The bridge has also been demolished! Local villager: A man who built a bridge without permission and charged a fee for causing trouble was sentenced to imprisonment for the crime of provocation and disturbance

Recently, news of a villager being sentenced for building a bridge without permission has sparked heated discussions.

According to CCTV, a villager in Jilin Province built a 7.5 meter long and 1.5 meter wide floating bridge on a river near the village without approval, with a total investment of over 130000 yuan. In order to recover the cost, he asked villagers and passersby who crossed the bridge to voluntarily pay fees. He was punished by the local water conservancy bureau on the grounds of illegal bridge construction and forced to demolish the bridge. Later, he was sentenced to two years in prison and suspended for the crime of provocation and trouble caused by the bridge construction fees.

At present, the villager has decided to continue appealing.

Villagers Privately Building Floating Bridges for Toll Collection Sentenced

According to Red Star News, Huang Deyi was from Zhenlin Village, Wafang Town, Taonan City, Baicheng City, Jilin Province, and grew up by the Tao'er River. Zhenlin Village, Anquan Village, and many other nearby villages are located on both sides of the Tao'er River. For many years, Tao'er River has been the mother river of production and life for villagers, but it has also made daily travel extremely inconvenient for villagers.

Huang Deyi's family has five brothers, all of whom have a career in ferry transportation. Huang Deyi told reporters that his father built a wooden boat in the 1970s to ferry on the Tao'er River. In the 1990s, Huang Deyi's third brother wanted to continue ferrying on the Tao'er River. At that time, Huang Deyi, who was already a teacher, paid 4000 yuan to build three iron boats and connect them together to ferry with his third brother.

The iron boats used to build floating bridges are now idle

A ferry consisting of three boats has limited capacity for people and vehicles. In 2014, Huang Deyi welded thirteen iron boats and built a fixed pontoon bridge. The floating bridge is adjusted according to the width of the water surface. Once the water is too heavy during the flood season or freezes in winter, the bridge will be removed from the water surface. It can be built for about five to six months a year.

In October 2018, the Water Resources Bureau of Taonan City punished and forced Huang Deyi to demolish the floating bridge on the grounds of illegal bridge construction.

After the floating bridge was demolished, Huang Deyi thought it was okay. But in February 2019, Huang Deyi was criminally detained by the Taonan Public Security Bureau on suspicion of provoking trouble. Since then, his third brother and several family members have also been taken into criminal measures. In July 2019, the Taonan City Procuratorate prosecuted Huang Deyi and several others to the Taonan City Court on suspicion of provoking trouble.

On December 31, 2019, the Taonan City Court made a first instance judgment. The court found that Huang Deyi and other personnel charged bridge tolls for building a ship's floating bridge from 2005 to 2014; Construction of fixed floating bridges from 2014 to 2018. Huang Deyi organized a scheduling and set a fee standard, with a small car costing 5 yuan and a large car costing 10 yuan. He intercepted passing vehicles and charged a total of 52950 yuan for bridge and road tolls. His behavior constituted the crime of provocation and disturbance, and Huang Deyi was sentenced to two years in prison with a two-year probation. The other 17 individuals were also sentenced to prison.

Huang Deyi was sentenced to two years in prison with a two-year probation

Among the total bridge toll of 52950 yuan determined by the Taonan Court, the villager Li who was charged the most by Huang Deyi was a total of 20000 yuan. According to Huang Deyi and Li, after the money was given to Li by the court, it was returned to Huang Deyi by Li. "Huang Deyi's construction of this bridge has indeed brought us convenience," said Li.

The first appeal has been rejected by the court

"I feel very wronged. Since ancient times, repairing bridges and roads has been a good thing. How could I be sentenced now?" At the end of 2021, Huang Deyi filed an appeal. Regarding the fees, Huang Deyi claimed that he invested over 130000 yuan in welding and building the ship, and the fees were intended to recover the cost. At the same time, he never forcibly collected the money, and it was voluntary for the villagers. There was also no situation of "not giving money and not letting go" towards ordinary passersby.

Li, a village official from Zhenlin Village, and several villagers from the safety village across the Tao'er River have also confirmed this statement.

On March 31st this year, Huang Deyi's appeal was rejected by the Taonan City Court

However, Huang Deyi's appeal was not smooth. On March 31 of this year, Huang Deyi's appeal was rejected by the Taonan City Court on the grounds that the court believed that he had illegally built a bridge to intercept passing vehicles and collect fees without the approval of relevant departments, and despite being subjected to multiple administrative penalties, he still refused to correct the situation. The circumstances were heinous and constituted a criminal offense of provocation and disturbance. The appeal does not comply with relevant legal provisions and should be rejected.

Huang Deyi appears somewhat confused about his future appeal path. But he still decided to continue appealing to the Baicheng Intermediate People's Court as the next step.

In response to this incident, the reporter contacted the Taonan Procuratorate and the Taonan Court, but the phone number of the Taonan Procuratorate remained unanswered. The Taonan Court stated, "I am not aware of the situation in this case.".

Local villager: "The bridge is gone, how can I get to the road?"?

Like Huang Deyi, there are also some villagers on both sides who are confused, especially those with land on the other side of the river, who have a particularly urgent need for bridges.

"After Huang Deyi built the floating bridge, it became much more convenient for us to go across the river to farm." Zhang, from Anquan Village, lives on the east bank of the Tao'er River, but three-quarters of his family's land is on the west bank of the Tao'er River. After 2000, various agricultural machinery began to gradually replace livestock, and crossing the Tao'er River became a considerable challenge. When the water is shallow, you can drive a tractor through it, but if the river rises sharply during the flood season, it won't work.

After the demolition of the floating bridge in 2018, it became much more troublesome for Zhang to go across the river to plant land. When there is a bridge, it takes about ten minutes to get to the ground. But the bridge is gone, even the nearest Zhenxi Bridge requires an additional 70 kilometers of detour. It takes more than 3 hours to drive a farm vehicle and 7 hours to travel back and forth, and even fuel costs cannot afford it.

Several local villagers have also stated that it is necessary to detour an additional 70 kilometers to plant land across the river. The detour was too far and wading into the river was dangerous. Zhang decided to contract the land to the person across the river. "There's a difference of 30000 yuan in one go, which is not a small amount for us," Zhang said. The land across the bank can earn 50-60000 yuan per year, while outsourcing can only earn 20000 yuan.

Li, who runs a supermarket at home, needs to go to Baicheng to purchase goods. He claims to be the person who travels the most on the floating bridge built by Huang Deyi. Apart from the Chinese New Year's Eve and the first day of the lunar new year, he travels almost once a day. Sometimes the goods sell quickly, and there may be two trips.

When the floating bridge was not demolished, Li used it to go to Baicheng, and the road was relatively smooth, with a one-way journey of 45 kilometers. After the floating bridge was demolished, we had to go around the Zhenxi Bridge, a one-way journey of 80 kilometers, which would take an additional 40 to 50 minutes for almost half of the journey. "I am driving a truck, and if I go back and forth, I will have to spend more than 100 yuan on fuel. If I go back and forth twice, I will have to spend more than 200 yuan, which will also delay a lot of time," said Li.

The reporter interviewed whether there are plans for bridge construction in the local area of Taonan Transportation Bureau. The staff of the bureau replied, "There is currently no plan to build a bridge on the Tao'er River near Zhenlin Village."

Lawyer: There is no similar case of being sentenced for bridge repair fees

According to Hu Yongping, a lawyer at Beijing Horizon Law Firm, personal bridge construction requires approval and unauthorized construction is not allowed.

Additionally, individuals are not allowed to set up toll gates on highways without permission. According to Article 9 of China's Highway Law, it is prohibited for any unit or individual to illegally set up checkpoints, collect fees, impose fines, or intercept vehicles on highways. At the same time, Article 59 also stipulates three types of chargeable situations, including highways built by transportation departments of local people's governments at or above the county level using loans or raising funds from enterprises or individuals. That is to say, apart from these three types, it is illegal to charge fees for public or private roads or bridges.

Hu Yongping said, "For those who were sentenced for bridge repair fees, there have been no similar cases so far. Criminal law violations and criminal accountability must first have social harm. If there is no social harm, even if it meets the provisions of the Criminal Law and constitutes a certain crime, it can be considered not to hold them criminally responsible, and more moderate administrative penalties and criticism and education methods can be adopted. This can achieve better social effects."

Lv Boxiong, a lawyer at Zhejiang Jinglin Law Firm, believes that according to relevant judicial interpretations, the subjective elements of the crime of provocation and disturbance are that the perpetrator artificially seeks stimulation, releases emotions, and acts recklessly, and only by committing relevant acts without reason can this crime be established.

Lv Boxiong stated that if the toll collection for bridge repair has not gone through relevant approval procedures, it constitutes an administrative violation, but the criminal punishment for it may be a legal error. In the absence of public services, the spontaneous repair of bridges by the masses and appropriate fees have simple legitimacy and do not pose social harm. After all, the ultimate goal of government governance and judicial adjudication is still to increase social welfare, not to reduce harm.

[Central Media Review]

Law enforcement is to maintain public order and safeguard the interests of the masses

On July 5th, the Farmers Daily commented that whether it is dismantling illegally built floating bridges or dealing with other rural governance issues, law enforcement is aimed at maintaining public order and safeguarding the interests of the people. If this essence is ignored, it may go against the original intention of law enforcement for the people.

The comments suggest that the reason why this matter has sparked heated discussion is firstly because the punishment results in the incident conflict with people's naive cognition. From the perspective of legal regulations, individual bridge repairs require approval and are not allowed to be constructed without authorization. In addition, China's Highway Law prohibits any unit or individual from arbitrarily collecting toll fees. But in daily life, repairing bridges and roads is considered a good deed by many people, especially in this case, the villager did not force others to cross the bridge and pay fees. After the total bridge toll of 52950 yuan was refunded by the court, the villager who paid 20000 yuan, also the most, returned the money to the bridge repairer, citing that the floating bridge did indeed bring him convenience. To some extent, this also represents people's sympathy for the villagers who are repairing the bridge.

Secondly, is the determination of the crime of provocation and disturbance appropriate? Generally speaking, if it constitutes the crime of provoking trouble, the perpetrator is required to artificially seek stimulation, vent emotions, show off and act recklessly, and engage in related behaviors without any reason. So the premise for determining this crime is that someone intentionally committed negative behavior and caused trouble to others. But currently, it seems that the villager did not make any profit from building the floating bridge, and there is still a considerable cost involved. Moreover, the report did not point out any safety issues that have occurred with the bridge since its construction. In fact, this bridge has actually facilitated the production and life of the local people. In this situation, it is clearly difficult for the public to accept such punishment for the villagers who are repairing the bridge.

Finally, after the floating bridge was demolished, the transportation difficulties for the public were not solved. Public reports show that since the demolition of the floating bridge in 2018, there has been no plan to build a bridge on the river in question, making it extremely inconvenient for nearby villagers to travel. In fact, the problem of crossing the river that troubles villagers has long existed, especially since 2000 when various agricultural machinery was introduced into local agricultural production, and the public has an urgent need to cross the bridge and river. Nowadays, the floating bridge has been demolished, and some villagers need to detour an additional 70 kilometers to plant land and transport goods across the river. The originally ten minute journey would take more than three hours. For so many years, the practical difficulties faced by the villagers have been present, but they have never received the attention and resolution of relevant departments. After the demolition of the floating bridge spontaneously built by the villagers, it did not meet the needs of the people, reflecting the lazy thinking of the local government.

In fact, the incident of villagers building bridges and charging fees without authorization is not an isolated case, as it has also occurred in other places before. When similar incidents occur, it is essential to provide criticism and education to villagers, inform them of the dangers of building bridges without authorization, and popularize relevant legal knowledge. But at the same time, it should also be noted that the phenomenon of building bridges without authorization reflects the urgent need of some local people for the construction of rural road facilities, especially in some remote areas and the traffic difficulties on both sides of rivers, which are closely related to the production and life of villagers and urgently need to be taken seriously and solved. How to balance the relationship between correcting illegal behavior and safeguarding the interests of the masses is a problem that relevant departments should deeply consider and effectively solve.

It should be recognized that whether it is dismantling illegally built floating bridges or dealing with other rural governance issues, law enforcement is aimed at maintaining public order and safeguarding the interests of the people. If this essence is ignored, it may go against the original intention of law enforcement for the people. Taking this incident as an example, the demolition of illegally built floating bridges in the local area was intended to maintain the safety of nearby residents. However, by imposing a fine, the actual difficulties faced by the public were ignored, resulting in the impression of "only enforcing the law and not doing anything". In dealing with such issues, it is simple to ban them, but it is important to solve the problems of the masses and keep up with follow-up services, which tests the ability of local governments to serve the people. Not long ago, grassroots governments in many parts of Henan province opened their doors and invited farmers to come into their homes to dry their crops, providing us with a good solution. In order to avoid safety hazards caused by farmers sun drying their crops on the road, the local government did not simply ban it. Instead, they chose to take an extra step and opened up new sun drying places for farmers. This not only avoids simplified law enforcement, but also solves the practical problems faced by the public. The thoughtful service has won praise. This also provides us with inspiration. If relevant departments can actively understand the needs of the people, do more practical things for the people, and better implement the concept of serving the people in the law enforcement process, many governance problems related to the interests of the people will be better solved.