|
|
|
No. 10 of Ten Model Cases of Administrative Litigation Supervision by the Procuratorial Organs across the Country Published by the Supreme People's Procuratorate: Case of issuing a procuratorial proposal on social governance and promoting dispute source governance by the People's Procuratorate of [REDACTED] City, Tibet
|
|
最高人民检察院发布10起全国检察机关行政诉讼监督典型案例之十：西藏某市人民检察院制发社会治理检察建议推动诉源治理案
|
|
【法宝引证码】
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| No. 10 of Ten Model Cases of Administrative Litigation Supervision by the Procuratorial Organs across the Country Published by the Supreme People's Procuratorate: Case of issuing a procuratorial proposal on social governance and promoting dispute source governance by the People's Procuratorate of [REDACTED] City, Tibet | | 最高人民检察院发布10起全国检察机关行政诉讼监督典型案例之十：西藏某市人民检察院制发社会治理检察建议推动诉源治理案 |
| [Keywords] | | 【关键词】 |
| Supervision according to functions; procuratorial proposal; dispute source governance | | 依职权监督 检察建议 诉源治理 |
| [Basic Facts] | | 【基本案情】 |
| In the performance of administrative litigation supervision functions, the People's Procuratorate of [REDACTED] City, Tibet Autonomous Region (hereinafter referred to as the “People's Procuratorate of [REDACTED] City”) discovered that the Written Administrative Penalty Decision (No. 74 [2020], Traffic Law Enforcement Penalty, X) issued by the [REDACTED] Traffic Integrated Law Enforcement Team of [REDACTED] City was a format document. After the revision of a law, the [REDACTED] Traffic Integrated Law Enforcement Team of [REDACTED] City failed to update the applicable law clauses in a timely manner and the People's Procuratorate of [REDACTED] City learned that the [REDACTED] Traffic Integrated Law Enforcement Team widely used such format document to issue administrative penalty decisions. A timely rectification was required. Therefore, the People's Procuratorate of [REDACTED] City filed the case according to the supervision matter in procuratorial proposals of social governance. | | 西藏自治区某市人民检察院在履行行政诉讼监督职能中，发现该市某交通综合执法队制作的×交执法罚〔2020〕74号《行政处罚决定书》系格式文书，在法律修订后未及时更新法律适用条款，并了解到该交通综合执法队普遍使用该格式文本作出行政处罚决定，需要及时整改，遂按照社会治理类检察建议监督事项予以立案。 |
| [Supervision by the Procuratorial Organ] | | 【检察机关办理情况】 |
| Investigation and verification. The People's Procuratorate of [REDACTED] City conducted comprehensive consultation of case files and examination of the administrative penalty given by the [REDACTED] Traffic Integrated Law Enforcement Team and listened to the opinions of the administrative counterpart. It was found upon examination that there were generally the following problems in the Written Administrative Penalty Decision issued by the [REDACTED] Traffic Integrated Law Enforcement Team: (1) the citation of the legal provisions did not comply with the relevant provisions. The legal provisions cited in the Written Administrative Penalty Decision issued by the [REDACTED] Traffic Integrated Law Enforcement Team only stated the chapter and section of the law or regulation, but the article, paragraph, subparagraph, and item were not stated. (2) the time limit for prosecution notified by the [REDACTED] Traffic Integrated Law Enforcement Team to the administrative counterpart was erroneous. The Administrative Litigation Law amended in 2014 has changed the time limit for prosecution from three months to six months, namely, paragraph 1 of Article 46 provides that “to directly file a complaint with a people's court, a citizen, a legal person, or any other organization shall file the complaint within six months from the day when the citizen, legal person, or other organization knew or should have known that the administrative action was taken.” However, in notification of the time limit for prosecution, the Written Administrative Penalty Decision issued by the [REDACTED] Traffic Integrated Law Enforcement Team still used the relevant provisions of the Administrative Litigation Law before its amendment in 2014. | | 调查核实。某市人民检察院由点及面，对某交通综合执法队所作行政处罚进行全面阅卷审查，并听取了行政相对人的意见。经查，某交通综合执法队制作的《行政处罚决定书》普遍存在以下问题：一是引用法律条文不符合规定。该交通综合执法队制作的《行政处罚决定书》引用法律条文仅写明法律法规的章、节，未写明条、款、项、目。二是告知行政相对人提出行政诉讼的期限错误。2014年修改的行政诉讼法将起诉期限由三个月改为六个月，即第四十六条第一款规定，“公民、法人或者其他组织直接向人民法院提起诉讼的，应当自知道或者应当知道作出行政行为之日起六个月内提出”。但该交通综合执法队制作的《行政处罚决定书》在告知起诉期限时仍沿用修改前的行政诉讼法的规定。 |
| ．．．．．． | | ．．．．．． |
Dear visitor,you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases . If you are not a subscriber, please subscribe . Should you have any questions, please contact us at:
+86 (10) 8268-9699 or +86 (10) 8266-8266 (ext. 153)
Mobile: +86 133-1157-0713
Fax: +86 (10) 8266-8268
database@chinalawinfo.com
| |
您好：您现在要进入的是北大法律英文网会员专区，如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录，进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息；如您还不是我们 的英文用户，请注册并交纳相应费用成为我们的英文会员 。如有问题请来电咨询；
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content
found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright
owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.
Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations
of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language
versions as the final authority. lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly
or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.
We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve
the quality of our materials.
|
|
| |
|
|