Voters' recall of deputies to the National People's Congress was rejected

On August 17, Zhang Jianzhong, a citizen of Hangzhou, submitted an application signed by 64 citizens to the Standing Committee of Xiacheng District People's Congress in Hangzhou, demanding the recall of Zhao Zhiyi, a deputy to Xiacheng District People's Congress and the legal representative of Hangzhou Xidebao Company.

Zhang Jianzhong, the initiator of this recall action, frankly stated that the recall action originated from a private property right dispute. He believes that Zhao Zhiyi, the chairman of Xidebao Group, has occupied the private property there for many years, and he knows the law and violates the law, demanding that his qualification as a deputy to the Xiacheng District People's Congress be removed.

On August 19th, the Standing Committee of Hangzhou Xiacheng District People's Congress made the Reply on Zhang Jianzhong's Proposal to Recall Zhao Zhiyi, a representative of the District People's Congress, arguing that the recall proposed by Zhang Jianzhong could not be established due to various reasons of 64 voters.

According to the reply, "it is the right of voters to apply for the recall of deputies to the National People's Congress, which should be fully respected, but it must also be implemented according to law". "From the current verification, because Zhang Jianzhong himself is not a voter in Chaoming Street, Xiacheng District, Zhao Zhiyi's original constituency, and among the 64 people who jointly signed, there are less than 5 voters in the original constituency. In addition, judging from the current situation, the reasons for dismissing NPC deputies are not established. "

It is rare for voters to directly demand the recall of deputies to the National People's Congress in Zhejiang Province and even the whole country. Although the incident ended up being rejected by the Standing Committee of the District People's Congress, it was quickly expanded into a national news event after being reported by the media, and both Zhang Jianzhong and Xidebao were involved in the whirlpool of public opinion.

The "aborted" action of voters to recall deputies to the National People's Congress originated from a property dispute.

According to Zhang Jianzhong, the property of Yangqianlong in Xiacheng District of Hangzhou covers an area of .76 mu, which is the ancestral property. In 1968, it was forcibly occupied by Hangzhou bleaching and dyeing factory (the predecessor of Hangzhou Xidebao Group Company) and has not been returned to the property owner.

On November 1th, 28, six people, including Yang Fengtang, Yang Fengmei and Yang Fengming, filed a civil lawsuit with the People's Court of Xiacheng District, Hangzhou, claiming that No.41-3, Yangqian Lane (formerly No.28, Yongkang Lane), located in Xiacheng District, Hangzhou, was a private house owned by Zhu Suzhen, which was occupied by Hangzhou Bleaching and Dyeing Factory in 1968 and was later converted into a two-story house. Ask the court to order that the property right of the house belongs to the plaintiff and other six people.

The reporter noticed that in this lawsuit, among the six plaintiffs who are descendants of the Yang family, there is no Zhang Jianzhong's name, and Zhang Jianzhong only appeared as the entrusted agent of the six plaintiffs. Zhang Jianzhong admitted in an interview with reporters afterwards that he was not a direct descendant of the Yang family, "I adopted the past".

After several sessions, on June 11th, 29, the People's Court of Xiacheng District of Hangzhou made a first-instance judgment, holding that the original house No.28 in Yongkang Lane registered under Zhu Suzhen's name in this case had been requisitioned by Hangzhou Dyeing and Dyeing Factory from the then housing management office, and it was rebuilt into a two-story building in the late 198s. Although the rebuilt house kept the original house number, it was actually not registered under the name of Zhu Suzhen. According to the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law, the judgment rejected the claims of the plaintiff Yang Fengtang and others.

six plaintiffs, including Yang Fengtang, refused to accept this judgment and appealed. After hearing the case, on April 18th, 21, the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court made a second-instance judgment, arguing that the claims of six people, including Yang Fengtang, for the confirmation of Zhu Suzhen's private house were unfounded, and the appeal grounds of Yang Fengtang and others could not be established. The court finally ruled that the appeal was dismissed and the original judgment was upheld.