Basic information of the hearing

Specifically, all opinions put forward at the hearing must be responded by the decision makers in the final ruling, otherwise the relevant actions may be invalid. In American administrative law, the formal hearing is usually presided over by an administrative judge appointed by the administrative organ by the opposing parties selected by lottery. The trial completely cloned the court debate. Both sides not only expressed their opinions, but also produced their own witnesses and documents to support their views. Finally, the administrative judge must make a final ruling like a court trial, and the ruling must respond to the views of both parties in detail, otherwise the ruling may be invalid due to procedural problems in judicial review.

In foreign countries, hearings are often used in legislative procedures. The hearing in legislation is more casual, and the hearing representatives elected by lottery will express their opinions on a bill, which will become an important reference for members to vote. Because members enjoy immunity from speech and voting, hearings in legislative procedures are not as binding as those in administrative procedures. In other words, members can completely ignore the opinions at the hearing, but in a democratic system, members should consider the votes, and the hearing reflects the opinions of voters. Few members ignored these opinions.

In China, besides the hearing system in administrative procedure, there is also the hearing system in legislation. People's congresses in many places have held hearings when formulating local laws and regulations, and the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) has also held hearings when amending the individual income tax law. However, there are obvious defects in the hearing system in China, and the hearing in the administrative procedure is not binding, which leads to the hearing in name only; Due to the lack of transparency in the legislative process, it is difficult for the hearing representatives to fully and appropriately express their opinions, and the lack of democratic mechanism also makes the hearing results not actually binding on the members of the legislature.

Because the recent price adjustment hearings are all price increases after the hearings, they have been dubbed by many netizens as "listening to the price increase meeting".