"Hunan Province Changde City Jinsawa Real Estate Co., Ltd. and other owed land transfer of land transfer Golden Public interest lawsuits" is a typical case released by the Supreme People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as the "Supreme Prosecutor") in 2019。In this case，Procuratorate urging the Changde City Land and Resources Bureau to recover the Casino Company involved in the case in accordance with the law、Kim Ze Company、When Hengze Company owed huge land transfer fees，It is found that a standardized document "Preliminary Construction Supervision System (Trial)" formulated by the Changde Municipal Housing and Urban Construction Bureau, which is related to this case, has obvious illegal issues，Its illegal is: First, the provisions of violation of the construction law on the construction permit before the construction of the construction unit should obtain the construction permit; the second is that there is no document of this standardized document、No text date; third, this standardized document is not announced to the society、Not filed with the government's legal department。So，Whether from content or programming，This specified file has serious violations，belonging to a typical illegal normative document。For this，The procuratorial organs adopt the procuratorial recommendation method，Suggestion from the legal department of the Changde Municipal Government to review and deal with this standardized document in accordance with the law。The legal department of the municipal government has adopted procuratorial recommendations，and send a processing letter to stop executing the file to the Municipal Housing and Urban Construction Bureau of this specified document，The Housing and Urban Construction Bureau abolished the standard file。The final process Bet365 lotto review of this case is satisfactory，Not only does it withdrawn more than 1.3 billion yuan of land transfer money，and also makes the illegal standardized documents be abolished in time。But it also triggered the following issues worth thinking: Is there a legal basis for the supervision of normative documents in the supervision of normative documents in the administrative public interest litigation? How should we design the legal system of procuratorial organs on regulatory documents?

Administrative Public interest litigation supervision is mainly reflected in the provisions of Article 25 of the Administrative Procedural Law，This model stipulates that the procuratorial organs of the administrative organs in the ecological environment and resource protection、Food and Drug Safety、Protection of state -owned property、The transfer of administrative powers in the field of state -owned land use rights and other fields，After the pre -litigation procedure, the administrative organs still do not perform the legal duties，Against administrative public interest litigation will be filed，but there is no stipulation that the procuratorial organs are in the administrative public interest lawsuit，You can supervise related normative documents。And，The standardized document attached to the normative document of ordinary administrative litigation based on the protection of the relative person's interests，It is not applicable to administrative public interest litigation。So，The current "Administrative Procedure Law" cannot find the basis for the procuratorial organs through administrative public interest litigation.。Even in the relevant provisions of the Supreme Procuratorate on the Prosecution Proposal，Nor involved the supervision of standardized documents。The highest inspection released the "Provisions on the Work of Procuratorate of the People's Procuratorate" on February 26, 2019，Regulations on the relevant issues applied to the procuratorial suggestion。bet365 live casino games For example，Standards the type of procuratorial recommendation，Including retrial procuratorial recommendations、Correction of illegal procuratorial suggestions、Public interest litigation procuratorial recommendations、Social governance procuratorial recommendations、Other procuratorial recommendations。Analysis of the scope of these procuratorial recommendations type，It does not involve supervision of standardized documents，Especially in administrative public interest litigation，Not to involve the supervision of standardized documents。

It can be said，The supervision of the prosecutor's supervision of standardized documents through administrative public interest litigation is a lack of legal basis，This is also an important reason for people to question the normative documents of the procuratorial organs in the above cases。I think，Building an administrative public interest litigation attached review system is a better choice for supervision of standardized documents。

On the one hand，Strengthening the supervision of standardized documents through administrative public interest litigation is an inevitable trend。Strengthening supervision of standardized documents，Not only the need for the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of citizens，It is also the need for the protection of national interests or social public interests，Especially goals that protect public interests，To strengthen the supervision of standardized documents through administrative public interest litigation becomes an inevitable trend of the development of the administrative public interest litigation system。Administrative organs not only violate national interests or social public interests through their specific administrative acts，and often behind the specific administrative behavior，It has standardized files as the basis for its behavior，Just like the case in this article，The illegal law of normative documents has become an important reason for its administrative behavior illegal。If you do not correct the illegal normative file，Even if the specific administrative behavior is corrected，It is also difficult to fundamentally solve the thoroughness of infringing bet365 Play online games public interests，These standardized documents may become the basis for their continued to infringe national or social interests。So，Objectives to safeguard national interests or social public interests，It determines that the administrative public interest litigation system must extend to supervise the standardized documents based on administrative actions。

On the other hand，Establish a censorship system with administrative public interest litigation，It is the right way to supervise standardized documents。Supervise the standardized documents through administrative public interest litigation，Although it is a more recognized view of the academic and practical circles，But in which method to strengthen supervision，There are different views。Some think，The scope of regulatory documents should be included in the case of administrative public interest litigation，Just like other administrative acts in the scope of the case，Clearly list it，Even the procuratorial organs can directly file administrative public interest lawsuits on standardized documents。I think，This view is a bit too advanced。In our country，Supervise the normative documents through the relief method，Including administrative reconsideration、Ordinary administrative litigation，Super supervisors performed in an attached review，Even administrative reconsideration supervision within the administrative system，It is also an attached review，That is the applicant "when applying for administrative reconsideration for specific administrative actions，You can submit an application for review of the regulations to the administrative reconsideration agency "，instead of proposing legitimacy review requests on the standardized documents。So，Under the current situation，Specific documents directly as the scope of the case of administrative public interest litigation，Obviously it is inappropriate，It is also not possible，The best way is to adopt a method of attached censors。

With the increasing perfection of the administrative public interest litigation system，Strengthening the supervision of standardized documents becomes an inevitable trend。Now，On the basis of the administrative public interest litigation system，On the basis of Bet365 lotto review absorbing general administrative lawsuits on the standardized document with a censorship system，Establish a censorship system with regulatory documents of administrative public interest litigation。Considering the difference between administrative public interest litigation and ordinary administrative litigation，So，Regular documents of administrative public interest litigation documents and attachment review should also be different from the attached review of ordinary administrative litigation。

First，In terms of time of mentioning。Ordinary administrative lawsuits set the time limit for the attached review，As soon as it is prosecuted，Or if there are "legitimate reasons", you can also propose it during the investigation stage of the court，Other time is not allowed to mention。Public nature of the benefits of the protection of administrative public interest litigation，Unlike ordinary administrative lawsuits for personal gain，So，The procuratorial organs shall be allowed to propose the inspiration requirements for the illegal situation of the standardized documents discovered at any stage，Even in the second instance stage, it can be proposed，without time limit。

2，In terms of the correlation between standardized documents and administrative behaviors。The close association between the general administrative litigation emphasizes the standardized documents and the administrative behavior complained，Emphasizing that standardized documents must be a direct basis for administrative acts，As a result, many normative documents cannot enter the legitimate review procedure。and the administrative public interest litigation due to the subject itself has legal supervision duties，As long as it finds the illegal situation of standardized documents，It should give it a chance to supervise，So，As long as the illegal normative documents have a certain connection with the case，Even if it is not a direct basis for administrative acts，Not even the basis for administrative acts，But to adversely affect the national interests or social public interests，All should allow procuratorial organs to apply to attached review requirements，instead of the degree of correlation is too demanding。

third，In terms of standardization standard for the legality bet365 Play online games of normative documents。In reality，The review criteria adopted by ordinary administrative litigation are relatively loose，For example，Specifications documents such as "non -resistance" and "not illegal" and other standards that are usually only applicable to regulations are used as review standards，Therefore, rarely standardized documents are identified as illegal，It also enables the specified files to be reviewed in shape。and administrative public interest lawsuits out of the need for protecting greater public interests，It should take more stringent standards，That is, the specified file must have the upper method basis，and consistent with the provisions of the position，Otherwise, it is a standardized file of illegal law，To achieve the goal of true supervision and protection of public interests for normative documents。

Fourth，In terms of the conclusion of the conclusion of illegal normative documents。General administrative litigation identification of normative documents is illegal，Not reflected it in the conclusion of the referee，Instead, it is explained to explain the reasonable part，thus affecting its execution，So that the court proposed to the formulation authority to correct the judicial suggestion of illegal regulatory documents，Formulating agencies often "ignore" or "Bido Gao"，It is difficult to clean up illegal normative documents。and administrative public interest litigation should reflect their different characteristics，The results of the identification of normative documents are used as part of the court referee conclusion，It is reflected in the conclusion of the referee，so as to make it compulsory execution，As a result, a strong supervision force，Timely eliminating illegal normative documents that constitutes harm to public interests。

(Author Unit: School of Law of Hohai University)