The Supreme People's Procuratorate has released typical cases of administrative public interest litigation in the field of state-owned property protection and state-owned land use right transfer Urge the recovery of state-owned property and state-owned land transfer fees of more than 41 billion yuan
On December 17, the Supreme People's Procuratorate released nine typical cases of administrative public interest litigation in the field of state-owned property protection and transfer of state-owned land use rights, providing guidance for local procuratorial organs to broaden the clues of cases in related fields, increase the strength of case handling, and standardize case handling.
Typical cases released this time are the administrative public interest litigation case of environmental protection tax in Ganzhou City, Jiangxi Province, the administrative public interest litigation case of soil and water conservation compensation in Zhidan County, Shaanxi Province, the administrative public interest litigation case of endowment insurance fund in Yanta District, Xi'an City, Shaanxi Province, and the administrative public interest litigation case of Zhejiang Xinchang County Procuratorate urging the recovery of special funds for preschool education, Administrative public interest litigation case of poverty alleviation project subsidy in Zaoqiang County, Hebei Province, administrative public interest litigation case of urban infrastructure supporting fee in Jiaoling County, Guangdong Province, administrative public interest litigation case of state-owned land use right transfer fee in Zhuzhou City, Hunan Province, administrative public interest litigation case of Jiangning District, Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province, and administrative public interest litigation case of idle land in Shanghe County, Shandong Province.
This typical case focuses on the implementation of major national strategies and the hot issues of people's livelihood, focuses on point to area, promotes systematic improvement, and uses procuratorial wisdom to help solve administrative supervision problems, reflecting the equal emphasis on supervision and support. In addition, it also reflects the characteristics of giving full play to the advantages of integration, comprehensively using supervision methods, adhering to follow-up supervision, and striving for the best case handling effect.
Since the public interest litigation procuratorial work was fully carried out in July 2017, the procuratorial organs across the country have handled 42413 public interest litigation cases in the field of state-owned property protection and state-owned land use right transfer, urged the recovery of more than 12.5 billion yuan of national property and rights, and urged the recovery of more than 28.5 billion yuan of unpaid state-owned land use right transfer fees.
The person in charge of the Supreme People's Procuratorate said that these nine cases are a microcosm of the procuratorial work of public interest litigation in the field of state-owned property protection and the transfer of state-owned land use rights, reflecting the role of the procuratorial function of public interest litigation in the special relief of national interests.
Typical cases of administrative public interest litigation in the field of state-owned property protection and state-owned land use right transfer
Administrative Public Interest Litigation Case of Environmental Protection Tax in Ganzhou City, Jiangxi Province
Keywords
Pre litigation Procedure of Administrative Public Interest Litigation Special Rectification of State owned Property Protection and Environmental Protection Tax
[Main point]
In view of the construction unit's failure to declare and pay the environmental protection tax as required, the procuratorial organ urges the tax department to recover the tax and overdue fine according to law, and can carry out special actions from point to point to promote the linkage and systematic governance of similar problems in the region.
Basic Case
For the 15 real estate development projects under construction, 2 expressway municipal projects under construction and 8 public parking lot construction projects under the supervision of Ganzhou Municipal Taxation Bureau at the same level, the construction unit failed to declare and pay environmental protection tax according to law, and the tax receivable was not put into storage in full and in time, which led to the loss of state-owned property and damaged the national interests.
[Investigate and supervise the performance of duties]
In June 2020, Ganzhou Municipal People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as Ganzhou Municipal People's Procuratorate) found that there might be omissions in the collection of environmental protection tax when communicating with the housing construction and environmental protection departments, so it decided to file a case for investigation in July. Ganzhou Municipal People's Court obtained the collection and details of environmental protection tax since 2018 from the Municipal Taxation Bureau, the municipal supervision project list from the municipal housing construction department, and the enterprise emission reduction measures from the municipal ecological environment department, It was found that 25 real estate development and construction projects supervised by Ganzhou Municipal Taxation Bureau failed to pay environmental protection tax according to law. According to the field knowledge, the above 25 projects have the problem of construction dust. According to the Environmental Protection Tax Law of the People's Republic of China, the Notice of the Ministry of Finance, the State Administration of Taxation, the Ministry of Ecological Environment on Clarifying the Application of Environmental Protection Tax Taxable Pollutants and Other Related Issues, and the Administrative Measures for the Verification and Calculation of Environmental Protection Tax in Jiangxi Province (for Trial Implementation), building dust is a taxable atmospheric pollutant, Construction enterprises shall declare and pay environmental protection tax according to the verification calculation method for general dust tax items.
On August 7, 2020, Ganzhou Municipal People's Court took the initiative to go to the Municipal Taxation Bureau to fully exchange and interact around the legislative significance of environmental protection tax, the collection of environmental protection tax in the city, and the experience and practices of other places, and reached a consensus. On August 20, Ganzhou Municipal People's Court publicly announced to the Municipal Taxation Bureau the delivery of the procuratorial proposal, which proposed to recover the environmental protection tax of the construction project involved in the case, conduct a comprehensive investigation, punish the act of failing to handle the tax declaration according to the provisions, strengthen the cooperation and cooperation with relevant departments such as ecological environment and housing construction in the collection and management, and strengthen data sharing, Promote the establishment of a division of labor and cooperation mechanism.
After receiving the procuratorial proposal, the Municipal Taxation Bureau attached great importance to it, organized and carried out a special inventory and supplementary report, and collected a total of 353500 yuan of environmental protection tax and 28600 yuan of overdue fine for 25 projects involved in the case. In view of the fact that enterprises within the jurisdiction have little knowledge of the new tax category of environmental protection tax and less initiative to declare, the Municipal Taxation Bureau, with this case as the driving force, has taken the way of convening taxpayer seminars, home visits and other means to publicize the environmental protection tax law, so as to meet taxpayers of key projects and cover more than 800 taxpayers in the city and district alone. At the same time, we strengthened communication and cooperation with ecological environment, housing construction, finance and other departments, improved the sharing of basic tax related information, established a detailed list of tax sources of environmental protection tax payers, and realized the orderly collection of environmental protection tax according to law.
In view of the problem that the implementation of environmental protection tax collection is not in place throughout the city, Ganzhou Municipal People's Court deployed special actions in its jurisdiction, 11 grassroots procuratorates issued pre litigation procuratorial suggestions to local tax authorities, and 8 grassroots procuratorates conducted supervision according to law through pre litigation consultation and other means. From January to September 2020, the city's environmental protection tax received 56.7 million yuan, accounting for 21.7% in the province, with a year-on-year growth of 98.7%. The total revenue, increment and growth rate rank first in the province.
Typical significance
As a new type of tax, environmental protection tax is an effective means to play the role of tax leverage, positively encourage enterprises to save energy and reduce emissions, promote green production, and accelerate high-quality development. Since the Environmental Protection Tax Law of the People's Republic of China has been promulgated for a short time, it is common that some enterprises fail to voluntarily declare taxes because they do not understand this new tax category in practice. The procuratorial organ focuses on the problem of environmental protection tax evasion of construction projects, actively performs the procuratorial function of public interest litigation, promotes the tax department to strengthen the verification collection and management of environmental protection tax, recovers the construction projects that have not paid the environmental protection tax in full according to law, and constructs and improves the working mechanism of multi department cooperation. At the same time, we deployed and carried out special supervision activities in the whole region from point to area, gathered the joint force of tax inspection, promoted the construction of green tax system, and effectively played the dual role of protecting state-owned property and serving green development.
Administrative Public Welfare Litigation Case of Soil and Water Conservation Compensation in Zhidan County, Shaanxi Province
Keywords
Pre litigation procedure of administrative public interest litigation Compensation for state-owned property protection and water and soil conservation
[Main point]
In view of the inadequate collection of compensation fees for water and soil conservation, the procuratorial organ strengthened the interpretation and reasoning of the law, and urged the administrative organ to recover the fees in accordance with the law.
Basic Case
Yongning Oil Production Plant and West Area Oil Production Plant were merged into Zhidan Oil Production Plant in November 2016, mainly engaged in crude oil exploration, exploitation, transportation, sales and other businesses. During the production period from May 1, 2015 to December 31, 2018, Zhidan Oil Production Plant should pay 56.4694 million yuan of compensation for water and soil conservation on a quarterly basis. The actual payment was 36.1007 million yuan, and the arrears was 20.3687 million yuan.
[Investigate and supervise the performance of duties]
In March 2019, the People's Procuratorate of Zhidan County, Shaanxi Province (hereinafter referred to as the People's Procuratorate of Zhidan County) found clues through interviews and filed a case, and found out the facts of the case by obtaining evidence materials such as the transmittal sheet of water and soil conservation compensation fees in Zhidan County, the summary sheet of water and soil conservation plan registration, and the verification and confirmation sheet of oil and gas production well pads in Yan'an City. In accordance with the Law of the People's Republic of China on Water and Soil Conservation, the Administrative Measures for the Collection and Use of Water and Soil Conservation Compensation Fees and other laws and regulations, production and construction projects or other production and construction activities in mountainous areas, hilly areas, wind and sand areas and areas prone to water and soil loss identified in the water and soil conservation plan have been set up, which have damaged water and soil conservation facilities, landforms and vegetation, If the original functions of water and soil conservation cannot be restored, compensation fees for water and soil conservation shall be paid, which shall be used specifically for the prevention and control of water and soil loss. Where the mining of mineral resources is in the production period, the payer shall pay compensation for water and soil conservation on a quarterly basis. As the supervision and management organ of water and soil conservation work in the county, Zhidan Water Affairs Bureau failed to urge the Zhidan Oil Production Plant to pay the compensation for water and soil conservation on time and in full, and failed to impose relevant administrative penalties, which resulted in the loss of state-owned assets and damaged the national interests.
On March 14, 2019, Zhidan County People's Court issued a procuratorial proposal to Zhidan County Water Affairs Bureau and publicly announced its delivery, suggesting that it should collect the water and soil conservation compensation fees owed by Zhidan Oil Production Plant according to law to safeguard the national and social public interests. Zhidan Water Affairs Bureau attached great importance after receiving the procuratorial suggestions, held a special meeting, set up a special working group, and issued the Notice on Urging Compensation for Water and Soil Conservation. After receiving the notice of call for payment, Zhidan Oil Production Plant explained to the procuratorial organ that the unpaid compensation for water and soil conservation was basically owed by the West Oil Production Plant before the merger of the plant, and also stated that the plant had actual financial difficulties and legal problems such as unclear rights and responsibilities between administrative organs and enterprises, enterprises and enterprises after the merger. In order to ensure the effectiveness of case handling, Zhidan County People's Court has convened Zhidan County Water Affairs Bureau and Zhidan Oil Production Plant for many times. Through symposiums and other forms, on the one hand, it explained the law and reasoned about Zhidan Oil Production Plant, and told the merged legal person to bear the obligations of the legal person before the merger according to law, that is, the unpaid taxes before the merger of the West Area Oil Production Plant should be paid by Zhidan Oil Production Plant; On the other hand, actively communicate and coordinate according to the financial difficulties raised by enterprises. Afterwards, Zhidan Oil Production Plant formulated a repayment plan, paid off the water and soil conservation compensation of 20368700 yuan owed in six installments, and entrusted a third-party appraisal agency to prepare a water and soil conservation plan for construction land.
Typical significance
The compensation fee for water and soil conservation is the fund collected from production and construction units and individuals that damage water and soil conservation facilities, landform and vegetation, and cannot restore the original function of water and soil conservation, and is specially used for prevention and control of water and soil loss. It belongs to the state-owned property. The Yellow River Basin plays a very important role in China's economic and social development and ecological security. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that "the problem of the Yellow River is apparent in the Yellow River, and the root lies in the basin", emphasizing that "soil and water conservation and pollution control should be emphasized in the middle reaches". The procuratorial organ urged the water affairs department to collect the compensation fees for water and soil conservation, which not only effectively prevented the loss of state-owned property and safeguarded the national interests, but also was of great significance for the protection and governance of the fragile ecology of the Loess Plateau, reflecting the new role and responsibility of the procuratorial organ in serving and ensuring the implementation of the national strategy for ecological protection and high-quality development of the Yellow River basin.
Administrative Public Welfare Litigation Case of Endowment Insurance in Yanta District, Xi'an City, Shaanxi Province
Keywords
Pre litigation procedures of administrative public interest litigation Industry norms for endowment insurance funds for employees of state-owned property protection enterprises
[Main point]
With regard to the issue of fake pension, the procuratorial organ accurately grasped and applied the laws and policies, urged the administrative organ to recover the fake pension, and promoted the formulation of relevant industry norms.
Basic Case
After the death of Bai, a resident of Yanta District, Xi'an, in September 2013, his family continued to receive pension until August 2017, totaling 61400 yuan.
[Investigate and supervise the performance of duties]
In November 2017, the People's Procuratorate of Yanta District, Xi'an City, Shaanxi Province (hereinafter referred to as the Yanta District People's Procuratorate) received a report from the masses, reflecting that Bai's family claimed a pension as a fake after his death. On January 24, 2018, Yanta District People's Court decided to file a case for investigation, and on February 6 of the same year, it sent a procuratorial proposal to the Yanta District Endowment Insurance Agency Center, urging it to deal with the behavior of a Bai family member claiming a pension in accordance with the law. The center replied that it had transferred the case to the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau of Yanta District (hereinafter referred to as the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau of Yanta District). In March 2019, Yanta District Court found that the family members of 20 people, including Liu, were suspected of claiming pensions under false pretences during follow-up supervision, so it filed an investigation on April 16 of the same year. After that, we found out the original work units, family members, home addresses, specific time of death, household registration information, and pension payment of Liu and other 20 family members by accessing and consulting the employment files of Yanta District Employment Agency, the household registration information of the public security organ, the pension account of the elderly care agency center and other materials, and finally found out the fact that Liu and other 20 family members claimed pensions falsely, The amount of false claim varies from more than 10000 yuan to more than 200000 yuan, totaling 2.3946 million yuan. On May 7, 2019, Yanta District People's Hospital issued a procuratorial proposal to the Yanta District Pension Insurance Agency Center, urging it to deal with the behavior of 20 insured persons such as Liu who continue to receive pensions after their death according to law.
After receiving the procuratorial advice, the Yanta District Endowment Insurance Agency Center fed back to the Yanta District Court that it had transferred the case of Bai to the Human Resources and Social Security Bureau of Yanta District, and was returned as having no jurisdiction. In view of the problem that Yanta District does not accept cases, Yanta District Court has visited several departments to understand their responsibilities and work processes, and analyzed them in combination with the laws and regulations queried, and found that the crux of the problem is the responsibility regulations. For the investigation and handling of illegal pension cases of enterprise employees, departmental rules and the "three determinations" There are differences in the provisions of the scheme: The Social Insurance Audit Measures issued by the former Ministry of Labor and Social Security stipulates that social insurance agencies are responsible for verification and the administrative departments of labor and social security are responsible for investigation and punishment. However, pension insurance agencies in Shaanxi Province implement vertical management, and the "Three Determinations" scheme of local human resources and social security departments only stipulates that pension funds for urban and rural residents are responsible for investigation and punishment, The duty to investigate and deal with illegal pension cases of enterprise employees is not stipulated. In order to solve the problem from the source, Yanta District People's Court held a discussion with the provincial, municipal and district pension insurance authorities to discuss and exchange pension recovery procedures, recovery measures, administrative law enforcement, criminal justice connection and other issues. In September 2019, the Human Resources and Social Security Department of Shaanxi Province formulated and issued the Notice on Regulating the Investigation and Treatment of Issues Related to Illegal Appropriation of Enterprise Employees' Pension Fund, which clarified the pension verification, order return procedures, application documents and other issues of pension insurance agencies and human resources and social security departments, and thoroughly solved the problem of gaps in regulations and procedure convergence, It also requires the pension insurance agencies at all levels in the province to check regularly every month to promote the institutionalization and normalization of the management of illegal pension cases of enterprise employees. At present, Yanta District Endowment Insurance Agency Center has recovered a total of 2.4259 million yuan of pension, and the remaining 30100 yuan is being returned.
In November 2019, Yanta District People's Procuratorate reported to Xi'an People's Procuratorate in writing, suggesting that special supervision should be carried out on the issue of retirement workers receiving pensions after their death. In January 2020, the Xi'an People's Procuratorate carried out a special procuratorial and supervision activity for retired employees of enterprises to defraud pension insurance funds in the whole city.
Typical significance
The basic pension insurance fund is not only the "life support money" of the masses, but also an important public fund. In recent years, the phenomenon of falsely claiming pensions has increased, resulting in the loss of national property. In this case, the procuratorial organ conducted an in-depth investigation on the long-standing illegal situation of falsely claiming pension insurance benefits in the jurisdiction, found similar cases from individual cases, and found the inconsistency between the administrative organ's "Three Determinations" plan and the department's regulations in case handling, promoted the introduction of normative documents at the provincial level, made up for regulatory loopholes, and promoted the standardization of local pension insurance work be institutionalized.
Administrative Public Interest Litigation Case of the People's Procuratorate of Xinchang County, Zhejiang Province, urging the recovery of special funds for preschool education
Keywords
Pre litigation procedure of administrative public interest litigation Special funds for the protection of state-owned property Preschool education Cross regional cooperation Public interest litigation prosecution and criminal prosecution connection
[Main point]
With regard to the illegal issue of defrauding special funds for pre-school education, the procuratorial organ urges the education administrative department to recover them according to law. In the process of handling cases, the procuratorial organs strengthened regional investigation cooperation, focused on the analysis and application of new evidence, and promoted the supervision of criminal case filing while urging the administrative organs to perform their duties in accordance with the law.
Basic Case
From 2015 to 2018, 27 kindergarten teachers from 13 private kindergartens in Xinchang County who did not have teacher qualifications were introduced and contacted by the head of the kindergarten and other teachers, bought forged teacher qualifications from others, and engaged in preschool teaching for a long time. 22 of them used forged teacher qualification certificates to apply to Xinchang County Education and Sports Bureau (hereinafter referred to as Xinchang County Education and Sports Bureau) for the award subsidy for in-service self employed teachers of kindergartens totaling 122510 yuan (note: the award subsidy for in-service self employed teachers of kindergartens is one of the special funds for preschool education, hereinafter referred to as the award subsidy). By December 2019, there were still 21 people engaged in preschool teaching in kindergartens.
[Investigate and supervise the performance of duties]
The People's Procuratorate of Xinchang County, Zhejiang Province (hereinafter referred to as the People's Procuratorate of Xinchang County) found clues in the criminal cases of others forging, buying and selling certificates of state organs handled by criminal procuratorial departments. On November 5, 2019, Xinchang County Court set up a public interest litigation team to carry out investigation. On the basis of the existing criminal case evidence, we interviewed the relevant administrative department executives and the kindergarten principals involved in the case, asked the kindergarten teachers who bought and sold forged teacher qualification certificates, and analyzed the criminal evidence materials of the same criminals in the two places together with the Xuzhou Municipal Procuratorate of Jiangsu Province through cross regional collaborative case handling, The data information of the production and sale of fake certificates of the accomplices is compared with the list of the personnel receiving the reward subsidy in Xinchang County one by one, and the fact that the investigation organ has not yet mastered the forging, buying and selling of teachers' qualification certificates to defraud the reward subsidy is found out. At the same time, the new evidence found will be transferred to the Xuzhou Municipal Procuratorate in Jiangsu Province and the Criminal Procuratorate of Xinchang County People's Court respectively. According to the newly verified evidence, the Xinchang County People's Court put on record and supervised 2 people, corrected 11 missing criminal facts, and the Xuzhou Municipal Procuratorate corrected 6 missing criminal facts.
On January 13, 2020, the Xinchang County People's Court issued a procuratorial proposal to the Education and Sports Bureau of Xinchang County, suggesting that the reward subsidies for in-service teachers in kindergartens defrauded should be recovered, the kindergarten teachers involved should be graded, and the supervision mechanism for reward subsidies for in-service teachers in kindergartens should be improved. After receiving the procuratorial advice, the Education and Sports Bureau of Xinchang County implemented the rectification according to the contents of the procuratorial advice, recovered all the cheated reward subsidies of 122510 yuan, confiscated 27 forged teacher qualification certificates, ordered the relevant kindergartens to dismiss or transfer 21 teachers who do not have teacher qualifications, and carried out a special inspection on the practice of kindergartens and preschool teachers throughout the county, We will carry out special rectification of kindergarten teachers' ethics and promote kindergarten teachers to work with certificates. During the rectification period, six suspects who cheated for rewards and subsidies surrendered to the public security organ. At the same time, the Education and Sports Bureau of Xinchang County formulated and issued the Regulations on the Administration of Kindergarten Teachers' Qualification Certificates, revised the Measures for the Administration of Special Funds for the Development of Preschool Education in Xinchang County, and established a three-level review system for the application materials of incentives and subsidies by kindergartens, central schools (education workstations), and the Education and Sports Bureau.
Typical significance
In the report to the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized "doing a good job in preschool education", and regarded the realization of "having children and education" as the first major livelihood issue of the "seven haves". The special funds for preschool education are not only state-owned property, but also related to the sustainable and healthy development of preschool education. The procuratorial organ gives full play to the advantages of integrated case handling, finds clues of public interest litigation cases from criminal cases, strengthens regional cooperation, jointly analyzes data, finds new evidence and transfers it to relevant units and departments, and plays a combined fist of "public interest litigation+criminal attack" against violations across administrative divisions. The successful handling of this case has saved the loss of state-owned property, prompted the administrative organs to improve the supervision system, effectively curbed the chaos of defrauding special funds for preschool education, and provided legal guarantee for the implementation of the central government's decision to deepen preschool education reform.
Administrative Public Welfare Litigation Case of Poverty Alleviation Project Subsidy in Zaoqiang County, Hebei Province
Keywords
Administrative public interest litigation State owned property protection and poverty alleviation project subsidy procedural responsibilities
[Main point]
With regard to the issue of defrauding subsidies for poverty alleviation projects, the procuratorial organ urges relevant administrative organs to recover them according to law.
Basic Case
Changmou of Matun Village, Zaoqiang County, Hebei Province used his Guangfeng Specialized Cooperative for Vegetable Planting in Zaoqiang County (hereinafter referred to as "Guangfeng Cooperative") to forge a series of materials, such as the official seal of the village committee of Matun Village, the signatures of poor households, village secretaries, village directors, and land use right transfer contracts of some poor households in Matun Village, Two times, 1.3668 million yuan was applied for poverty alleviation project subsidies in the name of poor households in Matun Village, which infringed the national interests.
[Investigate and supervise the performance of duties]
On May 15, 2018, Zaoqiang County People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as Zaoqiang County People's Procuratorate) found in a criminal case involving fraud that Zaoqiang County Poverty Alleviation and Agricultural Development Office (hereinafter referred to as the County Poverty Alleviation Office) failed to recover the poverty relief funds defrauded by Guangfeng Cooperative in strict accordance with the law, and decided to file a case for investigation. Through reviewing the relevant responsibilities of the County Poverty Alleviation Office, the materials related to the initiation, approval and project appropriation of the poverty alleviation projects involved, and asking the relevant personnel, it was found that the County Poverty Alleviation Office failed to fulfill the corresponding responsibilities such as strict verification when reviewing the vegetable greenhouse poverty alleviation projects declared by Guangfeng Cooperative, and failed to timely recover the subsidies of the cheated poverty alleviation projects according to law, which continued to infringe the national interests.
On October 17, 2018, Zaoqiang County People's Court issued a procuratorial proposal to the County Poverty Alleviation Office, proposing to cancel the poverty alleviation projects declared by Guangfeng Cooperative in accordance with the law, and recover the defrauded subsidies for poverty alleviation projects in accordance with the law together with finance and other relevant departments. On December 5 of the same year, the County Poverty Alleviation Office replied and argued that according to the Regulations of Hebei Province on Rural Poverty Alleviation and Development, the change of poverty alleviation projects should be approved by the people's government at the county level. It does not have the authority to cancel poverty alleviation projects and cannot cancel the poverty alleviation projects of Guangfeng Cooperative.
Zaoqiang County Court found through follow-up investigation that after receiving the procuratorial advice, the County Poverty Alleviation Office failed to report to the county people's government the relevant situation of Guangfeng Cooperative forging materials to defraud subsidies for poverty alleviation projects, and failed to cooperate with the county finance bureau to recover the defrauded subsidies for poverty alleviation projects according to law, and its failure to perform its duties in accordance with the law led to the continuous violation of national interests.
[Litigation and Enforcement]
On December 24, 2018, Zaoqiang County Court filed an administrative public interest lawsuit with Zaoqiang County People's Court, requesting that the County Poverty Alleviation Office perform the relevant duties of canceling the financial poverty alleviation subsidy projects declared by Guangfeng Cooperative in accordance with the law and recover the allocated funds of the defrauded poverty alleviation projects together with the financial departments. In the court hearing, the county poverty alleviation office argued that, according to the provisions of the third paragraph of Article 30 of the Regulations of Hebei Province on Rural Poverty Alleviation and Development, changes involving poverty alleviation projects should be approved by the people's government at the county level, and the county poverty alleviation office has only the right to apply for and make suggestions, not the right to make decisions on project changes and recover funds. In response to the reply of the County Poverty Alleviation Office, Zaoqiang County People's Court, according to Article 5 of the Regulations of Hebei Province on Rural Poverty Alleviation and Development, "the poverty alleviation and development work agencies of the people's governments at or above the county level are responsible for the planning, coordination, management, service and supervision of the rural poverty alleviation and development work in their administrative regions" Article 46 "If a poverty alleviation project is fabricated or forged, the relevant department shall cancel the project according to law, and recover the allocated funds for the poverty alleviation project together with the financial department and other relevant departments". Referring to the "Three Determinations" plan and the provisions on the main responsibilities of the county poverty alleviation office in the minutes of the county government meeting, the county poverty alleviation office is considered to have the responsibility to report to the county government the cancellation of the poverty alleviation project of Guangfeng Cooperative, As well as the responsibility of recovering the funds allocated for poverty alleviation projects jointly with the financial department, the County Poverty Alleviation Office's defense reasons are not tenable.
On May 30, 2019, the People's Court of Zaoqiang County made a judgment, determining that the need for declaration, suggestions and due administrative procedures decided by the county poverty alleviation office cannot be the reason for failing to perform their duties. Judgment: The County Poverty Alleviation Office performed the relevant procedural duties of canceling the subsidy projects declared by Guangfeng Cooperative, and took relevant measures to recover the poverty alleviation subsidy funds allocated to Guangfeng Cooperative. After the judgment came into effect, the County Poverty Alleviation Office actively performed its duties and reported the relevant information of the Guangfeng Cooperative's falsification of materials to defraud subsidies for poverty alleviation projects to the county government. The executive meeting of the county government decided to cancel the poverty alleviation subsidy projects declared by Guangfeng Cooperative, and directed the County Poverty Alleviation Office to cooperate with the County Finance Bureau for the 1.3668 million yuan of national poverty alleviation project subsidies allocated to Guangfeng Cooperative, Start the recovery program. At present, the County Poverty Alleviation Office has recovered more than 900000 yuan of subsidies for poverty alleviation projects defrauded.
Led by this case, Zaoqiang County People's Court organized special actions within its jurisdiction to urge 16 poverty alleviation projects with similar illegal situations to start legal procedures and recover more than 5 million yuan of subsidies for poverty alleviation projects that were defrauded.
Typical significance
Winning the battle against poverty is the solemn commitment of the Party to the people. The accuracy of subsidy use and the effectiveness of management of poverty alleviation projects are of great significance to winning the battle against poverty. In view of the unclear responsibilities of relevant local departments and the shifting of responsibilities, the procuratorial organs, based on the principle of equal rights and responsibilities and actively safeguarding national interests, accurately identified relevant departments and their responsibilities according to relevant laws and regulations, and referred to the "Three Determinations" plan, and urged the administrative organs to perform their duties according to law. If the administrative organ still refuses to make rectification for improper reasons after issuing the procuratorial recommendation, it shall resolutely file a lawsuit to strengthen the rigidity of supervision. In the court trial, strengthen the explanation, win the support of the court, and make the correct judgment that the responsible department has the procedural responsibility of reporting the relevant information to the decision-making organ. At the same time, draw inferences from other cases, take advantage of the situation, organize and carry out special supervision, rapidly expand the results, and effectively maintain the security of special funds in the field of poverty alleviation.
Administrative Public Welfare Litigation Case of Supporting Fees for Urban Infrastructure in Jiaoling County, Guangdong Province
Keywords
Administrative Public Interest Litigation State owned Property Protection Urban Infrastructure Supporting Fee Legal Performance Determination
[Main point]
In the case of urging the administrative organ to recover the unpaid expenses of state-owned property, the procuratorial organ should pay attention to distinguish the difference between the administrative organ's objective inability to perform and its negligence in performing its duties. When the administrative organ fails to take legal measures to effectively stop illegal acts and the national interests are still in a state of infringement, it should timely file an administrative public interest lawsuit with the people's court.
Basic Case
In 2016, a company in Jiaoling County, Guangdong Province built a commercial and residential community in the county. According to relevant laws and regulations, it should pay the corresponding urban infrastructure supporting fees on time. Until March 2018, the company still had 2102900 yuan of urban infrastructure supporting fees unpaid.
[Investigate and supervise the performance of duties]
At the beginning of 2018, the People's Procuratorate of Jiaoling County, Guangdong Province (hereinafter referred to as "Jiaoling County People's Procuratorate") found the clue that Xinmou Company was in arrears with urban infrastructure supporting fees when handling another public interest litigation case. On February 27 of the same year, Jiaoling County Court filed a case for investigation, and on March 7, issued a procuratorial proposal to Jiaoling County Housing and Urban Rural Construction Bureau (hereinafter referred to as Jiaoling County Housing and Urban Rural Construction Bureau), urging it to legally call for the overdue urban infrastructure supporting fees.
On April 27, 2018, the Housing and Urban Rural Development Bureau of Jiaoling County replied: after receiving the procuratorial advice, it issued a notice of payment reminder to Xinmou Company on March 13, 2018, which is limited to three months to pay off the urban infrastructure supporting fee owed by 2102900 yuan; On April 19, we received the repayment plan submitted by Xinmou Company (500000 yuan by August 31, 2018, 600000 yuan by December 31 of the same year, and 1002900 yuan by April 30, 2019).
In November 2018, Jiaoling County Court made a follow-up investigation on the payment of a company in Xinmou and found that the company only paid 100000 yuan of urban infrastructure supporting fees after submitting the repayment plan. After being urged by the procuratorial organ, another 100000 yuan was paid on December 30 of the same year, but 1902900 yuan was still owed.
[Litigation and Enforcement]
In view of the fact that the Housing and Urban Rural Development Bureau of Jiaoling County has not taken effective measures to recover the urban infrastructure supporting fees in arrears, on February 27, 2019, Jiaoling County Court filed an administrative public welfare lawsuit to the Xingning People's Court, which has centralized jurisdiction over the administrative litigation case of Meizhou City, requesting confirmation that the administrative act of the Housing and Urban Rural Development Bureau of Jiaoling County in delay in recovering the urban infrastructure supporting fees in arrears is illegal, It was also judged that the bureau performed its duties according to law and timely recovered 1902900 yuan of urban infrastructure supporting fees. During the litigation, the Housing and Urban Rural Development Bureau of Jiaoling County once again recovered 100000 yuan of urban infrastructure supporting fees from a company in Xinmou.
On April 4, 2019, the Xingning People's Court held a public hearing to hear the case, and the two sides conducted cross examination and debate on such key issues as whether Jiaoling County Housing and Urban Rural Development Bureau fully fulfilled its legal responsibilities according to law, and whether the urban infrastructure supporting fees belong to state-owned property. On June 18, Xingning People's Court made a judgment of first instance, supporting all the claims of the procuratorial organ: it confirmed that Jiaoling County Housing and Urban Rural Development Bureau was negligent in collecting the urban infrastructure supporting fees in arrears, and it should collect the urban infrastructure supporting fees in arrears of 1.8 million yuan from Xinmou Company within six months after the judgment came into effect.
On July 10, 2019, the Housing and Urban Rural Development Bureau of Jiaoling County appealed against the first instance verdict. On September 29, 2019, Meizhou Intermediate People's Court made a second instance judgment: rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment.
Typical significance
Whether the administrative organ performs its duties according to law directly affects the repair effect of damaged national interests. In practice, it is common for administrative organs to perform their duties by reaching a repayment agreement with the counterpart. In this case, the procuratorial organ followed up and supervised the implementation of the repayment agreement in a timely manner, and filed a lawsuit against the administrative organ's negligence in urging the counterpart to pay fees in accordance with the repayment agreement to safeguard national interests, And for the illegal acts of administrative organs that emphasize the objective reasons but do not play the subjective initiative to perform their duties according to law, analyze the ways and effects of performing their duties, identify the differences between not performing their duties and not performing their duties according to law, put forward legal opinions, promote the administrative organs to improve their awareness of administration according to law, and help the modernization of national governance.
Administrative Public Interest Litigation Case of Grant Fee of State owned Land Use Right in Zhuzhou City, Hunan Province
Keywords
Pre litigation procedures of administrative public interest litigation The unpaid transfer fees for the transfer of state-owned land use rights were fully performed
[Main point]
The procuratorial organ may urge the administrative organ to fully perform its duties by applying to the arbitration commission for arbitration and to the court for compulsory execution when handling the case of arrears in the transfer fees of the state-owned land use right.
Basic Case
In July 2017, Jinmou Real Estate Co., Ltd., a subsidiary of a large real estate group, engaged in real estate development and operation business, won the state-owned land use right of four plots in Zhuzhou urban area through online listing, and signed four state-owned construction land use right transfer contracts with Zhuzhou Natural Resources and Planning Bureau within 10 days from the date of transaction. The contract stipulates that "if Jinmou Real Estate Company fails to pay the transfer price of state-owned construction land use right on time, it shall pay liquidated damages to the transferor at the rate of 1 ‰ of the delayed payment every day from the date of late payment... Any dispute arising from the performance of this contract shall be settled by both parties through negotiation. If the negotiation fails, it shall be submitted to Zhuzhou Arbitration Commission for arbitration. After the signing of the transfer contract, Jinmou Real Estate Company failed to pay the state-owned land transfer fees for two of the plots as agreed in the contract. As of July 2019, Jinmou Real Estate Company had a total of 295.84 million yuan in arrears.
[Investigate and supervise the performance of duties]
In July 2019, Zhuzhou Municipal People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as Zhuzhou Municipal People's Procuratorate) found in the special supervision activity of clearing up the unpaid state-owned land transfer fees that Zhuzhou Natural Resources and Planning Bureau had failed to fully perform its duties in accordance with the law against the unpaid state-owned land transfer fees of a real estate company, so it decided to file a case for investigation on July 9, 2019. The procuratorial organ inquired about the staff of the natural resources department of Zhuzhou City, interviewed the person in charge of a real estate company and made a site visit by taking the "three determinations" plan of the administrative organ and the relevant evidence materials for the performance of duties such as listing the transferred land, signing the transfer contract, collecting the land price and urging payment, It was found that although Zhuzhou Natural Resources and Planning Bureau issued a call notice on March 6, 2018, it failed to fully perform its duties in accordance with the law, and took effective measures to collect the state-owned land transfer fees and liquidated damages owed by a real estate company. On July 15, 2019, Zhuzhou Municipal People's Court issued a procuratorial proposal to Zhuzhou Natural Resources and Planning Bureau, suggesting that it actively perform its statutory duties and take effective measures to recover the land transfer fees and liquidated damages owed by a real estate company.
After receiving the procuratorial suggestions, Zhuzhou Municipal Bureau of Natural Resources and Planning has repeatedly consulted the procuratorate on the legal ways and measures of recovery. Zhuzhou Municipal People's Court carefully analyzed and studied the transfer contract and suggested that the Bureau apply for arbitration in accordance with the contract. On October 8, the bureau requested Zhuzhou Arbitration Commission to award that Jinmou Real Estate Company should pay the remaining state-owned land transfer fees and liquidated damages. On December 26, 2019, Zhuzhou Arbitration Commission awarded a property company with 295.84 million yuan of state-owned land transfer fees and 103.2927 million yuan of liquidated damages. Since Jinmou Real Estate Company failed to perform the award within the statutory time limit, Zhuzhou Municipal People's Court continued to follow up the supervision, urged Zhuzhou Natural Resources and Planning Bureau to apply to Zhuzhou Intermediate Court for enforcement, and supervised the court to timely implement the state-owned land transfer fees, liquidated damages, interest for delayed performance of arbitration award, and arbitration fees that Jinmou Real Estate Company should bear, totaling 404 million yuan. On April 23, 2020, all the above execution funds will be paid into the national treasury.
At the same time, Zhuzhou Municipal People's Court, guided by case handling, promoted special governance, carried out in-depth special supervision activities to clear up outstanding state-owned land transfer fees, cleared up 2 billion yuan of unpaid land transfer fees, selectively handled 13 administrative public interest litigation cases, and urged the collection of 60 million yuan of land transfer fees.
Typical significance
Behind the real estate driving economic development, it has become a common phenomenon that enterprises owe land transfer fees, which seriously affects the state's control of land transfer income. In this case, the procuratorial organ insisted on serving the overall situation, correctly handled the relationship between supervising the performance of duties by administrative organs according to law, supporting market entities to operate according to law and serving the local economic development, put forward legal suggestions in a timely manner when the administrative organ had doubts in law enforcement, and supervised the court's implementation of the arbitral award, Urge natural resources departments to fully perform their duties and recover land transfer fees and overdue liquidated damages. The amount of state-owned land transfer fees recovered in this case and special activities is huge, which fully demonstrates the spirit of the procuratorial organ to bite the "hard bone", which not only effectively protects the national interests, but also optimizes the local business environment.
Administrative Public Interest Litigation Case of Changing Floor Area Ratio in Jiangning District, Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province
Keywords
Pre litigation procedure of administrative public interest litigation Transfer of state-owned land use right changes plot ratio
[Main point]
In view of the situation that the construction project changes the plot ratio and fails to pay the state-owned land use right transfer fee, the procuratorial organ urges the relevant administrative departments to cooperate in recovering the state-owned land use right transfer fee.
Basic Case
In December 2005, a real estate company won the right to use a piece of state-owned construction land through bidding, auction and listing, and signed the Transfer Contract of State owned Land Use Right, which agreed that the land area was 47673 ㎡, the purpose was office, commercial, residential and supporting facilities, the floor area ratio was 2.3, and the transfer fee was 86 million yuan (paid). In February 2007, the original Jiangning District Planning Bureau adjusted the floor area ratio to 4.84. On July 13, 2009, the original Jiangning Land and Resources Branch issued the Letter on Signing the Land Transfer Contract and Paying the Land Transfer Fee to the company, requiring it to sign the Supplementary Agreement on Land Transfer Contract as soon as possible and pay the land transfer fee, but the company did not handle it. Although the original Land and Resources Branch has repeatedly urged for payment, the huge amount of land transfer fees that have not been paid has not been recovered.
[Investigate and supervise the performance of duties]
In 2018, the Nanjing People's Procuratorate of Jiangsu Province (hereinafter referred to as the Nanjing People's Procuratorate) found that the real estate development company involved in the case did not timely pay the state-owned land use right transfer fee after changing the plot ratio in handling an administrative appeal case, so it submitted the public interest litigation case existing in the case to the Jiangning District Procuratorate for handling.
The Jiangning District People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as the Jiangning District People's Procuratorate) decided to put the case on file for review on November 2, 2018 after receiving the transfer clues from the Nanjing Municipal People's Procuratorate. By obtaining the land use right transfer contract, the land transfer fee payment certificate, the performance account of the land and planning departments, and the floor area ratio adjustment document, ask the relevant staff of the land, planning, housing and construction departments, and the person in charge of the real estate company, and find out that the planning department and the Ministry of Land and Resources are not smoothly connected in the change of planning procedures, The fact that the enterprise involved did not pay the transfer fee of state-owned land use right according to law after changing the plot ratio. On November 22, 2018, Jiangning District People's Court issued pre litigation inspection suggestions to the original Land Branch, the original Planning Bureau, the District Finance Bureau and the District Housing and Urban Rural Development Bureau, suggesting that they actively perform their legal duties and take effective measures to recover land transfer fees in a timely manner.
In order to ensure the implementation of the procuratorial recommendations, the Jiangning District Court has held coordination meetings with the relevant departments of the district for many times to study solutions and suggest the relevant departments to report to the superior competent departments and the district government in a timely manner. Nanjing Municipal People's Court has also visited Jiangning District People's Court for many times to investigate and guide the difficult issues of the case. Under the active promotion of the procuratorial organs at the urban level, the Jiangning District Government attaches great importance to it and has convened the procuratorial organs and relevant functional departments to hold special meetings with a real estate company for many times to study the disposal plan. On July 12, 2019, the company involved signed the Supplementary Agreement on Land Transfer Contract with the original Land and Resources Branch. After the signing of the agreement, Jiangning District Institute continued to follow up and supervise, and urged the person in charge of the enterprise to pay the land transfer fee through an interview. The company paid a total of 81.375191 million yuan of land transfer fees, liquidated damages and taxes in July and December 2019.
Typical significance
Due to the adjustment of land use planning and the poor connection of relevant administrative work, it is not uncommon to fail to pay the transfer fee of state-owned land use right in accordance with the law after changing the plot ratio. In this case, the two-level procuratorial organs handled the case in an integrated way. The higher court strengthened its guidance, jointly played the procuratorial function of administrative public interest litigation, urged multiple administrative organs to cooperate with each other to perform their duties in accordance with the law and collect the transfer fees and liquidated damages for the use of state-owned land, effectively protecting the security of state-owned property, reflecting the role of the procuratorial organ as the guardian of national interests in the transfer of state-owned land.
Administrative Public Welfare Litigation Case of Idle Land in Shanghe County, Shandong Province
Keywords
Administrative public interest litigation State owned land use right transfer idle land Special treatment of related case protest
[Main point]
When procuratorial organs handle administrative public interest litigation cases, they comprehensively use civil procuratorial supervision means to assist the realization of the purpose of administrative public interest litigation. Whether the administrative organ performs its duties properly should be judged scientifically, and the conditions for withdrawing the lawsuit should be strictly grasped to ensure that the public welfare is effectively maintained.
Basic Case
On January 9, 2014, the former Shanghe County Bureau of Land and Resources (hereinafter referred to as "Shanghe County Bureau of Land and Resources") signed the Contract for Transfer of the Use Right of State owned Construction Land with a Hui Real Estate Company. A Hui Real Estate Company failed to start construction as agreed in the contract, resulting in idle land and breach of contract. On September 25, 2017, Shanghe County Land and Resources Bureau issued the Notice of Idle Land Survey to the company and urged it to start construction as soon as possible. The company started construction on December 18, 2017, and the overdue commencement period was 1043 days.
[Investigate and supervise the performance of duties]
On April 3, 2018, Shanghe County People's Procuratorate of Shandong Province (hereinafter referred to as Shanghe County People's Procuratorate) found this clue in the performance of its duties and filed a case for investigation. It was found that the Land and Resources Bureau of Shanghe County did not investigate a Hui Real Estate Company's suspected idle land behavior in a timely manner, nor did it investigate the company's liability for breach of contract, resulting in the infringement of national interests. In the same month, the Shanghe County Court issued a pre litigation inspection proposal to the Shanghe County Land and Resources Bureau, suggesting that it fully perform its duties according to law, investigate the suspected idle land of a Hui Real Estate Company, dispose of it according to law, and investigate the company's liability for breach of contract in accordance with legal provisions and the contract.
The Land and Resources Bureau of Shanghe County replied that: a Hui Real Estate Company failed to start construction in accordance with the contract period and became idle since February 8, 2016. On December 18, 2017, a Hui Real Estate Company started construction, lifted the idle state, and reached the rectification standard within the specified rectification period. According to the decision of the county's idle land use promotion meeting, a Hui Real Estate Company will not be held responsible for idle land. With regard to the breach of contract of a certain Hui Real Estate Company, a supplementary agreement has been signed with the company, and the company will not be held accountable and the completion period will be extended. In response to the reply, Shanghe County Court further found out that the Land and Resources Bureau of Shanghe County had not signed a supplementary agreement with a Hui Real Estate Company, and the original state-owned land transfer contract had not changed. A Hui Real Estate Company failed to pay the contract liquidated damages, Shanghe County Land and Resources Bureau failed to fully perform its duties, and the national interests are still in a state of infringement.
[Litigation and Enforcement]
On September 26, 2018, Shanghe County Court filed an administrative public interest lawsuit with the People's Court of Shanghe County. Request the defendant to continue to perform his duties and recover the liquidated damages in accordance with the law. In the court hearing, the Land and Resources Bureau of Shanghe County argued that it had issued a Letter of Reminder for Paying Liquidated Damages and Continuing to Perform the Contract to a certain Hui Real Estate Company. When the reminder expired, a certain Hui Real Estate Company failed to pay the liquidated damages and had filed a civil lawsuit according to law. On December 18, 2018, the People's Court of Shanghe County suspended the trial of this administrative public interest litigation case on the ground that it needs to wait for the trial result of the civil litigation case. On September 23, 2019, the People's Court of Shanghe County made a civil judgment, believing that the minutes of the meeting for promoting the use of idle land in the whole county determined that a Hui Real Estate Company would not be held accountable, so it rejected the lawsuit request of the Land and Resources Bureau of Shanghe County. Shanghe County Land and Resources Bureau did not file an appeal, and the civil judgment came into effect. On October 14, 2019, the Jinan Municipal People's Procuratorate launched the supervision procedure of civil effective judgments according to its authority, and filed a protest to the Jinan Intermediate People's Court according to law. The Intermediate People's Court of Jinan ordered the People's Court of Shanghe County to retry the case. The retrial court adopted the protest opinion and adjudged that a certain Hui Real Estate Company paid 2739961 yuan as the penalty, and a certain Hui Real Estate Company paid the penalty after receiving the court's retrial judgment.
The People's Court of Shanghe County resumed the trial of the case and called a pre court meeting. After reviewing and cross examining the evidence related to the payment of liquidated damages by a Hui Real Estate Company submitted by the Land and Resources Bureau of Shanghe County, the People's Court of Shanghe County believed that the appeal of administrative public interest litigation had been fully realized and met the conditions for withdrawal of the lawsuit, and withdrew the lawsuit against the Land and Resources Bureau of Shanghe County after being reported to the higher authorities for approval.
In response to the problems reflected in the case, the People's Procuratorate of Jinan City has contacted with the Land and Resources Bureau of Jinan City to promote the Jinan Municipal Government to carry out a two-year special action for the disposal of approved but not provided and idle land. At the same time, the Opinions on Issues Related to the Identification and Disposal of Idle Land has been issued, clarifying the disposal standards for idle land caused by different reasons. By the end of 2019, the disposal of 172 vacant land of 651.4 hectares in the city has been completed.
Typical significance
1. When procuratorial organs handle administrative public interest litigation cases, they should make full use of legal supervision means. In the case of administrative public interest litigation, it may occur that the trial of administrative public interest litigation may be suspended because the results of the other case have the preliminary effect. As the result of the trial of another case affects the judgment result of the administrative public interest litigation, the procuratorial organ should supervise the whole process of the other case and take the initiative. If the trial result of another case is improper, the procuratorial organ has the right to start civil or administrative procuratorial supervision, make full use of legal supervision means, play a good combination of fists, ensure the realization of administrative public interest litigation appeals, and maximize the protection of national interests and social public interests.
2. In this case, the procuratorial organ correctly understood and handled the issue that the relevant units proposed to take the minutes of government meetings as the basis for the administrative organ to perform its duties, and believed that the minutes of meetings could not break through the national laws, regulations and industrial rules in terms of effectiveness and level, which has important practical significance for judging whether the administrative organ is fully and properly performing its duties in practice.
3. When the procuratorial organ withdraws the administrative public interest litigation, it should review whether the administrative organ corrects the illegal act or performs its duties according to law from the aspects of the elements of conduct, the elements of results and whether the administrative means are exhausted, and scientifically judge whether the administrative organ performs its duties in place. During the trial of a case, the procuratorial organ may withdraw the prosecution only when the administrative organ corrects the illegal act or performs its duties according to law, the national interests and social and public interests are safeguarded, and all the procuratorial organ's litigation claims are realized.
Protect the common precious wealth of all citizens The person in charge of the Eighth Procuratorate Office of the Supreme People's Procuratorate answered questions about typical cases of administrative public interest litigation in the field of state-owned property protection and state-owned land use right transfer
State owned property and land are important components of national interests. However, in practice, the situation of state owned property and land being infringed is still severe. On December 17, the Supreme People's Procuratorate released a number of typical cases of administrative public interest litigation in the field of the protection of state-owned property and the transfer of state-owned land use rights. Hu Weilie, the director of the Eighth Procuratorate Office of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, answered questions from reporters.
Reporter: Why is it said that the protection of state-owned property and the transfer of state-owned land use rights are important areas of public interest litigation? What specific violations are mainly supervised by public interest litigation procurators in these two fields?
Hu Weilie: State owned property and land are the common precious wealth of all citizens, an important part of national interests, play an important role in national political, economic and social life, and play an important role in promoting national economic and social development, ensuring and improving people's livelihood, and protecting the ecological environment. In recent years, with the in-depth promotion of the comprehensive rule of law, the legal system and management norms in these two fields have become more and more perfect, and the relevant administrative organs have also played an active role in administering according to law and strengthening supervision. However, in practice, the situation of state-owned property and land being infringed is still serious, and it is necessary to strengthen the supervision over the violation of public welfare by administrative organs in these two fields, so as to safeguard national interests more effectively.
These two areas are the statutory areas of administrative public interest litigation as stipulated in the revised Administrative Procedure Law in 2017. Previously, General Secretary Xi Jinping made this clear in his explanation of the Decision of the Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee and the decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on the pilot work of public interest litigation. In 2020, the Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee and the relevant decisions of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress also put forward new requirements for strengthening the management and supervision of state-owned assets. The procuratorial organs resolutely implement the requirements of the central government and legal provisions, adhere to the case handling as the core, take public welfare protection as the goal, constantly increase the procuratorial work in these two fields of public interest litigation, and strive to be a good guardian of state-owned property and land.
On the protection of state-owned property, the specific violations supervised by the procuratorial organ include: low Transfer and lease state-owned assets and various state-owned economic resources occupied and used by administrative institutions in disguised form; Less tax collection, tax exemption, administrative charges, fines and confiscations in violation of laws and regulations, and unauthorized decision of tax preferences; Violating regulations to pay various bonuses and subsidies; Social security, social relief, preferential treatment, resettlement and donation, etc.
In the transfer of state-owned land use right, the specific circumstances supervised by the procuratorial organ include: illegal transfer of land use right at a low price; Be negligent in performing the obligation of collecting land transfer fees; Negligent in handling the illegal acts of idle land; Negligent in handling illegal acts such as unauthorized change of land use and plot ratio; Illegal approval, etc.
Reporter: In practice, how does the procuratorial organ play the role of public interest litigation to protect state-owned property and the right to use state-owned land? What achievements have been made?
Hu Weilie: From the case handling situation in various places, the procuratorial organ mainly communicates and coordinates with the administrative organ through pre litigation consultation, procuratorial suggestions and other ways to urge the administrative organ to solve the problem in the pre litigation stage. For the administrative organ's behavior of not performing its duties according to the procuratorial suggestions, it forces the administrative organ to perform its duties by filing administrative public interest litigation.
Due to the strong professionalism of cases in the fields of state-owned property protection and state-owned land use right transfer, and the narrow channel and scope of clue sources compared with other fields, there are fewer cases of people reporting to the procuratorial organs on their own initiative, which puts higher requirements on the case handling personnel of procuratorial organs at all levels in terms of case sensitivity and ability to dig clues. In addition, these two areas are often related to major national economic policies or people's livelihood hot issues, with high social concern, and slightly careless handling, which is very easy to cause social public opinion risks and other issues. In this regard, the procuratorial organs in various regions have taken various measures to improve their internal skills, enhance their skills, dig deep into clues, expand their achievements, and organize special actions with different characteristics in combination with local conditions to constantly make new progress and achievements.
Since the public interest litigation procuratorial work was fully carried out in July 2017, the procuratorial organs across the country have handled 42413 public interest litigation cases in the field of state-owned property protection and state-owned land use right transfer, urged the recovery of more than 12.5 billion yuan of national property and rights, and urged the recovery of more than 28.5 billion yuan of unpaid state-owned land use right transfer fees.
Reporter: From these typical cases, what are the characteristics of the public interest litigation work of the procuratorial organ in the field of state-owned property protection and state-owned land use right transfer?
Hu Weilie: These nine cases are a microcosm of the procuratorial work of public interest litigation in the field of state-owned property protection and state-owned land use right transfer, which reflects the role of the procuratorial function of public interest litigation in special relief of national interests and has the following characteristics:
First, focus on the implementation of major national strategies and the hot issues of people's livelihood to reflect the overall situation of service. For example, the legal collection of water and soil loss conservation fees in the ecological protection and high-quality development of the Yellow River basin, the standard distribution of subsidies in the fight against poverty, the collection of environmental protection taxes, and the collection of land use right transfer fees in China for land collection and storage. Based on the procuratorial function of public interest litigation, the procuratorial organ urges the administrative organ to perform its duties according to law.
The second is to focus on point to area and promote systematic improvement. For example, the People's Procuratorate of Zhuzhou City, Hunan Province, led by the outstanding land transfer fees of individual cases, carried out in-depth special supervision activities to clear up the outstanding land transfer fees in the whole city, cleared up the outstanding land transfer fees of 2 billion yuan, and achieved "handling one case, influencing one area, and driving the solution of the first class problems". For example, Ganzhou Municipal Procuratorate in Jiangxi Province promoted the establishment of a working mechanism of linkage and cooperation among multiple departments and strengthened the verification, collection and management of environmental protection tax by taking the case of environmental protection tax evasion as a driving force.
The third is to use procuratorial wisdom to help solve administrative supervision problems, reflecting the equal emphasis on supervision and support. For example, the Procuratorate of Yanta District, Xi'an City, Shaanxi Province, promoted the issuance of normative documents at the provincial level in response to the inconsistency between the "Three Determinations" plan of the administrative organ and the departmental rules, to remedy the regulatory loopholes of the administrative organ. For example, the People's Procuratorate of Zhidan County, Shaanxi Province, assisted the administrative authorities to explain the case to the enterprises involved, dispelled doubts and promoted the enterprises involved to pay the overdue compensation for water and soil conservation according to law.
Fourth, give play to the advantages of integration and improve the quality and efficiency of case handling. The relevant procuratorial organs have formed a joint force of supervision in such aspects as online claim transfer, evidence collection, fact finding, communication and coordination, and court response. For example, in the case of changing the plot ratio handled by the Jiangning District Procuratorate in Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, the clues were transferred by the Nanjing Procuratorate. For the difficult problems in the process of handling the case, the Nanjing Procuratorate strengthened its guidance to the lower level, played the procuratorial function together, and promoted the administrative organs to perform their duties according to law.
The fifth is to comprehensively use supervision methods to strive for the best case handling effect. The public interest litigation work will be coordinated with criminal prosecution and civil administrative prosecution work to form a "combination punch" to safeguard public interests. For example, the Xinchang County Court of Zhejiang Province finds clues to public interest litigation cases from criminal cases, and transfers the new evidence found in the public interest litigation investigation to the criminal prosecution department to play a combination punch of "public interest litigation+criminal strike". For example, Shanghe County Procuratorate of Shandong Province, in handling the public interest litigation case of idle land, started the civil procuratorial supervision and raised a protest to ensure the realization of the appeal of administrative public interest litigation for another effective judgment affecting the outcome of the administrative public interest litigation case.
Sixthly, adhere to follow-up supervision, and show the spirit of daring to bite the bullet. For example, the Procuratorate of Zaoqiang County, Hebei Province, based on the reply of the administrative organ that does not have corresponding responsibilities, through legal analysis, accurately identified the responsibilities that the administrative organ should perform, and strengthened the rigidity of supervision by filing a lawsuit. For example, the Procuratorate of Jiaoling County, Guangdong Province, timely followed up and supervised the implementation of the repayment agreement, identified the difference between failure to perform duties and failure to perform duties according to law, and promoted the administrative organs to perform duties according to law by filing administrative public interest litigation.
Reporter: Next, what measures will be taken by the procuratorial organ to continue its public interest litigation work in the field of state-owned property protection and state-owned land use right transfer?
Hu Weilie: First, improve the political position, guide procuratorial organs at all levels to fully understand the importance of public interest litigation in the field of state-owned property protection and state-owned land use right transfer, and further enhance the sense of responsibility and mission to do a good job.
The second is to focus on the major decisions and arrangements of the central government, identify the entry point and focus of the public interest litigation procuratorial work in two areas, take effective measures, broaden the case clues, increase the efforts to handle cases, and effectively strengthen the supervision of violations in key areas and key links of state-owned property losses.
The third is to improve the integrated case handling mechanism, improve the case handling system including assignment, supervision, participation, proposal, and lead. For "tough" cases, the superior court should strengthen guidance to the subordinates, help remove interference and resistance, and ensure the smooth progress of case handling.
Fourth, strengthen the construction of external cooperation mechanism, especially strengthen the communication and cooperation with audit institutions, share information and resources, and jointly safeguard public interests.
Fifth, strengthen theoretical research on difficult and hot issues in the two fields, respond to practical needs, strengthen professional quality training for police officers, innovate training methods, and improve case handling practical skills and professional level.
