Economic Cooperatives of Yongxinnansha Shares v. Subdisctrict Office of Chancheng District of Foshan City, China, Intermediate Court of Foshan City, Guangdong Province, 2014.
In 2012, the plaintiff claims their shareholder status in Nansha economic cooperative, and alleged the local subdisctrict office to affirm their qualification. The subdisctrict office affirmed and granted certificate. Nansha economic cooperative thereby sued the Subdistrict office for its administrative decision. Nansha alleged that according to article 15 of the Article of Stockholding of the Precinct of Yongxin: women married before December 31, 1992 shall be regarded as “out-married” women and shall not be given the right to share dividends, nor their shareholder qualification. The trial court finds that according to Article 61, section 3 of Law of the People's Republic of China on the Organizations of Local People's Congresses and Local People's Governments, Article 27, 36 of Law of the People's Republic of China on the Organization of the Villagers Committees; and Article 4 of rural collective economic organization regulation of Guangdong Province, the distribution of rural collective property shall not violate other laws and regulations of China, and shall not infringe other people’s legal rights. Article 15 of the Stockholding Article is in violation of the equal right of women and therefore invalid. The intermediate court affirmed the judgment.
Guo Jing v. East Cooking Vocational Skills Training School, China, West Lake District Court of Hangzhou, 2014.
The plaintiff alleged that in June 2014, she saw the recruiting advertisement of the respondent on the Internet, knowing that the respondent want to recruit two copywriters. Guo submitted her resume accordingly. However, Guo has not got reply since then. With the certainty that she is capable of the position, Guo called the School, asking about the job. Guo was told that since the position requires many business trips, only male can be considered. Guo emphasized that she can adjust to those business trips but was still refused by the same reason. Guo therefore brought this lawsuit on the basis that the respondent’s action is in violation of Article 3 of Employment Promotion Law of the People's Republic of China, which requires that “Workers shall be entitled by law to enjoy the right to equal employment and to seek their own employment. No worker seeking employment shall suffer discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity, race, gender or religious belief.” The respondent argues that because of the specialty of the position, the copywriter should live in the same room with the president of the school, all of whom are male, while during the business trips. It is out of the consideration and care to the plaintiff that they did not recruit her. The court finds that since the respondent did not provide any evidence to prove the specialty of the position and the legal reasons for the unsuitability of female worker, it violates the accorded rule: Article 3, 12, 13 of Labor Law, which states “Labourers shall have equal right to employment and choice of occupation”, “Labourers, regardless of their ethnic group, race, sex, or religious belief, shall not be discriminated against in employment”, “Women shall enjoy the equal right, with men, to employment”.
Jiangsu Province v. Erming Wang, China, People’s Procuratorate of Quning District Court, 2014.
The defendant Wang “bought” a woman with intellectual disabilities, Yang, for RMB 10,000 to have a male heir. Wang chained Yang’s feet and hands and raped Yang several times. The imprisonment and rape lasted for 2 months until police rescued Yang. Quning District Court, Jiangsu Province found that defendant Wang trafficked the woman, imprisoned, and raped her. Therefore, according to Article 236 section 1 and Article 238 section 1 and Article 240 of Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, Wang was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment.
People’s procuratorate of Hechi City Guangxi Province v. Lan Shushan, China, Supreme People’s Court of PRC, 2014.
The defendant Lan Shushan was charged of the crime of trafficking women and children for trafficking 1 woman and 34 children. Throughout 1988 to 2008, the defendant Lan Shushan independently and with his colleagues Tan Ruxi etc trafficked 1 woman and 34 children to Fujian Province, and traded them for money with the help of accomplice Lin Chuanxi, Su Ermei etc. Lan Shushan benefited approximately RMB 500,000 from the transactions. According to Article 240 section 1 & 2, the ring leader of a large scale trafficking shall be sentenced to death penalty. Thereby, Lan was convicted and sentenced to death by the Appellate Court of Hechi City. Lan appealed to the Supreme Court of Guangxi Province and the judgment is affirmed. The Supreme People’s Court of PRC reaffirmed decision and approved Lan’s death.
People’s Procuratorate of Nanchang City Jiangxi Province v. Hu Shiming, Hu Jinlin, Shui Bei, China, Supreme People’s Court of Jiangxi Province, 2014.
The defendants Hu Shiming, Hu Jinlin and Shui Bei were charged of crime of organizing sneak across the border for trading three Cambodian women to China. One of the defendants, Shui Bei was introduced and married to defendant Hu Jinlin after she entered China under tourist visa. Shui Bei’s families got to know her good living condition and wished to married someone in China. Therefore, Hu Shiming and Hu Jinlin paid for the visa fee of three sisters of Shui Bei, got them in through Guangzhou custom, and advertised them for marriage. Soon after that, Hu Shiming and Hu Jinlin introduced the three to local persons at the will of both sides and took approximately RMB 240,000 in return. Shui Bei was the interpreter during the transaction. The trial court finds that according to Article 318 Section 1 of the Criminal Law of PRC, the defendants organized several foreign women to do things inconsistent with the approved visa, making up the reason to apply for visa, for the purpose of profit-making, which constituted the crime of organizing sneaking across the border. Hu Shiming appealed and alleged that according to Article 6 Section 4 of Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Certain Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of the Criminal Cases of Obstructing Border (Frontier) Control, crossing the border with certificates taken by faking reasons for crossing the border, hiding identity, illegally using others’ ID cards etc, shall be regarded as the act of sneaking across the border. All three requirements need to be satisfied, instead of selectively satisfied. The Supreme Court finds that according to the rationale of law interpretation, the three requirements are selective. Therefore the decision is affirmed.
People’s procuratorate of Nanjing City Jiangsu Province v. Ji Xingpeng, China, Supreme Court of Jiangsu Province, 2014.
The defendant Ji Xingpeng, husband of his 22 year-old wife, was charged of crime of intentional homicide for murdering his wife. The couple were married in 2012. Every since then, defendant was doubtful about his wife’s loyalty to him and thought she has affairs with other persons, therefore he always beat his wife after drunk. On a night in 2013, Ji was drunk again and quarreled with the victim. Holding a knife, Ji hacked and poked the wife more than ten times, causing his wife die immediately. Intermediate People’s Court of Nanjing City found that the act of the defendant constituted intentional homicide, and therefore decided a death penalty with two-year’s probation. The victim’s parents appealed that as for the civil suit collateral to criminal proceedings, more compensation shall be made. The Supreme Court of Jiangsu Province finds that the appellants did not provide any evidence for their claims, therefore the decision of the lower court is affirmed.
People’s Procuratorate of Ruian City Zhejiang Province v. Li, China, Intermediate People’s Court of Wenzhou, 2014.
Li was charged of crime of rape for raping the victim Zhang at her drunk. Li gets to know Zhang through wechat, a social app, three weeks before he asked Zhang out for dinner. After Zhang was drunk, Li took her to a hotel and had sex with her. The trial court finds Li guilty. Li appealed, arguing he and Zhang are in a relationship and there is no evidence Zhang was drunk at that night. There is also doubt about the examination of the sample collected from Zhang’s vagina and therefore it cannot be used as evidence against Li. Furthermore, Li has nephrosis and cannot have an erection, therefore he could not possibly rape Zhang. The appellate court finds that the raping fact is proved by not only the sample examine result, but also witness testimony, video recording and victim statement, and therefore are reliable. There is no evidence showing Li and Zhang are in a relationship. And that according to expert’s opinion, nephrosis would not have effect on sexual erection. Therefore, the conviction is affirmed.
People’s Procuratorate of Tianchang City Anhui Province v. Wang Chuanbao, Qu Qinchen, China, People’s Court of Tianchang, 2014.
The defendants Wang Chuanbao and Qu Qinchen were charged of crime of rape for repeatedly raping the victim Wang, and crime of coercive indecency for violently digging and touching Wang’s genitals. The prosecutor alleges that according to Article 25 section 1, Article 236 section 1 and Article 237 section 1 of Criminal Law of PRC, Chuanbao and Qinchen raped and molested Wang “with violence or threats”, constituting the crime of rape and coercive indecency. Chuanbao argues that he did not have sex with Wang, and all the evidences are hearsay evidence, thus is not guilty. Qinchen argues that he did not commit the crime of coercive indecency because taking off the trousers of the victim is to have sex with Wang. After Wang refused to do so, Qinchen stopped raping her and has no mens rea to molest her. The court finds that the fact the Chuanbao and Qinchen raped Wang had also been proved by the testimony of Qinchen’s girlfriend, one of the witnesses, therefore is founded. The act of coercive indecency is regarded as absorbed by the act of rape and thus would not be convicted separately under this crime.
Yunnan Province v. Enguang Yang, Wenjian Li, China, People’s Procuratorate of Honghe Harniyizu District Court, 2014.
The defendants Yang and Li trafficked 17 Vietnamese women who were prostitutes in Vietnam to Yunnan Province, China. Yang and Li pretended to be clients and brought the women to hotels and restaurants where they kidnapped the women and transported them to China. The defendants offered the women to villagers in remote rural area of Yunnan Province, China and forced the women to marry buyers by force or threats. Under Article 48 and Article 240 of Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, the two defendants were sentenced to the death penalty and their private property was confiscated by the court. The women were provided with assistance to return to Vietnam.
Zhao Fei, Yang Fang v. Cao Yin, Cao Chaoran, Luo Shihui etc., China, Hechuan District Court, Chongqing, 2014.
In 2012, the deceased respondent, Cao Yin cheated the deceased victim, Zhao Jing, to a Tap Water Company for interview, and arranged Zhao to start to “work”. On the next day, Cao tied Zhao up and brought her to the duty office of the company, forcing her to have sex with him. After that, afraid of being caught, Cao killed Zhao. Cao was caught finally by the police. In 2013, Cao was sentenced to death by First Intermediate Court of Chongqing. The judgment has been affirmed by the Supreme Court of Chongqing and Supreme Court of PRC. Cao has been executed. The plaintiff alleged that after Cao Yin’s death, his successors first in order shall be responsible for the damages caused. The plaintiff also sues against the Tap Water Company for their lack of due diligence. The court finds that, among the four respondents, all of whom are the successors first in order of Cao Yin, Cao Chaoran and Luo Shihui clearly quit their right of inheritance. Therefore, only the other two are responsible.
Fujian Province v. Lin, Lou, China, People’s Procuratorate of Guangzhe District Court, 2013.
In 2013, a teenage girl name Lin gathered two other girls to get revenge on Chen, another girl at Guangze senior high school, Fujian Province, for insulting her. Chen hid and so their plan for revenge was unsuccessful. Later that day, Lin asked someone else to take Chen to a quiet neighborhood. Lin and her friend slapped Chen’s face, broke her nose, pulled her hair, and made Chen take off all her clothes. Chen was too frightened to say no and took off all her clothes. Lin and her friend took pictures of the naked Chen and shared the photos.
Guangzhe District Court found that Lin and her friends assaulted the victim Chen. According to Article 237, Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China Lin and her friend were convicted of humiliating a woman with force and coercion. Lin was sentenced to two-years’ imprisonment, with a full suspension of the sentence. Lin’s friend, Lou, was sentenced to one-year jail time with a full suspension of the sentence. The court said that because both the defendants and the victim were under age of 18, and because the defendants were willing to cooperate with the police, tell the truth, and plead guilty, the court under Article 63, Article 67, Article72, and Article 73 of Criminal Law of People’s Republic of China to give the two defendants a mitigated punishment of community service. The court demanded that the defendants delete all the naked photos of the victim. After the crime, the defendants’ families compensated the victim and the victim forgave the defendants.
Liu v. Zhu, China, Court of Huilai County, Guangdong Province, 2013.
The plaintiff Liu alleged that she had a illegitimate son with a Yang when she was working in Sichuan province. Soon after that, she was having another child with a Chen. Since Chen was not going to perform his duty as a father, Liu decided to give birth to the child and raise it herself. Several months later, Liu’s first son, Yang was introduced by a matchmaker to the respondent as an adopted son. Out of the strait situation Liu faces, she agreed. Several days later, the respondent Zhu proposed since the son is too naughty and needs his mother to look after him, it is better that Liu came along. Liu came and Zhu’s little brother asked Liu to marry Zhu, and they will pay her 100,000 as gift, but Liu need to take care of Zhu. Liu agreed. After the wedding, Liu found out the respondent was disabled and sit on a wheelchair, having no sexual capability. However, the respondent kept sexually harassing the plaintiff. Plaintiff argued that she was cheated to get married, and Zhu lacks sexual ability, therefore she sued for divorce. The court finds that although the marriage is facilitated by a matchmaker, the two have lived together for many years and have developed some feelings for each other. Plaintiff’s arguments are not supported by any evidence, thus are not considered by the court.
Wang v. Luo, China, Court of Chaling County, Hunan Province, 2013.
The plaintiff alleged that she married the respondent in 2012 and had a son in the same year. However, the respondent is a male chauvinist and has a very bad temper. He often maltreated the plaintiff. Especially during the plaintiff’s pregnancy, the respondent urged the plaintiff to have an abortion. The abortion was not carried out only because they had no money at that time. Therefore, the plaintiff sought a divorce and to submit an Agreement of divorce to the court. The court found that since the respondent did not show up at the trial, the plaintiff could not prove the authenticity of the evidence. According to Article 32 of Marriage Law, the prerequisite of a divorce judgment shall be the certainty of the loss of affection between the couple. Since the plaintiff could not prove such certainty, the divorce was not allowed.