Top Ten Influential Litigation Cases in China in 2005
First, the She Xianglin case.
Brief case: 1 1 years ago, She Xianglin was sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment 15 years on suspicion of killing his wife. His wife's sudden appearance in 2005 proved that her case was false and wrong.
Public opinion: She Xianglin case, with great influence of public opinion, is an important case to promote the reform of criminal justice system in China. This case has caused us to deeply reflect on the judicial system and judicial concept such as the boundary of investigation power, the procedure of death penalty review, the rules of evidence, the right to silence, and the suspicion of crime. Subsequently, the accelerated reform of death penalty review procedure and criminal procedure law in China may be the first witness of the influence of She Xianglin case.
Expert comments:
Ping Jiang: The impact of this case, like Sun Zhigang's case, shows that our country is paying more and more attention to the protection of human rights. This case exposed some defects in our system, and facing up to these defects can promote the perfection of our system. Sun Zhigang's case contributed to the abolition of the detention and repatriation system, and She Xianglin's case also accelerated the reform of the death penalty review system and the second instance system of death penalty cases.
Jiang Mingan: As the first case of influential litigation, the She Xianglin case is of great significance. Its significance lies not in the case itself, but in how to balance judicial justice and public opinion, the principle of the whole criminal law and even the concept of the rule of law. It is suggested to amend the relevant provisions of the criminal law and the criminal procedure law and reflect on the death penalty system.
Mo: This case urges us to reflect on the function and scope of application of the death penalty.
He Haibo: This case has dramatically exposed the problems in our criminal procedure system. I think the significance of She case lies not only in the final realization of his personal justice, but also in the perfection of the system. More importantly than the perfection of the system, we discussed the problems in our system in an open and rational way to reflect on the problems in our system and improve them.
Gan Gongren: Through the She case, I think the problem that needs to be reflected is the reform of our entire criminal procedure system, and the criminal procedure should be reformed from concept to system. Including the implementation and application of the principle of presumption of innocence, evidence and evidence-related confessions, and the mechanism to prevent unjust, false and wrong cases.
Second, Japan's civil claims against China
Brief case: On June 65438+February 65438+September 2005, Wan Aihua, a former "comfort woman" of the Japanese invaders, and other 10 victims suffered another setback in their lawsuit against Japan. On the same day, the Tokyo High Court of Japan ruled that the plaintiff lost the case in the second instance, and rejected his claim for compensation of 200 million yen from the Japanese government and a formal apology. The reason is that "the statute of limitations has expired" and "individuals cannot sue the state". The loss of this case has become the epitome of China's civil litigation against Japan. In the past ten years, all china lawyers association organized China lawyers to participate in 25 civil claims against Japan, mainly including China's "comfort women" case, China labor case, gas bomb case and Nanjing Massacre case. Most of these cases lost, but rarely won.
Public opinion: From obscurity to widespread international concern, the Japanese civil claims against China, which lasted for ten years, showed the strength of persistence. Through the collection and disclosure of evidence, the world has seen the Japanese crimes committed in China, and people are always alert to the danger of war; Litigation brings people's patriotism into a rational track; The support and help of Japanese friendly people have made people see some Japanese people's introspection on war crimes and the hope of Sino-Japanese friendship.
Expert comments:
Yu Ning: For our country, these cases have little impact on the system level, but they have a great impact on ideas. The course of civil claims shows the progress of China. These cases have strong educational and publicity functions. So the significance of this case can be said to be beyond the meaning of the lawsuit itself. Being able to enter the "top ten" shows that the people still have a vision.
Jiang Mingan: In this case, we can learn from history and face this history squarely. However, we also need to think about some legal issues, such as prescription. Can we consider not applying the prescription system to such massive human rights violations?
Ping Jiang: Discussing these cases from a legal perspective is more conducive to the understanding between the Japanese people and the people of China. Many legal issues need further discussion, such as the relationship between state compensation and civil claims, such as prescription, and so on.
Mo: I once asked whether I could sue the Japanese government in China court. We can consider how to protect the basic human rights of our citizens in a wider scope in the process of protecting human rights, not only through our domestic laws, but also through international laws, combining domestic and international protection mechanisms.
Three, Ma De, Han Guizhi and Tian Fengshan series of corruption cases.
Brief case: From July, 2005 to February, 65438, with three powerful politicians in Heilongjiang Province-Ma De, former secretary of the Municipal Party Committee of Suihua City, Heilongjiang Province, Han Guizhi, former chairman of the Heilongjiang Provincial Political Consultative Conference, and Tian Fengshan, former minister of the Ministry of Land and Resources, successively tried and sentenced in Beijing, this series of amazing cases of bribery and selling officials finally came to an end.
Public opinion: The vote of netizens made the corruption case of Made, Tian Fengshan selected as "Top Ten Influential Litigation Cases in 2005", not only because it was called "the biggest case of selling officials since the founding of the People's Republic of China" by the media, but also because it reflected the determination of the Chinese government to fight corruption and the public's hatred of corruption.
Expert comments:
Ping Jiang: This case is very special, that is, selling an official, with a different nature. I think there are at least three aspects of corruption, which is the most serious corruption and can threaten the fate and future of the country: first, selling officials; Second, judicial corruption; The third is corruption relief funds and poverty alleviation funds. Selling officials can be listed as the most serious and fundamental corruption, which is fatal to a country.
Jiang Mingan: This case is thought-provoking. Corruption has not been fundamentally curbed. Anti-corruption should be reflected in the system. I think we should do a good job in four aspects at present: first, improve the appointment supervision system, and consider conducting direct elections at the county and township levels so that ordinary people can directly supervise corruption; Second, improve the responsibility system so that politicians can really take responsibility; Third, we must build a system and use it to fight corruption; Fourth, improve the administrative procedure system and use procedures to prevent corruption.
Gan Gongren: Why did he sell the official, or was it because he had the final say and the power was in his pocket? I think the biggest corruption is personnel corruption.
Fourth, consider the case.
Brief case: In 2005, Gu, a legendary private entrepreneur, turned the tables when his career was near the peak. Hisense invested 900 million yuan to successfully acquire Kelon Electric Appliances. Kelon Electric has changed from a private listed company to a state-owned listed company.
Public opinion: The shock caused by Gu's case to the business, academic and even the public is surprising. As early as 2004, the "dispute between Lang and Gu" and the subsequent "dispute between Lang and Zhang" caused extensive discussions on the loss of state-owned assets. Gu's fall seems to confirm the experts' judgment that China's capital market is "congenital deficiency and acquired deformity". However, the regulatory loopholes of the CSRC, the ineffectiveness of independent directors and the credibility of economists have once become the focus of discussion.
Expert comments:
Ping Jiang: The most fundamental problem reflected in this case is that there are loopholes in our company law and securities law. At present, many amendments to the Company Law and the Securities Law concerning the capital system and corporate governance, as well as the Implementation Measures for the Freeze and Seal-up of the Securities Commission promulgated on the last day of 2005, all reflect the gradual reflection and improvement of the company securities system in China.
Jiang Mingan: Gu case highlights the concept of economic development-whether economic development is people-oriented or based on economic indicators. Entrepreneurial crime is not entirely a system problem, but often a concept problem.
Mo: This case has caused us to think about how to protect and manage state-owned assets. Without a sound legal system and procedures, state-owned assets will definitely be lost. The most important thing to maintain and increase the value of state-owned assets is to establish a dynamic, strict and programmed supervision system.
Five, the mystery of Huang Jing.
Brief case: Two years ago, Huang Jing, a primary school teacher, was found dead naked in the primary school dormitory where she worked. Whether it is natural death or rape death, the expert conclusion has become the key evidence. However, five autopsies conducted by different appraisal institutions and six death appraisals issued by Huang Jing gave completely different appraisal conclusions each time. Huang Jing's death became a mystery.
Public opinion: Perhaps we can optimistically estimate that with the advancement of judicial expertise reform, the Huang Jing case, which once caused unprecedented public criticism on China's judicial expertise system, will soon come to the bottom. Perhaps we are still not optimistic, because the reality is that it is not enough to have a relatively perfect judicial expertise management system.
Expert comments:
Jiang Mingan: The design and implementation of the system should be considered. Those who establish and formulate the system should think from the perspective of being conducive to the implementation of the system. The rules of judicial expertise should be formulated by the NPC organs. This case also taught us a lesson.
Ping Jiang: Even if the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) formulates a unified handling method for this case, it is not the fundamental solution, because the expert conclusion itself is only evidence, and there is no provision requiring the judge to adopt a certain expert conclusion. The adoption of the appraisal should be decided by the judge. It can't be said that the judge can't make a judgment because the expert conclusion is different.
Gan Gongren: I am not in favor of establishing a unified national judicial authentication institution. Even if a unified judicial authentication institution is established, can we consider establishing a rechecking judicial authentication institution when we finally decide who will be responsible for the authentication?
6. Du Baoliang's huge ticket case
Brief case: Du Baoliang, a migrant worker in Beijing, received a fine of 10500 yuan on May 23, 2005, and the traffic violation score was 2 10. It was recognized by the traffic control department of Xicheng District, Beijing as a traffic violation 105 times. Du Baoliang then took the traffic control department to court. But then the lawsuit was dropped.
Public opinion: The emergence of "Du Baoliang case" reflects the lack of service awareness and procedural awareness in the law enforcement concept of government administrative law enforcement departments. The direct consequence of this case is that it led to a major rectification of the traffic control department in Beijing and became another example of "little people have great influence". As far as the relationship between individual cases and the rule of law is concerned, the influence of "Du Baoliang case" has not yet ended, which will surely prompt relevant departments to make up for this system loophole in legislation.
Expert comments:
Jiang Mingan: In the process of law enforcement, we must look at the purpose, principle and spirit of the law.
Mo: The key to the case is not the amount, but the number 105. If the traffic police informed a person in time when they found out that he was breaking the law, there would not be so many crimes. On the other hand, there is the problem of law enforcement concept. Is it necessary to add a fine of 10500 yuan for every fine of 10500? In fact, there is no such provision in law.
He Haibo: The existing law enforcement methods of electronic eyes must be changed. The solution is that all electronic eyes should be made public and popularized, and the method of secretly enforcing the law with digital cameras should be resolutely abolished. In addition, if the police want to change their work style, they should not only rely on law enforcement equipment, but also find illegal problems in time and stop them in time. Electronic police is a means to help law enforcement. It can't be said that electronic equipment helps not to enforce the law or can let law enforcement behavior go unchecked. This is unacceptable.
Seven, the Alto car hit people.
Brief case: At 20: 55 on May 9, 2004, Cao Zhixiu and his wife crossed the main road from north to south near Caihuying Bridge in Beijing. Liu Huan drove an Alto car and killed Cao Zhixiu in the green belt. On February 5, 2005, 65438, the Beijing No.1 Intermediate People's Court made a final judgment, and sentenced Liu Huan to bear the responsibility 100800 yuan.
Public opinion: "Beat for nothing" or "Beat for nothing"? The legislation on the conflict between car owners and pedestrians has aroused continuous concern. The case enlightens us that balancing and coordinating different interests through legislation is also a legal system engineering.
Expert comments:
Jiang Ping: Actually, the publicity report of this case is inaccurate. In fact, the formulation of "hit a white car" or "hit a white car" forgets two premises: whether the first victim is at fault or not and whether the second driver should pay compensation depends on whether the driver has fulfilled his due duty of care. If the driver is not at fault, he does not need compensation, nor does it conform to the principle of fairness stipulated in the General Principles of Civil Law.
Jiang Mingan: There are certain preconditions for the media to attract attention. However, the news still catches a problem, that is, how to balance the interests of all parties in solving legal confrontation. It is always said that drivers are a strong group and ordinary people are a weak group. In fact, strength is relative.
Mo: Actually, this is a legal principle, so there should be more room for interpretation. At present, the responsibility is determined according to the size of the burden of proof, and there is no legal provision to exempt the driver from absolute responsibility. If neither the driver nor the perpetrator violated the traffic rules, such as the driver taking measures to avoid pedestrians, resulting in the death of both the driver and the perpetrator, should the driver's family be allowed to pay the perpetrator's family?
Eight, Fujian farmers environmental pollution infringement case
Brief case: villagers in Pingnan County of Fujian Province filed an environmental pollution infringement lawsuit against Rongping Chemical Co., Ltd. in Pingnan County, and the Intermediate People's Court of Ningde City of Fujian Province made a first-instance judgment: demanding that the defendant immediately stop the infringement and compensate the plaintiff for the losses.
Public opinion: When public hazards infringe on public interests, what kind of response should be made in legal procedures to meet the needs of public rights protection? In a society with diversified interests, how to solve the rational way of coordinating and solving the conflict of interests through the progress of the legal system? From a deeper perspective, the case triggered people's reflection on the relationship between environmental protection and economic development.
Expert comments:
Jiang Ping: This case is very typical and practical. When the environment is damaged, it is still quite difficult to start the compensation system through judicial procedures at this stage.
Jiang Mingan: Environmental issues are related to the sustainable development of mankind. The environment is also a right, and the United States filed a lawsuit with environmental rights in the 1960s and 1970s. Environmental litigation should first establish a public interest litigation system.
Mo: This case tells us how to further prevent environmental pollution through litigation. The case focuses on infringement and class action. If farmers' rights and interests are damaged, they can make unified compensation to the victims through class action. The case also involves public interest litigation. We should not only provide civil compensation to the victims, but also control environmental pollution. Only by combining the two can we fundamentally solve the problem of environmental pollution.
9. Hao Jinsong sued the Railway Bureau for invoices.
Brief case: When Hao Jinsong returned the train ticket, the small ticket issued by the railway station was a receipt printed by the railway system itself, not a formal invoice, and she sued the railway bureau for not reimbursing it.
Public opinion: Public interest litigation is that the just seek judicial relief for the public interest in addition to their own interests. Because it concerns public interests and challenges vested interests, it has always been a hot spot of public concern. Although China has not yet established a public interest litigation system, this case is a useful attempt.
Expert comments:
Ping Jiang: The Hao Jinsong case mainly embodies the protection of public interests through private litigation. At present, we don't have a public organization to exercise the main rights of public interest litigation. The Civil Procedure Law is only a revision and a suggestion. Whether the consumer association can represent consumers in the future, whether the women's Federation can represent women and so on. This is another question. In fact, bringing a public interest lawsuit is a good means to protect the public interest.
Jiang Mingan: What is the scope of public interest litigation? If the public interest litigation expands indefinitely, if anyone can file a public interest litigation, then the limited judicial resources will be challenged. This requires thinking.
Gan Gongren: This case is very representative and involves too many similar problems. A public interest litigation system should be established as soon as possible.
General Daewoo v. Chery Company
Brief case: GM Daewoo sued Chery for lack of originality in the independent development of QQ cars, and Chery did not have the time and technical conditions for its self-proclaimed "independent development". After three years of intellectual property disputes, GM Daewoo and Chery reached a final settlement agreement in mid-June, 2005 165438+ 10.
Public opinion: The dispute between General Motors Daewoo and Chery raises a question: In the process of integrating into the international community, where should China's intellectual property protection be positioned to match our strategy of rising as a great power?
Expert comments:
Jiang Ping: The problems caused by this case are very important. We should create our own brand and know-how.
Mo: Through this case, it should be said that if we want to engage in national industries, we must have our own intellectual property rights, so that our national industries can develop well.
Jiang Mingan: This case reflects some questions about intellectual property rights, the formulation of national trade policies, how to abide by national trade norms, and how to combine long-term interests with short-term interests.
Ping Jiang: The process of rule of law in China should be promoted from top to bottom, and public opinion is the most powerful tool to promote it from bottom to top. At the same time, the process of rule of law in China needs not only the perfection of legislation, but also the renewal of the concept of judicial practice. The perfection of legislation is often triggered by individual litigation, especially influential litigation. These influential lawsuits will enable us to discover the defects and problems in legislation, and improve our rule of law in the process of solving these defects and problems.
Jiang Mingan: Ten influential lawsuits in China in 2005 will have an impact on the rule of law in China. This influence includes five aspects. First, it exposes and highlights some defects of China's existing legal system; The second is to guide people to think about how to improve our legal system; Third, it can promote the establishment of some laws and legal systems; Fourth, it may establish some principles that affect the process of legalization in China; Fifth, it is possible to form legal concepts that affect our legal development process.
Mo: The top ten influential litigation cases in 2005 covered a wide range. I believe that our legal system will be continuously improved and perfected in the process of the whole society paying attention to influential litigation.
Gan Gongren: I think the "Top Ten Influential Lawsuits in China in 2005" will have an important impact on our transformation from a paper law to a living law. I hope to hold such an influential litigation selection once a year.
He Haibo: Litigation used to be considered as settling disputes between citizens in a closed court. Now, in the era of citizen concern and the birth of the Internet, litigation has become a public forum. The selection of influential lawsuits is very meaningful. Each selected case represents a special problem in the process of rule of law. All these cases, when connected in series, will become a masterpiece to record the process of rule of law in China.
Thanks for reading!