非法采砂不仅被判刑还要赔偿生态损害

English title (machine-translated)
Illegally mining sand not only leads to imprisonment but also requires compensation for ecological damage.
Published
2025-05-30
Type
Law, regulation or policy
Subtype
法治
Level
Central Authorities
Length
1992 characters, 16 paragraphs
Author
经鉴定,张某山等人非法采砂造成长江生态环境损害,且该行为与案发地生态环境损害之间存在因果关系。长江生态环境损害评估数额为515万余元,包括河床结构损害、鱼类资源损害、底栖生物损害、生物多样性服务价值损害等修复费用和后续监测费用。
Editor
责任编辑:王瑜

Summary

(1)  In 2021, a group of individuals, including Zhang San, invested in a project to extract sand from the Yangtze River in Anhui Province's Tongling section, a national-level nature reserve for freshwater porpoises and other endangered aquatic species. The group, led by Hong Mouwu, used "three-no" sand-dredging ships, which are vessels that do not meet safety and environmental standards, and purchased sand from the ships' owners, Zhang Mouwei. The group extracted and transported over 46,000 tons of sand worth over 2.89 million yuan without obtaining the necessary permits. Ma Mouyue, aware that the sand was illegally extracted, purchased and sold 1,700 tons of the sand. The sand-dredging and selling activities spanned across Anhui and Jiangsu provinces.

(2)  An investigation found that the group's actions caused significant ecological damage to the Yangtze River, which was linked to the environmental damage in the area. The estimated cost of repairing the ecological damage was over 5.15 million yuan, including damage to the river's structure, fish resources, bottom-dwelling organisms, and biodiversity. The Jiangsu Province Jianhu County Procuratorate prosecuted Zhang San and others for illegal mining and Ma Mouyue for concealing and falsifying crime-derived income. They also filed a public interest lawsuit, seeking compensation for the environmental damage and a public apology through national media.

(3)  The case was transferred to the East Tai District Court in Jiangsu Province due to its complexity and the involvement of multiple provinces. The court found Zhang San and others guilty of illegal mining and sentenced them to prison, seizing their ill-gotten gains. Ma Mouyue was found guilty of concealing and falsifying crime-derived income and was also sentenced to prison, with his ill-gotten gains seized. The court ordered Zhang San and others to compensate for the environmental damage of over 5.15 million yuan and publicly apologize through national media.

(4)  The court then transferred the executed ecological restoration costs to the Tongling City Intermediate People's Court in Anhui Province, which collaborated with local authorities to implement a project to restore the Yangtze River's ecological environment and protect the freshwater porpoise.

(5)  The case has significant implications. Firstly, when there are multiple defendants and multiple provinces involved, the court should determine the most suitable jurisdiction. According to the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law, the court with jurisdiction should be the one that is most suitable for the case, even if it is not the defendant's residence or the location of the crime. In this case, the complexity of the case, the large number of defendants, and the involvement of multiple provinces made it more suitable for a court outside of Anhui Province to handle the case.

(6)  Secondly, the use of ecological restoration costs is a key aspect of the case. The Yangtze River's ecological environment should be protected through a systematic approach, with priority given to on-site restoration. In this case, the court transferred the executed ecological restoration costs to the relevant departments in Tongling City, Anhui Province, where the damage occurred. This ensured that the costs were used to restore the environment in the same location.

Original

(1)  【基本案情】 2021年,被告张某山等人出资,被告洪某武等人提供“三无”采砂船,与购砂船主被告章某伟等人,在未取得河道采砂许可证的情况下,在长江安徽省铜陵段淡水豚国家级自然保护区河段(该区域是中华鲟、江豚等珍贵濒危水生野生生物的栖息地)上下断面,非法采运江砂超4.6万吨,价值289万余元。被告马某玉明知江砂系盗采,仍收购1700吨并出售。采砂、卖砂行为跨皖苏两省。 经鉴定,张某山等人非法采砂造成长江生态环境损害,且该行为与案发地生态环境损害之间存在因果关系。长江生态环境损害评估数额为515万余元,包括河床结构损害、鱼类资源损害、底栖生物损害、生物多样性服务价值损害等修复费用和后续监测费用。 江苏省建湖县人民检察院指控被告张某山等人犯非法采矿罪、被告马某玉犯掩饰、隐瞒犯罪所得罪,向人民法院提起公诉,同时以社会公共利益受到损害为由,提起附带民事公益诉讼,请求判令张某山等人对生态环境损害承担连带赔偿责任,在国家级媒体赔礼道歉等。 【裁判结果】 因本案作案时间长且犯罪地跨多省,最高人民法院指定江苏省东台市人民法院审理本案。 东台市法院判决,认定被告张某山等人犯非法采矿罪并判刑,追缴违法所得;被告马某玉犯掩饰、隐瞒犯罪所得罪,被判刑,追缴违法所得。同时,附带民事公益诉讼被告张某山等人赔偿生态环境损害515万余元,在国家级媒体上公开赔礼道歉等。 东台市人民法院将执行到位的生态环境修复费用移交安徽省铜陵市中级人民法院,联合当地政府实施铜陵长江生态环境整治和江豚保护项目。 【指导性意义】 1.涉案人员多且涉及多省,如何确定管辖方? 《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法〉的解释》(法释〔2021〕1号)规定:“有关案件,由犯罪地、被告人居住地以外的人民法院审判更为适宜的,上级人民法院可以指定下级人民法院管辖。” 本案中,实施非法采砂行为的被告人数众多、作案时间长,采砂地点和卖砂地点跨安徽、江苏等地。案涉非法采砂行为具有利润巨大、团伙作案、内外勾连等特点,存在地方公职人员涉嫌犯罪线索,故本案指定安徽省以外的人民法院管辖更为适宜。 2.生态环境修复费用如何使用? 长江流域生态环境保护应当坚持系统治理、原地修复优先的原则。本案受损地位于长江安徽省铜陵段,张某山等人的非法采砂行为造成了当地长江生态环境的严重破坏。人民法院将执行到位的生态环境修复费用及时移交安徽省铜陵市相关部门。

(2)  【基本案情】

(3)  2021年,被告张某山等人出资,被告洪某武等人提供“三无”采砂船,与购砂船主被告章某伟等人,在未取得河道采砂许可证的情况下,在长江安徽省铜陵段淡水豚国家级自然保护区河段(该区域是中华鲟、江豚等珍贵濒危水生野生生物的栖息地)上下断面,非法采运江砂超4.6万吨,价值289万余元。被告马某玉明知江砂系盗采,仍收购1700吨并出售。采砂、卖砂行为跨皖苏两省。

(4)  经鉴定,张某山等人非法采砂造成长江生态环境损害,且该行为与案发地生态环境损害之间存在因果关系。长江生态环境损害评估数额为515万余元,包括河床结构损害、鱼类资源损害、底栖生物损害、生物多样性服务价值损害等修复费用和后续监测费用。

(5)  江苏省建湖县人民检察院指控被告张某山等人犯非法采矿罪、被告马某玉犯掩饰、隐瞒犯罪所得罪,向人民法院提起公诉,同时以社会公共利益受到损害为由,提起附带民事公益诉讼,请求判令张某山等人对生态环境损害承担连带赔偿责任,在国家级媒体赔礼道歉等。

(6)  【裁判结果】

(7)  因本案作案时间长且犯罪地跨多省,最高人民法院指定江苏省东台市人民法院审理本案。

(8)  东台市法院判决,认定被告张某山等人犯非法采矿罪并判刑,追缴违法所得;被告马某玉犯掩饰、隐瞒犯罪所得罪,被判刑,追缴违法所得。同时,附带民事公益诉讼被告张某山等人赔偿生态环境损害515万余元,在国家级媒体上公开赔礼道歉等。

(9)  东台市人民法院将执行到位的生态环境修复费用移交安徽省铜陵市中级人民法院,联合当地政府实施铜陵长江生态环境整治和江豚保护项目。

(10)  【指导性意义】

(11)  1.涉案人员多且涉及多省,如何确定管辖方?

(12)  《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法〉的解释》(法释〔2021〕1号)规定:“有关案件,由犯罪地、被告人居住地以外的人民法院审判更为适宜的,上级人民法院可以指定下级人民法院管辖。”

(13)  本案中,实施非法采砂行为的被告人数众多、作案时间长,采砂地点和卖砂地点跨安徽、江苏等地。案涉非法采砂行为具有利润巨大、团伙作案、内外勾连等特点,存在地方公职人员涉嫌犯罪线索,故本案指定安徽省以外的人民法院管辖更为适宜。

(14)  2.生态环境修复费用如何使用?

(15)  长江流域生态环境保护应当坚持系统治理、原地修复优先的原则。本案受损地位于长江安徽省铜陵段,张某山等人的非法采砂行为造成了当地长江生态环境的严重破坏。人民法院将执行到位的生态环境修复费用及时移交安徽省铜陵市相关部门。

(16)  责任编辑:王瑜