Reflection And Reconstruction The Prescription System Of Administrative Punishment In Our Country

The statute of limitations for administrative punishments is one of the important systems of the Administrative Punishment Law.The full meaning of the punishment time effect should include the time limit for prosecution,the time limit for decision and the time limit for execution.Due to the execution time effect under the administrative legal system of our country,the administrative coercive law will solve it.Therefore,the limitation of punishment mentioned in this article only refers to the limitation of prosecution and the limitation of decision.This article can be divided into five parts.The first part is the presentation of the problem.The latest version of my country’s Administrative Punishment Law stipulates the time limit for prosecution and the time limit for administrative punishment processing.Because the limitations for prosecution is based on the condition that the illegal act is not found within the limitation period,both academic and practical circles regard the discovery of illegal acts as a reason for termination of the limitation period.After that,whether the administrative agency filed a case,and when the case was penalized,the competition is subject to statute of limitation.At the same time,due to the lack of legal consequences for overdue penalties,the time limit for punishment processing is considered to be an efficiency requirement for the work of administrative agencies,so it cannot effectively restrict the exercise of the administrative agency’s penalty power.This kind of system arrangement prevents the exercise of the right of punishment from being effectively restricted for a long time.In practice,the phenomenon of overdue punishment is widespread,which seriously affects the legitimate rights and interests of citizens.The second part focuses on the objectively achievable effects of the punishment limitation system.The main functions of the system are manifested in the following aspects:(1)Respect the stable state of facts formed during the period and realize the function of maintaining social order and stability;(2)Let the exercise of the right give way to the protection of the interests of the parties,in order to maintain the reasonable trust of the offender based on the long-term failure of the punishment agency to exercise its power;(3)while the power of punishment is fully exercised,the offender can be freed from unstable legal relations,to balance the interest relationship between the two;(4)Through the adverse consequences of the loss of power,the administrative agency is forced to exercise the right of punishment in a timely manner and make an administrative punishment decision;(5)Passed institutional arrangements enable administrative agencies to get rid of the shackles of old cases,rationally allocate and effectively use limited administrative resources.The third part analyzes in detail the shortcomings of my country’s existing punishment limitation system.First of all,the theoretical understanding of the “undiscovered” condition is divergent,which leads to inconsistent application standards in practice.At the same time,the existence of the “undiscovered” condition has made the “discovery of illegal acts” be regarded as the termination point of the statute of limitations in both academic and practice circles,resulting in the subsequent behavior of administrative agencies no longer subject to statute of limitations.Secondly,the five-year limitation period for special cases in the newly revised Administrative Punishment Law is consistent with the minimum prosecution period of the criminal law,which is inconsistent with the standard that the limitation period should be determined in accordance with the social harm of the behavior;and the unclear definition of behaviors involving life,health and safety,and financial security creates hidden dangers of divergence in the future application of the system.Third,due to the lack of corresponding legal consequences,the penalty decision period system cannot effectively curb the phenomenon of overdue penalties,which is not conducive to the timely stability of legal relations.The fourth part emphatically discusses what kind of legislative mode should be adopted in our country.Looking at the legislative practice outside the region and Chinese Taiwan,the legislative model of the system can be divided into two main types: one is the monistic model,which stipulates the longest statute of limitations for the administrative agency’s penalty decisions;the other is the dual model.That is,the time limit for prosecution and the time limit for decision are separately stipulated.Combining our country’s specific national conditions and the difficulty of legislative technology,our country should adopt a unified legislative model.The fifth part is based on the establishment of a unified legislative model,and proposes to restructure my country’s administrative penalty statute of limitations system,that is,by deleting the “undiscovered” condition in the current penalty prosecution statute of limitations,and amending it to “No administration penalty shall be given to the illegal act after two years”,then it will be transformed into a penalty statute of limitations system including the statute of limitations.At the same time,in conjunction with the legislative practices of foreign and other regions,a statutory suspension system has been adopted.The reasons for suspension mainly include force majeure;the person being punished evades investigation or punishment;the punishment decision needs to be based on other decisions or judgments;the criminal procedure is prior.