Study Under Limitation Of Actions Of Admin Istration Litigation System

After being remained unchanged for decades, Administrative Procedure Law is reforming with a real innovation, from soliciting public opinion to the final publication and practice. The modified administrative law is affecting the whole legal process everywhere. The 18th Fourth Plenary Session of China’s Communist Party established the rule of law as the core issues with the form of thematic reports, the Communist Party of China valued the concept of rule of law to an unprecedented level. Legal system couldn’t be well constructed without the legal operation of each process, among which the administration adhere to law is particularly important. Administrative law consists of administrative legislation, law enforcement, administration of justice and other micro-system. Whether the various executive actions of the administration is by law or not is directly related to the success of the construction of legal system. It is said that in China "one who knows the law and breaks the law is conducting a worse crime." The destruction brought to law from the violations of administration is more serious than civic violations, while the public power are more likely to be abused. If the public authorities hold the power that derives from the citizens to violate the legitimate interests of ordinary people, and do not subject to legal sanctions that they deserve; and if the executive administration can enact rules according to their own will, whereas they do not comply with those rules, then the construction of legal system in China might be a project that is impossible to accomplished.This paper discusses the nature of the limitation of prosecution deadline, then predominantly analyzes the logical relationships and problems of the current law. Part Ⅲ uses the type of administrative litigations, administrative actions about different objects and different types of administrative actions in three dimensions as a reference, discussing the starting point, period and the influence of legal impact respectively. Part Ⅳ summarizes the results of the previous analysis, moreover it describes the extended system, along with the obligation of evidence about prosecution deadline.The innovation of this paper predominantly focuses on organizing the logic of law articles and the discussion about the 3rd and the 4th segments, which is not because of the amendment of law. Whereas, due to the length of the paper and the author’s ability, the framework of the previously designed third segment cannot be fully developed in depth. I will lay out the overall framework of the 3rd segment in the following content as a reference to other scholars.Compared with previous studies, I have concluded 3 factors that may affect the prosecution deadline system:1. procedure dimension is divided into five types, involving direct prosecution, prosecution after reconsideration, prosecution with compensation, reconsideration with compensation and filed separately with compensated litigations; 2. internal factors are divided into three dimensions, ranging from the starting point of prosecution deadline to the terms of prosecution deadline and to its legal consequences; 3. external factors are divided into three types of dimensions, including types of administrative litigations, administrative actions of different objects, and different types of administrative action. Each situation within the three factors are not equally important, or saying it has different researching significance. After observation, considering the core factor as leading guide, and the secondary factor to be mainly discussed, we ultimately get to analyze and research on the various factors of prosecution deadline, and there is no research and study in this field before.