The Supreme Law issued 8 typical cases of environmental pollution crimes.
CCTV News:According to the website of the Supreme People’s Court, on December 26th, the Supreme People’s Court released a typical case of environmental pollution crime.
Typical cases of environmental pollution crimes
Case 1: Liu Zuqing’s environmental pollution case
The discharge of pollutants containing heavy metals seriously exceeds the standard, which constitutes the crime of environmental pollution.
(1) Basic facts of the case
Since October 2013, the defendant Liu Zuqing, together with others, has hired workers to engage in shoe mold processing without going through the formalities for examination and approval of industrial and commercial business license and environmental impact assessment according to state regulations and without building supporting environmental protection facilities such as water pollution prevention and control. During this period, the generated wastewater was discharged to the village drainage channel through the pipeline connecting the cofferdam without treatment. According to the monitoring, the concentration of heavy metals in the total effluent of the above-mentioned processing plants is 23,200mg/L of nickel, 8.64 mg/L of total chromium, 36mg/L of copper and 132 mg/L of zinc, which are 23,199 times, 4.76 times, 35 times and 25 times higher than the discharge standards stipulated in the Integrated Wastewater Discharge Standard (GB8978-1996) respectively.
(II) Judgment results
The first-instance judgment of Jinjiang People’s Court in Fujian Province and the second-instance ruling of Quanzhou Intermediate People’s Court held that the defendant Liu Zuqing and others violated the state regulations when processing shoe molds, and discharged wastewater containing nickel, chromium, copper and zinc, which exceeded the national discharge standards by 23,199 times, 4.76 times, 35 times and 25.4 times, which seriously polluted the environment and constituted a crime of environmental pollution. Accordingly, the defendant Liu Zuqing was sentenced to two years and eight months in prison for environmental pollution and fined RMB 50,000.
Case 2: Environmental pollution cases in Tian Jianguo and Li Enguo.
Illegal lead smelting polluted the environment and was sentenced to four and a half years in prison.
(1) Basic facts of the case
Defendant Tian Jianguo leased a lead smelting plant, did not obtain a hazardous waste business license, did not take any pollution prevention measures, and used pyrometallurgical process to produce lead from waste lead-acid batteries. From August 2012 to October 2013, the defendant Tian Jianguo successively purchased more than 13,500 tons of waste lead-acid batteries with a value of RMB 108,330,105 from Zhang Zhufang and others (handled separately), which was used to reduce lead production and seriously polluted the environment. Defendant Li Enguo built a lead smelting plant and leased it to Tian Jianguo, and provided assistance for the operation of Tian Jianguo. Tian Jianguo confessed his crimes truthfully after he was brought to justice.
(II) Judgment results
The first-instance judgment of Yunlong District People’s Court in Xuzhou City, Jiangsu Province and the second-instance judgment of Xuzhou Intermediate People’s Court held that Tian Jianguo illegally purchased waste lead-acid batteries and used pyrometallurgical process to smelt lead. During the illegal disposal, a large amount of wastewater and waste gas were discharged directly without treatment, and the spilled dust was collected in self-made bags, and the finished lead ingots were piled up in the open air, causing serious pollution, which constituted a crime of environmental pollution. Li En’s country constitutes a joint crime of environmental pollution. Considering the factors such as the duration of pollution, the scale of operation, the scope of pollution and the quantity of pollutants discharged, the behavior of the two defendants should be considered as "particularly serious consequences". Accordingly, the defendants Tian Jianguo and Li Enguo were sentenced to four years and six months’ imprisonment and fined RMB 100,000.
Case 3: Zhejiang Huidelong Dyeing and Chemical Co., Ltd. and other environmental pollution cases.
More than 18,000 tons of distillation residue was dumped into the seawall and fined 20 million yuan.
(1) Basic facts of the case
Defendant Zhejiang Huidelong Dyeing and Chemical Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Huidelong Company") is a chemical enterprise with an annual output of 40,000 tons of insurance powder and 3,800 tons of sodium sulfite. Shaoxing Tengda Printing and Dyeing Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Tengda Company") is mainly engaged in printing and dyeing projects, and the actual controllers of the above two companies are both defendants Yan Haixing. Distillation residue (containing methanol, sodium formate, sodium sulfite, etc.) produced in the process of sodium hydrosulfite synthesis, filtration and drying belongs to hazardous waste. In July and August, 2012, in order to alleviate the pollution discharge pressure of Huidelong Company in treating the distillation residue, Yan Haixing negotiated with the defendants Pan Defeng (general manager of Huidelong Company) and Pan Hualin (civil engineer of Tengda Company) to transport the distillation residue of Huidelong Company to Tengda Company without the qualification of hazardous waste disposal. After being mixed with the wastewater generated by Tengda Company, the distillation residue is directly discharged into the pipe network through the concealed pipe, with a cumulative discharge of more than 5,000 tons. Since October, 2012, in order to alleviate the pollution discharge pressure of Huidelong Company in treating the distillation residue, Pan Defeng entrusted the defendant Ru Jianguo, who is not qualified for hazardous waste disposal, with the price of 50-80 yuan/ton to handle the distillation residue of Huidelong Company. Yan Haixing knew and acquiesced in the above-mentioned handling behavior. Ruan Jianguo, together with defendants Ruan Jiancheng and Ruan Jun, hired defendants Xu Fusuo, Tang Changzheng, Li Zhenhua, Luo Weijie, etc. to transport the above distillation residue to the seawall outside Shangyu Industrial Park in Hangzhou Bay for direct dumping.More than 18,000 tons have been dumped. Defendant Pan Defeng (warehouse supervisor of Huidelong Company) knew that Huidelong Company illegally transported and disposed of the distillation residue, but still accepted Pan Defeng’s assignment, and organized personnel to be responsible for weighing the tank trucks transporting the distillation residue and filling in the supply list.
(II) Judgment results
The first-instance judgment of Shangyu District People’s Court in Shaoxing City, Zhejiang Province and the second-instance ruling of Shaoxing Intermediate People’s Court held that the defendant Huidelong Company, together with the defendants Ru Jianguo, Ru Jiancheng and Ru Jun, violated state regulations, discharged, dumped and disposed of toxic substances, which seriously polluted the environment and constituted a crime of environmental pollution, with particularly serious consequences. Considering the circumstances of surrender, meritorious service, truthful confession, refund of illegal income and payment of sewage treatment fee after the incident, the defendant Zhejiang Huidelong Dyeing and Chemical Co., Ltd. was fined RMB 20 million for environmental pollution; Sentenced the defendant Yan Haixing to four years and six months in prison and fined RMB 1 million; The defendants Pan Defeng and Ru Jianguo were sentenced to four years’ imprisonment and fined RMB 300,000. The defendant Pan Hualin was sentenced to three years in prison and fined RMB 60,000. Sentenced the defendant Ru Jiancheng to one year and six months in prison and fined 50,000 yuan; Sentenced the defendant Ru Jun to one year and three months’ imprisonment and fined RMB 30,000; The defendants Pan Defeng and Xu Fusuo were sentenced to 10 months’ imprisonment, suspended for one year, and fined RMB 10,000. The defendants Tang Changzheng and Li Zhenhua were sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, suspended for one year and fined RMB 10,000. The defendant Luo Weijie was sentenced to six months’ criminal detention, suspended for ten months and fined RMB 10,000. Defendants Xu Fusuo, Tang Changzheng, Li Zhenhua and Luo Weijie are prohibited from engaging in activities related to sewage discharge during the probation period.
Case 4: Wang Qiu is a case of equal environmental pollution.
Illegal landfill of domestic garbage near residential areas was sentenced to five years in prison.
(1) Basic facts of the case
From October 2014, the defendant Wang Qiu contracted the land backfilling project of Modern Agricultural Logistics Park and subcontracted it to others, knowing that the land of the Logistics Park did not have the function of domestic garbage disposal and that others were not qualified to dispose of domestic garbage, he allowed them to dump and bury domestic garbage. The northwest of the landfill is Wusong River, and the east is farmland. There are 3 villages within 500m, and the nearest village is 125m away from the landfill. Wang Qiu is in partnership with defendant Li Wei, in which Wang Qiu is in charge of the landfill project. Defendant Liu Honghai is the person in charge of the south landfill site, and defendant Han Yang participated in the south landfill project as a partner at the invitation of Liu Honghai. The landfill adopts the method of layered landfill of domestic waste and construction waste to landfill domestic waste. After the landfill of domestic garbage was discovered, Wang Qiu sent people to remove part of the domestic garbage in the north, and continued to landfill domestic garbage in the south until March 2015. According to the calculation, the amount of domestic garbage dumped and buried in the north is 48,236 cubic meters, and that in the south is 146,935 cubic meters. According to the assessment, the total loss of public and private property caused by Wang Qiu Wei and Li Weigen’s landfill of domestic waste is about RMB 12,067,009.94, and that caused by Liu Honghai and Han Yang’s landfill of domestic waste is about RMB 9,084,680.27.
(II) Judgment results
The People’s Court of gusu district, Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province ruled that the defendants Wang Qiu Wei and Li Weigen knew that the land of the logistics park involved in the case did not have the function of domestic garbage disposal, and others were not qualified to dispose of domestic garbage, causing heavy losses to public and private property. The defendants Liu Honghai and Han Yang violated state regulations and were not qualified to dump and bury domestic garbage, causing heavy losses to public and private property. The actions of the above-mentioned defendants all constitute crimes of environmental pollution, and the consequences are particularly serious. Accordingly, the defendant Wang Qiu was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment and fined 200,000 yuan for environmental pollution. Defendant Liu Honghai was sentenced to four years and eight months in prison and fined RMB 150,000. Defendant Li Weigen was sentenced to three years and six months in prison and fined RMB 100,000. Defendant Han Yang was sentenced to two years and six months in prison and fined RMB 60,000. The judgment has taken legal effect.
Case 5: Environmental pollution case of Huzhou Industrial and Medical Waste Disposal Center Co., Ltd.
Hazardous waste disposal enterprises illegally dispose of hazardous waste, and the consequences are particularly serious.
(1) Basic facts of the case
Huzhou Industrial and Medical Waste Disposal Center is an enterprise with the qualification to dispose of hazardous wastes, and its licensed business items are the collection, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes and medical wastes such as medical wastes, organic solvent wastes, waste mineral oil and photosensitive material wastes within Huzhou. From 2011 to April 2014, the defendant Zheng Zheng (legal representative) instructed, instructed or agreed to its subordinate management personnel to hand over more than 5,950 tons of hazardous waste collected by the center to units and individuals without corresponding qualifications for disposal and profit. Among them, some hazardous wastes were dumped at will.
(II) Judgment results
The first-instance judgment of Wuxing District People’s Court in Huzhou City, Zhejiang Province and the second-instance judgment of Huzhou Intermediate People’s Court held that Huzhou Industrial and Medical Waste Disposal Center Co., Ltd., the defendant, violated state regulations and disposed of hazardous waste, seriously polluting the environment. The defendant’s administration is the person in charge who is directly responsible for the defendant’s unit, instigating, instructing or agreeing with its subordinate management personnel to carry out the above acts. The actions of the defendant unit and the defendant have constituted the crime of environmental pollution, and the consequences are particularly serious. Considering the relevant criminal circumstances of this case, the defendant Huzhou Industrial and Medical Waste Disposal Center Co., Ltd. was convicted of environmental pollution and fined 400,000 yuan. The defendant was sentenced to three years and ten months in prison for the crime of polluting the environment, and fined RMB 150,000. He was sentenced to six years and three months in prison and fined RMB 250,000.
Case 6: Environmental pollution case of Jiantao (Hebei) Coking Co., Ltd.
Volatile phenol discharged directly into the atmosphere beyond the standard was fined 2.45 million yuan.
(1) Basic facts of the case
In March 2014, the defendant Jiantao (Hebei) Coking Co., Ltd. died of activated sludge in the biochemical pool of the second-phase biochemical treatment station, which failed to meet the standard for ammonia distillation wastewater treatment. Defendants Chengwu Wang (general manager of the company), Zhang Jianfu (manager of the public works department), Hu Xiaojing (deputy manager of the public works department), Chen Rui (director of the second-phase biochemical treatment station) and Zhang Zhu (person in charge of the post) discovered this situation, and in order to avoid the supervision of the environmental protection department, Zhang Jianfu instructed Chen Rui and Zhang Zhu to fabricate a false water quality test table that met the standard without taking effective measures to make the ammonia wastewater treatment meet the standard. These substandard ammonia distilled wastewater was used to make up water for quenching tower, which led to the direct emission of volatile phenol in ammonia distilled wastewater into the atmosphere, seriously polluting the environment. After testing, the volatile phenol in the make-up water for quenching tower exceeded the national standard by 137 times.
(II) Judgment results
The people’s court of Qiaodong District, Xingtai City, Hebei Province ruled that the defendant Jiantao (Hebei) Coking Co., Ltd. violated state regulations and discharged pollutants that seriously endangered the environment and harmed human health, seriously polluting the environment, which constituted a crime of environmental pollution. Defendants Zhang Jianfu, Zhang Zhu, Chen Rui, Chengwu Wang and Hu Xiaojing, as directly responsible persons in charge or other directly responsible persons, shall bear corresponding criminal responsibilities. After the incident, the defendant Jiantao (Hebei) Coking Co., Ltd. invested a lot of money to transform the equipment to meet the requirements of environmental protection, and may be given a lighter punishment as appropriate. Accordingly, the defendant Jiantao (Hebei) Coking Co., Ltd. was fined RMB 2.45 million for environmental pollution; Defendant Zhang Jianwei was sentenced to one year in prison and fined RMB 50,000. Defendant Zhang Zhu was sentenced to 10 months in prison and fined RMB 30,000. Defendant Chen Rui was sentenced to 10 months in prison and fined RMB 30,000. Defendant Chengwu Wang was sentenced to six months in prison, suspended for one year and fined RMB 20,000. Defendant Hu Xiaojing was fined RMB 20,000. The judgment has taken legal effect.
Case 7: Bai Jialin and Wu Shuqin’s environmental pollution case.
Illegal disposal of packaging barrels containing mineral oil constitutes a crime of environmental pollution.
(1) Basic facts of the case
Mineral oil, such as lubricating oil, is hazardous waste. According to the National Hazardous Waste List, discarded packages and containers containing or directly contaminated with hazardous waste are also hazardous waste. From October 2014 to April 2015, the defendant Bai Jialin bought waste packaging barrels contaminated with mineral oil, paint waste and waste organic solvents from the defendant Wu Shuqin and others without obtaining a hazardous waste business license, and hired workers to clean or cut them and sell them. For the waste water generated by cleaning the waste packaging barrels, Bai Jialin instructed the workers to dump it on the ground and discharge it to the outside environment through the laid pipeline. According to the investigation, Wu Shuqin successively sold 50.5 tons of waste packaging barrels contaminated with lubricating oil to Baijialin.
(II) Judgment results
The first-instance judgment of the People’s Court of Yubei District, Chongqing held that the defendant Bai Jialin violated state regulations and illegally disposed of more than three tons of hazardous waste, seriously polluting the environment; Defendant Wu Shuqin knew that Baijialin had no business license and provided him with hazardous waste, which seriously polluted the environment and constituted a joint crime. Accordingly, considering that the defendant Wu Shuqin was a first-time offender and voluntarily pleaded guilty during the trial, the defendant Bai Jialin was sentenced to one year and eight months in prison for environmental pollution and fined 150,000 yuan. Defendant Wu Shuqin was sentenced to one year in prison, suspended for two years and fined 80,000 yuan. After the defendant Bai Jialin filed an appeal, he applied to withdraw the appeal, which was approved by the Chongqing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court after examination.
Case 8: Zhejiang Jinfanda Biochemical Co., Ltd. and other environmental pollution cases
Illegal dumping of more than 35,000 tons of glyphosate mother liquor was fined 75 million yuan.
(1) Basic facts of the case
Fangbu Chemical Plant is a subsidiary of Zhejiang Jinfanda Biochemical Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Jinfanda Company), specializing in the production of pesticide glyphosate. In 2011, the mother liquid of glyphosate, a hazardous waste produced by Fangbu Chemical Plant, was flooded because it was not treated in time. In order not to affect the production and reduce the processing cost, the defendants Du Zhongxiang (deputy general manager of Jinfanda Company) and Song Qiuqin (manager of domestic trade department of Jinfanda Company), with the acquiescence of the defendant Pu Jianguo (general manager of Jinfanda Company), Entrust chemical raw material providers with business dealings, such as Hangzhou Lianhuan Chemical Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Lianhuan Company"), Huzhou Dexing Chemical Materials Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Dexing Company"), Fuyang Boxin Chemical Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Boxin Company") and the defendant Quzhou Xinhe Agricultural Means of Production Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Xinhe Company"), to dispose of glyphosate mother liquor illegally. Defendant Li Xiaofeng (deputy director in charge of property management department of Fangbu Chemical Plant) was still responsible for contacting Song Qiuqin to inform Xinhe Company and other units to illegally haul glyphosate mother liquor, knowing that the glyphosate mother liquor produced by production should be entrusted to a qualified enterprise for disposal. From October 2011 to May 2013, Jinfanda Company illegally disposed of more than 35,000 tons of glyphosate mother liquor and directly dumped it into the external environment.
In the second half of 2011, the defendant, Xinhe Company, in order to gain profits, violated national regulations without the qualification for hazardous waste disposal. With the consent of the defendant Wu Guichang (the legal representative of Xinhe Company), the defendant Hong Guonv (the deputy general manager of Xinhe Company) contacted Du Zhongxiang and Song Qiuqin, and agreed to dispose of glyphosate mother liquor for Jinfanda Company and charge a disposal fee of 80-100 yuan per ton. From the beginning of 2012 to May 2013, Xinhe Company transported more than 5,000 tons of glyphosate mother liquor from Fangbu Chemical Plant to Quzhou through a tanker jointly operated by defendants Huang Xiaodong and Wang Fei, dumped it in streams, beaches and woodlands, and paid Huang Xiaodong and Wang Fei 50-60 yuan per ton for disposal. Defendant Yan Qi (shareholder of Xinhe Company) is responsible for settling the disposal expenses of glyphosate mother liquor and issuing invoices with Huang Xiaodong, Wang Fei and Jinfanda Company. Defendants Lin Shumu, Shu Wenzhong, Chai Ronggui, Yang Jianyun, Fu Guoxiang, Chen Xierong, Zhang Xianguo, Fang Yueliang, Qiu Tuliang and Jiang Donghua, as drivers and escorts of tank trucks, participated in the transportation of glyphosate mother liquor and assisted in dumping.
(II) Judgment results
The first-instance judgment of Longyou County People’s Court in Zhejiang Province and the second-instance ruling of Quzhou Intermediate People’s Court in Zhejiang Province hold that the defendants Zhejiang Jinfanda Biochemical Co., Ltd., Quzhou Xinhe Agricultural Means of Production Co., Ltd. and the defendants Huang Xiaodong and Wang Fei violated the state regulations, dumping and disposing of hazardous wastes and seriously polluting the environment, all of which constituted environmental pollution crimes, and the consequences were particularly serious. Considering the circumstances of surrender, truthful confession and return of illegal income after the incident, the defendant Zhejiang Jinfanda Biochemical Co., Ltd. was fined 75 million yuan for environmental pollution; Sentenced the defendant Quzhou Xinhe Agricultural Production Materials Co., Ltd. to a fine of RMB 4 million; The defendant Du Zhongxiang was sentenced to six years in prison and fined RMB 1 million; And the corresponding fixed-term imprisonment and fines of other defendants.
In addition, the Fuyang District People’s Court, Xiaoshan District People’s Court, Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court, Deqing County People’s Court and Huzhou Intermediate People’s Court of Zhejiang Province have made judgments on Boxin Chemical, Lianhuan Chemical, Dexing Chemical and related defendants involved in the case respectively.