Oil spill compensation suits blocked in courts

By Lu Na
0 Comment(s)Print E-mail China.org.cn, December 27, 2011
Adjust font size:

ConocoPhillips claimed that the company had tested the water quality around the Penglai 19-3 oilfield in north China's Bohai Bay, and said there was no evidence to suggest the spill harmed the environment, according to the Wall Street Journal on Dec. 16.

On Dec. 19, the company clarified its statement, saying that the sustainable effects to the environment were very small.

"If ConocoPhillips denies the pollution, there would be no evidence to prove the shrimps and fishes were killed by oil spill pollution," Jia Fangyi of Beijing Huacheng law firm said. He said he was worried about the obstacles of adducing evidences.

Jia was the first lawyer who brought to court complaints on behalf of the fishermen. He submitted the fishermen's environmental commonweal complaints to three courts: Hainan Provincial Higher People's Court, Qingdao Maritime Court and Tianjin Maritime Court.

However, the courts refused to file the suits, citing insufficient evidences, which gave greater burden to the fishermen to adduce evidences themselves. "Victims only have the responsibility to testify basic facts such as water pollution and marine products dead. But the information on oil spill volume and scales should have been provided by the polluter," Jia said.

According to article 66 of the Tort Liability Law of China, where any dispute arises over an environmental pollution, the polluter shall assume the burden to prove that it should not be liable or its liability could be mitigated under certain circumstances as provided for by law, or to prove that there is no causation between its conduct and the harm.

Yin Fuqiang, a lawyer of lawov.com told China Economic Weekly that the environmental agencies such as the North China Sea branch of the State Oceanic Administration must publish pollution statistics. Fishermen can appeal to the courts for the data, but the premise to retrieve the information for sufficient evidence is that courts had first decided to take up the case – quite the Catch-22.

"The deadline of [whether to file the case] the case has passed at the beginning of December, but the Qingdao Maritime Court didn't give me any response," Jia Fangyi told China Economic Weekly.

On Dec. 12, 107 fishermen submitted a lawsuit at the Tianjin Maritime Court against ConocoPhillips China. They asked the oil company to pay 490 million yuan (US$77 million) for economic damages to the 107 affected fishermen in Laoting County, Hebei Province. But ConocoPhillips denied the pollution before the court had decided whether to take up the case.

Jia said that the court did not take up the case or make a ruling because it said this was a new type of case and they had to turn it over to a higher court. "Neither keeping silent nor discussing it with their leaders is in accordance with court procedural law," Jia said. "I call this process a 'Silence Gate.'"

Yin Fuqiang said that if courts do not take up the case, it must announce its decision. The formal rejection allows plaintiffs to appeal to higher courts. Without it, the fishermen are in a limbo. Furthermore, because court proceedings are not recorded or videotaped, the fishermen cannot even make complaint about the judges.

Adding to the fishermen's frustration is the lack of progress on ConocoPhillips' promised compensation fund. More troubling still, the North China Sea branch of the State Oceanic Administration had said that it would sue ConocoPhilips for its spill on behalf of China. However, when China Economic Weekly called it recently regarding the lawsuit, branch spokesperson said: "It is none of our business. We know nothing about it."

During the 23rd session of the 11th NPC Standing Committee, the Civil Procedure Law was amended. Wang Shengming, vice director of the Commission of Legislative Affairs of the NPC Standing Committee said that deputies of NPC suggested adding public interest litigation system in the Civil Procedure Law due to increasing environmental pollution and food safety incidents. According to the draft, social groups can appeal to courts for acts jeopardizing public interests, such as environmental pollution.

"Although the official law has not come out, it is written in the amendment's draft, which means our works are not in vain," Jia said.

Print E-mail Bookmark and Share

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)

No comments.

Add your comments...

  • User Name Required
  • Your Comment
  • Racist, abusive and off-topic comments may be removed by the moderator.
Send your storiesGet more from China.org.cnMobileRSSNewsletter
主站蜘蛛池模板: 两个人看的www免费视频中文| 亚洲一区二区三区在线观看蜜桃| 老师~你的技术真好好大| 国产精品久久久久久久久kt| aaaaa级少妇高潮大片| 成人乱码一区二区三区AV| 久久亚洲精品无码观看不卡| 最近最新的免费中文字幕| 亚洲欧美乱综合图片区小说区| 男男强行扒开小受双腿进入文| 啊轻点灬大ji巴太粗太长了电影| 金莲你下面好紧夹得我好爽| 国产成人综合色视频精品| 2019日韩中文字幕MV| 在线免费看黄网站| japanese日本护士xxxx18一19| 成年女性特黄午夜视频免费看 | 两个人看的视频www在线高清| 日本人与黑人videos系列| 九九精品视频在线观看| 欧美三级在线观看不卡视频| 亚洲成在人线中文字幕| 97日日碰人人模人人澡| 好好的日视频www| 三上悠亚破解版| 成年性午夜免费视频网站不卡| 久99频这里只精品23热视频| 日本电影100禁| 亚洲第一网站男人都懂| 男人的天堂网在线| 免费无码国产V片在线观看| 精品无人乱码一区二区三区| 品色堂永久免费| 黄色成人免费网站| 好吊妞在线播放| 一级毛片免费毛片毛片| 成人免费福利电影| 中国国语毛片免费观看视频| 我要看免费的毛片| 中文字幕在线一区二区三区| 最近免费韩国电影hd视频|