Source: China Youth Daily

According to China Youth Online reports, late at night on December 26, 2018 and at 13:32 on December 29, 2018, Cui Yongyuan posted on Weibo saying that the 100-billion-dollar mineral rights case file in northern Shaanxi has been stolen for two years and has not been found yet., causing concern.

In the middle of the night on December 29, the Supreme People's Court issued a circular, stating that it had launched an investigation procedure, and that if any violation of trial discipline by our court staff was found, it would be dealt with severely in accordance with discipline and law.

Regarding the 100-billion mining rights case in northern Shaanxi referred to by Cui Yongyuan, China Youth Daily reported it in a special report on August 2, 2010.

In 2010, China Youth Daily received reports from readers that a lawsuit concerning mining rights disputes in Hengshan County, Shaanxi Province was being heard by the Supreme People’s Court (hereinafter referred to as the Supreme Court), but it received a letter from the General Office of the Shaanxi Provincial Governmentletter.

In this letter, regarding our province’s opinions and requests, it is stated that the provincial high court’s first-instance judgment did not understand the basis of the cited documents correctly. If the provincial high people’s court’s judgment is upheld, a series of serious consequences will occur.The stability and development of Shaanxi have brought about a relatively large negative impact.

In response to this letter, Professor Hou Xinyi, deputy dean of the Nankai University School of Law, and several domestic legal experts believe that this letter abandons the fair and neutral position that the government should have in market competition, and is suspected of using state organs to serve private interests.

Politicize ordinary civil cases, elevate economic cases into political events, and exert enormous political pressure on the Supreme People's Court under the pretense of "affecting the social stability of Shaanxi Province".The above-mentioned legal experts appealed that illegal letters should be resisted to interfere with the judiciary.

According to informed sources, although the letter was sent in the name of the General Office of the Shaanxi Provincial Government, it was actually drafted by the Shaanxi Provincial Department of Land and Resources.

Cooperative exploration and discovery of high-quality coal reserves

At the beginning of 2003, on the portal website of Xi'an Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration and Development (hereinafter referred to as Xi'an Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration and Development) of Shaanxi Provincial Bureau of Geology and Mineral Exploration and Development (hereinafter referred to as Xi'an Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration), an article about the joint exploration of coal mines in the Boluo-Hongshiqiao area of Hengshan County, Shaanxi Province was posted.Resource investment information.

According to the information, the Boluo-Hongshiqiao mining area where the Western Exploration Institute has obtained the exploration right covers a total area of 279.24 square kilometers, and the exploration work has invested as much as 10 million yuan.

After seeing this information, Yulin Keqilai Energy Investment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Keqilai Company) contacted the Western Exploration Institute.On August 25, 2003, Kechlai Company signed a cooperative exploration contract with the Western Exploration Institute.

The contract stipulates that the two parties will jointly invest in the joint detailed and precise investigation of the coal resources in the Polo-Hongshiqiao Exploration Area.The prospecting right of this mining area has been evaluated by the statutory evaluation agency and reported to the Department of Land and Resources for record. The two parties have negotiated and determined its value to be 15 million yuan.

It is stipulated in the contract that Kaiqilai Company will pay 12 million yuan to the Western Exploration Institute and own 80% of the interest in the exploration project.After the agreement comes into effect, Kechlai Company and Xican Research Institute will share the benefits generated by the exploration area, whether it is exploration appreciation, joint development, or mineral rights transfer, at a ratio of 8:2.

Note in the contract: This agreement will come into effect on the date of signing by both parties.

On July 30, 2010, Zhao Faqi, the legal representative of Keqilai Company, told reporters that this contract is risky, and investment in prospecting is like gambling.If there is no mine, the investment in it will be thrown away.

At the end of 2004, Zhao Faqi obtained preliminary data showing that nearly 2 billion tons of high-quality thermal coal were stored under the 279.24 square kilometers mining area.According to the estimation of domestic raw coal prices in 2004, Zhao Faqi will be worth an astonishing amount.

However, a series of unbelievable things happened next.The Polo-Hongshiqiao mining area is located in the Mu Us Desert.Data picture The Polo-Hongshiqiao mining area is located in the Mu Us Desert.

After coordination, the cooperation re-agreed

On March 22, 2005, Keqilai Company transferred 12 million yuan to the Western Exploration Institute, but the Western Exploration Institute refused to accept it, and sent a letter to Keqilai Company on March 25 stating: According to the relevant regulations of the Mineral Resources Law of the People's Republic of ChinaAccording to the regulations, our institute signed a cooperative exploration project with your company: lsquo; Coal Resources Cooperative Exploration Contract in Hongshiqiao Area, Polo, Hengshan County, Yulin City, Shaanxi Province rsquo;The relevant policies of the minutes of the 21st meeting held by the government are inconsistent and cannot be implemented according to the contract, so you cannot collect money from your company.

Since then, the two sides have coordinated.On May 26, 2005, Kechlai Company paid 9 million yuan for the pre-exploration work to the Western Exploration Institute, and the Western Exploration Institute issued a receipt.

During this period, Shaanxi Geological and Mineral Exploration and Development Bureau proposed to terminate the cooperative exploration contract on the grounds that the cooperative exploration contract was inconsistent with the spirit of the 21st meeting minutes of the provincial government in 2003 and that the state had not yet drawn up a development plan for the cooperative exploration area.Keqilai Company reported this to the General Office of the Shaanxi Provincial Government, and the Provincial Government instructed the Provincial Department of Land and Resources to coordinate.

After investigation and coordination, the Department of Land and Resources of Shaanxi Province issued a document on November 8, 2005 in Shan Guo Tu Zi Ban Fa [2005] No. 65 on Coordinating and Solving Coal Resource Cooperative Exploration Disputes in Poluo Hongshiqiao Area, Hengshan County, Yulin CityThe report of the situation shall be reported to the General Office of the Provincial Government.

A reporter from China Youth Daily saw the report.The report said: In March 2004, the West Exploration Institute and Keqilai Company sent the cooperative exploration contract signed by the Western Exploration Institute and the summary of the exploration right assessment report of the Poluo Hongshiqiao Exploration Area in Hengshan County, Shaanxi Province to our department for record.After review, our department believes that both parties are willing to undertake risks and are willing to carry out cooperative exploration in accordance with the relevant regulations of the Shaanxi Provincial Government, which meets the requirements of national laws and regulations, and can agree to their cooperative exploration.

The report said: Our office has repeatedly convened representatives of the two parties for coordination, and finally came to the following opinion: Both parties agreed to continue the cooperative survey based on the cooperative survey contract signed on August 25, 2003.It is also agreed that after the exploration work is completed, the prospecting rights will be transferred to a new company jointly established by the two parties or to Keqilai Company for later development.

This report shows that Kechlai Company and the Western Exploration Institute have reached an agreement again and are ready to perform the contract.Then, however, things changed again.

Two filings for the same mining area

On December 8, 2005, Kechley Company sent a letter to the Western Exploration Institute, hoping that the Western Exploration Institute immediately fulfilled its contractual obligations, provided detailed investigation design and budget as soon as possible, and clarified the amount of payment that Kechley Company should still pay.

On December 14, 2005, the Western Exploration Institute stated in its reply letter: Regarding the issue of immediate performance of the contract, because within the validity period of the contract, we have not obtained the approval of the downstream industry project approval, we have lost the opportunity to start the performance of the contract, and now we have no way to perform the contract.talk about.Recently, I received a letter from the relevant provincial department that the Polo Minefield was planned by the province as a resource allocation resource for a key chemical project in Hong Kong Yiye. As a provincial geological prospecting unit, we must obey. Our cooperation with the Polo Minefield depends solely on our strength.Has been unable to start.

Afterwards, the Department of Land and Resources of Shaanxi Province, which had not long ago issued a report coordinating Keqilai Company and Xikan Institute to continue to perform the contract, on January 13, 2006, sent a document to Shaanxi Province with the document No. [2006] No.The provincial people's government submitted a request for instructions on the coordination opinions of China National Chemical Engineering Group Co., Ltd. Hong Kong Yiye Investment Co., Ltd. to participate in the exploration of coal resources in the Poluo Mine Field.

In the request for instructions in this document, there is such a statement: According to the instructions of the leaders of the provincial government, the Western Exploration Institute should actively coordinate and sign the lsquo; Polo Well Field rsquo;Exploration (intensive investigation) cooperationExploration agreement.In accordance with the principle that China National Chemical Engineering Corporation and Hong Kong Yiye Investment (Group) Co., Ltd. contribute funds, the Western Exploration Institute is responsible for the exploration work, and the exploration results are owned by the investor. After the lsquo;methanol MTO project rsquo;The Western Exploration Institute transferred the prospecting right of the minefield to the project development owner according to law.

It is understood that the above-mentioned Polo Minefield covers an area of about 340 square kilometers. The area of the Polo Minefield in Hengshan County held by the Western Exploration Institute is about 258 square kilometers.In other words, most of the two areas overlap.

On April 14, 2006, the Western Exploration Institute and Hong Kong Yiye Investment (Group) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Hong Kong Yiye) signed a cooperative exploration contract on the Poluo Mine Field.

Zhao Faqi was very angry after confirming that the Xikan Institute signed a cooperation agreement with other companies on the mining area that was originally shared by the Xikan Institute and Keqilai Company.In May 2006, Keqilai Company sued Xikan Institute to the Higher People's Court of Shaanxi Province.

On October 19, 2006, the Higher People's Court of Shaanxi Province ruled in favor of Kaiqilai Company in the first instance.The Shaanxi Higher People's Court held that the August 25, 2003 cooperative exploration contract signed by Kaiqilai Company and the Western Exploration Institute was a true expression of the two parties' intentions, and the content did not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and regulations, so the contract should be deemed valid.

Document No. 90 (2005) of the Shaanxi Provincial Department of Land and Resources can confirm that the plaintiff and the defendant have reported the contract dated August 25, 2003 for the record, and at that time the department also agreed to continue to perform the contract.established.

The court held that the West Exploration Institute terminated the performance of the contract for various reasons. In the case that the contract relationship with Ketchley Company was not terminated in accordance with the law, the area signed with other units included the cooperative exploration of the joint exploration area between the West Exploration Institute and Ketchley Company.contract, its conduct constitutes a breach of contract.

The court ruled that the cooperative exploration contract between Kechlai Company and the Western Exploration Institute on August 25, 2003 was valid, and both parties continued to perform it.In addition, the Western Exploration Institute shall pay Ketchley Company a liquidated damages of 27.6 million yuan within 10 days after the judgment takes effect; and transfer the prospecting rights to Ketchley Company within one month after the judgment takes effect.

The Xikan Institute refused to accept it.In November 2006, Xikan Institute appealed to the Supreme People's Court.

Zhao Faqi believes that after the Shaanxi Provincial Department of Land and Resources filed the cooperation contract between Keqilai Company and Xikan Institute, it also filed the contract formed between Xikan Institute and another company. This is the root of the contradiction.

What is the origin of Sinochem Yiye?

Why are there two filings for the same mining area?

The reporter obtained a transcript of the investigation made on December 17, 2007 by Kechley's attorney when he investigated Wang Fenglin, a cadre of the Exploration Division of the Shaanxi Provincial Department of Land and Resources.Among them, when asked why the same project was filed twice, Wang Fenglin replied that you can ask the relevant departments and leaders about this question.

Then, how did China National Chemical Engineering Corporation (hereinafter referred to as China National Chemical Corporation) and Hong Kong Yiye appear?

The reporter's investigation found that in a document issued by the Shaanxi Provincial Development and Reform Commission on August 18, 2005, in the reply to the relevant issues related to the construction of a coal chemical project by China National Chemical Corporation Hong Kong Yiye Investment Company, there was such a statement: According to our CommissionThe MTO project cooperation agreement signed with China National Chemical Engineering Corporation and Hong Kong Yiye Investment (Group) Co., Ltd. Sinochem Yiye Energy Co., Ltd., as the owner of the 2.4 million tons of methanol-to-olefins (MTO) project in Yuheng Coal Chemical Industry Park, shouldCarry out pre-project work.

On October 10, 2005, the Shaanxi Provincial Development and Reform Commission issued the Shaanxi Development and Reform Energy (2005) No. 932 document, specifying that the supporting coal resource for the Yuheng 2.4 million tons methanol MTO project is the Poluo Mine Field.

On July 7, 2006, Shaanxi Provincial Development and Reform Commission issued a notice on the filing of Shaanxi Sinochem Yiye Energy Investment Co., Ltd.'s 2.4 million tons of methanol MTO Phase I 600,000 tons of methanol project, agreeing to file for the project.

The reporter found out that it was precisely because China National Chemical Corporation and Hong Kong Yiye applied for the 2.4 million tons of methanol MTO project in Yuheng that the subsequent cooperative exploration contract between the Western Exploration Institute and Hong Kong Yiye on the Boluo Mine Field came about.However, is Shaanxi Sinochem Yiye Energy Investment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Sinochem Yiye) really established by Sinochem Group and Hong Kong Yiye?

The reporter's investigation found that Sinochem Yiye was jointly funded and established on June 16, 2006 by Shaanxi Yiye Investment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Shaanxi Yiye) and China National Chemical Corporation.Among them, Shaanxi Yiye accounts for 90% of the registered capital, and China National Chemical Corporation accounts for 10%.

Information from the industry and commerce department shows that Shaanxi Yiye was established on April 14, 2006, and its legal person shareholders are Shaanxi Taixing Real Estate Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Shaanxi Taixing Real Estate) and natural person Liu Feng.Among them, Liu Feng accounts for 95% of the registered capital, and Shaanxi Taixing Real Estate Co., Ltd. accounts for 5%.

Relevant information shows that Liu Feng was born in Xi'an in 1979.But there is no further public information.

Shaanxi Taixing Real Estate was established on June 10, 2003. Its business scope includes: real estate development, operation and supporting services; comprehensive tourism development and supporting services; cultivation and sales of Xilin flowers; sales of building decoration materials and native products.

The shareholders of Shaanxi Taixing Real Estate are natural persons Liu Hao and Liu Liang.The reporter found that Shaanxi Yiye had made an investor (equity) change on February 3, 2008, and the legal person shareholder was changed from Shaanxi Taixing Real Estate and Liu Feng to Liu Feng.In other words, Shaanxi Yiye became Liu Feng's sole proprietorship.

In addition, on July 25, 2008, Sinochem Yiye made an investor (equity) change. The legal person shareholders were changed from Shaanxi Yiye and China Chemical Group to Shaanxi Yiye and Shaanxi Taixing Real Estate, and China Chemical GroupQuit completely.

As a result, Sinochem Yiye is owned by Liu Feng, Liu Hao, and Liu Liang.

The letter sent to the Supreme Law was drafted by the Shaanxi Department of Land and Resources?

An even more bizarre thing happened during the second instance of the lawsuit between Keqilai Company and Xikan Institute in the Supreme People's Court.

According to insiders, on May 4, 2008, the General Office of the Shaanxi Provincial Government issued a report to the Supreme People's Court on the dispute between the Western Exploration Institute and Keqilai Company.

According to reports, among the several opinions and requests put forward by the report to the Supreme People's Court, is that the contract exploration contract between the Western Exploration Institute and Keqilai Company has not been completed for the record and has not been implemented, so it should be an invalid contract;The understanding of the basis of the cited documents is incorrect, and the execution of the first-instance judgment will cause a serious loss of state-owned assets.

At the same time, the report also stated that if the judgment of the Provincial Higher People's Court is upheld, a series of serious consequences will be produced, which will have a relatively large negative impact on the stability and development of Shaanxi.

It is understood that in response to this letter, in February 2009, several domestic legal experts, including Professor Hou Xinyi, vice dean of Nankai University Law School, jointly sent a proposal to the Supreme Court calling on the Supreme People's Court to boycott the illegal letter to interfere with the judiciary.

In this proposal, legal experts reflected the opinion that the confidential letter violated the relevant provisions of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on the Disclosure of Government Information, and illegally encrypted the government information that should be actively disclosed, which caused the litigation status of both parties to be different during the litigation process.A serious imbalance seriously affects the vital interests of one party concerned.

The secret letter abandons the fairness and neutrality that the government should have in market competition, and there is a suspicion of using state organs to serve private interests.

The secret letter politicizes ordinary civil cases, elevates economic cases into political events, and exerts enormous political pressure on the Supreme People's Court under the title of "affecting the social stability of Shaanxi Province", challenging the judicial authority of the Supreme People's Court.

However, Professor Hou Xinyi told the China Youth Daily reporter on August 1 that he only listened to the content of the letter introduced by the person concerned, and did not see the letter with his own eyes.

It is understood that this mining rights dispute case was appealed to the Supreme Court in November 2006, and it was not until November 4, 2009 that the Supreme Court ruled to revoke the decision of the Shaanxi Provincial High Court and remand it for retrial.Regarding the case itself, in the ruling, there is only an expression that the court believes that the facts found in the original judgment are not clear.

According to Zhao Faqi, he learned from some insiders that the letter submitted in the name of the General Office of the Shaanxi Provincial Government was actually drafted by the Shaanxi Provincial Department of Land and Resources.

The staff of the General Office of the Shaanxi Provincial Government who handled the matter told the media reporter that this is an internal document, which has been going on for a long time and needs to be checked to see if it has been filed. When asked about the organization that drafted the document, he said it should beDrafted by Shaanxi Provincial Department of Land and Resources.

However, later in the day, when the staff member was asked about the file checking again, he said that the file was not in his hand, and he could not remember exactly who drafted it. The staff member finally suggested that he could directly ask Shaanxi Provincial Land and Resourceshall.

However, the staff of the Shaanxi Provincial Department of Land and Resources who handled the case told reporters that the case has been remanded by the Supreme People's Court to the Shaanxi Provincial High Court for retrial, and denied the drafting of the report.

Zhao Faqi said that what he hopes is an openness and transparency. If the law says that I am wrong, then I believe that what I want is a fair result.

Author: Wang Guoqiang