Deepen the supervision of administrative procuratorial cases, actively perform duties, and promote the governance of litigation sources
——The person in charge of the Seventh Procuratorate of the Supreme People's Procuratorate answered reporters' questions on the 36th batch of guiding cases of the Supreme People's Procuratorate
The Supreme People's Procuratorate recently released the 36th batch of guiding cases themed on the supervision of administrative procuratorial cases.
The reporter interviewed the person in charge of the Seventh Procuratorate of the Supreme People's Procuratorate about the relevant background of the case selection and the supervision work carried out by the procuratorial organs on administrative procuratorial cases.
Reporter: We have noticed that the four guiding cases released this time focus on the supervision of similar cases in administrative procuratorial cases. What is the difference between the supervision of similar cases and the supervision of individual cases? Why does the Supreme People's Procuratorate emphasize the supervision of similar cases? How does the procuratorial organ supervise similar cases?
Person in charge of the Seventh Prosecutor's Office: The Supreme Procuratorate's Leading Party Group and Chief Prosecutor Zhang Jun have made several instructions on strengthening the supervision of similar cases, requiring the in-depth implementation of Xi Jinping's thought on the rule of law, strengthening the system concept, and giving play to the role of similar case supervision in correcting, innovating, and leading the construction of the system , to promote the resolution of judicial concepts, policies and orientations in a field and period, and to achieve the unification of the political, legal and social effects of case handling.
In judicial cases, some reflect the inconsistent application of law in a class of cases, some reflect emerging, tendentious, and universal problems, and some reveal deep-seated contradictions. The inherent laws of administrative procuratorial decisions determine that administrative procuratorates should not passively administer justice, but rather They should be able to perform their duties proactively, be good at "seeing the details and knowing the works" from specific cases, and promote grasping the root causes and curing the root causes.
Based on the unification of law enforcement and justice, adhere to the value pursuit of promoting the construction of a social governance system, perform duties in accordance with the law, serve the overall situation, and serve the people's justice. Procuratorial suggestions, continue to track and implement, promote the unified and correct implementation of laws, and achieve source governance and system governance.
When procuratorial organs supervise similar cases, they should pay attention to three points: First, establish the concept of supervision of similar cases and pursue the effect of precise supervision.
In handling cases, it is necessary to enhance the awareness of supervision of similar cases, be good at discovering common problems from individual cases, focus on the outstanding problems and weak links that are concerned by the Party Central Committee and strongly reflected by the people, and discover through investigation and verification, public hearings, special investigations, special supervision activities, etc. , analyze common problems in law enforcement and judicial activities and social governance, identify the crux and root causes of problems, and conduct similar case supervision in the form of procuratorial suggestions, annual or special reports, etc.
At the same time, give full play to the role of administrative procuratorial procurator as "one-handed support for two", implement precise supervision throughout the entire process of supervision of similar cases, adhere to the concepts of penetrating supervision, systematic supervision, and win-win, multi-win and win-win, actively perform duties, and transform the supervision of similar cases For the efficiency of social governance, we strive to handle one case and manage one piece.
The second is to clarify the relationship between case supervision and similar case supervision.
The procuratorial organs should dialectically view the relationship between individual case supervision and similar case supervision in performing their legal supervision duties.
Whether to put forward supervision opinions on individual cases, or to carry out supervision of similar cases, it is necessary to comprehensively consider the specific circumstances of the case to make a choice.
If there are common problems and the efficiency of implementing case supervision is not high, similar case supervision can be carried out to promote the solution of a type of problem; however, while supervising the common problems, individual case supervision should also be strengthened for individual problems, so as to realize case supervision and similar cases. Case supervision is organically combined.
The third is to strengthen the use of wisdom to improve the quality and efficiency of supervision of similar cases.
Chief Prosecutor Zhang Jun emphasized that it is necessary to use big data to empower legal supervision, integrate into the general pattern of social governance, and walk out of an innovative development of digital procuratorial that "takes digital procuratorial as the traction, takes the supervision of similar cases as the core, and aims to promote social governance". road.
Digital technologies such as big data and artificial intelligence can better promote the collection, classification, analysis, research and judgment of similar case information clues, and realize the informatization, intelligence and systematization of similar case supervision.
At the same time, for some issues with high social attention and strong professionalism, we must be good at using "external brains" to invite experts to participate in demonstrations and hearings, provide constructive reference for the supervision of similar cases, and broaden the supervision perspective of the procuratorial organs.
Reporter: Prosecution No. 146 is a case of "drunk driving". How should I understand whether a motor vehicle driver's license should be revoked if a person is held criminally responsible for driving a motor vehicle while drunk? What positive effects does this case have on handling such cases?
Person in charge of the Seventh Prosecutor's Office: Judgment on drunk driving is mainly based on the alcohol content of the driver's blood.
The social harm of driving a motor vehicle while drunk is extremely serious.
The Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China imposes severe penalties on drunk driving.
In this case, the administrative authorities and the judicial authorities have disagreements on whether to revoke all driving licenses of the perpetrator for driving a motor vehicle while being held criminally responsible, which affects the credibility of law enforcement and the authority of the judiciary.
This case clarifies that the revocation of a motor vehicle driver's license is a punishment that deprives the holder of the qualification to drive any motor vehicle, rather than a punishment that only deprives the driver of a certain permitted type of driving. Therefore, driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated will be investigated for criminal responsibility. To revoke all the driver's motor vehicle driver's license.
In view of the fact that the administrative penalty of revoking a motor vehicle driving license detracts from the rights and interests of the person being punished and has a significant impact on the person being punished, the handling of the case requires standardized procedures, strict fact-finding, and comprehensive consideration of the illegal facts, nature, circumstances and social harm degree of the illegal driver. The penalty is equivalent.
In this case, the procuratorial organ did not handle the case, and extended from individual case supervision to similar case supervision by filing protests, negotiating with administrative organs and people's courts to promote the formation of consensus, by countersigning normative documents, meeting minutes, etc. Inconsistency, inconsistent standards and other issues, unified the correct understanding and application of the relevant provisions in the "Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China", which fully reflects that the punishment is equivalent, and has guidance for the handling of similar cases in the future, and the unified administrative law enforcement and judicial judgment standards. significance.
Reporter: We found that No. 147 is a case of administrative litigation enforcement supervision. Please introduce the specific circumstances of the procuratorial organs' supervision of administrative litigation enforcement activities in detail.
Person in charge of the Seventh Procuratorate: The parties are obliged to automatically implement the judgments and rulings made by the people's courts.
At the same time, the state guarantees the realization of judicial judgments with the force of law, and urges the obligors of judgments and rulings to perform their obligations.
Enforcement is an important guarantee for the realization of effective judgments by the people's courts.
The enforcement agency must not only follow legal procedures and take effective enforcement measures in a timely manner according to law, but also ensure that the enforcement measures are accurate, appropriate and necessary for the enforcement of judgments and rulings, so as to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the person subject to enforcement.
In order to ensure that the enforcement of administrative judgments is lawful and well-founded, Article 101 of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that the people's procuratorate shall supervise the enforcement of administrative cases.
The "Administrative Litigation Supervision Rules of the People's Procuratorate" stipulates the illegal situations in the supervision of the execution of administrative litigation by the procuratorate.
Specifically, it includes two aspects: one is to supervise the enforcement of rulings and decisions of the people's courts in violation of the law.
It mainly includes adjudication of acceptance, rejection, suspension of execution, termination of execution, termination of this execution procedure, resumption of execution, and reversal of execution, etc.
The second is to supervise the people's courts that fail to perform or are slack in performing their duties.
It mainly includes that the application for enforcement should be accepted in accordance with the law, but it is not accepted and the ruling is not made in accordance with the law; no enforcement ruling is made within the statutory time limit for the accepted enforcement case, and enforcement measures are not taken without justifiable reasons.
The third is failure to take enforcement measures in accordance with Article 96 of the Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China for administrative organs that refuse to perform administrative judgments, rulings, or mediation documents.
If the procuratorial organ finds the above circumstances, it shall make a procuratorial suggestion to the people's court at the same level.
If the party believes that the people's court has violated the law or that the failure to do so will damage their lawful rights and interests, they may apply to the procuratorate for supervision.
Reporter: Case No. 148 of the Procuratorate mentioned that the county procuratorate did not accept the procuratorial suggestion from the county court, and asked the city procuratorate to follow up and supervise. May I ask, under what circumstances does the procuratorial organ adopt the method of follow-up supervision? How to ensure the effect of follow-up supervision?
Person in charge of the seventh procuratorial office: Follow-up supervision refers to a supervision method in which the procuratorial organs make protests, procuratorial suggestions and other supervision opinions on administrative litigation supervision cases, and the violations of the supervised organs cannot be corrected, and they are re-supervised according to law.
The main purpose of establishing a follow-up supervision system is to effectively enhance the rigidity of procuratorial supervision, ensure the effectiveness of administrative procuratorial supervision, and has practical guiding significance for promoting daring and good supervision.
Article 125 of the "People's Procuratorate Administrative Litigation Supervision Rules" clearly stipulates follow-up supervision.
In the following circumstances, follow-up supervision may be followed in accordance with the law or the people's procuratorate at a higher level may be referred for supervision: First, the judgment, ruling, or mediation letter made by the people's court in the trial of an administrative protest case still meets the protest conditions and there are obvious errors; second, the people's court or administrative organ Failure to deal with the procuratorial suggestion put forward by the procuratorial organ and reply in writing within the prescribed time limit; third, the people's court or administrative organ handled the procuratorial suggestion incorrectly.
In this case, after the county people's procuratorate made a procuratorial suggestion, the county people's court did not adopt the procuratorial suggestion, and the illegal situation of the county people's court still existed, and the municipal people's procuratorate could follow up and supervise according to the law.
In order to better improve the quality and efficiency of follow-up supervision, the procuratorial organs will make efforts from the following three aspects: First, accurate judgment should be the premise.
Follow-up supervision In order to promote problem solving and achieve expected results, accurate judgment is the premise.
Procuratorial organs should consider the scientific methods of solving problems from the perspectives of the overall situation of the party and the country, social and economic development, public welfare and private rights protection, and from multiple dimensions of state, society, law, and morality, including from the perspective of the proposed organ. To ensure that the procuratorial recommendations made are objective, accurate, rational, realistic and feasible.
The second is to help build consensus.
Follow-up supervision is required, indicating that there is a difference between the judgment of the procuratorial organ and the understanding of the supervised organ.
The process of follow-up and supervision is also a process of building consensus.
In the follow-up supervision, the procuratorial organ should take the initiative to strengthen close communication and cooperation with the supervised object before, during and after the event. Party committees and people's congress reports, strive for government support, form a joint supervision force, and improve the rigidity and quality of follow-up supervision.
The third is to be guided by the supervision effect.
Procuratorial organs should regularly or irregularly track and understand the implementation of the rectification of procuratorial suggestions, check them on the spot, and promptly put forward rectification opinions when problems are discovered, so as to ensure that the procuratorial suggestions are implemented soundly.
At the same time, the procuratorial organ filing a protest in accordance with the law is not a simple judgment question of choosing right or wrong. After the protest is lodged in accordance with the law, it should follow up and follow up the effect according to the law to ensure that the retrial procedure is proper and the results are fair, and strive to achieve the conclusion of the case.