Legal information

What is a normative document?

Let’s explain the concept first. Normative documents are generally binding documents formulated and issued by administrative agencies, targeting unspecified objects, commonly known as "red-headed documents". It is not a punishment decision for a specific person, but a rule telling everyone that "this kind of thing will be done this way in the future." For example, a district government issued a document stipulating that all catering companies in the district must meet a higher oil fume emission standard. This is a normative document. Once this document takes effect, it will affect catering companies throughout the jurisdiction.

What is incidental review?

Incidental review means: when you apply for administrative review, you cannot apply for administrative review based on this normative document alone. It must be submitted together with your specific case. For example, if you are a restaurant, the district government has issued a document requiring the installation of higher-level oil fume purification equipment. If you are not satisfied with this requirement, when applying for administrative review, you can "incidentally" request the review authority to review the legality of the document itself. When the review agency hears your case, it will also review whether the document complies with the higher-level law and whether it exceeds statutory authority. This is incidental review.

Which normative documents can be reviewed?

The new regulations clarify that the following types of normative documents can be subject to incidental review: first, those that exceed statutory authority; second, those that conflict with the provisions of higher-level laws; third, those that set administrative penalties, administrative licenses, administrative coercion, etc. have no legal basis; fourth, those that violate legal procedures. Simply put, it is a normative document that is obviously illegal or ultra vires. However, if this document is formulated by a department of the State Council or a provincial government, according to the principle of hierarchical jurisdiction, the administrative review agency generally does not have the authority to review it and needs to be transferred to the competent authority for processing.

What should I do after the review results come out?

If the review authority finds that there is a problem with the normative document after review, there are two ways to deal with it: first, directly declare the normative document to be illegal or invalid in the review decision; second, if the issue with the normative document does not fall within the scope of the review authority, it needs to be transferred to the competent authority for processing. For the competent authority that transferred the materials, the new regulations require that they should respond with the processing results within 60 days after receiving the transferred materials. In this way, even if the review agency itself cannot control the document, it can help you pass the issue to the level with the authority to handle it, which is equivalent to opening a door for you to "appeal".

[Lawyer Yingting’s conclusion]

The review system attached to normative documents is a very powerful weapon provided to us by this new regulation. It solves a problem that has troubled everyone for a long time: knowing that a certain "red-headed document" is unreasonable, but not knowing who to talk to for explanation or how to explain it. Now, as long as this document affects your specific case, you can bring it out for review during the reconsideration process.