On April 24, 2016, in Changzhou, Jiangsu, an environmental monitoring vehicle drove into the Changzhou Foreign Language School campus. Data picture/Visual China
Two public welfare organizations sued three polluting enterprises and were sentenced to lose the first instance; the second instance court believed that the company was harming the public interests and should apologize to the public in September 2015, after Changzhou Foreign Language School moved its new campus, many students in the school developed physical discomfort. Many people have abnormal symptoms such as dermatitis, eczema, and abnormal blood indicators. Some students have been diagnosed with malignant diseases such as lymphoma and leukemia. Parents suspect that their children's illness may be related to the open space opposite the school where soil restoration construction is underway. Environmental protection organizations " Friends of Nature " and "Green Hairdressing Association" intervened to sue the company involved. The case is called the "Changzhou Drug Land Case". In the end, the court ruled that the public welfare organization lost the case in the first instance and was responsible for the case acceptance fee of 1.8918 million yuan.
Yesterday morning, the second instance of the "Changzhou Poisonous Land Case" Environmental Public Interest Litigation case was sentenced in Jiangsu Higher People's Court , and some litigation requests of "Friends of Nature" and "Green Haikong" were supported. The court held that the three chemical companies that caused pollution should apologize to the public for causing pollution and pay attorney fees and travel expenses to the two public welfare organizations.
"Friends of Nature" litigation agent said that the judgment result is within expectations, and sentenced to apology from the company is a small breakthrough. However, the litigation agent of the "Green Haikong Association" believes that this result does not deter the companies that cause pollution.
public apology request was supported
On the morning of December 19, the Jiangsu Higher People's Court held a public hearing on the "Changzhou Poisonous Land " public interest litigation case. In court, the prosecution and defense debated the issue of whether the three chemical companies should bear the liability for environmental pollution tort, whether they should bear the cost of environmental pollution repair, and whether they apologize to the public.
"Green Haikong Club" litigation agent said in court that the 100,000 residents within three kilometers of the polluted plot involved in the case are all pollution receptors and may be potentially affected by pollution. The three chemical companies are the persons responsible for pollution and should bear the responsibility for environmental restoration and control, and apologize to the teachers, students and surrounding residents of Changzhou Foreign Language School who have been harmed by environmental pollution.
"In accordance with the regulations of the Ministry of Environmental Protection, the land use rights are clarified, and the transferee shall bear the responsibility for governance and restoration." Changlong Chemical's litigation agent argued that the company has signed a "State-owned Land Use Right Acquisition Agreement" with the Land Reserve Center of New Taipei District, Changzhou City. The other two chemical companies also believe that the three companies should not bear the responsibility for repair and refuse to apologize on the grounds that pollution did not cause serious consequences.
In this judgment, the request of two environmental protection organizations to apology publicly was supported by the collegial panel. The court believes that although pollution has certain historical reasons and development limitations, it is difficult to require the three chemical companies to apologize for all their pollution behaviors. However, all three companies have been improperly dealt with.
, especially Changlong Company, was subject to administrative penalties for exceeding the standard of pollutant discharge, conducting related production, illegal storage, and disposing of hazardous waste without approval from the environmental protection department. In addition, waste liquid dumping occurred during the relocation project, resulting in serious local soil pollution. The public interest of society should be damaged and requested for an apology should be supported.
The court ruled that Changlong, Chang Yu and Huada, the three chemical companies that caused the pollution, apologized to the public for causing pollution in national media within 15 days after the judgment took effect.
The two environmental protection organizations also proposed that the three chemical companies bear the repair costs of government expenditure. However, the court held that the request exceeded the scope of environmental public interest litigation and was not supported. Zhao Guang, the agent of
"Green Hairdressing Club", believes that this result does not deter the companies that cause pollution.
"Changwai Pollution" incident
Guo Hua (pseudonym) was a parent of a student at Changzhou Foreign Language School. Two years ago, his son was in junior high school.In September 2015, the Foreign Language School, a key school in Xinbei District, Changzhou City, moved from the city center to the new site in the suburbs. Three months later, some students developed rashes and acne. Parents organized them to take their children to the hospital for examination.
According to CCTV reports, 641 students in the school were sent to the hospital for examination, of which 493 people developed abnormal symptoms such as dermatitis, eczema, bronchitis, abnormal blood indicators and leukopenia. Some students were also diagnosed with malignant diseases such as lymphoma and leukemia.
Parents quickly targeted the open space across the school, where land restoration was underway. They found out from the Internet that it was previously the location of three chemical companies, Changlong Company, Changyu Company and Huada Company. Changlong Chemical, the largest company, lived there for 52 years, so that open land is also called the "Changlong Plot".
"Before the relocation, the enterprise buried a large number of chemical hazardous waste materials that could not be processed, and the plots here have always emitted a foul smell. The ground is reddish-brown, and even the grass cannot grow." Parents reported in the materials.
After that, the State Council Education Supervision Committee jointly established an investigation team with multiple departments to conduct investigation and analysis work in Changzhou.
From April 19 to May 20, 2016, the investigation team conducted an investigation on environmental issues related to the Changwai incident. The investigation team believes that there are problems with the construction and supervision of the restoration work of the "Changlong Plot", but the campus environment of Changzhou Foreign Language School is safe; the expert team also found no obvious abnormalities after on-site inspections and analysis of medical examination data. "The health status of residents around the 'Changlong plot' is not significantly different from that of other regions in Changzhou City . There is no significant difference in the physical health status of the 2016 junior high school graduates and students in other schools."
Nowadays, parents and children's lives have gradually returned to peace. The "toxic land" that emits a stinky smell has also been built according to the plan to build a sports park with the theme of "ecology, leisure, and fitness".
Litigation by a public welfare organization
After the incident in Changzhou Foreign Language School, the environmental protection public welfare organization "Friends of Nature" filed an environmental public interest lawsuit against three chemical companies suspected of causing environmental pollution, Changlong, Chang Yu and Huada Company, on the grounds that "toxic land" has the risk of harming the public interests of society. A week later, the "Green Haikong Club" also joined the case as a co-plaintiff. This case is called the "Changzhou Poisonous Land Case."
On December 21, 2016, the "Changzhou Poisonous Land Case" was heard in the first instance in the Changzhou Intermediate People's Court. In court, the two plaintiffs' environmental protection organizations proposed that the three defendants' chemical enterprises seriously polluted the "Changlong plot" covering an area of about 260,000 square meters and the surrounding environment during production and operation and management of hazardous waste. When the chemical company evacuated, the contaminated land did not repair it, which caused the students of Changzhou Foreign Language School who moved in to experience discomfort.
The court found that the "Changlong plot" does have serious environmental risks. From March to May 2011, the Xinbei District Government of Changzhou City planned to develop commercial residential projects on the "Changlong Plot". It had commissioned the former Changzhou Environmental Protection Research Institute to investigate the soil and groundwater pollution in the "Changlong Plot", and prepared two reports, "Technical Report on the Site Survey of the Site of Changlong (Huada, Changyu) Company Original Plant" and "Health Risk Assessment Report on the Site of Changlong (Huada, Changyu) Company Original Plant".
Changzhou Intermediate People's Court held that the Changzhou Xinbei District Government has organized and carried out damage repair work on the "Changlong Plot" environmental pollution, and the environmental pollution risk has been effectively controlled. On the grounds that "the purpose of protecting the public interests of the social environment has been gradually realized", it rejected the lawsuit requests of Friends of Nature and the Green Development Association, and ruled that the two organizations jointly bear the case acceptance fee of 1891,800 yuan. The two environmental protection organizations were dissatisfied with the verdict and filed an appeal on February 7, 2017.
The litigation agent of the Green Haikong Association explained that according to the provisions of the "Regulations on the Payment of Litigation Fees of the State Council", there are two types of case acceptance fees for general civil litigation: cases that do not involve property are charged according to the number of cases. If they involve property claims, they shall be paid in a cumulative manner in a certain proportion based on the amount of the litigation request.
"In the first instance, the court calculated the acceptance fee based on the case involving property." Zhao Guang said. The second-instance judgment shows that during the first-instance trial, Zhao Guang, the agent of the "Green Haikong Association", mentioned three times that the defendants were determined to bear the restoration responsibility in accordance with the draft of the soil and groundwater restoration plan in August 2013. As a result, the "Green Haikong Association" and "Friends of Nature" lost the case, and the court ruled that the two environmental protection organizations would pay more than 1.89 million yuan at a percentage of 370 million yuan.
The second instance judgment held that the appeal of the two public welfare organizations in this case to repair the damaged environment and apologize by three chemical companies is a non-property claim; and the appeal of requiring them to bear the repair costs, because the expenses required for subsequent governance cannot be determined and cannot be used as the basis for calculating the case acceptance fee. Therefore, the case acceptance fee is calculated in this case based on non-property cases, and the case acceptance fee for first-instance cases and second-instance cases is 200 yuan, which shall be borne by the three defendants.
Beijing News reporter Wang Chongpengcheng Wang Hongchun
