(PLO)- Only when the leader dares to admit the wrong and correct it, dare to be fair with the people when participating in the proceedings, will the administrative management work better and the people’s confidence in the public apparatus will increase day by day. higher.
In administrative cases, if leaders of state agencies are not active and irresponsible in participating in the proceedings as well as voluntarily executing judgments, no matter how advanced the law is, it will be difficult to improve efficiency. judgment execution.
To perform the state management function, state agencies and competent persons will issue many administrative decisions or perform administrative acts to solve arising problems. These administrative decisions and acts will in many cases be subject to complaints and lawsuits when affected individuals and organizations think that their legitimate rights and interests have been infringed.
 |
| An administrative trial held online by the People’s Court of Binh Duong province. Photo: LE ANH |
The Law on Administrative Procedures recognizes that all agencies, organizations and individuals are equal in exercising their rights and obligations in administrative proceedings before the court. Therefore, in order to facilitate the settlement of an administrative case, the petitioner, the defendant and other participants in the proceedings must be aware of their procedural rights and obligations, and at the same time must actively participate in the proceedings. Actively participate in the proceedings so that the case is resolved quickly.
However, through a review of the practical settlement of administrative cases in localities throughout the country, the defendant is a state administrative agency that has not yet actively participated in the administrative case. According to an interdisciplinary report at a symposium on administrative judgment settlement on May 11 of the People’s Procuracy of Hanoi and the People’s Court of Hanoi, the rate of administrative judgment settlement of two levels of courts in Hanoi in six the first month of 2023 is just over 17%.
One of the reasons for the protracted administrative cases is that the heads of the agencies being sued often do not participate in the proceedings but authorize their deputy. The deputy then filed an application for a trial in his absence due to busy work, so usually only the defender of the rights and interests of the defendant participated in the trial (assigned to management officials in different departments). professionals or lawyers, legal assistants, etc.).
Therefore, the case could not hold a dialogue but had to be brought to trial, so it was difficult to end it early, making the petitioner (usually the people) frustrated because they could not have dialogue and litigation to clarify the issues. issues that, in the process of making complaints to the competent administrative levels, the petitioners have not been clearly explained or, although they have been explained, there are still problems and uncertainties…
And even when the case has ended, the issue of judgment enforcement for legally effective judgments is still very much, there are many backlogs, lasting for many years. The main reason pointed out is that the administrative judgment enforcement is carried out according to the “self-execution” mechanism of the judgment debtor. Therefore, whether or not it can be adjudicated depends greatly on the sense of compliance of the defendant who is the state agency, the competent person in the state agency, but specifically the head. If the head or the head’s immediate superior is not active and irresponsible in urging hypertension, it is difficult to effectively treat hypertension.
I think, in the rule of law, the head of the state administrative agency must be aware that the law has the ultimate value, although they are the subject of state power, they must also accept the binding of the state. law. A legally valid judgment must be strictly enforced.
This is not only the respect for the law but also the spirit of daring to admit wrongs and correcting mistakes, daring to be fair with the people when participating in the legal relationship where the court is the authority with the right to arbitrate. . Only then will the administrative management work better and the people’s trust in the public apparatus will increase day by day.
MSc NGUYEN NHAT KHANH, University of Economics and Law (National University of Ho Chi Minh City)