Promote substantive resolution of administrative disputes in the performance of supervisory duties
The Supreme People's Procuratorate released the top ten typical administrative prosecution cases in 2021
□ Our reporter Zhang Hao
On January 24, the 2021 Top Ten Typical Administrative Procuratorial Cases Selection Activities, hosted by the Seventh Procuratorate of the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Administrative Law Research Association of the China Law Society, organized by the Law School of the University of International Business and Economics and the editorial department of Economic and Trade Law Review, Announcing the selection results.
According to reports, in 2021, administrative prosecutors will focus on the handling of typical cases with corrective, innovative and leading values in the application of laws, policy orientation and judicial concepts, especially the implementation of the "Opinions of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Strengthening the Legal Supervision of Procuratorial Organs in the New Era" Regarding the requirement of "carrying out the work of substantive resolution of administrative disputes in the performance of legal supervision duties, and promoting the conclusion of cases", adhere to the requirement of substantive resolution of administrative disputes as an important carrier to promote the practical activities of "procuratorial affairs for the people", and resolve administrative disputes together More than 9100 pieces.
Protest "potential energy" turns into "dynamic energy" to resolve disputes
After Cui and Ma remarried, they moved their household registration to Ma, the tenant of the public house at No. 17 in a Hutong.
After Ma's death, Ma's eldest son and grandson moved their household registrations to No. 17, a Hutong.
After learning about the incident, Cui believed that Ma had passed away, and a branch of the Beijing Public Security Bureau (hereinafter referred to as a branch) should not apply for household registration without the consent of the head of the household. Document information of a eldest son and a grandson of Ma moving in”.
A precinct replied that the information did not exist.
Cui Mou sued to a district court in Beijing. The court ruled to reject Cui Mou's claim, and Cui Mou's appeal and application for retrial were both rejected by the court.
Cui Mou applied to a Beijing procuratorate for supervision.
A procuratorate listened to the opinions of Cui and a branch, went to the Population Corps of the Beijing Public Security Bureau to discuss and investigate, and asked the grass-roots branch about the practice of household registration migration in practice.
The court found out that there is a "Consent Letter of Household Head" signed by the deceased "Mr. Ma" in the household registration materials. The household registration transfer in the city requires both parties to be present. If they cannot be present, the public security organ will ask for the household head authorization letter or the household head consent. Book.
The procuratorial organ also learned that after Ma died, the tenant of his public house had been changed to Cui according to law, but Cui was kicked out of the house by Ma’s eldest son and grandson, and the living conditions were very poor. delayed implementation.
检察机关认为，“户主同意书”是某分局办理马某长子及孙子户口迁入的依据，某分局认为该文书非办理这次户口迁移的依据、不属于审批信息，因此未向崔某公开的理由不充分，法院判决存在认定事实不清、适用法律错误的情况。某检察院提请上级检察院抗诉，上级检察院提出抗诉，该案发回重审并得到改判。
某检察院提请抗诉后开展化解工作，与公安机关和法院执行部门沟通协调，目前，公安机关为崔某办理了新的户口簿，民事判决亦及时得到执行，崔某已搬回原住所居住。
【意义】
坚持以人民为中心，将解决群众的实际困难放在首位。检察机关坚持“穿透式监督”和“能动监督”的工作理念，依法监督的同时，将抗诉的势能转化为解决纠纷的动能，积极与法院和行政机关沟通协调解决百姓困难。
办理一案治理一片惠及一方
2020年8月以来，多名行政相对人在上海市中环线某路下匝道，经过两次虚线变道进入右转车道，事后被以一次连续变换两条车道为由处以罚款200元。
某区检察院参与共同化解行政争议时，发现该道路系交通违法易发多发路段。经调查核实，道路标线设置不合理是造成违法行为高发并产生争议的重要原因。某区检察院据此向公安机关提出类案检察建议，建议加强对涉案道路交通标线设置合理性研究。公安机关采纳检察建议进行了整改，该路段违法数量明显下降，交通秩序得到明显改善。
【意义】
道路交通是市域治理的重要方面，道交行政执法事关群众的切身利益。检察机关在化解行政争议的同时，通过类案监督促进道路交通的安全畅通，推动解决人民群众身边事和烦心事，防范化解社会风险和行政争议根源，体现了行政检察办理一案、治理一片、惠及一方的综合效果。
保障国家人口政策落地落实
From 2019 to 2020, the Health and Health Bureau of a county in Fujian Province (hereinafter referred to as the "County Health and Health Bureau") decided to levy social maintenance fees on four families including Yan on the grounds of violating the regulations on population and family planning in Fujian Province. Because Yan Mou and others did not take the initiative to pay the money, the County Health and Health Bureau applied to the court for compulsory execution against Yan Mou and other 8 people.
The county court granted compulsory execution and took measures such as inclusion in the list of dishonest persons, restrictions on consumption, and property control.
In August 2021, after the implementation of the national three-child birth policy, Yan and others filed an application for supervision with a county procuratorate, requesting that the implementation be stopped and the compulsory enforcement measures be lifted.
After accepting the case, the county procuratorate carefully studied the changes in the spirit of the current national fertility policy.
Through investigation and verification, it was found that there were thousands of cases of unsettled social support payments in the county.
Focusing on the supervision idea of "leading the face with points and promoting the governance of similar cases with individual cases", the county procuratorate has repeatedly visited the county health and health bureau to investigate and verify, solicit opinions, understand the situation and concerns face-to-face, take the initiative to report to the standing committee of the county people's congress, contact the county court, and hold two meetings The work coordination meeting reached a consensus on the joint overall planning and overall deployment to promote the resolution of a series of cases.
On the basis of investigation, verification and communication and coordination, the county procuratorate issued a similar case procuratorial suggestion to the county health and health bureau.
The county health and health bureau adopted the procuratorial suggestion and applied to the county court to close the case.
The county court promptly removed the parties from the list of dishonest persons, lifted measures such as restrictions on consumption, and closed the case.
The Fujian Provincial People's Procuratorate guided a city's procuratorate to carry out a special campaign of "supervision of the implementation of the collection of alimony", issued 9 procuratorial recommendations for similar cases, and found more than 4,020 similar cases. So far, 946 cases have been settled, involving 1,877 people from 946 households.
A few days ago, the Fujian Provincial Procuratorate summed up and forwarded the relevant experience of a city's procuratorate in handling social support cases, and deployed the province's procuratorate to carry out clues and similar cases.
【意义】
After the change of the national maternity policy, in practice, there are still many unenforced cases involving social maintenance payments, and the persons subject to enforcement are still restricted in terms of travel and high consumption, which affects their normal lives.
The procuratorial organs accurately grasp the spirit of the national policy, provide judicial guarantee for the implementation of the national population policy, and solve the vital interests of thousands of households.
Supervise and correct mistakes in accordance with the law, administrative penalties
毛某系一名钩机车司机，2013年12月在河南省某市政府主导的合村并城改造项目施工中，将郑某部分房屋设施推倒损坏。郑某报案后，某市公安局某派出所受理立案。公安机关以故意毁坏财物为由，对毛某作出行政拘留10日的处罚。申请复议被维持后，毛某诉至法院，要求撤销行政处罚及行政复议决定。毛某的起诉、上诉、申请再审均未获支持。
毛某向检察机关申请监督后，某市检察院审查后提请抗诉。河南省人民检察院调查核实，查明省高院就郑某诉某市政府确认拆迁行为违法一案作出生效判决，确认政府拆迁行为违法。审查认为，案涉合村并城改造项目是由该市人民政府主导实施的行政行为，毛某实施的拆除行为是在政府主导下强制拆除行为的一部分，由此产生的法律后果应由该市人民政府承担，而非毛某个人承担。毛某虽客观上实施了拆除行为，公安机关提供的证据不能证明其具有损毁公私财物的主观故意，且行政处罚办案期限明显超期。河南省检察院据此提出抗诉，省高院采纳抗诉意见作出改判，撤销案涉行政处罚决定及行政复议决定。
【意义】
在政府主导实施的征收拆迁过程中，为实现行政征收目的，个人在行政机关组织下实施的具体拆除行为不具有独立的法律属性，由此产生的法律后果由作出征收决定的行政机关承担。公安机关将其认定为故意损毁公私财物的个人行为并进行行政处罚，系适用法律错误，检察机关应当监督法院依法再审，撤销原行政处罚，切实维护公民合法权益。