| 英文摘要 |
“Procedural Ineffectiveness”refers to a phenomenon in administrative litigation where the process proves ineffective and inefficient in resolving administrative disputes. It occurs when judicial procedures fail to address the substantive claims of the parties, trapping them in a cycle of repetitive litigation. This ineffectiveness results from the complex interplay of multiple institutional and systemic factors, such as entangled interrelated administrative disputes, a judicial tendency to focus predominantly on legality review, and inherent deficiencies in existing litigation and adjudication theories. As institutions responsible for promoting the uniform application of legal rules, procuratorial organs should fully leverage the functional strengths of administrative prosecutorial supervision. By identifying tools within the existing legal framework to prevent and address procedural ineffectiveness, they can facilitate the substantive resolution of administrative disputes. The“Three Abilities”principle serves as both the epistemology and methodology of prosecutorial supervision. As an epistemology, it reveals the structural obstacles within the current administrative litigation system; as a methodology, it provides the mindset and working approach for achieving substantive dispute resolution. Guided by the“Three Abilities,”addressing procedural ineffectiveness will help develop distinctive conceptual markers for China's administrative procuratorial studies, advance the formation of a theoretical paradigm for socialist administrative procuratorial theory with Chinese characteristics, and construct an autonomous knowledge system for Chinese administrative procuratorial science. |