Research on Hearing Procedures in Our Country

Author: Liu Mianyi
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2004-09-01
Features: As of June 2003, China's legislative law, administrative penalty law, price law, and other relevant laws, as well as regulations and rules, have made certain provisions on the hearing procedure. This report is based on these provisions, combined with practical conditions, and drawing on successful foreign experiences, to comprehensively, systematically, and deeply analyze and explore some important theoretical and practical issues of China's hearing procedure. The report is divided into four parts: "Overview of the Hearing Procedure," "Research on China's Legislative Hearing Procedure," "Research on China's Administrative Penalty (Specific Administrative Decisions) Hearing Procedure," and "Research on China's Price (Administrative Decision) Hearing Procedure."
The first part mainly introduces the content and form of the hearing procedure, its historical development, and its social significance. In countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan, the hearing is a broad concept referring to the process of soliciting opinions from interested parties; its forms are also diverse, with formal hearing sessions being one of them. The hearing procedures stipulated in China's existing three laws are all in the form of hearing sessions. The gradual expansion of the scope of application is a clear feature in the historical development of the hearing system, and China is no exception. Although the hearing procedure has certain drawbacks, it can promote the democratization, openness, and scientificity of legislation and decision-making, encourage administrative organs to make fair and reasonable decisions, and its important social significance cannot be denied.
The second part analyzes and studies China's legislative hearing procedure. The legislative hearing procedure serves the functions of soliciting public opinion and investigating facts. The hearing rules in parliamentary legislation of countries like the United States and Germany, as well as the hearing procedures in the formulation of U.S. administrative regulations, are rich in content, some of which have direct reference significance for us. China's legislative hearing practice has gradually expanded and achieved certain results and experiences, but there are also many areas that need improvement. Further development and improvement of China's legislative hearing procedure should focus on ten basic issues: the form of the hearing session, the differences between the hearing session and forums, the scope of application, the initiation procedure, the determination of the moderator, the selection of participants, the rights of participants, hearing rules, hearing records, and formal statements (hearing reports).
The third part, based on the administrative penalty hearing procedure, explores in depth the value connotation, scope of application, moderator, participants, specific procedures of the hearing session, evidence materials, decisions, and review of the hearing procedure. The essence of the hearing procedure is procedural justice, and its value connotation is that there is a close connection between fair procedures and fair results. Although it conflicts with efficiency to a certain extent, a deeper perspective reveals that the two are unified. The determination of the scope of application of the hearing procedure is a complex issue, mainly including the standards of behavior and interests. The expansion of the scope of application of the hearing procedure in China is an inevitable trend, but its implementation requires careful planning. The moderator is responsible for the conduct of the hearing procedure; further improvement of China's hearing moderator system relies on studying and drawing on the reasonable components of the U.S. administrative judge system, but more importantly, it requires making choices that align with the national conditions. Participants in the hearing procedure include both participants and other participants; the determination of the scope of participants and its relationship with the scope of litigants are issues that cannot be avoided both theoretically and practically. The specific operational procedures of the hearing session can be roughly divided into three parts: preparation, conduct, and results. There are some shortcomings in China's legal provisions and practices, which can be improved by learning from relevant foreign practices. The evidence materials accepted by the hearing procedure come in various forms, but those that are illegal must be excluded. Participants have the right and obligation to provide evidence, and administrative organs bear the main responsibility for providing evidence; the "reasonable doubt" standard is the proof standard for administrative penalty cases. When making decisions after the hearing, the reasonable core of the "exclusivity of the case file principle" and the "decision-maker must hear principle" should be absorbed, and the role of hearing records and hearing moderators should be fully played to avoid the hearing becoming a mere formality. During the process of administrative review and judicial review of administrative decisions, the review of the hearing procedure is an important aspect, mainly including the review of the steps, sequence, methods, deadlines, and rights of participants of the hearing procedure.
The fourth part, using the price hearing procedure as a point, studies the characteristics, scope of application, moderator, participants, specific procedures of the hearing session, and review of the hearing procedure of administrative decision-making hearing procedures, summarizes the basic conditions of practice, analyzes outstanding issues, and proposes improvement suggestions. The administrative decision-making hearing procedure has some characteristics in common with legislative and specific administrative decision-making hearing procedures, but it also has significant differences. The expansion of the scope of application of the hearing procedure in the field of administrative decision-making is both a result of theoretical deduction and a pressing need in reality. The selection of participants and their representativeness, as well as the advance disclosure of hearing matters, are outstanding issues in the current provisions and practices of price hearing sessions and are also issues that are heavily criticized. They must be improved in a practical manner. Looking ahead at the development prospects of China's hearing procedure, it can be optimistically estimated that its scope of application will gradually expand, its forms will become more diverse, its connotations will become richer, and its specific systems will become more perfect.