Two officials of Gansu province poisoned rehabilitate convicted | | | controversy tainted bean sprouts bean sprouts _ news
> Maiji district people's Court dismissed complaints from people such as Fan Jianmin notices.
January 11, Gansu wheat product district quality prison Council of Fan Jianqiang, and Guo Yanxue, people to reporter reflect, October 2014, they for "HIV bean sprouts" case was sentenced from criminal punishment, with China more to appeared "HIV bean sprouts" case withdrawal, and revision innocence of case, Fan Jianqiang, people to Tianshui city, and wheat product district two level court filed complaints, requirements revision innocence, is was dismissed or was told "not accepted".
Director of the Bureau of quality and technical supervision and the State Secretary for "poison bean sprouts" case convicted
Fan Jianqiang maiji district of Tianshui Gansu province, turned out to be Deputy Director of the Bureau of quality and technical supervision, Food Inspection Division in charge, Guo Yanxue is maiji district Bureau of quality and technical supervision, former Director of food.
Judgments show that in January 2012, Guo Yanxue led to maiji district East section the fruit and vegetable inspection, market within four has been found in maiji district people's Court in producing and selling toxic and hazardous food crime conviction in bean sprouts bean sprouts production and management in production, the illegal use of "rootless". Guo Yanxue fine them respectively, but failed to take any other measures. Zhihou, four households continue to illegally produced poisonous bean sprouts.
Afterwards, Guo Yanxue Fan Jianqiang, Deputy Director reports to the supervisor after the default. The above, in January 2013, check again.
March 2014 maiji District Court on these four households make penalty for people involved in the production of toxic and harmful food decisions. Fan Jianqiang, Guo Yanxue in maiji district Bureau of quality and technical supervision from 4 to October of the same year to dereliction of duty crimes exempted from criminal punishment.
Conviction and sentencing is based will add a "no water" bean sprouts as "poisonous food" finds.
Judgment pointed out that, according to the State Bureau of quality and technical supervision on food additives, 2011 of 156th of propyl p-hydroxybenzoate 33 products, such as announcements of the supervision and the General Office of the Ministry of health on the implementation of the standards for use of food additives (GB 2760-2014) reply of the file, proves the case of bean sprouts in "6-benzyl adenine" has been explicitly prohibited for use as food additives.
Bean sprouts made "undocumented", convicted of nearly thousand people a year
> Maiji district people's Court judgement of people, such as Fan Jianmin.
Guo Yanxue Fan Jianqiang and others experience, just a few years ago to "poison bean sprout" a microcosm of the convicted person.
In 2011, "as plant growth regulators" are pulled out of the national standards for use of food additives in food safety standards (GB2760) list "according to farm inputs management" after 6-benzyl adenine and 4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid sodium in the registration could not be well recognized by the Department of agriculture on the bean sprouts: see the bean breeding in an "engaged in food production" will not be accepted.
Issued by "undocumented" lead bean sprout regulatory touch, bean sprouts, add "no water" is therefore considered illegal toxic and hazardous materials, testing add "6-benzyl adenine" and "4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid sodium salt" is also as evidence of the conviction of the judiciary.
In the heavy punishment under the background of food safety crimes, "poison bean sprouts" first.
Surging, according to news reports, to "bean sprouts toxic and harmful food" as a keyword under the Supreme People's Court in China "China adjudicative network" retrieved on January 1, 2013, to August 22, 2014, a total of 709 cases, 918 people jailed. Judgment, the "bean sprouts 6-benzyl adenine was detected in" high-frequency words.
The dispute "without water" to be let, whether toxic
> Fan Jianqiang, who submitted to the Tianshui city intermediate people's Court of criminal appeals.
"Poison bean sprouts" appears once, which immediately caused widespread concern in the community. At almost the same time, legal profession, the academia and the industry has been "rootless" water security, adding "no water" bean sprouts are made by the business constitutes a crime, as well as "poison bean sprouts" problems of application of law debate.
March 2015, China method learned food security rule of law research center Combs 203 copies "no root bean sprouts" judgment Hou made analysis report said, "no root bean sprouts in the detection out 6-benzyl base gland purine and (or) 4-chlorobenzene oxygen acetic acid sodium + criminal 144th article, and ' two high ' explained 9th article and (or) 20th article = production, and sales toxic, and harmful food crime" of logic reasoning is not established of.
A Vice President of China's Supreme People's Court Criminal Court of second spoke on "rootless sprouts" case said: "under normal circumstances, 144th article of the criminal law is not applicable in such cases by producing and selling toxic and hazardous food processing. …… Should not be invoked in the courts around two high on the handling of criminal cases against food safety laws applied to 20th of the interpretation of the provisions of articles directly of 6-benzyladenine and other non-food substances identified as toxic or harmful material. Reason: not ' notice concerning the Department banned substances ' and ' hazardous substance ' simply draw an equal sign between. ”
"Poison bean sprouts" event of controversial core, from "can do it" management problems go to "toxic" on the scientific issues.
Convicted of multiple buds from the guarantor to innocent chorus
In April 2015, Fujian full bud Shang Gen add "no water" bean sprouts was sentenced to 10 years and 6 months of the first instance, during the second instance court agreed to release on bail pending trial. Meanwhile, Shandong, Guangdong and other places of many convicted buds released on bail, "poison bean sprouts" cases have appeared loose.
When outgoing message said the District Court, received a "high two" notify "stop bean sprouts." This was seen as "tainted bean sprouts" judicial correction has begun, and it was also justice and significant progress.
On June 16, 2015, Liaoning province Huludao lianshan district people's Court of second instance on "poison bean sprouts" case convicted bud Kwak, and a judgment of acquittal.
Huludao lianshan district court verdict said "no water", "security is not known, so the two defendants ' acts are plot significant slight harmless, is not considered a crime. Therefore, the Prosecutor accused two defendants of charges, the Court not to accept it. ”
Fujian bud Shang Gen's lawyer said in an interview: "in that case (lianshan District Court of" poisonous bean sprouts "case a judgment of acquittal) other courts found that 6-benzyl adenine is a toxic and harmful substances are very far-fetched. ”
Complaint is dismissed or being told to "not accept"
> Fan Jianqiang on many occasions at China Court gave judges a message boards reflect the situation.
In July 2015, Fan Jianqiang, Guo Yanxue, who started the maiji District Court complaint, such "poison bean" series of case or sentence case on bail, is the important content of Fan Jianqiang, who claim.
On November 18, the maiji District Court "trial the facts are clearly ascertained and well-documented, applicable law and conviction are no improper" Fan Jianqiang, who dismissed the appeal request.
Fan Jianqiang maiji District Court rejected complaints requesting the reasons for disagreeing.
He told journalists in the upper reaches, the current "no water" additive toxicity has not yet reached a conclusion, so used to make bean sprouts constitutes "poisonous and harmful food production" will be difficult to set up, not to mention their regulatory responsibilities. Second, the Fan Jianqiang, who "lack of supervision" consequences of, has not yet been reached in the criminal law on the crime of neglect-the State personnel Act "caused heavy losses of public property and the interests of countries and peoples" decision criteria.
Therefore, Fan Jianqiang, who refers to the maiji District Court made a verdict in this case, the "error of law".
In maiji district courts has not been satisfied with the response, the Fan Jianqiang, who filed complaints to the Tianshui city Intermediate Court in December 2015.
Fan Jianqiang complaints to the hospital in Tin Shui Wai and another hit a wall. Fan Jianqiang said in Tin Shui Wai in January 2016, after accepting it into the second Chamber handles of punishment, but there has been no response. On October 27, 2016, the Tin Shui Wai by telephone in reply said "oral notification of the superior court, (the) case ' will not be accepted, no reception, no reply."
The afternoon of November 12, journalists call the punishment second Chamber in Tin Shui Wai in the upper reaches, a staff member said, in Tin Shui Wai "without trial, did not accept" the case Fan Jianqiang, who "has no appeal".
Fan Jianqiang denied the staff member, said he had submitted to the Tin Shui Wai as early as November 27, 2015 of the criminal complaint, just the other side "has been delayed".
", The maiji district, Tianshui city two levels of courts not qualified to judge ' without water ' is toxic to make judgments in this error of law on the basis of our case, now prove to provide them with material to be heard and that will not be accepted. "Fan Jianqiang told reporters, cases of its working life and spirit have a very negative impact, their principal staff member demoted to Senior Staff Member, income was also affected.
Current Fan Jianqiang and Guo Yanxue, who seek the revocation of their criminal sentence and commuted their innocence.
(Upstream news-Chongqing morning news reporter Chen Junjun trainee intern Liu Yuyu)
> Editor: Li Peng
Article keywords:Vindicate the controversial virus bean sprouts
I want feedback
Save a Web page
Chongqing morning post-upstream news
甘肃省两官员因毒豆芽案获罪|平反|争议|毒豆芽_新闻资讯
>麦积区人民法院驳回樊建民等人的申诉通知书。
1月11日，甘肃麦积区质监局的樊建强、郭彦学等人向记者反映，2014年10月，他们因“毒豆芽”案被判免予刑事处罚，随着中国多地出现“毒豆芽”案撤诉、改判无罪的案例，樊建强等人向天水市、麦积区两级法院提起申诉，要求改判无罪，却被驳回或被告知“不受理”。
质监局副局长及主任因“毒豆芽”案获罪
樊建强原来是甘肃天水麦积区质监局副局长，主管食品监督室工作，郭彦学则是麦积区质监局食品室原主任。
判决书显示，2012年1月，郭彦学带队对麦积区东部果品蔬菜进行节前检查，发现市场内有四家曾被麦积区人民法院以生产、销售有毒有害食品罪作出有罪判决的豆芽生产经营户在生产豆芽中，非法使用“无根水”。郭彦学分别对其进行罚款处理，但再未采取其他任何措施。之后，四户经营户继续违法生产有毒有害豆芽。
事后，郭彦学向主管副局长樊建强汇报情况后予以默认。上述情况，在2013年1月的检查中重演。
2014年3月麦积区法院对上述四户经营户涉案人员以生产有毒有害食品罪作出刑罚判决。樊建强、郭彦学等麦积区质监局4人于同年10月以玩忽职守罪免予刑事处罚。
定罪量刑的基础在于将添加了“无根水”的豆芽作为“有毒有害食品”的认定。
判决书指出，根据国家质监局2011年第156号《关于食品添加剂对羟基苯甲酸丙酯等33种产品监管工作的公告》以及卫生部办公厅关于实施《食品添加剂使用标准》（GB 2760-2014）问题的复函文件，证明本案中用于制发豆芽的“6-苄基腺嘌呤”已被明确禁止作为食品添加剂使用。
豆芽制发“无身份”，一年多时间近千人获罪
>麦积区人民法院对樊建民等人的判决书。
樊建强和郭彦学等人经历，只是前些年来因“毒豆芽事件”获罪人员的一个缩影。
2011年，因“作为植物生长调节剂”被拉出《食品安中国家标准食品添加剂使用标准》（GB2760）名单“按农业投入品管理”后，6-苄基腺嘌呤和4-氯苯氧乙酸钠在豆芽上的登记未能顺利被农业部门承认：认为豆芽培育种发属“食品生产经营”而不受理。
制发的“无身份”导致豆芽的监管脱节，豆芽制发中添加“无根水”因此被认为是非法添加有毒有害物，检测添加“6-苄基腺嘌呤”和“4-氯苯氧乙酸钠”也被作为司法机关定罪依据。
在重拳惩治食品安全犯罪的大背景之下，“毒豆芽”首当其冲。
据澎湃新闻此前报道，以“豆芽有毒有害食品罪”为关键词在中国最高人民法院下设的“中国裁判文书网”做检索，2013年1月1日到2014年8月22日期间，共有相关案件709起，918人获刑。判决书中，“豆芽中检测出6-苄基腺嘌呤”成为高频词。
争议“无根水”，让不让用、是否有毒
>樊建强等人向天水市中级人民法院提交过的刑事申诉书 。
“毒豆芽”事件一经出现，随即引起社会的广泛关注。几乎同一时间，法律界、学界和业界掀起了“无根水”安全性、添加“无根水”制发豆芽是否构成犯罪以及“毒豆芽”案件适用法律等问题的大讨论。
2015年3月，中国法学会食品安全法治研究中心梳理203份“无根豆芽”判决后作出分析报告称，“无根豆芽中检测出6-苄基腺嘌呤和（或者）4-氯苯氧乙酸钠+《刑法》第144条、‘两高’解释第9条和（或者）第20条=生产、销售有毒、有害食品罪”的逻辑推理是不成立的。
中国最高人民法院刑二庭的一位副庭长曾谈到对“无根豆芽”案的观点称：“一般情形下，此类案件不适用刑法第144条按生产、销售有毒、有害食品罪处理。……各地法院不宜援引两高《关于办理危害食品安全刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第20条的规定，直接将6-苄基腺嘌呤等物质认定为有毒有害的非食品原料。理由是：不能在‘有关部门公告禁止使用的物质’和‘有毒有害物质’之间简单地画等号。”
对“毒豆芽”事件的争议核心，逐渐从“让不让用”的管理问题转到“是否有毒”的科学问题上。
多地获罪芽农从取保候审到无罪改判
2015年4月，福建芽农全尚根因添加“无根水”制发豆芽一审被判有期徒刑10年零6个月，在二审期间被法院同意取保候审。同时，山东、广东等地的多位获罪的芽农取保，“毒豆芽”案件相继出现松动。
当时有地方法院传出消息称，收到“两高”的通知“叫停豆芽案”。这被外界视为“毒豆芽”案的司法纠偏已经开始，这同时也是司法的重大进步。
2015年6月16日，辽宁省葫芦岛市连山区人民法院二审对因“毒豆芽”案获罪芽农郭某、和鲁某改判无罪。
葫芦岛市连山区法院下达的无罪判决称，“无根水”的“安全性尚不清楚，故二被告人行为应属情节显著轻微危害不大，不认为是犯罪。故对公诉机关指控二被告人的罪名，本院不予采纳。”
福建芽农全尚根的辩护律师在接受采访时表示：“这种情况下（连山区法院对“毒豆芽”案改判无罪）其他法院再认定6-苄基腺嘌呤属有毒有害物质就非常牵强。”
申诉被驳回或被告知“不予受理”
>樊建强曾多次在中国法院网给大法官留言版块反映情况。
2015年7月，樊建强、郭彦学等人开始向麦积区法院提出申诉，上述有关“毒豆芽”系列案件取保或改判的案例，正是樊建强等人申诉书的重要内容。
同年11月18日，麦积区法院以“原审认定事实清楚，证据充分，适用法律及定罪量刑均无不当”，驳回樊建强等人的申诉请求。
樊建强对麦积区法院驳回申诉请求的理由表示不同意。
他告诉上游新闻记者，目前对“无根水”添加剂是否有毒尚未有定论，因此将其用于制发豆芽是否构成“生产有毒有害食品罪”就难以成立，更不用说他们监管主体的责任。其次，樊建强等人“监管不力”造成的后果，尚未达到《刑法》中有关玩忽职守罪——国家机关工作人员的行为“致使公共财产、国家和人民利益遭受重大损失”的判定标准。
因此，樊建强等人指麦积区法院在对该案作出判决时，“适用法律错误”。
在麦积区法院申诉未获满意的答复后，樊建强等人于2015年12月向天水市中院提起申诉。
但樊建强向天水中院申诉也接连碰壁。樊建强说天水中院于2016年1月受理后转入刑二庭负责处理，但一直不予回复。2016年10月27日，天水中院通过电话回复称“接上级法院的口头通知，（对）这个案子‘不受理、不接待、不答复’”。
11月12日下午，上游新闻记者致电天水中院刑二庭，一名工作人员回应称，天水中院“没有审理、没有受理”该起案件，樊建强等人“也没有上诉”。
樊建强否认了该工作人员的说法，称自己早在2015年11月27日就向天水中院提交过《刑事申诉书》，只是对方“一直在拖”。
“天水市、麦积区两级法院没资格判定‘无根水’是否有毒就做出判决，在这基础上对我们的案件适用法律错误，现在向他们提供申诉材料和证明还不受理。”樊建强对记者表示，案件对其工作生活和精神产生很大的负面影响，自己从主任科员降职至副主任科员，收入也受到影响。
目前樊建强和郭彦学等人要求撤销对其的刑事判决，并改判他们无罪。
（上游新闻-重庆晨报见习记者 陈均俊 实习生 刘煜妤）
>责任编辑：李鹏
文章关键词： 平反 争议 毒豆芽
我要反馈
保存网页
重庆晨报-上游新闻