On the afternoon of July 2, the China Biodiversity and Green Development Foundation(CBCGDF) submitted to the Supreme People's Court the application for retrial of the civil public interest litigation case of the tannery sludge landfill of Zhejiang Fubang Group Company and Fubang Leather Co., Ltd. (Zhejiang Fubang case), which marked the retrial procedure known as "the first environmental public interest litigation case brought by social organizations in Zhejiang Province". At the same time, this is the second retrial application filed by the CBCGDF to the Supreme People's Court for the effective judgment of the High Court after the application for retrial of the "Changzhou Toxic Land Case". The trial of Zhejiang Fubang case and the trial of Changzhou toxic land case are in serious violation of environmental protection laws and regulations on soil pollution prevention and control. If such a miscarriage of justice is allowed to spread in environmental justice, the authority of environmental justice will be greatly undermined and damages the construction of ecological civilization in China.

In view of Zhejiang Fubang case, the main reasons why the CBCGDF applied for retrial are as follows: the basic facts identified in the original judgment lacked evidence, and the supposed scenario of public greening land was mistaken for objective facts; the groundwater of the plots involved was mistakenly identified as having no pollution damage consequences, and the objective status of the contaminated soil was not ascertained. There are obvious errors in the key evidence of the case; there are omissions and cases beyond the litigation requests of the parties; the court of the first instance clearly violates the legislative intent and applies the law errors, etc.

With the deepening of the construction of ecological civilization, some basic environmental legal concepts and regulations have been challenged. In practice, there have been some cases of incorrect application of environmental law, and some so-called "legal interpretation" breaking through the legal bottom line has contributed to this. These "precedents" and "explanations" need to be tested on the platform of practice, analyzed and criticized from the perspective of jurisprudence and constitution, commented on the basis of existing laws, so as to achieve the purpose of eliminating the false and preserving the true, and make our environmental justice really become the last line of defense to safeguard environmental justice. To really help the construction of ecological civilization.

To this end, we will organize experts from the theoretical and practical circles of environmental law to make a detailed analysis of the typical cases of environmental justice in the past year and some hot spots of environmental law theory, especially those cases with obvious legal errors, which obviously violate the viewpoints of the existing laws and regulations of our country, and publicize the results of the study. Review and criticism of various viewpoints from all walks of life. Whether theoretical or practical, we look forward to the rational and practical discussion and analysis. We look forward to criticism and debate based on jurisprudence and current law. We look forward to greater progress in environmental justice.

Original Chinese article:

http://www.cbcgdf.org/NewsShow/4857/9162.html

By / Li Xue