Abstract:The Administrative Litigation Law of China 1989 paints a rosy picture in which the individual and the government face each other in court, both submitting to the judgment of the law. However, in reality, many administrative cases do not conclude with judicial rulings but largely with withdrawals by plaintiffs (varying between 30-57%). In recent years, coordination and settlement in administrative litigations are even advocated in the official directives.This paper employs national statistical data, articles and reports written by judges to demonstrate that in most situations, withdrawals in administrative cases have not only denied individual plaintiffs the opportunity to protect their legal rights through litigation, but also rendered illusory any potential contribution that litigations might have towards the rule of law. The large number of withdrawals indicates the degree of difficulty that the institution of administrative litigation faces. Efforts made by the Supreme People's Court to enhance the number of administrative cases or reduce the rate of withdrawal have failed to reverse the general pattern. The preference for coordination and settlement that courts at all levels have expressed in administrative litigation may be partly motivated by the prevailing judicial philosophy, but it is believed to be primarily a collective compromise that courts have made in face of challenging conditions.The paper indicates that the institution of administrative litigation, embedded in the contemporary political and social structure of China, cannot be a means for achieving constitutional governance in China, and its impact on social change is severely limited. To eliminate the obstacles to administrative litigation, the immediate priority should be the promotion of judicial independence and authority. In the long term, the reform depends on the growth of civil society and the perfection of democratic politics.

On the Challenge to China's Administrative Legal System by Privatization

A Preparatory Study on Privatizing of Public Utility——In a View of Public Law

Legal Regulation of Public Administrative Organization

Logic Foundation and Practical Text of Administration by Law

Human-oriented·Flexible Administration·Public Participation·Harmonious Society——Analysis of the Trend of Administrative Legal Reform by Classic Cases

Paying for the Dream of Public Ownership: Case Studies on Corruption and Privatization in China

A Study on the Administrative Public Interest Litigation System

Litigations Without a Ruling: the Predicament of Administrative Law in China

On the Public Utility Privatization and Government's Responsibility

On the Plight of Campaign-Styled Administrative Enforcement of Law and China's Governance

The Systematization and the Reform of Administrative Law Theory in China

On Administrative System Reform in Rule of Administrative Organization Law

Administrative Law and the Chinese Legal System: Some Issues on Judicial Review of Administration Activity

Public Administration In China-Evolution And Current Challenge

Four Challenges to Accountability in Contemporary Public Administration: Lessons From the United States and China

On the “Chineseness” and “Publicness” of Chinese Public Administration

Governing nonprofits under competing institutional logics: The implementation of board governance in China

Decentralized Privatization and Change of Control Rights in China

To Fulfil Administrative Tasks in the Form of Private Law--Reviewing Object: Welfare Privatization

On the Government's Public Service Contract Outsourcing

What Motivates and Constrains Politicians to Privatize? the Case of China