On The Judicial Path Of Standardization Of Plaintiff Qualifications In Administrative Litigation In My Countr

One of the achievements of the revision of The Administrative Litigation Law of the People’s Republic of China in 2014 is the establishment of the standard of “interest”.It has become the general rule for determining whether the prosecutor in administrative adjudication activities can be admitted the qualification of plaintiff,requiring an interest relationship between the prosecutor and the administrative act being sued or the controversial administrative legal relationship.From the perspective of the legislation,the landing of the standard of “interest” brings positive significance for the development of the entire administrative litigation system in China.It overcomes the passivity and strictness of the original standards such as "direct interest" and " relative person in administration",showing greater openness and inclusiveness in the identification of the plaintiff’s qualification in administrative litigation,which accords with the fact that the administrative litigation in China is based on the subjective litigation concept.It’s also helpful to recognize and protect the interests of citizens that worthy of legal protection,and to ensure the law enforcement from the administrative departments is in accordance with the regulations.It accords with the inner jurisprudence spirit of administrative litigation law theory and can be in line with the international trend of expanding the qualification of administrative litigation plaintiff.However,the application of the “interest” is slightly unsatisfactory from the judicial perspective.As an uncertain legal concept,the court has been unable to reach a consensus on its legal connotation for a long time."Causality","actual influence","legitimate rights and interests" and other judicial rules are widely applied by various courts,resulting in a judicial chaos of different judgments in the same case,hindering the formation and implementation of the standard judicial path of interest,which is now frequently questioned and criticized for its certainty as a standard.In order to solve the dilemma of the difficulty in identifying the plaintiff’s qualification in administrative litigation,the Supreme People’s Court explicitly introduced Protection Norm Theory for the first time in the administrative Reconsideration Proposal of "Liu Guangming v.Zhangjiagang Municipal People’s Government Administrative Review" in 2017.This extraterritorial identification standard originated from Germany is a powerful tool for Germany,Japan and other Civil law countries and regions like Taiwan of China to judge the qualification of the plaintiff in administrative litigation.It takes subjective public rights as the supporting legal principle,the protection of individual interests as the basis of the judgment,and legal interpretation as the main means.This theory also aims to play a role in expanding the protection of citizens’ legitimate rights and interests in administrative litigation with subjective litigation as its function orientation.The mainstream view praises it as a recognition rule with plasticity,operability and maturity,which attracts various courts to try it widely.Based on the existing administrative judicial cases applying the standard of “interest”or the Protection Norm Theory,this paper,after sorting,screening,inducting,analysing and reflecting all the data,holds that on the matter of how to understand the relationship between the Protection Norm Theory and the standard of “interest”,the latter should still be regarded as the basic criterion for determining the plaintiff’s qualification in administrative trials,while the former is just a specific rule to assist in judging the elements of "interest".Only in this way can both rules provide a more predictable entity support for the identification process and results with rigorous legal doctrinology technology and deductive reasoning,improving the openness and inclusiveness of local identification standards,and truly respecting the achievements of administrative legislation without frequent amendments to administrative laws and regulations.As for how to apply this theory to judge the interests,this paper argues that,according to the core meaning of this theory,we should start from three aspects: locating the scope of objective legal norms,extracting the intension of personal interest protection and systematic legal interpretation.Meanwhile,the judges are indirectly urged to improve their capacity of legal interpretation to fully consider the interests worthy of legal protection,and to exclude the norms of civil law so as to alleviate the possible negative influences on the judgment of private interests.