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 15:43:05 Turning sue in Wuxi， Jiangsu Office of housing， Deputy Director of the court litigation
Jinling evening news reporter Dong Hongwei
Reporter Shi Zhongxuan
Insufficient compensation when their housing units, turning Wang in Wuxi, in July this year to the Office of housing and urban-rural construction in Jiangsu Province (hereinafter provincial Housing Department) request to reveal all the demolition procedures. Ministry's reply was not to her satisfaction, Wang came to Nanjing to prosecute. Yesterday, the mingaoguan lawsuit, trial in the Nanjing intermediate people's Court.
Because lawyers are unwilling to represent before, plaintiffs ' son had studied law, as mother's agent yesterday in court. Sitting in the dock, was a Deputy Director of the Office of housing. Jinling evening news reporter, 1-in November of this year, the Nanjing intermediate people's Court in administrative adjudication, administrative leaders appear in court and to take part in the coordinated rate is about 70%.
Demolition "short-changed", turning public information
The agreement sued the provincial Office of the typical "mingaoguan" case, attracted more than 10 media attend yesterday.
The plaintiff of the case comes from the woman, huishan district, Wuxi city, Wang.
According to Wang's agent to Jinling evening news reporter, took to the road to litigation, in Royal House demolition "at a disadvantage".
According to its introduction, home town, huishan district, Wuxi city, located in the housing area of 200 square meters, with the launch of Wuxi Metro Line 1 xizhang Depot, Wang was taken place.
Wang felt a new House floor area less than 200 square meters, still need to pay tens of thousands of their own dollars paid back the price difference, including demolition, demolition standards, including the announcement of information, not to its local produce. According to the plaintiff's agent said in an interview that they had requested from local units Management Department, but did not receive.
In July 9, 2013, Wang was sent to the provincial Office of housing and the Jiangsu provincial Department of construction the Government open information application form to force disclosure of Wuxi City line Line 1 xizhang Depot all demolition procedures, construction project approval documents, including the demolition plans and programmes, issued by financial institutions compensation placement proof of funds and approval document of the State Council, and so on.
On July 29, the provincial housing and let us say: "Wuxi line Line 1 xizhang Depot demolition licensing requirements, belonging to the local Department in charge of demolition has been open to the public information, the Wuxi municipal people's Government units Management Office for details. ”
This response, Wang thinks he's right has not been respected, but was "one sentence prevarication."
Agreement: the province does not fulfill Government information public responsibilities of the Office
Wang believed that provincial Housing Department acts is not to fulfil its statutory duties of the information disclosure Act, and she to the Nanjing intermediate people's Court of the institution of administrative proceedings requiring provincial Housing Department carry out construction information public statutory duties.
Yesterday afternoon, the Nanjing intermediate people's Court conducted in an open court hearing.
In the course of the trial, plaintiff's agent believes that they are public information, belong to the scope of the defendant and the defendant should perform their duties according to law, answered one by one which belonged to the defendant or the defendant's subordinate administrative departments function, rather than the mantra to cope. "Wuxi local units Management Office is not an administrative body, so this should be the province of the public hall. Moreover, in most cases should also take the initiative to provide this contact information public, rather than a word play. ”
In his view, the provincial Housing Department violated the relevant provisions of the information disclosure regulations, a request for the defendant "comprehensive information on properly carrying out the open content, open information about the planning permit for construction."
Deputy Director of court litigation: specific project is not responsible for information disclosure
On behalf of the provincial Housing Department sat in the dock, is Deputy Director of the Song Ruya, he said in his reply, demolition duties is the dismantlement and removal of Wuxi municipal people's Government Office, which projects on access to information, should apply to the Office of Wuxi municipal people's Government removal.
He further explained that, under the relevant provisions of the information disclosure regulations, Government information means "the Administration in carrying out its responsibilities during the production or acquisition of, records, maintained in some form of information. "Provincial Housing Department is responsible for directing the relocation work in the province, but is not responsible for issuing demolition permit for specific projects, has not made or kept for demolition and licenses issued by the Government information, so that specific information should be publicly administered by the relocation of the local Government Office.
They are not belonging to government information public law had been to the Wang, let us, the public sector and to inform the specific, has fulfilled its duties according to law.
Court: provincial Housing Department has fulfilled its information response responsibilities
Parties reply after the 20-minute recess, the Nanjing intermediate people's Court ruling, rejected Wang's claim.
The Court found that Wang requested public information belongs to Wuxi demolition the demolition permit should be issued by the management review of the material, not provincial Housing Department produce or acquire, preserve information and provincial Housing Department does not have a public statutory duties of the above information. And they reply made July 29 letter, it did not exceed the Government information disclosure provisions of section 24th of the Ordinance of 15 working days term.
Provincial housing and in reply to the letter, also told Wang needed to get its information-related departments, has fulfilled the Government open information reply duties, program is innocent.
So courts have no support for Wang's claim.
Administrative trials, the leaders appear in court rate 70%
After the delivery, the plaintiff and their agents into silence.
According to press reports, it looks like a regular case of mingaoguan process, like the expressive power of the plaintiff's agent in court, are rather delicate. Difficulty starting from the plaintiff's lawyer. The agents of the trial proceedings had not yet digested, it is the plaintiff's son. Professional environmental technologies he, prior contact with the law, limited to College electives. But because the family can't even find the two lawyers are unwilling to represent, in a non-professional capacity to this specialized court battle.
As the other party to the case, the Deputy Director of the provincial Department of housing and court litigation, has become another highlight in this case. Views were expressed that, the Executive Heads of court litigation, contribute to the understanding of administrative law enforcement situations, head of the executive authorities, improve the level of administration according to law, facilitate the timely settlement of administrative disputes, coordinate public contradiction, improve the capability of Government. Jinling evening news reporter learned from the Nanjing intermediate people's Court, 1 to November this year, the Nanjing intermediate people's Court in administrative adjudication, administrative leaders appear in court and to take part in the coordinated rate is about 70%. In Nantong, the ratio had reached 100%.
(Original title: turning Sue provincial Deputy Director of housing court litigation)
金陵晚报记者 董红伟
通讯员 施中轩
觉得自家房屋拆迁时补偿不足，无锡的拆迁户王某，今年7月向江苏省住房和城乡建设厅(以下简称省住建厅)要求公开所有拆迁手续。省厅的回函并没有令她满意，王某专程赶来南京起诉。昨日，这起民告官的官司，在南京中院开庭审理。
因为之前找的律师都不愿代理，原告儿子只好恶补法律，昨日作为母亲的代理人到庭。而坐在被告席上的，是省住建厅的一位副厅长。据金陵晚报记者了解，今年1-11月份，南京中院行政审判中，行政单位领导出庭应诉及参与案件协调率约为70%。
拆迁“吃亏”，拆迁户要求公开信息
这起拆迁户状告省厅的典型“民告官”案件，昨日吸引了十多家媒体到庭旁听。
案件的原告，是来自无锡市惠山区的女子王某。
据王某的代理人向金陵晚报记者介绍，之所以走上打官司之路，与王家的房屋在拆迁中“吃了亏”有关。
据其介绍，自家位于无锡市惠山区的住房面积200平方米，随着无锡启动地铁一号线西漳车辆段，王某家被拆迁安置。
可王某觉得新房建筑面积不足200平方米，还需要自己掏几万元补齐差价，而包括拆迁公告、拆迁标准等在内的信息，当地都未向其出示。据原告代理人接受采访时说，他们曾向当地的拆迁管理部门索要，但没有得到。
于是在2013年7月9日，王某向省住建厅寄去了《江苏省建设厅政府信息公开申请表》，要求公开无锡市地铁一号线西漳车辆段的所有拆迁手续，包括建设项目批准文件、拆迁计划和方案、金融机构出具的拆迁补偿安置资金证明以及国务院的批准文件等。
7月29日，省住建厅回函表示：“无锡市地铁一号线西漳车辆段拆迁许可证核发的要件，属于当地拆迁的主管部门已经公开的信息，可到无锡市人民政府拆迁管理办公室查询。”
这个回复，让王某认为自己的知情权并没有被尊重，反而被“一句话推诿”了。
拆迁户：省厅不履行政府信息公开职责
王某认为，省住建厅的如此行为，是不履行政府信息公开法定职责行为，于是她向南京市中级人民法院提起行政诉讼，要求省住建厅履行城建信息公开法定职责。
昨日下午，南京中院公开开庭进行了审理。
庭审过程中，原告代理人认为，他们所申请公开的信息，属于被告的职能范围，被告应依法履行职责，逐项回答哪些是属于被告或者被告下属行政管理部门职能范围，而不是一句套话来应付。“无锡当地的拆迁管理办公室，并不是一个行政主体，所以做这个公开的应该是省厅。更何况，回函也应该主动提供这个信息公开单位的联系方式，而不是一句话踢走。”
他认为，省住建厅违反了信息公开条例的相关规定，请求法庭判令被告“全面正确履行信息公开内容，公开关于建设用地规划许可证的信息”。
副厅长到庭应诉：不负责具体项目信息公开
而代表省住建厅坐在被告席上的，是副厅长宋如亚，他在答辩时表示，拆迁职责是无锡市人民政府拆迁办公室，该案项目公开资料应向无锡市人民政府拆迁办公室申请。
而他进一步解释称，根据《政府信息公开条例》的规定，政府信息是指“行政机关在履行职责过程中制作或者获取的，以一定形式记录、保存的信息。”省住建厅虽然负责指导全省的拆迁工作，但并不负责对具体项目核发拆迁许可证，并没有制作或保存此次拆迁许可证核发的政府信息，因此具体信息应该由当地政府的拆迁管理办公室予以公开。
而他们对依法不属于被告公开的政府信息，已向王某回函告知，并向其告知了具体的公开部门，已经依法履行了职责。
法院宣判：省住建厅已履行信息答复职责
双方答辩结束后，经20分钟休庭，南京中院做出判决，驳回了王某的诉讼请求。
法院认为，王某所要求公开的信息，属于无锡市拆迁管理部门在核发拆迁许可证时应当审查的材料，并非省住建厅制作或者获取、保存的信息，因而省住建厅并不负有公开上述信息的法定职责。而他们7月29日作出的答复函，也没超过《政府信息公开条例》第二十四条规定的15个工作日的期限。
省住建厅在答复函中，也告知了王某获取其所需信息的相关部门，已依法履行了政府信息公开答复职责，程序亦无不当。
因此法院对王某的诉讼请求不予支持。
中院行政审判中，领导出庭应诉率达七成
宣判后，原告及其代理人陷入沉默。
而据记者了解，这起看似普通的民告官案件的过程，如同原告代理人在庭间的表达能力一般，颇费周折。其中的难度，从原告找律师开始。这个对审判程序尚未吃透的代理人，正是原告的儿子。环境技术方面专业出身的他，此前接触的法律，仅限于大学时的选修课。但因为家里连找的两个律师都不愿代理，只好以非专业人士的身份来打这场专业的官司。
而作为案件的另一方，省住建厅的副厅长到庭应诉，也成为本案的另一个亮点。有观点认为，行政机关负责人出庭应诉，有助于行政机关负责人了解行政执法情况，提高依法行政水平，有助于及时解决行政纠纷，协调官民矛盾，提高执政能力。金陵晚报记者从南京中院了解到，今年1到11月份，南京中院行政审判中，行政单位领导出庭应诉及参与案件协调率约为70%。而在南通市，这个比例已经达到了100%。
(原标题：拆迁户告省住建厅 副厅长到庭应诉)
赞