegal compulsory measures.

　　In May 2020, the Baoding Intermediate People's Court received the filing materials and relied on the administrative dispute resolution platform to coordinate and resolve the case.

On the one hand, Wang Moumou agreed to accept the return of the vehicle and reached a preliminary opinion on the amount of compensation and the handling of the overhaul; on the other hand, through the court’s interpretation, Wang Moumou accepted the administrative punishment for exceeding the limit. Agree to pay the fine.

Through the coordination and linkage between the two-level administrative dispute resolution platform of Baoding Intermediate People's Court and Quyang County People's Court, with the support of Quyang County Government, the funds involved in the case were allocated in time and the disputes involved in the case were successfully resolved.

　　According to the law enforcement officer, this case is a typical case in which the government and courts and the two-level courts resolve the platform to jointly resolve administrative disputes and effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of the right holders of large trucks.

In order to promote the safe, healthy and orderly development of the road transportation industry, administrative agencies should strictly control and manage all aspects of cargo transportation, and should also fully protect the legitimate rights and interests of truck owners in administrative law enforcement, humane law enforcement, and avoid intensification of conflicts. .

　　In this case, there was an illegal over-loading of the large truck, which should be subject to administrative punishment, but the administrative agency caused actual losses to the owner of the large truck in the process of implementing the administrative compulsory measures.

The administrative dispute resolution platform of Baoding city and county courts effectively coordinated the linkage and formed joint forces with the government. On the basis of interpreting the law and clarifying the responsibilities, it not only prompted the owners of large trucks to consciously fulfill the administrative punishment decisions, but also protected the owners of large trucks. Losses caused by illegal and compulsory measures have been provided with timely and comprehensive legal relief, which has realized the substantive resolution of administrative disputes and has positive social guidance value.

　Restaurant fined for expired ingredients

　　Joint defuse exemption from additional penalties

　　In August 2019, the Xianghe County Market Supervision and Administration Bureau of Langfang City, Hebei Province, during a routine inspection and random inspection of a dumpling restaurant in the county, found that the production date of the 5 bottles of ginger juice it purchased was July 7, 2018, and the shelf life was 12 Month, the shelf life of 1 month has been exceeded.

Subsequently, the Xianghe County Market Supervision and Administration Bureau imposed a fine of 50,000 yuan on the dumpling restaurant on the grounds that the food raw materials used exceeded the shelf life.

　　The dumpling restaurant involved in the case did not file an administrative lawsuit within the statutory time limit, nor did it fulfill the obligation of fines determined by the administrative penalty decision.

In May 2020, Xianghe County Market Supervision and Administration Bureau filed an application with the County People's Court for a mandatory penalty of 50,000 yuan in principal and an additional fine of 50,000 yuan.

　　The Xianghe County Court held that this was a non-litigation enforcement case filed by an administrative agency.

In response, the dumpling restaurant operator submitted an application for the resolution of administrative disputes to the court.

The court found that the dumpling restaurant did not constitute a deliberate low-price purchase or use of food raw materials beyond the shelf life, and the purchased food raw materials have not been used, nor did it cause adverse consequences.

At the same time, it is understood that due to the impact of the new crown pneumonia epidemic, the dumpling restaurant has been closed for a few months after the Spring Festival that year. At the beginning of the resumption of work and production after the epidemic, the dumpling restaurant is in urgent need of funds to resume operations. If mandatory enforcement measures are taken, dumplings The museum may be unsustainable.

　　In June 2020, the Xianghe County Court and the County Procuratorate jointly held an administrative dispute resolution work promotion meeting to interpret the relevant policies of the party and the government based on the current epidemic situation, fully listen to the opinions of both parties, and put forward guidance and resolution suggestions within the legal framework.

The Xianghe County Market Supervision Administration finally decided that the dumpling restaurant should pay the principal of the fine and exempt the additional fine.

The operator of the dumpling restaurant accepted the resolution plan and paid the principal of the fine in time.

　　The law enforcement officer stated that during the prevention and control of the new crown pneumonia epidemic, in order to help enterprises resume work and production, the state actively advocates that various functional departments should create convenient conditions for enterprises and operators to resume work and production, and reduce the adverse impact of the epidemic.

In response to the actual situation of the case, the court clarified the problems and identified the difficulties, simultaneously invited the procuratorial organs to participate, put forward guiding opinions, formulated resolution plans within the legal framework, and held resolution work promotion meetings to build a platform for the resolution of administrative disputes and pave the way. The authority of administrative law enforcement has effectively resolved administrative disputes and provided strong judicial service guarantees for operators to resume work and production during the epidemic.

Companies that are fined for pollutant discharge are dissatisfied

　　Introduce supervision and self-correction

　　On April 18, 2019, the Yuanshi County Branch of a Wall Material Co., Ltd. in Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province ignited production.

One day later, the People's Government of Yuanshi County launched a Class II warning for severely polluted weather and required the company to take immediate measures as required.

The company had an accident in the process of taking fire-fighting measures and the pollution treatment facilities could not be used. On the same day, it submitted a written application to the Yuanshi County Branch of the Shijiazhuang City Ecological Environment Bureau and established a temporary smoke exhaust channel to discharge untreated smoke and humidity. gas.

　　On April 20, 2019, the Shijiazhuang City Environmental Law Enforcement Detachment found that the pollution treatment facilities of the company were not operating, and the untreated flue gas was directly discharged into the atmosphere.

Subsequently, the Shijiazhuang City Ecological Environment Bureau made an administrative penalty decision based on this, determined that the material company constituted "discharging air pollutants by evading supervision" and imposed a fine of 150,000 yuan.

The material company refused to accept it and filed an administrative lawsuit, requesting that the administrative penalty decision be revoked.

　　The People's Court of Yuhua District of Shijiazhuang City received the case filing materials and filed the case in accordance with the law. During the trial, it was discovered that the administrative agency may have flaws in the facts determination.

After fully listening to the parties’ statements, relying on the Administrative Dispute Resolution Center to actively communicate with administrative agencies and clarify relevant laws and regulations.

On the basis of clarifying facts and responsibilities, and in accordance with the regulations on the resolution of administrative disputes in the district, the Yuhua District Court, the District Supervisory Committee, and the District Justice Bureau jointly participated in the resolution.

With the joint efforts and supervision of all parties, the administrative agency made corrections on its own based on the specific circumstances of the case and changed the fine to 40,000 yuan in accordance with the law.

In the end, the material company applied to withdraw the lawsuit, and the dispute was resolved smoothly.

　　The accepting officer stated that in the process of substantive resolution of administrative disputes, some administrative agencies were unwilling to mediate or dare not mediate, which greatly restricted the full play of the role of the administrative dispute resolution platform.

The Yuhua District of Shijiazhuang City jointly issued the "Implementation Measures for Promoting the Resolution of Administrative Disputes in the Yuhua District of Shijiazhuang City According to Law (Trial)" by the government, supervisory committee, court, and procuratorate. The superiority of the supervisory function, upholding an objective and fair position, vigorously promote the substantive resolution of administrative disputes, and effectively solve the problem that the administrative organs are unwilling to adjust and dare not adjust.

With the participation and supervision of the Supervisory Committee, the case was finally resolved substantively, and the legitimate rights and interests of the enterprises involved in the case were fully protected.

Disputes over investment promotion

　　Multi-party communication to reach a settlement

　　In March 2017, the People’s Government of Nanhe District, Xingtai City, Hebei Province entrusted the Nanhe Economic Development Zone Management Committee and a Beijing Investment and Development Co., Ltd. to sign the "Region Agreement Text", stipulating that the Nanhe District Government will provide land and support funds for investment The company is responsible for project design and planning, investment promotion, and joint construction of industrial parks.

　　However, during the implementation of the agreement, the two parties had disputes.

The investment company believes that the Nanhe District Government did not provide land and support funds on schedule, which caused its enterprises to attract investment and investment to be unable to enter the park normally, causing losses to it.

Based on this, the investment company filed an administrative lawsuit, requesting an order that the Nanhe District Government and the Nanhe Development Zone Management Committee perform the "Agreement on Entering the Zone", conduct bidding, auction and listing of the relevant land, pay the remaining support funds of more than 30 million yuan, and pay the corresponding Liquidated damages.

　　After Xingtai Intermediate People's Court received the case filing materials, considering that the case involved a key investment attraction project in Nanhe District of Xingtai City, which had a greater impact, it transferred the case to Xingtai City Administrative Dispute Resolution Center after seeking the consent of the investment company.

After the center received the case, the responsible judge actively communicated the case with the Nanhe District Government and the Nanhe Development Zone Management Committee, prompting its litigation risks and the direction of resolution.

After that, the disputes will be communicated between the two parties, and the law enforcement officer will provide legal advice and litigation guidance throughout the entire process to help the parties rationally choose a resolution plan.

After multi-party communication and several coordination resolutions, the investment company finally applied for withdrawal of the prosecution on the grounds that the two parties had voluntarily reached a settlement agreement and fulfilled it, and the administrative dispute has been substantially resolved.

　　The judge stated that the "Opinions on Improving the Property Right Protection System and Protecting Property Rights According to Law" issued by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council clearly requires that local governments at all levels and relevant departments must strictly fulfill the policy commitments made to the society and administrative counterparts in accordance with the law, and earnestly fulfill the investment promotion Various contracts signed in accordance with law with investment entities in activities such as investment attraction and government-social capital cooperation.

In response to the dispute arising from the investment promotion agreement between the two parties in this case, the court used the standardized operation of the administrative dispute resolution platform to provide judicial services based on the reasonable demands of private enterprises, build a communication bridge between the enterprise and the administrative agency, and urge both parties to comply with the premise permitted by laws, regulations and policies. A consensus was reached under the next stage, and finally the administrative disputes were substantively resolved, and the legitimate rights and interests of private enterprises were effectively protected.

　　Regulation Bazaar

　　Relevant regulations of the Administrative Litigation Law

　　Article 1 In order to ensure that the people's courts hear administrative cases in a fair and timely manner, resolve administrative disputes, protect the lawful rights and interests of citizens, legal persons, and other organizations, and supervise the exercise of powers by administrative agencies in accordance with the law, this law is formulated in accordance with the Constitution.

　The Supreme People's Court's Opinions and Relevant Provisions on Promoting the Reform of the Separation of Complex and Simplified Administrative Litigation Procedures

　　Article 5: For cases that can be mediated by the Administrative Litigation Law, cases for which administrative counterparts require reconciliation, or cases that are more conducive to the substantive resolution of administrative disputes handled through reconciliation, the people’s court may guide the parties to reconcile themselves or through a third party before filing the case. Conduct mediation.

The pre-litigation mediation shall be conducted on the mediation platform and the corresponding case number shall be established.

　　Relevant provisions of Hebei Province Diversified Dispute Resolution Regulations

　　Article 42: For administrative disputes brought before the people’s court, the people’s court and the administrative agency involved in the lawsuit shall work together to resolve the administrative dispute before the lawsuit.

If the parties do not agree to the pre-litigation resolution or the pre-litigation resolution fails, they shall promptly transfer to the litigation procedure.

　Lao Hu Comments

　　In accordance with the provisions of my country's Administrative Procedure Law, the people's courts, on the basis of following the principles of voluntariness and legality, and not harming the national interest, social public interest, and the legitimate rights and interests of others, can make administrative compensations, compensations, and administrative agencies exercise the discretionary provisions of laws and regulations. Right to mediate the case.

This legal provision has laid a solid legal foundation and opened up a broad prospect for the substantive resolution of administrative disputes and administrative litigation.

　　The people’s courts at all levels in Hebei Province actively promoted the establishment of administrative dispute resolution platforms jointly by the government and courts, and established a substantive resolution mechanism for administrative disputes before litigation. It played a positive role in safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of the parties and reducing the conflicts between administrative agencies and the common people, and was highly praised and welcomed by all parties to administrative disputes and administrative litigation.

　　It is hoped that more local people’s courts can, like the people’s courts at all levels in Hebei Province, actively exert their subjective initiative, avoid the simple approach of a verdict, and strive to promote the substantive resolution of administrative disputes and administrative litigation, in order to resolve social conflicts and build peace. China, to achieve fairness and justice, improve the level of modernization of the national governance system and governance capabilities and contribute to the judicial power.

Hu Yong