论文部分内容阅读
一、举证责任在行政诉讼实践运用现状及产生的影响举证责任亦称证明责任或提供证据的责任,是指当事人对自己提出的主张所根据的事实,负有提出相应证据的责任.我国行诉法第32条、第34条规定:被告应当就其作出具体行政行为的事实依据举证,人民法院不承当举证责任.对此举证制度的确立和实施,在实践中收到较好的社会效果,但目前存在的问题是,法院事实上承担和部分承担了举证责任,具体表现为;1.法官在收集、调查证据上花费了大部分时间和精力,尤其是在行政机关举证不充分时,法官表现出主动地收
First, the burden of proof in the administrative litigation practice the status quo and the impact of the burden of proof The burden of proof is also known as proof of liability or provide evidence that the parties to their own claims based on the facts, bear the burden of presenting evidence. Article 32 and Article 34 of the Law stipulate that the defendant should give evidence on the factual basis of his specific administrative act and the people’s court does not bear the burden of proof. The establishment and implementation of the proof system in this regard has received relatively good social effects in practice, However, the existing problem is that the court actually undertakes and partially assumes the burden of proof as follows: 1. The judge spends most of his time and energy in collecting and investigating evidence. In particular, when the administrative organ fails to provide sufficient evidence, the judge Show proactively