A: The State Compensation Law is a special law integrating entity and procedure. The subject, procedure, scope, methods and standards of state compensation are directly stipulated by law. Procedurally, except that the organ liable for compensation handles it first and requests reconsideration (administrative compensation is different), the legislature sets the final handling authority of judicial compensation cases in the compensation Committee of the people's court. This work is another new and important work of the people's court after criminal, civil and administrative trials and execution.
20 10 On April 29th, the 14th meeting of the 11th the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) deliberated and adopted the Decision of the NPC Standing Committee on Amending the State Compensation Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) (hereinafter referred to as the Decision). The revision of the law this time will be more conducive to ensuring that citizens, legal persons and other organizations enjoy the right to state compensation according to law and promoting state organs to exercise their functions and powers according to law. There are many amendments to the Decision, including unblocking the channels of claim, improving the compensation processing procedures, determining the burden of proof of both parties, clarifying the compensation for mental damage, and ensuring the payment of compensation fees. The revised State Compensation Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) has been implemented since 20 10 12 1.
After the implementation of the law, the people's court (as the organ liable for compensation) and the compensation committee of the people's court, in the practice of implementing the state compensation law, how to protect the legitimate rights and interests of compensation claimants more effectively, maintain the legal order and social order more effectively, and better reflect the purpose and purpose of the revision of the state compensation law has become an urgent problem to be solved. In view of this, this interpretation clearly stipulates the convergence of the application of the State Compensation Law before and after the revision, the handling of the original confirmed cases, the appeal or retrial of the confirmed compensation cases that came into effect before the implementation of the revised State Compensation Law, the filing conditions of some compensation cases, the opinions of the procuratorial organs on the effective decision, and the implementation time of this interpretation. Question 2: What is the guiding ideology in formulating this explanation?
A: In the process of formulating this interpretation, we mainly followed the following guiding ideology. First, strictly follow the legislative spirit. Based on the functional orientation of judicial interpretation, this interpretation is drafted in strict accordance with the spirit of laws and regulations such as the State Compensation Law to ensure that some principles and provisions of the State Compensation Law are effectively refined and implemented. Second, protect the legitimate rights and interests of compensation claimants and safeguard the unity of state organs and their staff in exercising their functions and powers according to law. The state compensation law is a law that compensates victims after adjusting public power. On the one hand, the Interpretation pays attention to the compensation for the damage to the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations, embodies the principle of abiding by laws and correcting mistakes, and implements the principle of respecting and protecting human rights in the Constitution. At the same time, it also pays attention to ensuring that state organs and their staff exercise their functions and powers according to law. The third is to fully carry forward democracy. In the process of drafting this interpretation, we listened carefully and comprehensively to the opinions and suggestions of relevant legislation, law enforcement departments, court system, experts, scholars and lawyers, and made many revisions according to the feedback, striving to be eclectic and make the formulation of judicial interpretation meet the needs of practice. The fourth is to highlight operability. Focusing on the hot, difficult and key issues in the practice of state compensation, we should consider the priorities and draft them step by step to provide a unified ruling basis for the practice of compensation. Question 3: How does this interpretation embody the principle of protecting victims from state compensation?
A: It is a major feature of this interpretation to embody the principle of guaranteeing victims to obtain state compensation. The State Compensation Law is a law that stipulates that citizens, legal persons and other organizations should compensate for the damage caused by the infringement of state organs and their staff. Tort is the most important element that constitutes the state's liability for compensation. Therefore, it has both legal basis and maneuverability to take the time of infringement as the demarcation point before and after the revision of the State Compensation Law. According to the general principle of non-retroactivity of the law, if the infringement occurred before the implementation of the revised State Compensation Law, the revised State Compensation Law shall be applied in principle when reviewing and handling compensation cases. On the basis of adhering to the principle of non-retroactivity of the law, we should always grasp the spirit of strengthening human rights protection embodied in the revision of the State Compensation Law, and make relevant exceptions in combination with the specific situation in practice, so as to make this interpretation more conducive to protecting victims from obtaining state compensation. It is reflected in two aspects:
1. The revised State Compensation Law is applicable to infringements that last after 20 10 12 1. In practice, the infringement in some cases is not a single point in time, but a continuous process. If the right to personal freedom is violated and innocent people are detained, the whole detention process is the continuation of the infringement (if someone was criminally detained, arrested and sentenced during June 2009 to June 201/kloc-0, and released after retrial, his two-year detention time should be regarded as infringement). It is stipulated that the revised State Compensation Law is applicable to the infringement that lasts until 20 10, 12 and 1, which is beneficial to reflect the original intention of strengthening human rights protection highlighted by the legal amendment, and also conforms to the relevant provisions on the retroactivity of the State Compensation Law made by the Supreme People's Court at the beginning of the implementation of 1995, which reflects the unity of legal application.
Second, although the infringement occurred before 20 10 12 1, according to the regulations, the claimant filed a claim for compensation after 2010/2. The significance of this provision lies in: implementing the new provisions and spirit of unblocking compensation procedures and increasing compensation for mental damage in the revision of the State Compensation Law, taking care of the opinions and demands reflected by the people in the process of soliciting opinions on the draft judicial interpretation, and conforming to the provisions of Article 84 of the Legislative Law, that is, laws are generally not retroactive, except for special provisions made to better protect the rights and interests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations. This provision not only adheres to the general application principle of non-retroactivity of laws, but also takes into account the specific situation in judicial practice. Question 4: How does this explanation reflect the convenience for the claimant to enter the claim procedure?
A: Before the amendment, the State Compensation Law stipulated that the compensation request should first confirm that the original authority act was illegal, that is, the conclusion of illegal confirmation is the pre-procedure of compensation request. Therefore, the judicial interpretation of the Supreme People's Court stipulates that the confirmation cases accepted by the people's courts (mainly judicial confirmation cases in civil and administrative proceedings and execution procedures) and the state compensation cases shall be tried as two cases respectively. The revised State Compensation Law cancels the pre-confirmation procedure, and stipulates that if the claimant thinks that the state organ and its staff have caused damage by illegally exercising their functions and powers, he can directly request compensation from the organ liable for compensation. In fact, it is necessary to implement the procedure of "integration of confirmation and compensation". Therefore, this interpretation should adjust and modify the previous "separation of confirmation and compensation" procedure accordingly.
Interpretation Article 3 For confirmed cases accepted by the people's courts before 2010/21,according to the relevant provisions of the State Compensation Law before the amendment and the provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Confirmed Cases by People's Courts (for Trial Implementation), the trial and confirmation of legal documents shall be continued. The main considerations of the above explanation are as follows: First, although the "Decision" cancels the pre-procedure of separate confirmation, the basic principle of illegal compensation has not changed. In order to reduce the litigation burden of the applicant, save judicial resources and improve judicial efficiency, the court that has accepted the case should continue the trial and make a ruling in time. Secondly, in the original separate judicial confirmation procedure, in order to prevent self-justification, the grass-roots people's court has no right to confirm its own judicial behavior, and the level of the court is relatively high. In view of the fact that the case is accepted by the superior court, it is not appropriate to retreat to the lower court for handling, so as to meet the people's expectations for the judicial credibility of the superior judicial decision.
The fourth article is about how to deal with the legal documents made by the judicial organs before 20 10 12 1, which have taken legal effect and have not been confirmed as illegal. In order to maintain the stability of legal order and social relations, and at the same time guarantee the right of appeal enjoyed by citizens, legal persons and other organizations according to law, if citizens, legal persons and other organizations are not satisfied with the effective legal documents that do not confirm the illegality, they should lodge a complaint in accordance with the provisions of the State Compensation Law before the amendment. After the appeal, if the relevant authorities make a conclusion that it is illegal but refuse to pay compensation, or if the claimant refuses to accept the compensation decision or reconsideration decision and applies to the compensation committee of the people's court for a compensation decision according to law, the compensation committee of the people's court shall accept it and protect the claim right of the claimant. Question 5: How does this explanation balance the problems that are beneficial to the claimant's claim and pay attention to maintaining the res judicata of the effective judgment?
A: After the implementation of the new law or the revised law, there will be a problem of the retroactivity of the new law and the res judicata of the effective judgment documents. Referring to the common practice of judicial practice around the world, it generally follows the principle that res judicata takes precedence over retroactivity, that is, the revised new law has no retroactivity on the adjudicative acts that have been finalized or come into effect before its implementation, and no one or any organ can reverse the verdict according to the provisions of the new law. Accordingly, Article 5 of this Interpretation stipulates that the res judicata of legal documents of state compensation cases that have taken legal effect before 20 10 12 1 will not change due to the implementation of the revised state compensation law. Considering that the claimant's right to appeal should be protected, this Interpretation stipulates that if the claimant refuses to accept the compensation decision that came into effect before 20 10 12 1, he can lodge a complaint, but at the same time, it stipulates that the state compensation law before the amendment should be applied when examining and handling the complaint. If the claimant only complains about the compensation items and standards increased by the revised State Compensation Law, it is stipulated that it will not be accepted. Its purpose is to maintain the overall fairness of legal and social interests and maintain the stability of the existing reasonable social order.
Based on the principle of seeking truth from facts and correcting mistakes, Article 6 of this Interpretation stipulates that the people's court shall re-examine and deal with legal documents that came into effect before 20 10 12 1, and the State Compensation Law before the revision shall apply. This provision mainly takes into account that this legal document was formulated according to the state compensation law before the amendment and has come into effect, and should have the same applicable standards as other effective legal documents formulated according to the state compensation law before the amendment. And according to the provisions of Article 5 of this Interpretation, if there is no mistake in the legal documents that came into effect before the implementation of the revised State Compensation Law, there is no need for retrial, and its res judicata is protected by law. Therefore, even if there are errors in the legal documents that came into effect before 2010/21and need to be retried, the revised state compensation law should be applied instead of the revised state compensation law, otherwise it will be unfair to those cases with protected res judicata and their compensation claimants. Question 6: How does this interpretation stipulate that the compensation claimant can claim compensation promptly and effectively after canceling the confirmation pre-procedure?
A: The revised State Compensation Law cancels the pre-confirmation procedure. In order to facilitate the claimant to request state compensation in a timely and effective manner, this interpretation makes relevant provisions in combination with the characteristics of duty infringement of judicial organs and the relationship between compensation and other litigation procedures.
Article 7 is about the elements of criminal compensation claim. Generally speaking, the behavior elements that constitute the state liability for compensation are that the state organs and their staff have committed illegal acts, including legal acts and factual acts. Violations of personal freedom and property rights stipulated in Articles 17 and 18 of the revised State Compensation Law, that is, legal acts made by criminal judicial organs in the course of criminal proceedings, are intuitively manifested as illegal detention, false arrest, illegal criminal seizure, seizure, freezing, recovery or wrong judgment and punishment. Generally speaking, the request for compensation for legal acts in criminal proceedings should be based on the conclusion of criminal proceedings. For example, She Xianglin case and Zhao Zuohai case, which we are familiar with, can only make a request for criminal compensation according to law after the criminal retrial procedure ends and the conclusion of acquittal is reached. It is hard to imagine that criminal compensation claims can be made at will when the criminal proceedings have not been concluded and the above legal acts have not gone through legal procedures. Therefore, Article 7 of this Interpretation stipulates that the claim for compensation for legal acts made in criminal proceedings should be based on the conclusion of criminal proceedings in principle. However, in some criminal cases, the victims whose personal rights or property rights have been violated are not criminal suspects, and they do have evidence to prove that they have nothing to do with the criminal case. In other criminal cases, if the victim requests compensation according to Article 198 of the Criminal Procedure Law because his property has not been returned or he thinks that the returned property has been damaged, the termination of the criminal case may not be the condition for requesting compensation.
The provisions of article 8 are the same as those of article 7. In principle, claims for compensation for legal acts in civil and administrative litigation and execution procedures should be based on the termination of the original litigation or execution procedures. In addition to the above reasons, as far as the relationship between compensation and other litigation procedures is concerned, if the case of other litigation or enforcement procedures has not yet ended, you can request compensation for legal acts and start the state compensation procedure, which will inevitably lead to confusion in which litigation or enforcement procedures coexist with the state compensation procedure. However, it is impossible to make a final judgment on the compensation procedure before the litigation or execution procedure is over. Therefore, the claim for compensation for legal acts in civil and administrative litigation or execution procedures should also be based on the termination of litigation or execution procedures. However, in civil and administrative proceedings or execution procedures, if the people's court cancels the detention decision and the fine decision made for obstructing the proceedings according to law, it means that the original compulsory measures are illegal. In this case, the claimant should be allowed to directly request state compensation, which solves the problem that the victim can protect his rights in time and effectively.