Research On Centralized Jurisdiction System Of Administrative Cases

In order to ensure that courts can independently exercise judicial power in administrative cases in accordance with the law,and to better reflect the concept of justice for the people,according to the Supreme Court,the pilot work of centralized jurisdiction over administrative cases in my country has been carried out.In some areas,railway courts are used for centralized jurisdiction over administrative cases.Beijing and Shanghai directly add the sign of Intermediate Court in front of the Railway Transport Intermediate Court to exercise centralized jurisdiction over administrative cases within their jurisdiction;Guangxi,Yunnan,and Shanxi have direct jurisdiction.Using two levels of railway transportation courts,a relatively independent administrative case jurisdiction system is formed.In most parts of the country,the centralized jurisdiction of administrative cases is carried out by ordinary courts within the existing system.The more distinctive ones are the cross-jurisdiction model,the "refined" jurisdiction model,and the party’s choice of jurisdiction model.Regardless of the jurisdiction model,certain difficulties were encountered in the initial stage of the pilot program.With the continuous deepening of reforms,the old difficulties have been resolved,and new problems have gradually emerged.Looking at the pilot situation across the country,there are mainly the following three prominent problems.First,there is a lack of legislation in the centralized jurisdiction court.The name of the railway court began to appear "not true to the name" problem.In the name of the railway court,it actually has jurisdiction over administrative cases;as a centralized jurisdiction,it lacks a legal basis and legal authorization when exercising its jurisdiction;In practice,there is a lack of effective supervision by corresponding power organs at the same level.Second,the inherent shortcomings of the centralized jurisdiction system are constantly exposed.The purpose of centralized jurisdiction is to realize the separation of judicial and administrative divisions.However,it also exposes the inherent shortcomings of the centralized jurisdiction system.First of all,it has caused the internal separation of the "two-convenience principle".The centralized jurisdiction system allows administrative cases to be tried in different places.Although it increases the relative independence of the trial courts,it sacrifices the litigation convenience of the parties to a certain extent.Secondly,there has been a misalignment of supervision between the court of jurisdiction and the authority.The centralized jurisdiction courts have concentrated administrative cases in several administrative divisions,which are only supervised by local authorities in law,and non-local authorities in the judicial divisions cannot achieve effective supervision.Third,centralized jurisdiction cannot necessarily effectively resolve administrative contradictions.The separation of jurisdictional courts and administrative divisions has increased the gap between courts and administrative agencies,making it more difficult to mediate administrative cases;courts can only judge administrative disputes at the legal level,and later enforcement problems still exist.Third,the administrative divisions of courts with decentralized jurisdiction continue to decline or even disappear.Part of the jurisdiction of the court of decentralized jurisdiction was absorbed by the court of centralized jurisdiction,and its jurisdiction was limited or even completely stripped.As a result,the court of decentralized jurisdiction had no case to be tried,and the administrative tribunal was almost useless.Regarding the emerging problems in judicial practice,this article will put forward some suggestions to improve the centralized jurisdiction system.First,improve the top-level design of the railway court.Relevant laws should be revised in a timely manner to clarify the legal status of railway courts in the centralized jurisdiction of administrative cases to ensure that the jurisdiction of railway courts can be followed by law;in practice,local authorities should be properly used to conduct effective supervision and management of railway courts.Second,weaken the adverse effects brought about by the inherent defects of centralized jurisdiction.First,reduce the degree of internal separation of the "two-convenience principle" by the centralized jurisdiction system.Under the premise of ensuring judicial fairness,the parties are given limited jurisdictional choice and respect the free choice of the parties;the courts take the initiative to carry out convenient litigation activities,build “intelligent court”,and promote trials in circuit courts to reduce the litigation costs of plaintiffs in their jurisdictions.Second,build a new "People’s Congress-Court" structure.On the one hand,continue to play the supervisory role of the competent authority over the competent court.On the other hand,the competent court will promptly notify the various authorities in the jurisdiction of the litigation status of related administrative cases.Third,resolve administrative contradictions in substance.On the one hand,the court should pay attention to the plaintiff’s true demands and actively respond to their demands;on the other hand,it should promote healthy communication between the judicial and administrative agencies,and focus on solving problems through mediation and negotiation and building a harmonious society.Third,give full play to the positive role of courts of decentralized jurisdiction.Determine its role in assisting the jurisdiction of administrative cases in law,and then provide assistance to centralized jurisdiction courts in practice to jointly resolve administrative contradictions.