Civil Procuratorial Supervision: An Important Way for Ordinary People to Protect Their Rights
Reporting corrupt and incompetent officials can be done through the court. Arrests and prosecutions are under the court's jurisdiction. If ordinary people encounter injustice in civil lawsuits, does the court handle it?
Civil administrative prosecution is an important component of the legal supervision functions granted to procuratorial organs by law. However, compared to other legal supervision functions, the public has relatively little understanding of civil administrative prosecution supervision, and for many, it is a "new thing."
On September 25, the Supreme People's Court held a press conference to report on the implementation of civil prosecution supervision duties by procuratorial organs after the revised Civil Procedure Law came into effect. How should the public interact with procuratorial organs in civil litigation, and how do procuratorial organs lawfully protect the public's legitimate rights and interests in civil litigation? At the press conference, Zheng Xinjian, Director of the Civil Administrative Prosecution Department of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and Deputy Director Lü Hongtao provided on-site answers to related questions.
Under what circumstances in civil litigation can one seek help from procuratorial organs?
Civil prosecution is the legal supervision exercised by procuratorial organs over civil litigation activities in accordance with laws and relevant regulations. In civil litigation, how should the public interact with procuratorial organs?
At the press conference, a journalist asked: "Under what circumstances in civil litigation can one seek help from the court?" Lü Hongtao replied that, according to relevant regulations, parties can seek help from procuratorial organs in three situations: first, when they believe that a legally effective civil judgment, ruling, or mediation document contains errors, and their application for retrial to the court has been rejected, or the court has failed to make a ruling on the retrial application within the time limit, or the court's retrial judgment has obvious errors; second, when they believe that judicial personnel have engaged in illegal conduct during civil trial proceedings; third, when they believe that there are illegal circumstances in civil enforcement activities.
So, through what channels can parties seek help from the court? Lü Hongtao added that if a party disagrees with an effective civil judgment, ruling, or mediation document and applies to the procuratorial organ for supervision, they should submit the application to the complaint inspection department of the court at the same level as the court that issued the effective judgment, ruling, or mediation document; if a party believes that judicial personnel have engaged in illegal conduct during civil trial proceedings or that there are illegal circumstances in civil enforcement activities, they should submit the application to the complaint inspection department of the court at the same level as the court handling the trial or enforcement case.
Besides parties applying to the court for supervision, what other sources are there for civil litigation supervision cases? Lv Hongtao responded that according to relevant regulations, the sources of civil litigation supervision cases handled by the court mainly include the following three: first, parties applying to the court for supervision; second, other citizens, legal persons, and organizations besides the parties reporting or filing complaints to the court; third, the court discovering cases ex officio. "In practice, parties applying to the people's court for supervision is the main source of civil litigation supervision cases."
How do procuratorial organs ensure the effectiveness of civil litigation supervision?
Regarding legal supervision of civil litigation activities, the public not only cares about whether supervision is carried out but also pays more attention to how to ensure the effectiveness of supervision.
A reporter asked: "After issuing supervisory opinions on judges' illegal acts, what are the next steps for the procuratorial organs, and how are they handled?" Lv Hongtao explained that during the process of fulfilling their duties of legal supervision over civil and administrative litigation, if procuratorial organs discover that judges have illegal acts in trial or enforcement procedures, they should issue procuratorial recommendations to the court in accordance with relevant regulations. After issuing supervisory opinions, if the court refuses to correct or fails to respond, the procuratorial organ that issued the opinion can, based on the "Several Opinions on Implementing Legal Supervision over Civil Trial Activities and Administrative Litigation (Trial)" jointly issued by the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the "Several Provisions on Strengthening Legal Supervision over Dereliction of Duty by Judicial Personnel in Litigation Activities (Trial)" jointly issued by the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of State Security, and the Ministry of Justice, submit opinions through the higher-level court to the higher-level court, allowing the higher-level court to supervise and correct the lower-level court's illegal acts. If the judge refuses to correct the illegal acts and the circumstances are serious enough to constitute a duty crime, the relevant personnel should also be held criminally liable according to law.
Regarding whether the court has corrected all supervisory and corrective opinions issued by the procuratorial organs, Zheng Xinjian provided an overview. He stated that the court generally reviews the supervisory opinions issued by the procuratorial organs seriously and corrects them according to law. From January 1, 2013, to July 31, 2014, the change rate of protest cases handled by procuratorial organs nationwide was 76.1%; the adoption rate of retrial procuratorial recommendations was 66.9%. For supervision cases involving illegal acts in civil trials, the adoption rate of procuratorial recommendations was 84%; for supervision cases involving civil enforcement activities, the adoption rate of procuratorial recommendations reached 92.3%. "From these figures, it can be seen that by lawfully fulfilling their duties of legal supervision over civil and administrative litigation, procuratorial organs have supervised and corrected a large number of erroneous judgments and illegal acts by the court, playing a positive role in maintaining judicial fairness and legal unity, protecting citizens' lawful rights and interests, and promoting economic and social development."
Zheng Xinjian stated that to ensure the effectiveness of case supervision, the court strictly controls the quality of supervision cases and continuously improves case handling quality. At the same time, it focuses on strengthening communication and coordination with the court in its work to enhance the effectiveness of supervision.
How will prosecutorial authorities address new situations in civil litigation supervision?
After the implementation of the revised Civil Procedure Law, new situations have emerged in civil litigation supervision. How will prosecutorial authorities respond?
Compared to other civil and administrative prosecutorial duties, enforcement supervision is a relatively new task for prosecutorial authorities, having been carried out for a shorter period. A journalist asked: "What are the common problems found in court enforcement supervision? What causes these problems?" Lü Hongtao stated that, based on current supervision, illegal activities cover almost all aspects of civil enforcement, with issues mainly concentrated in enforcement implementation stages such as property control, disposal, delivery, and distribution, as well as review stages for enforcement objections and appeals. Examples include illegal adoption of property control measures like seizure, impoundment, and freezing (e.g., excessive seizure), illegal property disposal measures like appraisal, auction, and sale, illegal distribution and return of enforcement funds and property, and illegal addition or change of enforcement subjects.
Lü Hongtao indicated that, through research and analysis, the main reasons for these problems include: First, the complexity of enforcement activities themselves. Enforcement procedures are the most direct and concentrated stage of conflicting interests among parties, intertwining substantive and procedural law, with complex legal relationships and intense conflicts. To maximize their own interests, parties inevitably resort to various means, some of which may influence enforcement judges. Second, incomplete enforcement laws and regulations and imperfect systems. This is one of the objective reasons for frequent issues in enforcement activities. For example, issues like adding or changing enforcement subjects are only sporadically addressed in relevant judicial interpretations, making it difficult to meet practical needs. Third, factors related to the quality of enforcement personnel. While the overall quality of enforcement judges is good, objectively speaking, there are still some problems within the enforcement team. Fourth, a lack of effective supervision. For a long time, enforcement activities have lacked effective oversight, leading to abuse of enforcement power and the emergence of "chaotic enforcement."
"In recent years, with increased societal attention to enforcement activities and the advancement of judicial transparency, external supervision of enforcement has been strengthened. As specialized legal oversight bodies, prosecutorial authorities still have greater potential to effectively exercise their legal supervision functions," Lü Hongtao said.
Currently, cases of false litigation, corruption, perversion of justice, and malicious collusion in civil litigation occur from time to time. A journalist asked what supervisory measures prosecutorial authorities have for such cases. Lü Hongtao stated that in recent years, cases in the civil litigation field where parties maliciously collude to harm third-party interests through false litigation have become common, drawing widespread societal attention. Some false litigation cases also involve judges colluding with parties, engaging in corruption and perversion of justice.
"False litigation seriously disrupts normal economic and judicial order, infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of others, and damages the fair competition market environment and social fairness and justice. It has long been a key focus of heightened attention and strengthened supervision by procuratorial organs," said Lv Hongtao. Procuratorial organs supervise discovered false litigation cases by comprehensively utilizing methods such as protests, retrial procuratorial suggestions, procuratorial suggestions, and investigating and transferring criminal clues, continuously intensifying supervision over false litigation. Some local procuratorial organs have also collaborated with public security, courts, and judicial administrative departments to carry out special campaigns against false litigation, achieving significant results.
According to the revised Civil Procedure Law, procuratorial organs primarily supervise effective civil judgments through second-instance protests. In this context, how should grassroots courts act to ensure they "have work and do it well"? Zheng Xinjian responded that the Civil Procedure Law establishes a two-instance final adjudication system. If a party disagrees with a first-instance judgment, they should first appeal; if they neglect or evade the right to appeal and instead turn to procuratorial organs to initiate supervision, it not only wastes limited and valuable judicial resources, rendering the two-instance final adjudication system ineffective, but also violates the principles of civil litigation. Therefore, the Supreme People's Procuratorate requires procuratorial organs nationwide to focus supervision on effective second-instance judgments, and the "People's Court Civil Litigation Supervision Rules (Trial)" also clearly stipulate this.
"This adjustment in case handling structure has reduced the number of cases supervised by grassroots courts regarding effective judgments. However, supervision of illegal acts by judicial personnel during trial procedures and enforcement supervision under the Civil Procedure Law will primarily be undertaken by grassroots courts," said Zheng Xinjian. Facing new situations and tasks, grassroots civil and administrative procuratorial work should, in accordance with the unified deployment of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, promptly adjust work priorities, focusing supervision on illegal mediation supervision, illegal act supervision, trial activity supervision of first-instance final cases, and enforcement supervision at the same level. At the same time, it should actively explore and prudently carry out work such as urging prosecution and supporting prosecution, fully leveraging the functional role of grassroots civil and administrative procuratorial work.
What are the key focuses of civil and administrative procuratorial supervision?
The civil and administrative procuratorial departments of procuratorial organs comprehensively supervise civil and administrative litigation procedures, litigation results, and enforcement activities. In recent years, procuratorial organs have focused civil and administrative procuratorial supervision on serving economic and social development and safeguarding people's livelihoods, achieving good results.
A reporter asked: "What are the key focuses of civil and administrative procuratorial supervision, and what measures are taken for areas of public concern such as people's livelihoods and loss of state assets?" Zheng Xinjian stated that while adhering to comprehensive supervision of civil and administrative litigation activities, courts continuously strengthen their awareness of the overall situation and purpose, focusing civil and administrative procuratorial supervision on serving economic and social development and safeguarding people's livelihoods. In practice, procuratorial organs focus on three aspects: first, around protecting national and public interests, for cases involving loss of state assets, environmental pollution, etc., where relevant units and departments neglect their duties, they fulfill legal supervision duties through methods such as urging duty performance and urging prosecution; second, around safeguarding and improving people's livelihoods, they further strengthen judicial protection of the legitimate rights and interests of women, children, migrant workers, laid-off workers, and the disabled, resolutely supervise and correct effective judgments that seriously harm the vital interests of the people, and strengthen supervision over cases involving land contract management, rural financial services, etc., that seriously harm farmers' interests; third, around creating a trustworthy and orderly market environment, they strengthen supervision over civil and administrative judgments in areas such as finance, notes, securities, and futures.
