Research On The Right Protection In The Punishment Of Administrative Trust-breaking

Punishment for administrative trust-breaking,as a new way of governing in our country,plays a very important role in the construction of social credit system.However,due to the recent establishment of the system of punishment for administrative truth-breaking,such as the low level of legislation,the intensity of punishment was not differentiated according to the actual situation,the extensive abuse of administrative punishment incidents occurred frequently,the potential legal risks of the system were exposed and increased gradually,resulting in an endless series of situations of violating the other party’s legal rights and interests.Therefore,it is necessary to deeply explore the construction of the right protection system for the counterpart of administrative trust-breaking punishment,so as to provide more diversified relief paths for the counterpart to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests,so as to reduce the possible negative effects of administrative trust-breaking punishment.From the current situation of legislation and practice,The main problems of the right protection system in the punishment of administrative dishonesty are as follows: Firstly,the protection of rights legislation is not perfect enough.The level of administrative disciplinary legislation and normative documents is generally low in our country,and the content of administrative disciplinary measures is relatively obvious,and the tendency of ignoring the rights protection of the relative party.Secondly,the protection of procedural rights against trustbreaking is insufficient.It is mainly reflected in the non-standard procedure of notification and hearing in the inclusion stage,and the insufficient attention to the right of objection defense in the process of punishment.Due to the lack of standardization in the process of system regulation,administrative organs may ignore the hearing,notification and other procedural rights in the exercise of public power,which will easily lead to the wrong inclusion of the trustbreaking list.Third,the administrative subject supervision and restraint mechanism is insufficient.Only when any system accepts constraints and supervision can it reduce the occurrence of mistakes,or even if there are mistakes,it is timely enough to correct and make up for them.Administrative trust-breaking disciplinary system is no exception.Finally,the remedy mechanism of rights protection is not clear enough.When the substantive and procedural rights of the counterpart punished for trust-breaking are infringed,there are still many contradictions in the selection and treatment of right relief due to the different provisions on reconsideration,litigation and compensation in local documents,so it is necessary to further clarify these relief channels.In order to build a relatively perfect system of protecting the rights of the counterpart and implement the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the counterpart,we can improve it from the following points: First,improve the legal rank and clarify the legal basis.As a kind of restrictive right,punishment for trust-breaking must have clear basis of upper position law,and administrative organs should uphold the principle of handling affairs according to law and administration according to law.The second is clearly included in the stage of the notification and hearing procedures,the punishment stage of the objection and defense procedures.Specifically,the notice before the public list should be implemented to ensure that the counterpart is informed.At the same time,before imposing more severe measures or according to the counterpart’s application,the administrative organ should cooperate with the counterpart to actively organize the hearing and publicly protect the counterpart’s right to state and defend.Thirdly,the supervision mechanism of administrative subject should be perfected,which is reflected in the addition of administrative subject responsibility investigation clause and procedural control.At the same time,the combination of internal supervision and external social supervision of administrative organs should be improved,forcing administrative organs to pay attention to reasonable control of power.Finally,improve the trust-breaking punishment counterpart rights protection relief system.In particular,the scope and method of credit repair should be clarified.In the aspect of administrative reconsideration and administrative litigation,the scope of accepting cases of administrative reconsideration in punishment for trust-breaking should be clarified to smooth the channels of administrative litigation.In terms of administrative compensation for punishment of trust-breaking,we should actively explore and expand the compensable scope of administrative compensation,so that the administrative counterpart can obtain substantial relief,effectively reduce the loss and adverse impact of the counterpart,and protect the legitimate rights and interests of the counterpart.