On July 12, the Wechat Public Number of Jiangsu Higher Court issued an information note on Geng Wanxis application for state compensation by the Compensation Commission of Jiangsu Higher Peoples Court.
On July 11, 2019, the Compensation Commission of Jiangsu Provincial Higher Peoples Court rejected Geng Wanxis application for state compensation by making (2019) decision on compensation of the Soviet Commission in the case of innocent compensation retried by Yancheng Intermediate Peoples Court.
I. Basic Situation of Cases
In October 1986, Geng Wanxi was sentenced to five yearsimprisonment and one years deprivation of political rights by the Peoples Court of Binhai County on the first instance for fraud. On November 24, the second instance of Yancheng Intermediate Peoples Court upheld the original judgment. On September 3, 1990, Geng Wanxi was released on parole until April 27, 1991. In June 2018, the Third Circuit Court of the Supreme Peoples Court retried Geng Wanxi and acquitted him.
On June 20, 2018, Geng Wanxi applied to Yancheng Intermediate Peoples Court for state compensation, demanding compensation from Yancheng Intermediate Peoples Court for personal freedom compensation from detention to the expiration of parole, wage loss from detention to 60 years of age, pension and medical insurance loss per capita life, and spiritual comfort, totalling 1644 030. Five yuan. After examination, Yancheng Intermediate Peoples Court found that the case did not apply to the provisions of the State Compensation Law. On April 30, 2019, it decided to reject Geng Wanxis application for state compensation.
Geng Wanxi refused to accept this. On May 14, 2019, he filed an application with the Compensation Commission of Jiangsu Provincial Higher Peoples Court to revoke the decision of the Intermediate Peoples Court of Yancheng (2018) of Su 09. After hearing, the Compensation Commission of Jiangsu Provincial Higher Peoples Court held that the Yancheng Intermediate Peoples Court decided to reject Geng Wanxis application for state compensation, and the applicable law was correct.
2. The State Compensation Law is not applicable in this case.
First, Geng Wanxi was arrested on 28 April 1986 and paroled on 3 September 1990. The State Compensation Law came into force on January 1, 1995. Article 1 of the Supreme Peoples Courts Approval on the Retroactivity of the State Compensation Law of the Peoples Republic of China and the Scope of Acceptance by the Compensation Commission of the Peoples Court clearly stipulates that the State Compensation Law does not go back to the past. That is to say, acts of infringing upon the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations by state organs and their staff members when exercising their functions and powers occur before December 31, 1994, and shall be dealt with in accordance with the previous relevant provisions. If it happens after January 1, 1995 and has been confirmed by law, the State Compensation Law shall be applied to compensate it. Chinas state compensation for infringement of the right to personal freedom is calculated in the form of daily compensation. Therefore, with the release of detention, the violation of personal freedom will cease. Geng Wanxi was released from custody on parole before December 31, 1994. Therefore, the provisions of the State Compensation Law are not applicable in this case.
Secondly, the Supreme Peoples Court has made it clear through the way of case reply that the state is not liable for compensation for the fact that the party involved in the retrial and acquittal case has not actually been detained during the period of parole.
Thirdly, according to the provisions of Article 35 of the State Compensation Law, the State shall be liable for compensation for mental damage on the premise that it conforms to the provisions of Article 3 or Article 17 of the Law. That is to say, mental damage itself can not directly cause the application of the State Compensation Law. Therefore, Geng Wanxis alleged mental damage has been in a state of continuity, and can not be used as a reason for the application of the State Compensation Law.
3. Geng Wanxi should be compensated economically according to relevant policies
According to Article 1 of the Supreme Peoples Courts Approval on the Retroactivity of the State Compensation Law of the Peoples Republic of China and the Scope of Acceptance by the Compensation Commission of the Peoples Court, the State Compensation Law is not applicable in this case, but Geng Wanxi should be compensated economically in accordance with previous relevant provisions. According to Su Gao Fafas Several Opinions on the Rehabilitation of Criminal Cases Sentenced since 1977 and Revised after Retrial, the rehabilitation of Geng Wanxi case involves two aspects.
One is about the implementation of retirement benefits. During his detention, Geng Wanxis former unit had been disbanded, and all the relevant personnel were self-employed. Moreover, Geng Wanxi has supplemented the old-age insurance for employees in January 2012 and started to receive pensions. His working life started in 1970, far before he was detained in this case. Geng Wanxi now asks for endowment insurance again, which does not conform to the state policy.
The second is about wage subsidy or economic subsidy. Geng Wanxiyuans unit no longer exists, and can be compensated economically with reference to the provisions of the State Compensation Law. Geng Wanxi was detained for 1590 days. Referring to the provisions of Article 33 of the State Compensation Law, according to the average daily wage of employees in the previous year, Geng Wanxi can obtain compensation equivalent to personal freedom compensation of 1590 *315.94=502344.6 yuan. Referring to Article 35 of the State Compensation Law and Article 7 of the Opinion of the Supreme Peoples Court on the Application of Mental Damage Compensation to the Compensation Commission of the Peoples Court in the Trial of State Compensation Cases, Geng Wanxi can also receive spiritual consolation not exceeding 35% of the total amount of personal freedom compensation. The two compensations totaled nearly 680,000 yuan.
Geng Wanxi advocates reimbursement of his salary from the time of detention to the age of 60. There is no legal and policy basis, because his former unit has been dissolved and there is no factual basis.
IV. Coordination between two levels of courts
During the examination of Geng Wanxis state compensation application by Yancheng Intermediate Peoples Court, the two sides coordinated with Geng Wanxi many times by telephone communication and face-to-face exchange of opinions. Eventually, the two sides failed to reach an agreement because they could not coordinate the old-age insurance procedures for Geng Wanxi.
During the trial of Compensation Commission of Jiangsu Provincial Higher Peoples Court, the relevant materials were collected and verified by Geng Wanxi. It was found that the Funing County Comprehensive Trade Services Department, where Geng Wanxi was originally located, was dissolved during his detention, and that the relevant staff were self-employed. The Binhai County Human Resources and Social Security Bureau had been established in 2012. In January 2001, Geng Wanxi supplemented the old-age insurance for employees and other facts. The Compensation Commission of Jiangsu Provincial Higher Peoples Court has also discussed with Geng Wanxi the compensation scheme, which is as follows: referring to the provisions of the State Compensation Law, the Yancheng Intermediate Court will implement the compensation scheme by paying Geng Wanxi 680,000 yuan equivalent to the amount of personal freedom compensation and spiritual comfort compensation, taking into account the actual situation of Geng Wanxi, and then make up for it. Help 100,000 yuan, a total of 780,000 yuan. Geng Wanxi disagreed with the compensation scheme, demanding payment of personal freedom compensation, wage loss and spiritual comfort totalling 202,9230.51 yuan. The amount of compensation proposed by Geng Wanxi is neither in accordance with the provisions of document No. 28 issued by Soviet Gao Law , nor in accordance with the provisions of the State Compensation Law.
Source: Xing Haibo_NBJS8850, Responsible Editor of Beijing Newspaper