A probe into the public officials ' stake in the coal mine investigation and the judge

Reporter Wang Lewen shares in coal mine 1.8 million yuan, in two consecutive years without a dividend, Shaanxi SHENMU County Court Judge Zhangji the coal mine side to court, Hengshan County Court judgement Zhangji victory. According to state regulations, civil servants can not participate in coal mines, and Zhangji not only shares, but also justly through the lawsuit to return dividends.　　The verdict has aroused wide public concern. May 24, the Shenmu County Committee decided by the disciplinary Commission and the Public Prosecutor's Office to establish a joint task force, Zhangji shares in the coal mine investigation. At the same time, the county public officers stake in the coal mine to investigate.　　The Yulin Intermediate People's Court will sit on the case in an optional day. The judge shares the coal mine "to seek dividends" wins the lawsuit Zhangji is Shenmu County Court Supervision Room Deputy director. February 2005, Zhangji and wife Wang Hexia in the name of Zhangji and Chen, and other people partnership investment Shenmu County Sun home Fork Town song Home Ditch coal mine. April 2008, Zhangji couple learned that Chen in August 2007 to 50 million yuan in the price of the coal mine 2/3 transfer to von A, Yu, Chen MoU holds 1/3 stake in coal mine, and the legal representative changed to von.　　Zhangji that the other party deprived them of the right to a coal mine, and then sued to Shenmu County Court, asked the court to confirm its possession of 10% of the coal mine, and ordered the coal side to pay its two-year dividend of 11 million yuan and the losses caused by late payment. The case was appointed to be heard by the Hengshan County People's Court. Court to find out, song Jia Ditch coal mine in 2005 transferred to Chen, coal mine worth 18 million yuan. The same February, Zhangji couple in song home ditch coal mine shares 1.8 million yuan, Chen gave Zhangji issued a "this received Zhangji song home Ditch coal mine shares a million BA to collect the receipt." 2005, 2006, Zhangji couple in song home ditch coal mine two times to receive dividends 3.6 million yuan.　　The first instance court heard that, the plaintiff Zhangji couple holding song Jia Gou coal mine 10% shares, decree the defendant Chen a payment of two plaintiffs 2007 dividend 5 million yuan, 2008 dividend 6 million yuan, a total of 11 million yuan (has paid 3 million yuan). Whether the contract is effective is the dispute between the two sides this year, February 2, the Coal mining party, appealed to the Yulin Intermediate Court, request to revoke the Hengshan County court first instance judgment.　　The reporter learned in the interview, the dispute between the two sides of the case is whether the Zhangji of civil servants can buy a stake in the mine. In the judgement of the first instance, the court found that the prohibition of public servants to take stakes in the enterprise is "administrative mandatory" provisions. The validity of the contract shall be governed by the mandatory provisions of the contract law, and the law of the judges and the Civil Service Act do not adjust the civil activities.　　The plaintiff is only a dormant partner in the name of Chen, not the head of coal enterprise, and has not been directly involved in the coal mine according to the authority, and has not violated the mandatory stipulation of the contract validity stipulated in the contract law, so the plaintiff civil contract subject is established. Coal-mining side that Zhangji is a state official, as its identity is not engaged in for-profit business activities. In accordance with the national staff and state-ownedNotice of the investment in the coal mine by the head of the enterprise stipulates that the staff of the State organs shall not invest in the coal mine and the investment should be withdrawn.　　Therefore, the appellant believes that the 3 million yuan given to the Zhangji couple was the withdrawal and dividend after the national policy. Zhangji that the civil activities and the effectiveness of civil servants as natural persons should be determined by adjusting the civil laws and regulations of property and personal relations between the subjects of equality, and that violating the administrative provisions of the civil servant law does not necessarily result in the invalidity of the civil acts of the parties.　　Therefore, its legitimate rights and interests as a civil subject should be protected. Public opinion widely concerned that the provincial High Court has begun to investigate the case of the first instance of the verdict aroused widespread public concern. Ding, a lawyer in Shaanxi province, believes that as a public authority, public officials must eliminate the profit-making impulses of businessmen and be fully supported by taxpayers to ensure that they always serve the public interest. If the judge arbitrarily involved in the market business activities, then the public opinion will arouse the suspicion not only is "not doing nothing", more power to rent, money trading and other suspicion and distrust of judicial justice.　　It is in this sense that the most important concern of the case is not whether the judgement itself is appropriate or not, but the accountability and punishment of the competent judge in the relevant departments. SHENMU County Committee propaganda minister Reijiang said that the case is still in the trial, there is uncertainty.　　Only after the judgment of the second instance can we come up with a conclusion. Shaanxi Province senior People's Court party members, discipline leader Heberqing told reporters, the Supreme Court of the case is also very concerned about, the current provincial High Court has begun to investigate the case.