Under the guidance of Xi Jinping's thoughts on the rule of law, a review of the procuratorial work in 2020⑨

Punishing false litigation: maintaining judicial credibility

2020 year

First half

  To deepen special supervision of false litigation, procuratorial organs at all levels across the country handled 1,105 cases of false litigation supervision, a year-on-year increase of 22.8%

July

  In response to issues such as sanctions on false lawsuits and strengthening communication and coordination, the Supreme Procurator issued the "No. 5 Prosecutors Recommendation"

  The Supreme People’s Procuratorate issued the “Opinions on Giving Full Play to the Procuratorial Function to Serve the “Six Stability” and “Six Guarantees”, emphasizing that illegal and criminal acts such as creating “routine loans” by inflating the amount of loans should be strictly prosecuted

September

  The Supreme People’s Procuratorate deploys and promotes a smart supervision system for civil judgments across the country to promote the screening of false litigation clues

  The Supreme People’s Procuratorate and Supreme People’s Court jointly issued the "Opinions on Establishing a Work Platform for National Implementation and Legal Supervision to Further Improve Cooperation and Cooperation Mechanisms" to promote the establishment of relevant cooperation mechanisms for handling false litigation cases

November

  The Supreme People’s Procuratorate Civil Prosecution Research Base (Civil Prosecution Research Center of Southeast University) and Jiangsu Procuratorate jointly held a seminar on issues related to the supervision of bankruptcy cases and false litigation in the context of the implementation of the Civil Code

December

  The Supreme People’s Procuratorate issued the 23rd batch of guiding cases, suggesting that the handling of "routine loans" should pay attention to examining whether there are false litigation activities

  "In order to solve the problem of handling cases and strengthen the shortcomings of supervision, local procuratorial organs have taken multiple measures to increase the prevention and crackdown of false lawsuits——"

For finding difficult

  Focus on seeking "combat power" from science and technology, and actively promote the research and development and application of artificial intelligence and big data in the supervision of false litigation.

Difficult to verify

  Establish a professional case-handling team, build a collaborative work pattern, form a unified command and case-handling platform, strengthen upper and lower linkages, and share case information.

Difficult to supervise

  The Department of Public Security, Procuratorate and Law and other departments actively communicate and coordinate, establish cooperative mechanisms such as the transfer of clues to false litigation cases, joint investigation and handling, and result feedback, and increase the punishment of false litigation.

Dig into the root causes and promote the legalization of social governance

  Li Chengxia, representative of the National People's Congress and sewing operator of the first branch of Changzhou Lao San Group Garment Factory

  False litigation interferes with judicial trials, wastes judicial resources, jeopardizes the construction of credibility, and is extremely harmful to the society. The masses are very concerned.

At the end of 2020, when I attended the procuratorial work briefing in Changzhou, Jiangsu Province, I learned that Changzhou procuratorial organs deployed a one-year special campaign to combat false litigation, which left a deep impression on me.

  In the new year, it is hoped that the procuratorial organs will thoroughly implement Xi Jinping’s thoughts on the rule of law, always maintain a high pressure on false lawsuits, and respond to the people’s concerns in a timely manner.

While handling false litigation supervision cases, we must dig deeper into the underlying illegal and criminal issues, strengthen the analysis and judgment of false litigations, especially "routine loan" cases, and dig into the root causes and make recommendations for high-incidence areas and key areas. Promote the level of legalization of social governance.

In addition, the procuratorial organs should increase the propaganda of the rule of law, effectively play the role of warning and education in these typical cases, and enhance the people's awareness of the rule of law.

strange!

The signatures of 6 creditors came from one person

  Recently, after protesting by the Procuratorate of Yinzhou District, Ningbo City, Zhejiang Province, the court changed the sentence after retrial of a false lawsuit.

  In July 2016, Xu sued the court and demanded that Company A repay 1.5 million yuan in loans and 2 million yuan in credits assigned from Mr. Yang and other 6 people, and pay interest and legal fees, totaling more than 5.5 million yuan.

The legal representative of Company A, Mr. Bao, recognized the request of the plaintiff. Under the premise that both parties promised to be true and signed the letter of guarantee for good faith litigation, the two parties quickly reached a mediation agreement, and Company A returned Xu's principal and interest totaling more than 5.5 million yuan.

After the case entered the execution procedure, Xu received more than 3 million yuan of execution money from company A's workshop auction through participating in the distribution.

  In November 2019, another creditor of Company A reported to the Yinzhou District Procuratorate that the transfer of the creditor's rights involved in the case was a fabricated fact.

After the court accepted it, it quickly initiated the investigation and verification procedure.

The prosecutor found a number of suspicious points after investigation: The main evidence of the case was a "Debt Assignment Agreement" signed by 6 creditor assignors including Mr. Yang. It was identified that the signatures of the 6 people were mostly similar; it proved that the 6 creditor assignors The receipts and IOUs for the claims of Company A totaling RMB 2 million were handwritten by a certain person; at the hearing, the plaintiff and the defendant had no actual confrontation, and the details of the establishment and repayment of the claims were vague.

  In order to find a breakthrough in the case, the prosecutor handling the case sent a letter to the Yinzhou Branch of the Ningbo Municipal Public Security Bureau to assist in the investigation of the relationship between the persons involved and the identification of key investigators. At the same time, they sorted out the legal relationship of the case and asked 6 people including Mr. Yang. A total of seven creditor's rights and debt relationships with Xu's creditor's rights transfer relationship and Xu's 1.5 million yuan creditor's rights lent to Company A were investigated and verified one by one.

  It was finally found that Mr. Yang and Company A’s 300,000 yuan creditor's rights had been mediated by other courts and executed.

Mr. Yang said that he had never signed the "Debt Assignment Agreement", let alone know Xu.

The other 5 creditor assignors also did not assign creditors to Xu.

So far, the case has obtained a complete chain of evidence, sufficient to prove that the "Debt Assignment Agreement" involved in the case is a false agreement.

  So, was Xu's claim to loan 1.5 million yuan to Company A at the original trial true or not?

The prosecutor's investigation found that although Xu provided an IOU with the stamp of Company A, the bank transfer records showed that the 1.5 million yuan was remitted to someone's account.

  In September 2020, the retrial of the case opened. Bao and Xu explained that there was no transfer of 2 million yuan in creditor's rights between Xu and Mr. Yang, and the "Debt Transfer Agreement" involved in the case was a fictitious matter.

Company A had poor management and had high external liabilities. Bao considered that Company A’s assets would be auctioned off. In order to participate in the distribution and get back the money he had previously lent to the company, he forged the "Debt Assignment Agreement" and instigated his relative Xu. Prosecute as a creditor.

  On December 30, 2020, the court found that Xu and Mr. Yang had no credit assignment facts. The "Debt Assignment Agreement" involved in the case was fictitious, and the existing evidence was insufficient to determine that Company A had borrowed 1.5 million yuan from Xu and had not been repaid. The judgment revoked the original civil mediation document, rejected Xu's litigation request, and made detentions for 10 days and fines for the two false litigation actions.

"Prosecutorial Recommendation No. 5" and Punishment of False Lawsuits

  In July 2020, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate issued the “No. 5 Prosecutorial Proposal” to address the problems of the People’s Court in preventing and sanctioning false litigation and put forward suggestions for improvement.

  Feng Xiaoguang, Director of the Sixth Prosecutors Office of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, said that the Supreme People’s Procuratorate will continue to follow up and urge, strengthen communication and collaboration, and implement the “No. 5 Prosecutors Recommendations”.

At the same time, taking this as an opportunity, the procuratorial organ will further strengthen communication with courts, public security organs, judicial administrative organs and other departments, and establish clues transfer, joint investigation and handling of false litigation cases, and result feedback through joint investigations, document signing, and information sharing. Such cooperation mechanisms will increase the punishment of false litigation, maintain judicial authority and judicial credibility, and jointly create an honest and trustworthy litigation environment to achieve a win-win situation.

  This version of the text: our reporter Lu Zhijian, Cai Junjie, Wu Yihuo, Li Lifeng, correspondent Wang Qing, Guanlan, Hu Tingting, Wu Jie, and Wang Wencan Editor: Yang Lujia, Proofreader: Zhao Peng, US Editor: Zhao Yinuo

  Lu Zhijian Cai Junjie Wu Yihuo Li Lifeng Wang Qing Guan Lan Hu Tingting Wu Jie Wang Wencan