Keywords

Public interest litigation related to maritime administration; forbidden fishing gears; illegal fishing; building a law-based government

 

Case Overview

In 2020, in the course of an inspection during the summer fishing ban in the South China Sea, the procuratorate found a mass of illegal fixed nets in the sea waters under the administration of the Defendant, and hence made a proposal to the Defendant to urge the latter to fulfill their duties and take actions against the illegal fishing activities according to law. However, when the procuratorate returned to check for several times, they still found illegal nets remaining within the sea area. In June 2023, the procuratorate initiated an administrative public interest litigation, requesting the court to confirm that the Defendant was in violation of the law for negligence in performing their supervision and administration duties and to order the Defendant to perform their statutory duties within 2 months after the judgment took effect. During the trial of the case, upon the call of the court, the Defendant launched a special campaign to remove the remaining fixed nets used for illegal fishing from the sea area. The violation was hence rectified during litigation.   

 

Judgment

The court supported the amended litigation requests of the procuratorate and confirmed that the original administrative act of the Defendant was in violation of the law.

 

Significance

This is a typical case where the judicial trial and legal supervision forces are combined to promote law-based government administration and the building of a law-based government, and to promote the building of marine ecological civilization to achieve harmony between humanity and nature. In this case, the people’s court has taken proactive judicial actions to urge the administrative organ to perform its duties and rectify the damage to the public interest during the adjudicative process, which provides a good reference for the handling of public interest litigation cases related to maritime administration in the future. In this case, the court supports the amended litigation requests of the procuratorate and confirms that the original administrative act of the Defendant is in violation of the law. The judgment not only urges the administrative organ to timely perform their duties according to law and to strengthen marine fishery supervision, but also plugs institutional loophole which has a long-term impact on the protection of the public interest of our society.