On January 10, 2008, fifteen Zhejiang villagers, including Chen Guoliang, received the verdict from the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court, notifying them that they had won their lawsuit against the National Development and Reform Commission, the 21st Century Business Herald reported today.
The Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court ruled on December 24, 2007, repealing the NDRC's decision to refuse administrative reconsideration of the case. It also ordered the NDRC to reexamine the application for administrative reconsideration put forward by the fifteen Zhejiang villagers.
The Hangzhou Zhijiang National Tourist and Holiday Resort (ZNTHR) planned to construct a new road project called the Lijing Road Project. In order to do this the houses and lands of 15 Wangsha villagers in Zhuantang County of Hangzhou West Lake area were slated for purchase and destruction.
The two parties differed greatly regarding house area specifications and compensation. Villager Kong Xiangbiao said, "The Administration Commission of the ZNTHR had agreed to compensate us 100,000 yuan for every mu of land in the contract with us. But we villagers only got 30,000 yuan for each mu of land." The Wangsha villagers also doubted the legitimacy of this project.
According to one villager, approved construction on land requiring house demolition and land acquisition has to be confirmed by both parties. This procedure had been omitted in this project. Villagers here had not been consulted at all.
On October 20, 2006, while the two parties were disputing hotly about the legitimacy of the Linjing Road Project, the Zhejiang Provincial Development and Reform Commission (ZPDRC) published a list of 16 ZNTHR roads, whose construction had violated rules. The names of these roads were not specified.
Five ministries, including the NDRC and the Ministry of Land and Resources, jointly formulated the Guiding Opinions on Clarifying New Projects, stipulating that with regard to new projects with problems, their existing problems and corresponding solutions must be published in primary local media.
Wangsha villagers who doubted the legitimacy of the Lijing Road Project believed that Lijing Road was one of the unlawful roads. They had to present definitive evidence to the court to prove their premise so they hired the lawyer Yuan Yulai to collect evidence for them.
On October 27, 2006 Yuan Yulai came to the ZPDRC for details of these 16 unlawful roads. The ZPDRC refused to give him access to those details because they were considered confidential. On December 10, 2006 fifteen villagers applied to the NDRC for administrative reconsideration of the Lijing Road case. They requested the NDRC to order the ZPDRC to provide materials concerning the 16 roads for consultancy and copy.
The NDRC rejected their application later by saying the villagers didn't provide the materials held by ZPDRC in a timely fashion, proving the necessity of administrative reconsideration. Yuan Yulai responded that the NDRC had not even asked the ZPDRC before making any decision. Later the lawyer tried to sue the NDRC for this but the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court denied the case.
On January 30, fifteen villagers sent their application to the NDRC again, demanding that the NDRC tell ZPDRC to publicize the details of the 16 roads in question. Later on February 1, the NDRC denied the application again by answering that the application had surpassed the legal stipulated time. Yuan Yulai countered that the NDRC misunderstood the application, because they didn't focus on the announcement made on October 20, 2006, but on the ZPDRC – who had never publicized the details regarding the 16 roads.
On February 4, the fifteen villagers sued the NDRC again, asking the NDRC to withdraw their negative decision, and make an administrative reconsideration decision again. This time, the court allowed the case to proceed. On September 24, the court opened and finally ruled in favor of the villagers.
Now it is not known if the NDRC will appeal. But the legal defense, Yuan Yulai, was definitely excited. He stated that he took on this case as a typical example for resolving disputes via administrative procedures and administrative reconsiderations.
(China.org.cn by Zhang Ming'ai & Zhang Rui January 11, 2008)