THE chairman of a Shenzhen company has sued a public security subbureau that wrongfully detained him for 4 million yuan (US$585,600) as compensation for company losses.
Shen Qijia filed the suit in the Higher People’s Court of Guangdong Province in May. A verdict has not been announced.
He had already received 11,000 yuan of State compensation last year after he was detained by the Bao’an District Public Security Subbureau for 118 days nine years ago, yesterday’s Southern Metropolis Daily reported.
Shen, chairman of Shenzhen Yingchuanglian Industrial Development Co. Ltd. in Bao’an, was suspected of making fraudulent investments and drawing out capital illegally. He was detained Dec. 18, 2000, and freed April 11, 2001.
He sued the Bao’an District Public Security Subbureau on May 2001, asking for two kinds of State compensation, one for unreasonable detainment and the other for his company’s losses during the period.
Shen’s company owned the Nu’erjia Supermarket in Bao’an, which opened July 13, 2000.
The subbureau had initially decided early last year to pay Shen 9,871 yuan in compensation, based on the average daily wage for city residents in 2006, the Daily report said. Later, the amount was raised to 11,700 yuan, a calculation based on the 2007 standard. “Although it was only a little more than 10,000 yuan, the compensation proved the subbureau had admitted its mistakes,” said Shen.
However, the compensatory committee of the Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court rejected Shen’s demand for 4 million yuan in compensation in December 2008.
“When I was detained, my company was also implicated in the case,” said Shen.
During his detainment, Shen said, the subbureau seized the company’s documents, including business license, lease certificate and tax registration certificate, office and supermarket keys, goods and cash Dec. 17, 2000.
Shen said the subbureau’s actions had resulted in great losses for the company.
The compensatory committee said Shen had provided no evidence to show a causal relationship between the detainment and the company’s losses.
Shen appealed to the Compensatory Committee of the Higher People’s Court of Guangdong Province, and the case was heard May 21.
Shen said he began demanding the return of the confiscated property in June 2001, but the subbureau refused with one excuse after another. The company’s business license was subsequently revoked because the documents had been seized by police, Shen said.
The Bao’an District Public Security Subbureau said it would decide the compensation based on the court’s final decision.
(Cai Yingbo)