On May 27, 2005, “Seminar on Administrative Infringement Relief Strategies for Private Oil Enterprises in Northern Shaanxi Province†was held in Beijing. After the seminar, lawyer Yan Yonghong of Beijing Jietong Law Firm said in an interview with this reporter that the lawsuit was filed against Shaanxi Province. The administrative indictments of the People's Government, the People's Government of Yulin Municipality of Shaanxi Province and the People's Government of Jingbian County of Yulin City were sent to the Higher People's Court of Shaanxi Province from Hohhot, Inner Mongolia on May 25th by express mail.
Well recovery
This sued the lawsuits of the three levels of government in Shaanxi Province, Yulin City and Jingbian County, and was related to an oil well recovery incident in northern Shaanxi from March to June 2003. Regrettably, Feng Bingxian, the chief representative of the private oil enterprises in northern Shaanxi, who was due to attend the Seminar on Administrative Infringement Assistance Strategies for Private Oil Enterprises in Northern Shaanxi on May 27, was unable to attend the day. He commissioned Guo Haiyan, a professor at Capital Normal University, to present to the meeting. His speech.
Guo Haiyan introduced the ins and outs of the whole matter: On April 13, 1994, China National Petroleum Corporation and the Shaanxi Provincial Government signed an agreement demarcating 1,080 square kilometers and entrusting local counties to mine. The county governments have therefore formulated the “investment promotion†Preferential policies, private capital entered the mining field only after signing contracts with private enterprises.
Guo Haiyan said that in December 1999, the former State Economic and Trade Commission and the Ministry of Land and Resources jointly issued document No. 1239. This document required that “drilling, logging, well testing, fracturing, well repair, and other construction operations must stop immediatelyâ€. Privately-owned enterprises investing should take measures such as "acquisition" and "asset equity participation" and return all their oil wells to China Petroleum.
Guo Haiyan said that from March to June 2003, starting with Ansai County, the government did not negotiate with any private enterprise and did not provide any compensation, but only by a paper announcement, forced the drive with strong momentum and deterrent force. Privately-owned oil wells were arrested after they rebelled. In this way, oil well assets valued at more than 7 billion yuan in 15 counties of Yan'an and Yulin in northern Shaanxi were rapidly nationalized by the county governments.
Guo Haiyan went on to say that the case involves a large number of people: There are more than 1,000 private enterprises, more than 60,000 investors and more than 100,000 stakeholders; the assets involved are huge: In 2003, the value was more than 7 billion yuan, and the current value was more than 14 billion yuan.
The "Report Outline" conceals the truth?
The reporter also obtained a "Reporting Outline" from the Guolin Municipal Party Committee and the Yulin Municipal People's Government from Guo Haiyan. Guo Haiyan said that this was a document filed by the Yulin cadre to the relevant Beijing Municipal Office. She obtained the document from the department. . According to the "Reporting Outline," historically and objectively, the introduction of affiliated units to participate in oil development has played a positive role in solving the problem of insufficient input from local oil companies, increasing fiscal revenue, and promoting the development of the petroleum industry and regional economy.
However, the “Reporting Outline†continued: The paid “three rights†of oil wells has been approved and supported by the broad masses of the people, and has also been understood and supported by most oil investors. However, a very small number of individual investors who have drawn huge profits from oil exploitation are reluctant to give up illegal oil exploitation. They and Zhu Jiuhu and others have mutually induced each other, ignoring state laws and regulations and petroleum industry policies, and smashing the State Council and the provincial and provincial governments to rectify Shaanxi. The policies and measures of the North oil exploitation order distorted the facts, defrauded and mislead oil-related people and adopted a variety of unfair means, seriously disrupted the normal production and operation order of the oil fields, and had extremely adverse effects on social stability.
The hosting lawyer was "detained" by the police?
Zhu Jiuhu, who is mentioned in the “Report Outlineâ€, is the lawyer sponsoring the case and a lawyer of Beijing Jietong Law Firm. Zhu Jiuhu was the acting attorney of the Sun Dawu case. He also had to attend the "Seminar on Administrative Infringement Relief Strategies for Private Oil Enterprises in Northern Shaanxi" on May 27.
However, the reporter received the news from Yonghong Hung on the same day: Zhu Jiuhu was taken away by the police in Jingbian County, Shaanxi Province in the early morning of May 25. On May 29th, the reporter called Mou Yonghong and Zhai Yonghong told reporters that Zhu Jiuhu was still “detained†but the specific details were not clear. The reporter failed to contact Zhu Jiuhu.
Guo Haiyan said fiercely: Their so-called "Reporting Outline" is full of lies. In their so-called "Reporting Outline," they are full of corruption and defamation of private investors in northern Shaanxi and ordinary peasants. This is a blatant challenge to civil rights.
Why post an administrative complaint?
Yonghong Yong was one of the principal agents of the private company that recovered oilwell private enterprises in Jingbian County, Shaanxi Province. He said at the seminar: “I myself just returned from Shaanxi yesterday. Our lawyers group arrived in Xi’an on May 23rd and went to Shaanxi Province. The hospital submitted an administrative complaint and the person in charge of the Shanxi Provincial High Court Filing Office received us. However, they believed that the case was being processed by the government and the court was not good at intervening. Therefore, they refused to receive our administrative complaint. They also refused to talk to us about the law. Problems, and repeatedly stressed that we must see China's national conditions."
Yonghong Yong explained to reporters that according to the law, no matter whether the court accepts, rejects or rejects the prosecution, it must first take over the materials, and then give a written notice after failing the review. According to the law, the courts at the next lower level are not admissible and can be prosecuted in a higher court. The higher court of the Shaanxi Provincial High Court is the Supreme People's Court. However, the Shaanxi Provincial High Court does not accept the petition and cannot prove that we have submitted the petition. Therefore, we have adopted an administrative complaint form for them. According to the Administrative Litigation Law, the Shaanxi Provincial High Court should reply within 7 days. .
The work of mailing petitions was done by the Inner Mongolia Huicong Law Firm, and ZHANG Xianhua, a lawyer of Huicong Law Firm, was also one of the commissioned agents of the case. Zhang Xianhua told reporters that the complaint was issued by the Inner Mongolia Notary Office from Hohhot because the Shaanxi Provincial Public Notary Office was not convenient to do such a thing.
The lawsuit against the People's Government of Shaanxi Province, the People's Government of Yulin Municipality of Shaanxi Province and the People's Government of Jingbian County of Yulin City was sent by express mail from Hohhot, Inner Mongolia to the Higher People's Court of Shaanxi Province on May 25, according to China’s domestic express The delivery time of the special delivery has reached the Shaanxi Provincial Higher People's Court. According to the administrative litigation law, the Shaanxi Provincial High Court should reply within 7 days.
Well recovery
This sued the lawsuits of the three levels of government in Shaanxi Province, Yulin City and Jingbian County, and was related to an oil well recovery incident in northern Shaanxi from March to June 2003. Regrettably, Feng Bingxian, the chief representative of the private oil enterprises in northern Shaanxi, who was due to attend the Seminar on Administrative Infringement Assistance Strategies for Private Oil Enterprises in Northern Shaanxi on May 27, was unable to attend the day. He commissioned Guo Haiyan, a professor at Capital Normal University, to present to the meeting. His speech.
Guo Haiyan introduced the ins and outs of the whole matter: On April 13, 1994, China National Petroleum Corporation and the Shaanxi Provincial Government signed an agreement demarcating 1,080 square kilometers and entrusting local counties to mine. The county governments have therefore formulated the “investment promotion†Preferential policies, private capital entered the mining field only after signing contracts with private enterprises.
Guo Haiyan said that in December 1999, the former State Economic and Trade Commission and the Ministry of Land and Resources jointly issued document No. 1239. This document required that “drilling, logging, well testing, fracturing, well repair, and other construction operations must stop immediatelyâ€. Privately-owned enterprises investing should take measures such as "acquisition" and "asset equity participation" and return all their oil wells to China Petroleum.
Guo Haiyan said that from March to June 2003, starting with Ansai County, the government did not negotiate with any private enterprise and did not provide any compensation, but only by a paper announcement, forced the drive with strong momentum and deterrent force. Privately-owned oil wells were arrested after they rebelled. In this way, oil well assets valued at more than 7 billion yuan in 15 counties of Yan'an and Yulin in northern Shaanxi were rapidly nationalized by the county governments.
Guo Haiyan went on to say that the case involves a large number of people: There are more than 1,000 private enterprises, more than 60,000 investors and more than 100,000 stakeholders; the assets involved are huge: In 2003, the value was more than 7 billion yuan, and the current value was more than 14 billion yuan.
The "Report Outline" conceals the truth?
The reporter also obtained a "Reporting Outline" from the Guolin Municipal Party Committee and the Yulin Municipal People's Government from Guo Haiyan. Guo Haiyan said that this was a document filed by the Yulin cadre to the relevant Beijing Municipal Office. She obtained the document from the department. . According to the "Reporting Outline," historically and objectively, the introduction of affiliated units to participate in oil development has played a positive role in solving the problem of insufficient input from local oil companies, increasing fiscal revenue, and promoting the development of the petroleum industry and regional economy.
However, the “Reporting Outline†continued: The paid “three rights†of oil wells has been approved and supported by the broad masses of the people, and has also been understood and supported by most oil investors. However, a very small number of individual investors who have drawn huge profits from oil exploitation are reluctant to give up illegal oil exploitation. They and Zhu Jiuhu and others have mutually induced each other, ignoring state laws and regulations and petroleum industry policies, and smashing the State Council and the provincial and provincial governments to rectify Shaanxi. The policies and measures of the North oil exploitation order distorted the facts, defrauded and mislead oil-related people and adopted a variety of unfair means, seriously disrupted the normal production and operation order of the oil fields, and had extremely adverse effects on social stability.
The hosting lawyer was "detained" by the police?
Zhu Jiuhu, who is mentioned in the “Report Outlineâ€, is the lawyer sponsoring the case and a lawyer of Beijing Jietong Law Firm. Zhu Jiuhu was the acting attorney of the Sun Dawu case. He also had to attend the "Seminar on Administrative Infringement Relief Strategies for Private Oil Enterprises in Northern Shaanxi" on May 27.
However, the reporter received the news from Yonghong Hung on the same day: Zhu Jiuhu was taken away by the police in Jingbian County, Shaanxi Province in the early morning of May 25. On May 29th, the reporter called Mou Yonghong and Zhai Yonghong told reporters that Zhu Jiuhu was still “detained†but the specific details were not clear. The reporter failed to contact Zhu Jiuhu.
Guo Haiyan said fiercely: Their so-called "Reporting Outline" is full of lies. In their so-called "Reporting Outline," they are full of corruption and defamation of private investors in northern Shaanxi and ordinary peasants. This is a blatant challenge to civil rights.
Why post an administrative complaint?
Yonghong Yong was one of the principal agents of the private company that recovered oilwell private enterprises in Jingbian County, Shaanxi Province. He said at the seminar: “I myself just returned from Shaanxi yesterday. Our lawyers group arrived in Xi’an on May 23rd and went to Shaanxi Province. The hospital submitted an administrative complaint and the person in charge of the Shanxi Provincial High Court Filing Office received us. However, they believed that the case was being processed by the government and the court was not good at intervening. Therefore, they refused to receive our administrative complaint. They also refused to talk to us about the law. Problems, and repeatedly stressed that we must see China's national conditions."
Yonghong Yong explained to reporters that according to the law, no matter whether the court accepts, rejects or rejects the prosecution, it must first take over the materials, and then give a written notice after failing the review. According to the law, the courts at the next lower level are not admissible and can be prosecuted in a higher court. The higher court of the Shaanxi Provincial High Court is the Supreme People's Court. However, the Shaanxi Provincial High Court does not accept the petition and cannot prove that we have submitted the petition. Therefore, we have adopted an administrative complaint form for them. According to the Administrative Litigation Law, the Shaanxi Provincial High Court should reply within 7 days. .
The work of mailing petitions was done by the Inner Mongolia Huicong Law Firm, and ZHANG Xianhua, a lawyer of Huicong Law Firm, was also one of the commissioned agents of the case. Zhang Xianhua told reporters that the complaint was issued by the Inner Mongolia Notary Office from Hohhot because the Shaanxi Provincial Public Notary Office was not convenient to do such a thing.
The lawsuit against the People's Government of Shaanxi Province, the People's Government of Yulin Municipality of Shaanxi Province and the People's Government of Jingbian County of Yulin City was sent by express mail from Hohhot, Inner Mongolia to the Higher People's Court of Shaanxi Province on May 25, according to China’s domestic express The delivery time of the special delivery has reached the Shaanxi Provincial Higher People's Court. According to the administrative litigation law, the Shaanxi Provincial High Court should reply within 7 days.
Water-based Acrylic Adhesive Aluminium Foil Tape
Water-Based Acrylic Adhesive Aluminium Foil Tape,Water-Based Acrylic Aluminium Foil Tape,Water-Based Adhesive Aluminium Foil Tape,Acrylic Adhesive Aluminium Foil Tape
Jiangyin Danuo Adhesive Products Co., Ltd , https://www.danuoadhesive.com