Procuratorial Daily (the 5th edition on May 30, 2022: Voice Weekly)  

　　 Integrated performance of duties, releasing the endogenous power of procuratorial work  

　　 In recent years, local procuratorial organs have fully implemented Xi Jinping's rule of law thinking, given full play to the advantages of integrated case handling, strengthened overall planning, horizontal cooperation, and internal integration, and jointly handled a number of difficult and complex cases across levels, departments, and regions, boosting high-quality economic and social development and winning the recognition and support of NPC deputies.  

　　 Original title  

　　 Anhui: Supervising a loan dispute by authority  

　　 Our reporter Wu Yihuo  

　　 On May 25, the Provincial Procuratorate held a press conference to release six typical cases for the first time with the implementation of the Civil Code as the theme, of which the case of Li Mousheng and Han Mouyu's private lending dispute, which was continuously supervised by the three-level procuratorial organ of Anhui Province, caused Lv Hui, deputy to the National People's Congress and director of the Radio Drama Department of Anhui Radio and Television Music Frequency Operation Center Attention.    

　　 On December 1, 2016, Li Mousheng filed a lawsuit with the court of Qianshan County (removed from the county to the city in 2018, now Qianshan City), requesting Han Mouyu to immediately repay the loan of 700000 yuan and the corresponding interest. The court of Qianshan County filed the case on the same day, and served Han Mouyu with a copy of the indictment, subpoena and other legal documents by posting a notice.  

　　 On February 17, 2017, the court held the first instance hearing of the case when Han Mouyu did not actually appear in court. It was found in the first instance that on July 1, 2013, Han Mouyu borrowed 700000 yuan from Li Mousheng for business needs and issued an IOU, which was agreed to be repaid before August 29, 2013, and stated that the interest during the borrowing period had been paid, and the overdue interest rate was 5% of the monthly interest rate. On the same day, Li paid a loan of 700000 yuan to Han Mouyu through bank transfer. After the loan was due, Han Mouyu failed to repay the loan as agreed. The court therefore supported Li's claim and decided that Han Mouyu should repay Li's loan of 700000 yuan and the corresponding interest.  

　　 On October 30, 2019, the Qianshan Municipal Procuratorate found that Wang Moumou, the judge in charge, had taken bribes in the trial of the private loan dispute between Li Mousheng and Han Mouyu, so it started the supervision procedure on its own authority. The procuratorial organ verified that Wang received a bribe of 20000 yuan from Li Mousheng in handling another private lending dispute case that Li Mousheng had previously prosecuted. Later Wang was sentenced to three years and six months in prison and fined 200000 yuan in the first instance for bribery and civil perversion of the law. The procuratorial organ also found that when Wang Moumou tried the civil loan dispute case between Li Mousheng and Han Mouyu, the announcement service procedure was illegal, resulting in Han Mouyu's absence from the trial.  

　　 On December 9, 2019, Anqing Municipal Procuratorate filed a protest against the private lending dispute between Li Mousheng and Han Mouyu to Anqing Intermediate Court at the request of Qianshan Municipal Procuratorate. On December 25, 2020, Anqing Intermediate Court ruled that the protest against the Anqing Municipal Procuratorate should not be accepted on the grounds that the procuratorial organ did not follow the party's application and supervised the effective judgment or mediation statement ex officio, which should be limited to the extent that the effective judgment or mediation statement harmed the national interests and social and public interests.  

　　 When the Anhui Provincial Procuratorate learned of this situation, it instructed Anqing Municipal Procuratorate to follow up the review. On March 11, 2021, Anqing Municipal Procuratorate submitted a protest to Anhui Provincial Procuratorate. After examination, the Anhui Provincial Procuratorate believed that the judge of the original trial had accepted bribes from the plaintiff in the case, which was the case that should be retried; If the procuratorial organ supervises and raises a protest in accordance with the law, the court shall accept it and retry it; The original effective judgment violated the provisions and deprived the parties to exercise the right to defend the limitation of action. On April 23, 2021, the Anhui Provincial Procuratorate filed a protest to the Anhui Provincial High Court.  

　　 On May 10 of the same year, the Anhui Provincial High Court made a civil ruling, adopted the protest opinion of the procuratorial organ, and instructed Qianshan City Court to retry the case. On December 10, 2021, Qianshan City Court made a retrial judgment, confirming that the service procedure of litigation documents in the original trial was illegal and deprived the parties of their right to debate. When the original trial was filed, it had exceeded the limitation of action, so it rescinded the original judgment and rejected Li Mousheng's claim.  

　　 "The reason why the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China explicitly takes' the acts of embezzlement and bribery, favoritism and malpractice, and perverting the law 'as one of the conditions of the People's Court's Retrial Law is to ensure that the judges can make correct decisions under the conditions of independence, fairness and selflessness, and ensure the fairness and authority of judicial decisions. Article 37 of the Rules for the Supervision of Civil Procedure of the People's Procuratorate also clearly stipulates that, in addition to the cases that damage the national interests or social and public interests, the illegal acts such as corruption and bribery committed by the judicial and executive personnel also belong to the cases where the procuratorial organ initiates the supervision procedure on its own authority, and the supervision on its own authority is not limited by whether the parties apply for retrial. This provision precisely positioned the public power attribute of civil procuratorial supervision. " Lv Hui Said, "In this case, the relevant court not only failed to timely review and correct the mistakes that the procuratorial organ pointed out in the original effective judgment, but also made incorrect interpretations of laws and judicial interpretations, improperly restricted the scope of supervision by the procuratorial organ ex officio, and its application of law was obviously wrong. Under the continuous follow-up supervision and integrated supervision of the three-level procuratorial organs in Anhui Province, the wrong judgment was finally corrected. "