Abstract

The occupancy rate of first instance administrative litigation in three litigations in China is always not very high in long time，that is reflect the dilemma of “three difficulties” in the practice of administrative trial by primary court .Since the middle and late 1980s，the administrative procedure begin to imitate the civil procedure law in practicing，the administrative trial by primary court has been developing for more than 30 years. The changing rate of administrative litigation about R district and its occupancy rate in three litigations in China is similar to the rate of country .Although the R district in the west of China while its level of economic development is in the middle of the country，so it can be used as a representative sample to research the development of primary court's administrative trial.

From research the date change about administrative litigation is a good way to empirical research，so the administrative litigation rate can be introduced as a clue to the development of the trial practice. Because of the multi-administrative dispute resolution mechanism，the administrative litigation rate directly reflects the change of people's lawsuit relief selection，and also reflects the change of the operation of the lawsuit system. According to the changes of the litigation process，the administrative litigation rate can be deconstructed in order to be the prosecution rate，the case rate，the judgment rate，the rate of appeal，the rate of execution，and the rate of withdrawal. What is along the “administrative litigation rate”，“how to change”，“why”，“what is enlightenment”，“what the future holds”“how to deal with” logical train of thought，this paper will be divided into four parts.

The first front introduces the problem，introduces the research method，and defines the administrative litigation rate.

The front on the base of studying the research methods of litigation date fromhome and abroad and the text of administrative litigation，illustrates the sociological perspective method R area administrative litigation rate as well as the significance of the research methods. According to the definition of administrative litigation rate in the Chinese context and relevance index deconstruction，determines the analysis model，to Sue quantity changes，the types of cases and the change of trial processing （later level change） is defined as a analysis the thread of the litigation rate changes.

The front two provides a comprehensive description and detailed explanation of the change of administrative litigation rate in R district.

After the show the source of statistical data，the first part of this front will be the period 1987-2016 national，province，city of T，R，S area of each of the ten thousand people each year the number of administrative litigation are compared，found that R than T city area，S province is high，and slightly higher than the national average annual data，growth，fluctuated，explain R area changes in the rate of the administrative litigation with common throughout the country and regional character. In order to further analyze the personality of data presentation，the second，third and fourth parts of this front describe the changes of lawsuit quantity，type change and hierarchy of cases.

First of all，from the point of prosecution amount，in reference to the civil procedure law opened up from scratch，R zone administrative cases of prosecution in 1989 on the implementation of “administrative procedural law” during the period of 25 years has experienced long-term stagnate does not increase，and the life of a group litigation caused a surge in “administrative procedural law” in 2014，the implementation of two years appeared in collapse.

Second，from the point of case type，with the passage of time the case type into many types from a single case，concentrated amount outstanding cases involving hundreds of types of urban construction，public security，labor and social security，resources cases，convergence with the national condition，but each of the typical case of each small type case changes with the different，embodies the commonness and individuality of the construction of the R area urbanization.

Moreover，from the perspective of level changes in 30 years the rate of register high，dropped rate is high，the rate of appeal is high while the judgment rate is low，the low success，three “high” and two “low” trend，and the new administrative procedure law implementation before the trial execution problems. It is stated in the theory that “the case is difficult，the trial is difficult，the victory is difficult，theexecution is difficult” in the R region there is also the situation that has not occurred.

The third front makes a comprehensive analysis and elaboration on factors influencing the change of administrative litigation rate in R district.

The change of administrative litigation rate in R district in 30 years reflects the development of “top-down” administrative litigation system in the grass-roots practice. The formation mechanism needs to be investigated in the context of specific social development. This front follows in the area under the same point of view，in the first part analyzes the influence factors of formation of case after，respectively in the second，three，four parts are divided into three main analysis the influencing factors of R area administrative litigation rate change.

Firstly，a citizen's indictment is a link between a controversy and a lawsuit. From the change of administrative litigation quantity，the change of the cognizance and the right of action of citizen litigation can be sought. During the period 1987-2016，due to the influence of traditional culture and the reduction of letters and visits and reconsideration，citizens have been slow to use the administrative proceedings from the exclusion to the gradual acceptance. Which lawyers have played a role in “stimulus”，more importantly，economic development promotes R area before and after “acquaintance society” in 2000，gradually to “civil society”，“top-down” to make the rule of law gradually replace the franco-prussian propaganda “favor” relationship “has become” adjust the principles of social life，and convenient network information spread rapidly increased after 2010 civil litigation cognitive level，changes in legislation in 2014 and subsequently litigation convenient service to enhance the citizens' readiness to the exercise of litigation. In the social transition，various factors affect the choice of citizens' prosecution and influence the number of cases.

Secondly，the type of litigation cases is formed in the administrative activities. The change of litigation type can be traced to the development of administrative and law enforcement of administrative organs at different times. Since 1987，the change of management activities in the regional economic development of R district has led to the change of the type of litigation in different periods. Put forward at the same time，countries from 1993 and began to “top-down” to promote the process of administration according to law has brought the change of the law enforcement standard，at the grass-roots level to a certain extent，reduce the occurrence of the dispute and to affect the growth of the amount of the lawsuit. However local governance “flexible” makes the grass-roots law enforcement problem is complicated，and the change of legislation，the ascension of the consciousness of the masses and court concrete operation change and other factors work together to bring the case type of diversification.

Furthermore，the specific operation of the court directly influences the change of litigation rate. The change of level from different stages of litigation can be used to explore the strength and effect of law in grassroots practice. Different changes in the implementation of the three procedural laws during the period 1987-2016 brought about the change in the direction of the court closing，filing and trial of R district court；Supreme Court justice policy changes directly affect the operation of the R district court，especially the supervisor to supervise，the change of the performance review file and execution，makes the statistics of litigation directly from a make up case，different discharge and ups and downs. R district court after using comparable civil trial mode，draw lessons from criminal trial mode （with the defendant to the plaintiff），administrative coordination，administrative verdict processing cases，has a direct influence to the hierarchy of the litigation rate change，especially the coordination experience of inheritance，the difficulty of execution of the area does not appear，but the ultra-high rate of appeal of judgment. And the confrontation between adversaries and the processing of the court，left a national and local actual，judicial and administrative，legislative and administrative game with each other and form a resultant force to promote the mark.

The fourth front summarizes and enlighten the vicissitude of administrative litigation rate in R area.

First part summarizes the R area actually reflects the changes of the administrative litigation of civil litigation，administrative law enforcement and the change of the court to settle ability，confirms the subjects of the legislative，administrative，judicial and growth rule of law of the citizens，is a kind of economic development，population change，cultural development，institutional change and other factors influence the social phenomenon，at the same time will bring different times background，citizenship，executive power and judicial power，legislative power of the gaming，and form of administrative rule of law progress in certain circumstances “top-down” and “bottom-up” driving force.

The second part，on the basis of the evaluation thought theory should be based on the basic practice，proposed to the “how to face the litigation legislation and practice objective existence of the gap at the grass-roots level”，“how to implement the”“top-down ”and “bottom-up ”“fusion” and “how to make the practice at the grass-roots level to achieve real resolve dispute” three problems of reflection.

The third part，based on the new scope of administrative procedure law legislation to expand，R grassroots administrative operation of the special zone administrative mechanism reform period and civil rights protection consciousness enhancement and the implementation of the jurisdiction of the judicial reform focus，anticipation R area administrative litigation rate there will be a growth trend.

In the fourth part，under the precondition of the increase of the new administrative procedure law，the question of “entry” and “out” of the case in the court is discussed. For filing registration system，the case of a large number of “into”，has a value choice and operation on the court weighed the double pressure，based on the classification of the guarantee of litigation as the value guidance stratification filtering method can relieve stress. For litigation “case” happened “and” out “the court's problems，combining with R area 2015 new enforcement difficulties appears after the verdict，a court case” a “is not given rise to challenge the case，judge is put forward to strengthen theoretical study and pay attention to” coordination “experience and set up after its enforcement safeguard measures to promote the” out "problem solving.

Finally in the conclusion proposed academic research should assume provide theoretical motivation for grass-roots practice，we should believe that whatever grassroots administrative litigation practice changes，the final result is under ordinary citizens. In a new round of judicial reform should be based on “bottom-up” administrative dispute resolution requirements and “from the beginning to now” litigation practice experience to undertake operation，more effectively guarantee of citizen's procedural rights relief，can make the grass-roots court in litigation rate growth under the trend of more attaches great importance to the exertion of judge initiative and started security，to better show the lawsuit “fixed points check，case” happened dispute resolve advantage，let the citizens feel the judicial justice and social justice，enhance administrative trial court credibility at the same time，promote the administrative authority for raising the level of administration according to law.