The article "The 30th Anniversary of the Promulgation of the State Compensation Law" reviews the → typical cases

This year marks the thirtieth anniversary of the promulgation of the State Compensation Law, an important law that embodies the constitutional principle of respecting and protecting human rights. Over the past 30 years since its promulgation, it has played an important role in protecting the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations, promoting the lawful exercise of functions and powers by state organs, and maintaining social harmony and stability.

This reporter learned today from the Supreme People's Court that the Supreme People's Court has selected four cases from the judicial compensation cases heard by the people's courts over the past 30 years for publication. Among the four cases, some of them are landmark and influential cases in the field of state compensation, and some have a certain role in promoting the revision of laws and the formulation of judicial interpretations. Cases in which victims of unjust criminal cases or their families have received compensation in accordance with law, such as cases in which the families of Wu Chunhong, Zhang's uncle and nephew, and Hugejiltu applied for compensation; There are also cases involving property rights protection, such as the case of a real estate company in Shenyang applying for compensation. The published cases involve compensation for damage to personal freedom, compensation for damage to life and health, compensation for property damage, and other causes of action.

01

Wu Chunhong applied for a retrial of the case of not guilty compensation

Reasons for selection

This case is a case in which the Supreme People's Court applied the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of State Compensation Cases to Determine Liability for Moral Damages, and made a decision on state compensation, and was selected as one of the top ten cases in 2021 for promoting the rule of law in the new era.

Basic facts of the case

Wu Chunhong was sentenced to life imprisonment on suspicion of intentional homicide. After the Supreme People's Court ordered the Henan Provincial High People's Court to retry the case, the court issued a retrial judgment on February 24, 2020, revoking the first- and second-instance judgments and acquitting Wu Chunhong. In June 2020, Wu Chunhong applied for state compensation. After the Henan Provincial High People's Court made a decision, Wu Chunhong was not satisfied and applied to the Compensation Committee of the Supreme People's Court for a compensation decision.

Adjudication Results

On April 23, 2021, the Compensation Committee of the Supreme People's Court issued the (2020) Supreme Court Commission Compensation No. 25 State Compensation Decision, upholding the compensation for Wu Chunhong's infringement of personal liberty and apologizing to Wu Chunhong in the original state compensation decision of the Henan Provincial High People's Court, and decided to follow the provisions of Article 35 of the State Compensation Law and the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Determining Liability for Moral Damages in the Trial of State Compensation Cases, which came into effect on April 1, 2021. Increase the solatium for mental injury from $680,000 to $1,200,000.

Typical significance

How to provide better remedies to victims of criminal wrongful convictions, especially how to consider the standard of compensation for moral damages, is one of the hot issues of social concern. In order to implement the spirit of Article 35 of the State Compensation Law on compensation for moral damages, the Supreme People's Court has promulgated the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of State Compensation Cases to Determine Liability for Moral Damages" based on judicial practice. In this case, the Supreme People's Court applied the newly promulgated interpretation provisions, comprehensively considered the original verdict, the punishment, the length of detention, the victim's mental injury and many other factors, and decided to increase the amount of solatium for mental damages, so as to maximize the comfort of the mental trauma suffered by the claimant for compensation, and put in place the legislative purpose of the State Compensation Law's rights and remedies.

02

Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping applied for a retrial of the case of not guilty compensation

Reasons for selection

It is particularly important for victims of criminal wrongful convictions to be able to obtain timely and adequate compensation. Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping were wrongfully convicted and detained for a long time, and the people's courts insisted that mistakes must be corrected, and immediately initiated state compensation in accordance with the law after the retrial changed the verdict to not guilty, giving due compensation to the victims of criminal wrongful convictions, and convincing the people with prompt and adequate remedies that justice will not be absent in the end.

Basic facts of the case

Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping were convicted of rape and sentenced to death with a two-year reprieve, and 15 years in prison, respectively, for their involvement in a rape death case that occurred in 2003. After a retrial, the Zhejiang Provincial High People's Court publicly pronounced its verdict on March 26, 2013, revoking the original first- and second-instance judgments and acquitting Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping. On May 2, 2013, Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping applied for state compensation.

Adjudication Results

The Zhejiang Provincial High People's Court made a public apology to Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping immediately after the retrial and changed the verdict, filed the case on the day it received the application for state compensation, and sent someone to hear Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping's opinions, and made a decision on state compensation 15 days later, holding that Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping should be compensated for their personal liberty in accordance with the legal standards from their criminal detention on May 23, 2003 to their acquittal after retrial on March 26, 2013, and that the specific circumstances of their wrongful conviction and sentencing, the execution of their sentences, and the impact on their work and life should be comprehensively considered. Discretionary solatium for moral damages. On May 17, 2013, the court made a decision on state compensation, compensating Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping with compensation of more than 110 yuan each for personal freedom and solatium for mental damages.

Typical significance

This case is a benchmark criminal wrongful compensation case that has been corrected and compensated earlier since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. The people's courts' insistence on correcting wrongful criminal cases and promptly and fully compensating victims in accordance with the law reflects the state's clear attitude of pursuing judicial fairness and continuously promoting the civilized progress of the rule of law. In this case, the people's court adhered to the close connection of "reform and compensation", and immediately publicly apologized to Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping after the retrial and changed the judgment, and made a decision on state compensation 15 days after receiving the compensation application. At the same time, the people's courts are to determine solatium for mental injuries based on the level of local economic development and other specific circumstances such as Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping's wrongful conviction and sentencing, the enforcement of criminal punishments, and the impact on work and life. These positive actions and explorations have important reference value for promoting the issuance of relevant guiding opinions on the application of moral damages in state compensation cases.

03

The family of Hugjiltu applied for a retrial of the case of not guilty compensation

Reasons for selection

The reversal of the original criminal verdict in this case has a major impact on the whole country. The original wrongful death sentence has been executed, and the verdict has been changed to not guilty after retrial, and the family of the deceased victim has been compensated preferentially, which not only expresses the condolences for the deceased and the comfort of the living, but also reflects the state's firm determination to have zero tolerance for criminal wrongful convictions and to correct mistakes.

Basic facts of the case

In June 1996, Hugjiltu was sentenced to death for intentional homicide and hooliganism, and was executed on the 10th of the same month. On December 13, 2014, the High People's Court of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region issued a retrial criminal verdict: Hugejiltu was acquitted. On December 25, 2014, the Hugejiltu family applied for state compensation.

Adjudication Results

On December 30, 2014, the High People's Court of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region issued the (2014) Nei Fa Bao Zi No. 00001 State Compensation Decision, paying the family of the claimant Hugejiletu a total of 2,059,621.4 yuan in death compensation, funeral expenses, compensation for the restriction of personal liberty in Hugejiltu, and solatium for mental damages.

Typical significance

The retrial and revision of the Hugejil pattern and state compensation have had a significant impact at home and abroad. The case involved a retrial to a not guilty verdict and the death of the victim. In the spirit of fully protecting the lawful rights and interests of the claimant for compensation, the people's courts are to earnestly study and judge and fully consider circumstances such as the tremendous mental pain caused by the victim's death to his family, and preferentially determine the overall plan for compensation for death compensation, funeral expenses, compensation for restrictions on personal liberty during his lifetime, and solatium for mental damages. By providing full relief to the victims' families, this case not only expresses the condolences for the deceased and comfort for the living, but also reflects the state's firm determination to have zero tolerance for criminal wrongful convictions and to correct mistakes.

04

A real estate development company in Shenyang applied for compensation for criminal illegal seizure

Reasons for selection

This case is the first criminal case of illegal seizure and compensation involving property rights protection accepted and decided by the Compensation Committee of the Supreme People's Court.

Basic facts of the case

Between 2005 and 2006, a real estate development company in Shenyang (hereinafter referred to as the real estate company) expanded its area of 29.7 acres without authorization in the process of participating in the transformation of the village. In 2008, the Liaoning Provincial Public Security Department found that the real estate company and its personnel were suspected of illegally occupying agricultural land and other crimes in the process of investigating the criminal case of Huang, a cadre of Lanshengtai Village, and seized 20 million yuan from the company. After the trial, the real estate company, the actual controller and the original legal representative were convicted and exempted from punishment for the crime of illegally occupying agricultural land, but the aforementioned 20 million yuan was not recognized as criminal proceeds by the effective judgment. After the criminal verdict takes effect, the real estate company applies for state compensation.

Adjudication Results

During the trial of this case, the real estate company and the Liaoning Provincial Public Security Department reached an agreement on the return of the financial documents during the evidence exchange period and completed the performance before the cross-examination, and then during the cross-examination organized by the Compensation Committee of the Supreme People's Court, the collegial panel presided over the consultation, and the two parties voluntarily reached an agreement that the Liaoning Provincial Public Security Department would return to the real estate company the 20 million yuan seized during the investigation and pay the corresponding interest loss of 830,000 yuan within 30 days after the state compensation decision took effect. After review, the Compensation Committee of the Supreme People's Court made a compensation decision based on the content of the agreement and announced it in court, which was served on the same day and fully performed.

Typical significance

Studying and implementing the important spirit of the Party Central Committee on strengthening the protection of property rights, and properly handling cases involving the protection of property rights in accordance with the law, is an important measure for the people's courts to implement the principle of serving the overall situation and administering justice for the people. In this case, the Supreme People's Court found that the criminal seizure by the Liaoning Provincial Public Security Department was illegal in accordance with the law, and facilitated the conclusion of the case through negotiation, which protected the legitimate rights and interests of the parties and demonstrated its responsibility to strengthen the protection of property rights in the state compensation procedure. At the same time, this case sounded the "first gavel" of the justice's circuit trial of state compensation cases, and effectively facilitated the conclusion of the agreement, the announcement of the decision in court, and the completion of service on the same day through hearing opinions, exchanging evidence, public cross-examination, step-by-step consultation, remote video resolution, electronic signature, etc., reflecting the judicial pursuit of fairness, efficiency, sunshine and convenience. In addition, the interest compensation rules adopted in this case were absorbed by the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of Criminal Compensation Cases, and played a leading role in "hearing one case and governing one area".

Source: CCTV news client