The construction of a rule of law government is a key task and main project for comprehensively governing the country according to law. Administrative prosecution has functional advantages that distinguish it from other supervision methods, and can effectively fill the gaps in the existing supervision system, demonstrating its role in identifying and filling gaps and providing a bottom line, which is in line with the work layout of promoting the construction of a rule of law government. Promoting the rule of law through administrative prosecution and advancing the construction of a rule of law government has become a key topic in current legal research and prosecution practice. 1、 Sorting out the problems of administrative organs administering according to law is an important prerequisite and foundation for building a rule of law government. However, during the supervision and handling of cases, the author found that some grassroots administrative agencies still have some illegal performance of their duties, which not only leads to related administrative litigation, but also has a negative impact on grassroots social governance and the construction of a rule of law government. Taking the field of forced demolition as an example. After sorting out 216 administrative agency cases involving forced demolition that were concluded by a grassroots court in Beijing in 2023, the author found that 30% of the cases were not comprehensively, objectively, and impartially investigated and collected evidence by administrative agencies. They only determined illegal buildings based on the investigation results and inquiry records in the case investigation letter. 70% of cases are confirmed illegal by court rulings due to unclear facts and procedural violations. All lost cases cannot be proven by administrative authorities to fully comply with legal procedures. 40% of cases were not announced by administrative authorities in accordance with the law before forced demolition, and 40% of case documents were not delivered in accordance with the law, failing to protect the legitimate rights of parties to make statements and defend themselves. 20% of cases have varying degrees of procedural issues such as failure to comply with investigations, ordering corrections within a specified period, listening to the parties' statements and defenses, and urging for prosecution. Taking administrative penalty decisions as an example. The author has sorted out a total of 172 administrative penalty cases involving 7 grassroots governments from 2021 to 2022. According to statistics, more than half of the cases have the following problems: firstly, there were errors in the application of the law. According to the time when the illegal behavior was discovered, the modified law should have been applied but not applied, or there were errors in the understanding of the legal provisions, resulting in the application of the law. For example, those who should have been given warnings and fines according to regulations were only fined due to the administrative agency's incorrect understanding of the law. The second issue is that there are non-standard signatures, time records, and content records in document production. If there is a lack of signatures from law enforcement personnel, the inspected personnel have not signed to confirm the authenticity and have not provided a situation explanation, the investigation and inquiry time has been filled in incorrectly, and the record has not been recorded in a one question one answer mode. The third is the failure to make punishment decisions in accordance with legal procedures, such as failure to fulfill the obligation to inform before punishment, and non-standard disclosure of rights. Through a point-to-point analysis of the above situation, the author found that the problems of grassroots administrative law enforcement are mainly reflected in the following aspects: firstly, the awareness of lawful administration needs to be improved. Some grassroots administrative law enforcement personnel pursue substantive benefits while ignoring procedural norms. If there is no emphasis on document production and rights disclosure; For example, in the actual demolition work, some administrative organs still insist on forcibly demolishing the property before the deadline for the parties to apply for reconsideration or file an administrative lawsuit has expired, or even when the parties have already applied for reconsideration or filed a lawsuit. Secondly, the awareness of fixed evidence needs to be strengthened. Some grassroots administrative law enforcement personnel fail to form a closed loop by retaining evidence during the law enforcement process. The proportion of fixed evidence through video recording, photography, and other forms is very small, and most administrative agencies can only provide a small number of documents as evidence
Edit：Ying Ying Responsible editor：Shen Chen
Source：jcrb.com
Special statement: if the pictures and texts reproduced or quoted on this site infringe your legitimate rights and interests, please contact this site, and this site will correct and delete them in time. For copyright issues and website cooperation, please contact through outlook new era email：lwxsd@liaowanghn.com
Recommended Reading Change it 
Home
