Research on Administrative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms

Author: Zhang Shuyi
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2006-01-01
Features: This book is a mid-term achievement of the project "Improvement of WTO and Administrative Relief Systems" funded by the Ministry of Education. On the surface, "Improvement of WTO and Administrative Relief Systems" seems unrelated to the theme of this book, but this is not the case. Joining the WTO undoubtedly posed a historic challenge to China, and this challenge coincided with China's ongoing process of establishing a market economy. The reason we face such a significant challenge is precisely because of their common intersection: the market economy. Therefore, China chose the market economy during its reform, and it chose international economic integration through the market economy. For China, the market economy is not merely a type of economy different from the planned economy; in terms of technology, systems, and even culture, it is fundamentally distinct from the planned economy. This is why the term "social transformation" is used to describe Chinese society. A social transformation is a once-in-a-thousand-year event, but when considering technology, systems, and even culture, it is also something that is difficult to change in a thousand years. Such a transformation inevitably involves all aspects of society. WTO, government activities, and administrative relief are all factors that are hard to avoid in social transformation. When we focus on these factors, the first thing that catches our eye is such a contradictory phenomenon:
- Contradiction 1: China's reform broke the state's monopoly over all social resources, leading to increasing diversification of interests. Interest diversification inevitably leads to more disputes. Facing an increasing number of disputes, we hope for a strong judicial power, but the current state of judicial power is unsatisfactory.
- Contradiction 2: While judicial power is strengthening in China's reform process, it is also encountering the problem of "explosive litigation." The increasing number of disputes generated by a diverse society are flooding the courts, making it difficult for them to bear the burden. As a result, the strong judicial power we desire struggles to develop.
- Contradiction 3: When judicial power is in a difficult position, we see another scenario: disputes previously handled by administrative agencies are being pushed into the courts during the reform process. Laws like the Road Traffic Safety Law and the Public Security Administration Punishment Law exemplify this. This is undoubtedly "adding insult to injury" for the already struggling judiciary.
- Contradiction 4: While the transition from a planned economy to a market economy should reduce government functions, the reduction of government functions cannot be simplified. This leads to another aspect we see, which is the demand to strengthen government functions—to reduce its direct involvement in economic activities and resource allocation while strengthening its role in regulating and supervising the market. Between reduction and strengthening, we often make missteps.
The existence of these contradictions leads us to focus on a theme: in a society where conflicts, disputes, and conflicts are increasingly common, what kind of dispute resolution mechanism can we seek to maintain social harmony and stability? The social sciences and legal fields have proposed the concept of "diverse dispute resolution mechanisms," including private relief and public relief, such as judicial, arbitration, mediation, and reconciliation. All of these are important approaches. However, for Chinese society, we must consider the role of the administration in dispute resolution mechanisms. After all, our movement began from a starting point where the administration allocated all social resources. In China's reform, the administration should indeed withdraw from inappropriate areas, but it is also necessary to explore in which aspects the administration should be strengthened. Especially in areas where social disputes are increasing, the administration may have an inescapable responsibility in building a harmonious society. This is the purpose of this book.
Of course, since this book studies issues during the period of social transformation, especially China's social transformation, there are no precedents, and references are scarce. Many of the views presented may therefore appear superficial. This is not an excuse for the book's immaturity but rather an "autobiography" of Chinese academia. Let it serve as a "pebble to stir the pot."