What are the basic features of China's judicial review system?

China's judicial review system has the following characteristics:

1. The Administrative Procedure Law is the most direct legal basis for China's judicial review system.

Administrative Procedure Law from the legal nature, it is not only a procedural law, but also specific clear people's court enjoys the right to judicial review of the substantive law. In terms of the legal provisions of the Administrative Procedure Law, many provisions are involved in the judicial review of the legal relationship. This legal relationship of judicial review is mainly reflected in the Administrative Procedure Law in provisions of two natures. One is the provisions relating to the supervision by the people's courts of the powers exercised by administrative organs. Such articles and their main contents are: Article 5 provides that the people's courts have the right to review the legality of specific administrative acts; Articles 11 and 12 stipulate the scope of the people's courts to accept administrative cases; Article 34 stipulates that the people's courts have the right to collect evidence from the relevant administrative organs; Article 44 stipulates that under certain circumstances, the people's courts may decide to stop the implementation of the original specific administrative act; Article 48 stipulates that when the defendant refuses to appear in court without a valid reason, the court may order the defendant to stop the implementation of the original specific administrative act. Article 48 stipulates that if the defendant refuses to appear in court without justifiable reasons, the people's court may make a judgment in absentia; Article 54 stipulates that the people's court may make a judgment on a specific administrative act, such as upholding the original judgment, revoking or partially revoking it, and judging the administrative organ to make a new specific administrative act, judging the administrative organ to perform its duties, as well as altering the original administrative penalties; and Article 65 stipulates that the people's court has the power to take corresponding compulsory enforcement measures against an administrative organ that refuses to carry out the effective judgments and decisions. Article 65 provides that the people's courts are authorized to take appropriate enforcement measures against administrative organs that refuse to carry out a judgment or ruling that has entered into force. These articles give the people's courts the power to exercise the corresponding powers over the administrative organ that is the defendant in the hearing of a specific administrative case. These powers relate to the right to accept, the right to take evidence, the right to hear, the right to adjudicate, the right to pass judgment, and the right to enforce. The other category consists of provisions relating to the obligations of administrative organs. Such provisions include: Article 7, which stipulates that administrative organs have the same legal status as administrative counterparts in administrative litigation; Article 33, which stipulates that administrative organs may not collect evidence from plaintiffs and witnesses on their own in the course of litigation; Article 43, which stipulates that administrative organs are required to submit to the people's court the relevant materials for the original specific administrative act and the statement of defense; and Article 55, which stipulates that if the people's court decides that the defendant shall reissue a specific administrative act, the original administrative organ may not use that act as a basis for a new administrative act. If the people's court decides that the defendant should make a new specific administrative act, the original administrative organ may not, on the same grounds and in relation to the same facts, make a specific administrative act which is basically the same as the original specific administrative act; and Article 65 stipulates that the administrative organ must comply with the rulings and judgments of the people's court which have come into effect by law. These provisions, as a whole, establish that administrative organs in administrative litigation are in an equal legal position as administrative litigants with the citizens, legal persons or other organizations that are the administrative counterparts, and that the activities of the administrative organs are subject to certain limitations and have lost their original mandatory nature. The above provisions, in terms of their legal nature, are essentially determining the substantive legal relationship between the people's courts' power of judicial review and the administrative authorities' power of administrative management. Therefore, the Administrative Procedure Law establishes the judicial review of the legal relationship is the judicial review system in our country on the basis of the establishment and existence of the foundation.

2, the people's court is our country enjoys the right of judicial review of the legal subject. According to the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Law,

In our country, the legal subject enjoying the right of judicial review can only be the people's court, rather than the state power organs and state procuratorial organs. Although the organs of state power in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Constitution and the law, the right to supervise the activities of the state administrative organs; people's procuratorates in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Law have the right to exercise legal supervision of administrative proceedings. However, the supervision provided for in the Constitution and the law does not fall within the scope of the right of judicial review, but rather within the scope of the right of supervision. The right of judicial review is a State power rich in competence. According to article 3 of the Administrative Procedure Law, it can only be exercised by the people's courts in the course of their independent exercise of adjudicative power over administrative cases in accordance with the law, and it is not subject to the interference of administrative organs, social organizations and individuals. Moreover, article 2 of the Administrative Procedure Law also clearly stipulates that citizens, legal persons or other organizations who believe that a specific administrative act of an administrative organ or staff member of an administrative organ has infringed upon their lawful rights and interests have the right to bring a lawsuit to the people's courts in accordance with this Law, but not to other judicial organs. Therefore, in our country, the legal subject enjoying the right of judicial review can only be the people's court.

3, the people's court to exercise the right of judicial review can only be in the hearing of administrative cases in the administrative litigation process.

Of course, the people's court's right of judicial review can also be exercised in administrative compensation proceedings. This shows that the people's court, as a legal subject enjoying the right of judicial review, cannot exercise the right of judicial review over the activities of administrative organs outside the administrative litigation process. Since administrative litigation occurs as a result of the plaintiff's suit, the power of judicial review enjoyed by the people's courts in China, in terms of the manner in which the people's courts exercise their power of judicial review, is a passive power of judicial review, which cannot, and should not, be conducted on its own initiative. This is a fundamental boundary of the competence of the right of judicial review in China.

4. In our country, the power base for the existence of the right of judicial review is different from the system of separation of powers in capitalist countries.

The existence of the right of judicial review is not based on the nature of the power, but is established in accordance with the clear provisions of the law. Therefore, the connotation of the right of judicial review in China is clearer. Where the law does not expressly provide for the content of the power of judicial review, the people's court, the legal subject of the right of judicial review shall not be arbitrarily expanded interpretation. As article 5 of the administrative litigation law, the people's court administrative cases, the lawfulness of the specific administrative act for review, therefore, the people's court enjoys the right of judicial review can only relate to the administrative organs of the specific administrative act, not all administrative acts, so the people's court in China enjoys the right of judicial review is a limited right of judicial review.

5, our people's courts to exercise judicial review of the main function of its supervisory function, rather than the administrative organs of the administrative power of the constraints.

Because one is the people's court's right of judicial review can only be exercised in accordance with the law; secondly, the administrative litigation law provides that the people's court to hear administrative cases, to be based on administrative regulations. Here, it is clear that the people's courts still have to follow the administrative regulations formulated by the State Council, the highest administrative organ of the country, in exercising their power of judicial review. If the people's court enjoys the right of judicial review is to be regarded as the people's court's judicial power of the administrative organs of the administrative power of the constraints of the administrative regulations should not be used as the basis for the people's court to hear administrative cases. Therefore, China's judicial review of the legal relationship in the final analysis or a legal supervision relationship, is the people's court in accordance with the law on the administrative organs of the legality and rationality of the administrative activities of legal supervision, rather than the judicial power and administrative power of the constraints between the relationship.