Skip to content

China’s Supreme Court Denied Then Admitted Loss of Multibillion Dollar Case Document

Cui Yongyuan is a former Chinese television host and producer. He is known for leaking information regarding the Chinese film industry’s yin-yang contracts leading to movie star Fan Bingbing’s removal from the spotlight in 2018.

A number of Chinese media reports that Cui broke involved another story that there is a mole inside China’s Supreme Court that stole the appeal documents of a multibillion case in Shaanxi Province. The bizarre thing is that the Supreme Court first denied the loss of the document. As soon as Cui released the evidence, the Court withdrew its previous statement and, on December 29, announced it would “launch an investigation.”

The lost documents involve a lawsuit that Kechley Energy Investment initiated in 2006. In 2003, Kechley signed a contract with state-owned Xi’an Institute of Geological and Mineral Exploration (XIGME) to form a join coal-mining project in Yulin city of Shaanxi Province. In 2006, XIGME signed another contract with a third party – a company in Hong Kong – regarding the same coal-mining project without Kechley’s consent and without legally dismissing the previous contract.

In September 2010, Shaanxi’s high court ruled in favor of XIGME and suspended the license of Kechley. The plaintiff took the case to the Supreme Court. In August 2011, Zhao Faqi, general manager and corporate representative of Kechley, was illegally arrested by police in Yulin city and detained for 133 days.

In November 2016, when Supreme Court judge Wang Linqing prepared to hand down a verdict in favour of Kechley, all of the documents disappeared from his office. According to Wang, when he immediately told the presiding judge Cheng Xinwen, Cheng appeared unconcerned about the loss. Wang requested the video footage from closed circuit TV camera installed in his office. To Wang’s surprise, Cheng checked the video footage himself and told Wang that both closed circuit TV cameras had been broken on the day that the documents disappeared. Wang later reported to Supreme Court Chief Justice Zhou Qiang, who also appeared unconcerned and didn’t pursue an investigation.

Coincidentally, just 20 days before the loss, Kechley’s Zhao Faqi, reported with his real name over the Internet that Zhao Zhengyong, the former secretary of the Shaanxi Provincial Party Committee, and others intervened in the case.

In 2017, a year later, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Kechley’s favour, awarding it 13.7 million yuan for breach of contract. “According to the South China Morning Post, the court has been unable to implement the verdict because of the missing documents and has not explained how the ruling could be made without those documents.”

Hong Kong based Apple Daily quoted media from China that the case files were “lost” because they contained the instructions from the Chief Justice and the President of the Supreme People’s Court Zhou Qiang, and the then Vice President Xi Xiaoming. Now, Xi has been removed from office, but Zhou is still there. Clearly someone wanted to have these particular instructions disappeared from the court records.

On December 26, on his Weibo account, Cui Yongyuan pointed out that the Supreme Court has a mole, stealing the files of the multi-billion-dollar case.

The next day, the Supreme Court issued a statement that what Cui said, “has no factual evidence, and is a rumor.” Cui immediately rebutted that the Supreme Court was lying and hinted that he had more evidence. Cui also quoted the insider’s description of the story and revealed that the judge’s name was Wang Linqing.

On December 29, after Cui Yongyuan posted two screenshots of the above-mentioned files on Weibo, the Supreme Court admitted that the file was missing, and said that it has initiated the investigation procedure. That night, another Chinese media Huaxia Times broadcast a selfie video of Supreme Court judge Wang Linqing. Wang said in the video that “the video is for myself, to protect myself from unpredictable events and leave some evidence.”

As the story began to spread across the Internet, all mainland based Chinese media reports were deleted.

Source: Radio France International, December 31, 2018
South China Morning Post, December 30, 2018