What is the procedure followed when you apply to the people's procuratorate for supervision of administrative proceedings? How does the prosecution service ensure the efficiency and depth of oversight? Article 5 of the rules on the supervision of administrative proceedings of the people's procuratorate reveals two key working mechanisms within the public prosecutor's office to optimize the allocation of judicial resources and to upgrade the professionalism of case handling. Understanding this article helps you to establish reasonable expectations about the process of supervision and to know how to better cooperate with the prosecution service so that your case is properly handled in a manner commensurate with its complexity。
Part i: the law of law — the original text of the law
Article 5 of the rules on the supervision of administrative proceedings of the people's procuratorates provides that:
The people's procuratorate handles administrative litigation and monitors cases. It should be streamlined and streamlined。
The people's procuratorates shall exercise greater wisdom in conducting administrative proceedings and monitoring cases, and may consult with experts or organize expert opinions and advice on important, difficult and complex issues。
Part ii: understanding the law - a core interpretation of the mechanism for handling cases
This article defines two modern ways in which the public prosecution service can conduct cases with a view to improving the quality of its supervision, as follows:
“simplified, streamlined and streamlined”
Objective: to optimize judicial resources and achieve a balance between precise and efficient oversight. Avoiding “average force” and ensuring that limited prosecutorial power is used on “stabbing”。
Criteria: the “heavy” and “simple” of cases are not simply classified by the subjective perception of the parties or by the amount at issue, but rather are based on professional judgement based on factors such as the complexity of the legal controversy in the case, the difficulty of fact-finding, the magnitude of social influence and the novelty of the legal relationship。
Brief case: cases in which the facts are clear, the relationship between rights and obligations is clear and the application of the law is less controversial. In such cases, the procedure can be simplified, with the aim of prompt review and expeditious resolution of the case, in order to respond in a timely manner to your request。
Complicated cases: cases involving significant interests, complex legal relationships, material differences of opinion, difficulties in the application of the law or typical guidance. In such cases, the prosecution service will devote more effort to fine-tuning, in-depth investigation and verification, and adequate justification。
“strengthening the use of wisdom and hearing expert advice”
Objective: to compensate for the limitations of the prosecutor's knowledge structure in specific areas of expertise, to improve the accuracy of judgement on highly specialized and technically complex issues and to ensure the scientific and authoritative nature of oversight opinions。
Applicable situations: mainly in respect of specialized and technical issues involved in the case, such as professional judgments in the areas of financial securities, intellectual property rights, engineering, environmental science, medical certification, accounting auditing, etc。
Modalities: the public prosecutor's office may conduct individual consultations with specialists in the relevant fields on professional issues or organize expert meetings to produce professional advice or conclusions. These observations will serve as an important reference for prosecutors to examine cases and form hard evidence, rather than directly as evidence or conclusions。
Part iii: usage - recommendations for your application and cooperation
After learning about the above mechanisms, you can prepare and participate more strategically in the monitoring process:
Helping to “simplified diversion”, helping to locate cases accurately:
Clear presentation of the “complexity” of the case: if your case does involve complex legal issues or professional facts, its complexity should be clearly and prominently stated in the request for oversight. For example, it was made clear that there were significant differences in the understanding of a particular administrative statute in the original decision, or that the facts of the case involved technical aspects requiring expert body identification. This helps the prosecutor to identify them quickly during the preliminary examination and to integrate them into the “heavy” route。
Simplicity is not “heavy”: if the case is relatively simple and the claim is clear, the focus should be on submitting a concise application and avoiding the complexity of a simple matter, which would facilitate expeditious processing。
Be prepared in the field of expertise for the “wise use” of:
Prejudicing professional issues: to examine whether your case contains technical, professional or scientific issues that are difficult to understand by non-legal professionals. Examples include liability determination for medical accidents, quality assessment of buildings, comparison of technical characteristics of patents, etc。
You can organize and make available relevant industry standards, technical norms, authoritative academic views or similar jurisprudence as an annex to the application. Even if you are not in a position to draw professional conclusions, the provision of clear guidance will greatly assist prosecutors in determining whether and to what kind of expert assistance is required。
Consider the expert opinion rationally: if it becomes clear that the public prosecutor's office has consulted the expert on your case, be reasonable. The expert opinion provides an analysis from a professional point of view for the prosecutor's combined discretion in relation to the full legal facts of the case. You do not need to, and usually cannot, debate directly with the experts, but can present your views to the prosecutor as to whether the underlying facts on which the expert opinion is based are comprehensive and accurate。
Understand the different processes and reasonably anticipate the pace of the case:
A relatively fast review process could be expected for those who might be classified as “simplified cases”。
The review cycle is necessarily longer for “heavy” cases or cases where expert advice has been initiated. Please be patient as necessary, as a reflection of the accountability of the public prosecution service to you in keeping with the principle of “completing cases”。
Part iv: compliance - reasonable defence of rights under scientific mechanisms
Respect for professional judgement and the science of trust procedures: “full and simple diversion” is the scientific casework model developed by the public prosecution service on the basis of judicial law and extensive practice. Trust in and respect for the preliminary classification of the nature of your case by the public prosecution service, which in itself is a confidence in professional justice。
An objective presentation of the case in good faith: do not deliberately exaggerate the complexity or fiction of the case with a view to giving it “a sense of importance”. This does not contribute to the proper classification of the case, which, if found, would seriously undermine your integrity and the fairness of the case。
Use legal channels to provide constructive information: if you have authoritative professional information on the case or well-known expert information on the relevant area, it may be made available in writing to the public prosecutor's office, but with objectivity and without attempts to influence the expert's candidate or opinion unduly。
4. Maintaining procedural seriousness and waiting patiently for professional conclusions: expert advice is a serious professional exercise that takes time. In doing so, undue rush or challenge should be avoided. Wait patiently for the final legal judgement of the prosecution service, drawing on professional wisdom, as the basis for your decision on follow-up。
Summary: the provisions of article 5 demonstrate the inherent requirement for prosecutorial oversight to move towards precision, specialization and scientificization. For you, this means, on the one hand, that your supervisory applications will be dealt with in a system that focuses on efficiency and quality balance, and, on the other hand, that your active participation and rational cooperation — in particular, the clear identification of the key points of the case and the provision of professional leads — can lead to a virtuous interaction with the scientific mechanisms of the prosecution service. When you are based on the facts and the law to understand and adapt to these procedural characteristics, you are promoting in the most effective way the most prudent and professional treatment on the rule of law track of your legitimate claims. Reason, trust and patience are important partners in this path of professional advocacy。
