Study Of Administrative Procedure Evidence System In China

In a sense, Administrative program controlling the executive power is through the evidence of administrative procedures to control the executive power. The legality of administrative acts, level of law enforcement and democracy are determined by the evidence of administrative procedures. Therefore, it has important theoretical significance and practical significance for promoting the Chinese evidence of system of administrative procedures legislation and protecting the legitimate rights of the administrative counterpart to explore the evidence system of administrative procedure in china. The issue focuses on the four part using statistical analysis, comparative analysis, empirical analysis and logical analysis methods:Firstly, the evidence system of administrative procedures is independent and has its own characteristics and functions compared with the litigation evidence system.Secondly, the United States, Germany, Austria and China's Macao and other countries and regions et al have a uniform code of administrative procedures where the rule of evidence has been set forth. The evidence system of their administrative procedures exist the difference and convergence.Thirdly, there is not the real evidence system of administrative procedure in China. It is not desirable and feasible for administration organs have to comply with the administrative litigation evidence system in their administrative law-enforcement practice. These actions will cause many problems in theory, practice and law enforcement effect.Fourthly, in order to build the Chinese evidence system of administrative procedures, the following three aspects should be obeyed under referencing the extraterritorial evidence system of administrative procedure in their administrative Procedure Code: from its values, the efficiency and fairness should be emphasized; from its legislation style, its basic rules should be decided by unified administrative procedure law and the special rules of administrative acts be decided by single independent laws, regulations or rules; from its content, a general framework should formatted in accordance with "obtaining evidence–producing evidence-interrogation-confirmation" process and enriched and improved in the future.