Li was dissatisfied with the information of the Municipal People's Government
Publicly reply to the application for administrative reconsideration
【Keywords】
Administrative Reconsideration Supervision, Open Government Information, Partial Performance of Responsibilities, Administrative Organs Correct Errors on Their Own
[Basic facts of the case]
On November 24, 2023, the applicant, Mr. Li, submitted an application for open government information through the official website of the people's government of a city in Fujian Province, the respondent, applying for the disclosure of "a revised copy of the urban master plan (2010-2030) of a certain Zhengwen [2014] No. 21". On December 20, 2023, the respondent made a reply to the disclosure of government information, informing the applicant that the "Revised Urban Master Plan (2010-2030)" had been voluntarily published on the official website of the Municipal People's Government (with a query website). The applicant was dissatisfied with the reply to the disclosure of government information, and believed that the respondent had not disclosed the document [2014] No. 21 of the application for a certain political document applied for, and applied to the provincial people's government for administrative reconsideration.
[Reconsideration Handling]
The administrative reconsideration agency found that a certain political document [2014] No. 21 is the "Request for Approval to Implement the Revision of the Urban Master Plan (2010-2030)", although the document and the "Urban Master Plan (2010-2030) Revision" have the same theme, but the "Urban Master Plan (2010-2030) Revision" is only a part of a certain political document [2014] No. 21. The respondent disclosed the "Revised Urban Master Plan (2010-2030)" to the applicant, but did not reply to the existence of a certain political document [2014] No. 21, whether it can be disclosed and how it should be disclosed, etc., and failed to fulfill the obligation of comprehensive response, which is a partial performance of statutory duties. In order to substantively resolve the administrative dispute, the administrative reconsideration agency communicated with the respondent in a timely manner, and after determining that the information did not fall under the non-disclosure circumstances stipulated in Articles 14 and 15 of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Open Government Information, urged the respondent to take the initiative to provide a certain Zhengwen [2014] No. 21 document to the applicant. The applicant was satisfied with this and voluntarily withdrew the application for administrative reconsideration on the fifth working day after the case was accepted.
【Typical Significance】
Urging administrative organs to correct their own mistakes is an important mechanism entrusted to administrative reconsideration organs by the newly revised Administrative Reconsideration Law to supervise administration according to law and substantively resolve administrative disputes. In the course of hearing a case, if an administrative reconsideration organ discovers that there are problems in the administrative organ's law enforcement conduct, it may first communicate with the administrative organ and request it to correct the error within a certain period of time, so as to facilitate the resolution of the dispute. This method not only urges the administrative organs to improve law enforcement, but also achieves the goal of determining the number of points and ending disputes. In this case, the administrative reconsideration agency accurately grasped the legislative spirit of the newly revised Administrative Reconsideration Law, and when it was found that the respondent had failed to fulfill its obligation to disclose government information, it gave full play to the advantages of hierarchical supervision of administrative reconsideration, urged the respondent to perform its duties in accordance with the law, corrected its own mistakes, disclosed the relevant government information of its application to the applicant, and obtained the applicant's understanding, so that the administrative dispute was successfully resolved on the fifth working day after the case was accepted, demonstrating the institutional advantages of administrative reconsideration that are fair and efficient, and convenient for the people.
Expert commentary
Mechanism for administrative organs to correct errors on their own
Promote the substantive resolution of administrative disputes - Li is not satisfied
The Municipal People's Government's information disclosure response to the application for administrative reconsideration
Li Honglei
Professor, School of Law, University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
The "Implementation Outline for the Construction of a Rule of Law Government (2021-2025)" emphasizes "improving the substantive resolution mechanism of administrative disputes". In Li's application for administrative reconsideration of the people's government's reply to information disclosure, the reconsideration organ believed that the respondent had not responded to the existence of a certain political document [2014] 21, whether it could be disclosed and how to disclose it, and had not fulfilled the obligation to fully reply, which was a partial performance of statutory duties, and then urged the respondent to take the initiative to provide a certain political document [2014] 21 to the applicant. Although the legal relationship of this case is simple, it highlights the importance of the self-correction mechanism of administrative organs for the substantive resolution of administrative disputes, and has certain guiding significance and enlightening effect.
1. The role of the mechanism for self-correction by administrative organs
It is the basic requirement of the principle of administrative rule of law to promptly correct violations and improprieties that exist in administrative organs in areas such as the determination of facts, the application of law, and the exercise of discretionary powers. With the continuous advancement of the construction of the rule of law government in the mainland, the role of the self-correction mechanism of administrative organs has received attention and become increasingly apparent.
First of all, the self-correction mechanism of administrative organs can effectively respond to the goal of "substantive resolution of administrative disputes". The self-correction of administrative organs is based on the internal management system of administrative organs and is highly efficient. In this case, the administrative reconsideration organ, when it was found that the respondent had failed to fulfill its obligation to disclose government information, played the supervisory role of the higher-level organ, urged the respondent to disclose information in accordance with the law, and resolved the relevant dispute on the fifth working day after the case was accepted, demonstrating the administrative efficiency of the administrative organ's self-correction mechanism in administrative reconsideration.
Second, the mechanism of self-correction by administrative organs can effectively prevent the idling of procedures. At present, due to the limited scope of judicial review of disputed administrative acts in administrative litigation, there are certain limitations in the realization of citizens' substantive interests. By resolving the administrative dispute in the administrative reconsideration stage through the respondent's own error correction, the parties can avoid initiating the first instance and the second instance, which can reduce social contradictions and effectively save administrative and judicial resources.
Finally, the mechanism of self-correction by administrative organs can better protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens. Administrative organs should conduct a comprehensive review of administrative acts to correct their own mistakes, including both legality and reasonableness, and administrative organs directly face administrative disputes, so it is more convenient to collect evidence and investigate. As shown in this case, administrative disputes can be resolved more accurately and flexibly, which substantively resolves the applicant's disputes over government information disclosure, reduces procedural idling, saves citizens' time and money and other costs, conforms to the principle of administrative efficiency, and is efficient and convenient for the people.
II. The rule of law aspect of the mechanism for self-correction of errors by administrative organs
It is an intrinsic requirement of the principle of administration according to law for administrative organs to correct their own illegal and improper acts. There are also some laws in mainland China that explicitly grant administrative organs the right of revocation, such as Article 48, Paragraph 2 of the Administrative Punishment Law, and Article 69 of the Administrative Licensing Law. At the local level, in 2021, Nantong Municipality issued the "Implementation Opinions on Strengthening the Self-Correction of Administrative Acts", which included various situations such as major and obvious violations of administrative acts, failure to receive compensation for the damage to the legitimate rights and interests of the parties due to administrative acts, and failure to resolve legitimate petition claims in accordance with the law. In practice, the administrative ruling (2018) Zui Gao Fa Xing Shen No. 2218 Zhong Weidong v. the People's Government of Jiaoling County, Guangdong Province for the Cancellation of the Rural Land Contracting and Operation Certificate, which states that in an administrative lawsuit, the administrative organ as the defendant has the right to self-correct the wrongly sued administrative act.
At the same time, it should be noted that in the process of self-correction, administrative organs should also follow the requirements of the principles of legal stability and trust protection, and seek a harmonious balance between the stability of the law, the trust interests of the administrative counterpart, and the variability of the administrative organs' self-correction.
III. The application of self-correction by administrative organs in administrative reconsideration
On the one hand, the "Implementation Outline for the Construction of a Rule of Law Government (2021-2025)" emphasizes that "give play to the role of administrative reconsideration as the main channel for resolving administrative disputes", and the application scenario of self-correction by administrative organs is that the internal administrative organs are committed to the substantive resolution of administrative disputes in terms of institutional objectives, and there is a broad space for application in the field of administrative reconsideration.
On the other hand, administrative organs should adopt a cautious attitude towards self-correction. It is necessary to maintain the balance between the principle of trust protection and the principle of administration according to law, and avoid unduly damaging the viability of administrative acts and the seriousness of administrative law enforcement; Due procedures should be observed, and administrative procedures such as recusal, explanation of reasons, and information disclosure should be used to ensure the fairness, impartiality, and openness of administrative organs' self-corrections; It is necessary to do a good job of connecting the self-correction mechanism with administrative reconsideration, administrative litigation and state compensation, and if the lawful rights and interests of others are harmed in the process of correcting errors, those that meet the standards for compensation and compensation should actively protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens.
Source: WeChat public account of the Ministry of Justice