Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)aaapublished in(发表于) 2013/12/17 15:38:43 Farmers due to demolition Ltd-Jiangsu provincial Department of housing， no lawyers willing to represent
Time: Monday, December 16, 2013
Location: Nanjing, Jiangsu Province intermediate people's Court
Witness: our reporter, Ma Chao
After their houses were demolished, due to dissatisfaction with the results of compensation, Wuxi city, Jiangsu Province farmers apply to relevant departments for information. In every city and district levels after the relevant departments to nothing, note that the farmers have to apply to the housing construction of Jiangsu province public relocation information, replies "the Wuxi municipal people's Government Office relocation management for details", that the reply the applicant generally were turned, and the Jiangsu provincial housing and take them to court.
This afternoon, the intermediate people's Court in Nanjing, Jiangsu province public hearing of the administrative case that the plaintiff, huishan district, Wuxi, yanqiao town, 53 per cent of rural women Wang Qin Xiang, sitting in the dock was built in Jiangsu Province Deputy Director Song Ruya.
In court, Wang Qin Shang told reporters that "the absence of lawyers acting", she took her son in court. Construction, one party is unrepresented in court, but the Song Ruya face trial.
The trial, both sides around the "public housing and whether the Office of information, the availability of disclosure obligations, responsibilities are being fulfilled," an intense debate.
Wang Qin fragrant v said, its Yu July 9, 2013 to accused Jiangsu Province live built Hall mailing has information public application table under, requirements accused public "Wuxi Subway Line 1 line West Zhang vehicles paragraph (xizhang station, and days a station, and xizhang station to days a station interval, and days way to Liu Zhang station interval) of all demolition procedures, include construction project approved file, and construction with to planning license, and State-owned land right approved file, and demolition plans and programme, and Issued by financial institutions compensation fund is placed, and approved by the State Council document "information.
July 30, 2013, Wang Qin fragrant received accused Jiangsu Province live built Office made of Su Jian letter open (2013) 47th, on Wang Qin fragrant July 9 according to applications open of reply under, reply in the told, "on ' Wuxi Metro Line 1 line West Zhang vehicles paragraph ' demolition license issued of elements, belonging to local demolition competent sector has open of information, you can to Wuxi municipal people's Government demolition Management Office query".
Wang Qin Xiang believes that planning permit for construction of the scope of the information belonging to the public, the defendant should perform their duties according to law, answered one by one which belongs to the accused or the defendant's subordinate administrative departments open mandate, not relocation authority-laden with the relocation information be put off. Thus, the defendant violated the relevant provisions of the regulations of the publicity of Government information.
In court, both sides around the "housing and whether the plaintiff applied for the Office is the obligation of disclosure of the information disclosure" several rounds of debates. Wang Qin Xiang believes that "the master plan for each city in Jiangsu Province in the Housing Office sets up, such as light rail construction, Office of housing should know relevant information, in accordance with relevant regulations of governmental information disclosure requirements, it should I apply for information to be public."
Song Ruya argued that demolition project is the demolition by the Wuxi municipal people's Government Office in charge, Office of housing is not responsible for the production and preservation of the plaintiffs case related information. Therefore, Office of housing is not a body of the plaintiff an open information. "But we have duties of disclosure, we already clearly informed the plaintiff in reply which Department should go to query information."
Has performed its disclosure duties this assertion, Wang Qin Xiang do not agree. "Wuxi demolition is an internal body of the people's Government, does not belong to a specific administrative body, so that it does not have a disclosure duty and answer too general to build an Office, should be specified and contact address, trying to track down the Executive contact details".
After hearing, the Court finds that plaintiff an open information wrong, and relevant responses to the defendant, to the plaintiff, responses also identified specific queries to which department they should be, and without undue, then dismissed the plaintiff's claim in court. After the verdict, Wang Qin Hong said they plan to appeal.
"This is the first time I walked into court when the defendant directly. "Song Ruya confessed in an interview with a reporter, activist of the people's consciousness has been greatly improved, the executive authorities should further improve their level and ability, genuinely administration according to law, or there'll be accused.
(Original title: farmers complain of Jiangsu provincial housing and information not made public duties)
时间：2013年12月16日 星期一
地点：江苏省南京市中级人民法院
目击者：本报记者马超
自家房屋被拆迁后，因对赔偿结果不满，江苏省无锡市一农民向有关部门申请信息公开。在跑遍市、区两级有关部门均无果后，这名农民又向江苏省住建厅申请公开拆迁相关信息，被答复“可到无锡市人民政府拆迁管理办公室查询”，申请人认为答复笼统被搪塞，遂将江苏省住建厅告上法庭。
今天下午，江苏省南京市中级人民法院公开开庭审理了这起行政诉讼案，原告方系无锡市惠山区堰桥镇53岁的农村妇女王芹香，而坐在被告席上的则是江苏省住建厅副厅长宋如亚。
在庭审现场，王芹香告诉记者，“因没有律师肯代理”，她带着儿子上了法庭。住建厅一方也无律师出庭，而是宋如亚直接面对庭审。
庭审中，双方围绕“住建厅是否为信息公开主体、是否有信息公开义务、是否履行了职责”等方面展开激烈辩论。
王芹香诉称，其于2013年7月9日向被告江苏省住建厅邮寄了《信息公开申请表》，要求被告公开“无锡市地铁一号线西漳车辆段(西漳站、天一站、西漳站到天一站区间、天一路至刘漳站区间)的所有拆迁手续，包括建设项目批准文件、建设用地规划许可证、国有土地使用权批准文件、拆迁计划和方案、金融机构出具的拆迁补偿安置方面的资金证明以及国务院的批准文件等”信息。
2013年7月30日，王芹香收到被告江苏省住建厅作出的苏建函公开(2013)47号《关于王芹香7月9日依申请公开的复函》，复函中告知，“关于‘无锡市地铁一号线西漳车辆段’拆迁许可证核发的要件，属于当地拆迁主管部门已公开的信息，您可到无锡市人民政府拆迁管理办公室查询”。
王芹香认为，建设用地规划许可证的信息属于被告公开的职能范围，被告应该依法履行职责，逐项回答哪些信息属于被告或被告下属行政管理部门公开的职责范围，而不能用拆迁信息到拆迁部门查询的套话予以搪塞。因此，被告违反了《政府信息公开条例》有关规定。
法庭上，双方围绕“住建厅是否负有原告申请信息公开的义务即是否是信息公开主体”进行了多轮辩论。王芹香认为，“江苏省每一个城市的总体规划都在住建厅有备案，像轻轨这类城市建设，住建厅应该是知道相关信息的，按照政府信息公开条例有关规定，它应该对我申请的信息进行公开”。
宋如亚则认为，拆迁项目是由无锡市人民政府拆迁办具体负责，住建厅不负责制作和保存原告申请公开的相关信息。因此，住建厅不是原告申请信息公开的主体。“但是，我们履行了信息公开的职责，我们在复函中已经明确告知原告应当去找哪个部门去查询相关信息”。
对于已经履行了信息公开职责这一说法，王芹香并不认同。“无锡市拆迁办是人民政府的一个内置机构，不属于具体的行政机关，因此它并不负有信息公开的职责，而且住建厅的答复太笼统，应当告知具体应找哪个行政机关及联系地址、联系方式”。
法院经审理后认为，原告申请信息公开的主体不对，而被告也向原告作出了相关答复，答复中亦明确了具体应向哪个部门进行查询，程序并无不当，遂当庭驳回了原告的诉讼请求。宣判后，王芹香表示会上诉。
“这是我第一次走进法庭，直接当被告。”宋如亚在接受记者采访时坦陈，人民群众维权的意识有了很大的提高，行政机关应当进一步提高工作水平和能力，真正做到依法行政，否则就会当被告。
(原标题：农民诉江苏省住建厅未尽信息公开职责)
赞