The Tobacco Bureau responded that in the wee hours of the morning, they came to forge evidence

A notice that should have been delivered to the party three years ago, but on an early morning three years later, the staff temporarily posted it on the door and took photos for evidence. This behavior has recently become the focus of public opinion. Some media reports pointed out that in a lawsuit, the staff of the Tobacco Monopoly Bureau in Maiji District, Tianshui City, Gansu Province, were accused of "posing for photos" in the process of delivering the notice, which was recorded by the surveillance camera, causing concern about possible perjury.

In the trial, the representative of the Maiji District Tobacco Monopoly Bureau explained that although he admitted that the delivery record three years ago was lost, he emphasized that this supplementary auction was to correct the previous negligence, and insisted that despite the shortcomings in the delivery process, the administrative act itself was still legal and effective, in line with the procedural requirements. On June 17, the staff of the bureau disclosed that the personnel involved in the incident were being investigated by the Commission for Discipline Inspection.

Fu Jian, director of Henan Zejin Law Firm, analyzed that the validity of the evidence for the remake needs to be judged by the court according to the rules of evidence. Considering the nature of the remake, its authenticity may be questioned. If it is proved that the staff member knowingly knew that the other party had not received the notice, but still deliberately took the film and submitted it to the court, this may constitute a perjury, but the specific situation needs further investigation and confirmation. As for the evidence to be supplemented or corrected, it is legally allowed to supplement or modify the original evidence, provided that legal procedures are followed to ensure the legitimacy and probative force of the content to be supplemented or corrected.

The background of the case involves Ruan Shuangquan, a resident of Tianshui, Gansu Province, who was arrested and sentenced for illegally reselling tobacco. Ruan Shuangquan insisted that he had not received the notice of the withdrawal and cancellation of the tobacco monopoly license, which directly affected his right to apply for administrative review or bring a lawsuit. During the second instance, he filed an administrative lawsuit to request the revocation of the administrative act of the Tobacco Bureau. The evidence presented by Ruan Shuangquan's lawyer shows that the staff of the tobacco bureau suspected that they had recently put up a photo of the notice three years ago, including posting the notice and taking photos at the original business location in the morning, and trying to cooperate with the scene by tearing up the "Congratulations and Fortune" Spring Festival couplets on the scene. These behaviors were captured by the monitoring video.

The response of the Maiji District Tobacco Bureau was that Ruan Shuangquan could not be contacted at that time and he stuck a document on the door and took photos, but the original photos were lost due to the negligence of the staff. The behavior of taking additional photos was decided and implemented by the staff themselves after they realized that the delivery materials were incomplete, and then they reported to their superiors and accepted criticism. The CAAC side reiterated that although the delivery method was defective, the entire administrative act was still considered legal and effective. The lawyer countered that the rectification of business suspension and license recovery were two independent administrative acts, and no evidence of effective delivery decision was found from the tobacco bureau.

At present, the personnel involved in the Maiji District Tobacco Bureau are being investigated by the Commission for Discipline Inspection, and the specific handling results of the matter have yet to be announced.