Recently, China Biodiversity Conservation and Green Development Foundation (CBCGDF) received a notice from the Supreme People’s Court to accept the case. The maritime public interest litigation case, CBCGDF sued the People’s Government of Liushui Town, Pingtan County, Fujian Province and Longxiang Real Estate Co., Ltd. in Pingtan County, Fujian Province, the Supreme People’s Court has decided to retry the case.

The case originated on February 27, 2001. The defendants the People’s Government of Liushui Town, Pingtan County and Pingtan County Longxiang Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. signed a contract for the reclamation of 3,500 mu of Shanmen Bay beach, to start construction of the Shanmen Bay Reclamation Project in Liushui Town, Pingtan County with a total construction period of two years.

On August 9, 2002, the illegal activities of the two defendants were investigated by the Fujian Ocean and Fisheries Bureau at the time. At that time, the Fujian Provincial Bureau of Oceans and Fisheries issued a notice to the People’s Government of Liushui of Pingtan County, ordering them to stop maritime violations, which proved that the People’s Government of Liushui Town of Pingtan County and Longxiang Real Estate Co., Ltd. of Pingtan County did not undergo marine environmental assessment, carried out construction without authorization and has not stopped the behavior of destroying the ecology. On September 30, 2002, Pingtan County Longxiang Real Estate Co., Ltd.'s reclamation and breeding behavior in Shanmen Bay damaged the ecological environment of Shanmen Bay area. Moreover, the project has not undergone environmental impact assessment, and illegal construction and sea breeding have damaged the ecological environment of the Shanmen Bay sea area until now.

In January 2018, CBCGDF filed a lawsuit with the Xiamen Maritime Court. The Xiamen Maritime Court ruled not to accept the case on the grounds that social organizations do not have the qualifications to be the subject of marine public interest litigation. CBCGDF appealed to the Fujian Higher People's Court and was ruled inadmissible on the same grounds. In November of the same year, CBCGDF applied to the Supreme People's Court for a retrial. In August 2020, the Supreme People's Court decided to retry the case with a notice.

For a long time, social organizations have been the focus of heated discussion on the subject qualification of marine public interest litigation. In practice, procuratorial organs can also initiate marine public interest litigation, but social organizations have repeatedly been ruled not on the grounds that they do not have the subject qualification. The focus of the dispute is whether the second paragraph of Article 89 of the Marine Environmental Protection Law is a "special law" of the Environmental Protection Law. This controversial issue is explained in the article "On the Nature of Compensation Litigation for Marine Ecological Environment Damage - Combining the Investigation of the Type of Neighboring Litigation". The article believes that the "Regulations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Compensation Disputes over Marine Natural Resources and Ecological Environment", and the "Marine Environmental Protection Law," Article 89, paragraph 2, is the marine ecological environment damage compensation litigation. Marine ecological environment damage compensation litigation and marine environmental public interest litigation relief two different types of benefits. Environmental public interest litigation protects the environmental public interest, so the marine ecological environment damage compensation litigation does not protect, or at least not entirely, the environmental public interest. The basis of the two prosecutions is not mutually exclusive in terms of extension, and there is currently no clear provision prohibiting the initiation of two lawsuits simultaneously or successively. In particular, these two types of litigation belong to the broad category of civil litigation. Under the judicial framework, the adjustment of the plaintiff’s qualifications for prosecution should follow the principle of “it can be done without prohibition by law” and embody the principle of punishment. If public interest is interpreted as including national interest, then there is a subordination relationship between the two types of litigation; If public interest and national interest are interpreted as two different interests, then there is a cross relationship between the two types of litigation.

Therefore, the basis of most courts' determination that social organizations do not have the subject qualification of marine environmental public interest litigation may need to be further explored at the theoretical level. This CBCGDF's case has been given the opportunity of retrial by the Supreme People's Court, which is the opportunity to clarify whether social organizations can initiate marine environmental public interest litigation.

Welcome public and media attention. CBCGDF will continue to report the latest progress of the case.

Original Chinese article:

http://www.cbcgdf.org/NewsShow/4857/13583.html

By / Yao Jiahui (Intern) Modified / Niu Jingmei

https://www.paypal.me/CBCGDFChina

http://www.cbcgdf.org/English/ConfirmDonaTion/0.html