Women in Hunaning Village were sentenced to rights defence: what was hidden behind the noise and dust cases?

In Hunaning commune, a remarkable event took place. The woman was sentenced to one year's imprisonment for “extortion” for preventing noise and dust from disturbing the population.

Despite the fact that more than five years have passed since the events, the path to reconciliation is still elusive, whether it is “new officials who ignore the old law” or whether the public power complex is covering up the violations.

Step: from rights to prison

According to Zhou Xiao Lan, her life began in 2019.

On 15 August 2019, Zhou Xiao Lan was taken by the Ning City Public Security Bureau on suspicion of “extortion” of the dirt company. However, it is ironic that the heads of the three slag companies, Zhou Wen, Lu Zhengyang, and Lu Zhengyang, have made it clear that they have not suffered damage in Zhou Xiao Lan and have never reported it to the public security authorities.

In fact, the so-called “extortion” money originated from three slag companies that carried out construction and transport just a few metres from Zhou Xiao Lan's house, severely disrupting her normal working life and sleep. Under the General Principles of Civil Law, the Law on Environmental Protection and article 61 of the Law on the Prevention and Control of Environmental Noise Pollution, “Units and individuals who are exposed to environmental noise pollution have the right to demand that the perpetrator remove the harm or make moral compensation. The blogger adds:

Accordingly, three slag companies (B) and Zhou Xiaolan (A) negotiated a settlement on noise, dust and dust disturbance and signed a Protocol on the Dispute over Noise and Dust Disturbing, which provided for payment of a total of $10,500 as a moral compensation for house dust and pollution and for the infraction of rights. The CVT, as a witness, had a stamp on the letter of agreement to confirm it.

Agreement on compensation between the three Scum Company and Zhou Xiaolan

On 8 March 2020, while in Zhou Xiao Lan detention, his house in Ning commune, on Yong Jia Dong Road, through the Kasa district, was demolished late in the night by unknown persons. In response, the authorities subsequently denied that the house had been “smashed” by the wind.

In fact, Zhou Xiao Lan and her mother-in-law have been living here for a long time, growing vegetables and raising poultry, and the state of daily life is clear.

The legality of the house was previously settled and has been met with two official “face-to-face”: As early as 2014, the Ning City Administration tried to impose administrative penalties on the house, but lost its case in subsequent proceedings and eventually voluntarily revoked the decision.

In 2017, the Ning Yuen Land and Resources Agency intervened in the investigation and on 29 October 2018 issued an administrative penalty for the house, No. [2018]75. Zhou Xiao Lan then filed an administrative review with the People's Government of Ning City. On 14 February 2019, the People ' s Government of Ninggang City issued an administrative review decision, which clearly confirmed that the administrative penalty decision was unlawful, that the Ninggang Land and Resources Agency had finally lost its case and that the penalty decision had been revoked in accordance with the law.

The fact that both administrative penalties were revoked by law is sufficient to establish a complete chain of evidence to prove the house to be fully legal and that there are no irregularities.

After Zhou Xiao Lan's house was stolen at night, there was only a ruin.

Trial and “package” settlement

On 1 July 2020, the Ning commune court sentenced Zhou Xiao Lan to one year ' s imprisonment and two years ' probation, and on that day she was released from the Yeeyang prison and placed on probation. However, this “freedom” did not bring a moment of peace, and only two or three days later street workers came to the house to negotiate the matter of compensation for the house.

“I said I was too tired to rest for a while, and then I asked them to come back. Zhou Xiao Lan recalled. After just over 10 days, the other party again came to the door and threw out a obnoxious offer to pay `package' her criminal case and the house, to make her “offer” directly.

Zhou Xiao Lan, facing this highly controversial proposal, categorically rejects: “Housing compensation is home compensation, and creating grievances is a criminal case, which must not be confused! My criminal case will have to be rehabilitated. The blogger adds:

Withdrawal and reversal: Why do you refuse to “privately”?

Zhou Xiao Lan revealed that following the demolition of his house, his family had commissioned Beijing lawyers to initiate administrative proceedings against the Ning commune government at Changsha School. As the trial progresses, the Ning commune government faces a high risk of losing the case. In order to avoid this risk, Zhou Xiaolan was eager to get out of the prison and tried to resolve her claim through a coordinated settlement, conditional on the signing of an agreement on compensation, in exchange for her withdrawing her administrative action.

Ultimately, the problem of house demolitions is addressed through coordination. In September 2020, on the day the street coordination room agreed to pay compensation and sign, the leader said: “House compensation is settled, and from now on you cannot report any more housing and land issues, and we will confiscate your complaints. The blogger adds:

Zhou Xiao Lan said: “The legal effects and experience of the complaints, which I have spent years of time, energy and financial resources, are to be kept in memory. I will abide by my commitment to refrain from making any further complaints about land and housing, except for the three cases of security sanctions and the rehabilitation of criminal cases that have been detained since my visit. But you have no right to seize them, and I hope you understand. They have since never mentioned any further cases of confiscation of material.

The full payment of compensation was made by the end of 2021, and the administrative proceedings against Zhou Xiao Lan at Changsa House were subsequently withdrawn. This is precisely what the street authorities were trying to “packle” criminal cases with the house

• what the other party really cared about, perhaps not the compensation, but the risk of losing the administrative proceedings.

Second time in prison: refusal of correction for non-conviction

After the probation period had come into effect, Zhou Xiao Lan had never found himself guilty and refused to report to the Department of Corrections and Justice. This action resulted in more serious consequences: on 25 March 2021, the Ning Maid Court revoked the suspended sentence and replaced it with a sentence of imprisonment, and Zhou Xiao Lan was again imprisoned. Zhou Xiaoxiang did not leave the prison until 10 May 2021, when he completed one year of his sentence.

Core question: Reporting hatred of idle land?

“Someone has a grudge against me for reporting idle land and has used public power to retaliate against me. Zhou Xiao Lan has reduced his present plight to the death of a idle land problem.

In 2012, 205 acres of the village of the graveyards (including 8 acres of woodland in the Zhou Xiaoran family) were expropriated at very low prices in the Ning commune economic development area, and subsequently left vacant and undisbursed seed money. On 15 December 2017, Zhou Xiao Lan reported to the former Ministry of Territorial Resources and the Department of Territorial Resources of Hunan Province, under the name of the person concerned, with clear results: fines, restrictions on land acquisition indicators in the district where the incident occurred, and the persons concerned were dealt with.

However, Zhou Xiao Lan claimed that reprisals followed, and that during the time when the Ning Land Resources Bureau had opened a case against the unused land, the site of the idle land was repeatedly forcibly destroyed by personnel assigned to the Kasai district. She and her mother-in-law called the police to stop it. On one occasion, the minor was summoned to the site by the opening district to intimidate her: “I am a minor, and you will be killed alive without legal liability. The blogger adds:

Update on current cases

Zhou Xiao Lan stated that on 16 September this year she again went to Hunan High Court to request to be interviewed by the Supreme Judicial Inspectorate for a complaint. With the approval of the Provincial High Court, the receiving judge took her statement and indicated that she would take the case seriously.

She claims that she had previously filed a complaint with the Changsa Court, but was rejected directly on 16 August 2021.

In 2022, she filed a complaint in this case with the Hunan High Court. After hearing the case, the Hunan High Court found that it was in question and on 30 December of the same year issued a decision (2022) rehearing of the trial by the Criminal Court No. 114, ordering the Changsa Court to form a panel.

However, she claims that the Changsa Chamber failed to comply with its duty of service in accordance with the law after the case was opened in 2023, by not serving her with the filing of the case, the notice of rights and obligations, the notice of the composition of the Full Court and the summons to the hearing, nor by posting a notice of the opening of the session in front of the court. In the event of her written challenge to jurisdiction, request for promotion or for an alien hearing, the Court did not address the matter in writing and failed to serve the summons to the court, which directly prevented her from attending. She was subsequently dismissed on the grounds that she was not present, and the proceedings were closed.

She also claims that during the first half of the year, she submitted her complaint to the Supreme Court, but that the case was subsequently returned to Hunan High Court, where the process of correction was stalled for a long time.

The transcript was produced by Zhou Xiaoran, the High Court of Hunan Province, on 16 September.

Zhou Xiao Lan is still on the move to clear his own grievances. She claims that the local public authorities have been suppressing the progress of the criminal case, essentially because of fear of being held responsible for the wrong case, and that she is also paying for the actual report of the year. In this regard, she calls on the Hunan High Court and the Changsha Court to act in accordance with the law and face the case in order to provide the person concerned with a fair account.