The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs has released the first batch of guiding cases for agricultural administrative law enforcement.

Release Date:

2021-03-10

　　To implement the State Council’s requirements for strengthening case‑based guidance in administrative law enforcement and to enhance the case‑handling capabilities of local agricultural comprehensive administrative law enforcement agencies, on March 1, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs released the first batch of guiding cases for agricultural administrative law enforcement, intended as a reference for enforcement agencies nationwide.
　　Guiding Case No. 1: “A certain agricultural materials business in Baodi District, Tianjin, engaged in the sale of counterfeit…” seed The case involves the operation of counterfeit goods. seed Rules for handling unlawful acts. According to the… seed Article 75 of the Law stipulates that the production and sale of counterfeit goods… seed The competent agricultural and rural affairs authorities at or above the county level shall order the cessation of production and business operations, confiscate the illegal gains, and… seed , revocation seed A production and business license was revoked, and a fine was imposed. The party involved in this case actively cooperated with the investigation and voluntarily recalled the counterfeit products that had already been sold. seed and enter into compensation agreements with the farmers who purchased the seeds. This situation falls under the circumstances specified in the Administrative Penalty Law for imposing a lighter or reduced administrative penalty; accordingly, the agricultural and rural affairs authorities, in accordance with the law, shall only confiscate the illegal gains and… seed and impose a fine, without revoking its… seed The production and business license embodies the principle of proportionate punishment, balancing leniency with severity.
　　Guiding Case No. 2: “A certain agricultural materials business in Wenzhou City, Zhejiang Province, engaged in the sale of substandard…” seed The case concerns investigative and evidence‑gathering techniques in agricultural law enforcement. In this case, the agriculture and rural affairs authorities, starting from the matters involved… seed In both the upstream supply chain and downstream farmer sales channels, a comprehensive investigation and evidence collection were conducted across three key areas—purchases, sales, and inventory—leading to an accurate determination that the party concerned was engaged in the operation of substandard goods. seed the fact, regarding violations seed The quantity, value of the goods, illegal gains, and harmful consequences were accurately determined, and administrative penalties were imposed in accordance with the law.
　　Guiding Case No. 3: “A certain agricultural supplies store in Le’an County, Jiangxi Province, engaged in the sale of substandard products” Pesticide The case involves innovation in law enforcement and case-handling mechanisms. It was identified through cross‑jurisdictional, peer‑reviewed sampling inspections organized by the provincial agricultural and rural affairs department, which promptly referred the matter to the agricultural and rural affairs authority in the jurisdiction where the violation occurred for investigation and prosecution. This approach to law enforcement and case handling helps both to overcome local protectionism and to ensure the effective implementation of the inspection‑enforcement coordination mechanism.
　　Guiding Case No. 4: A certain agricultural development company in Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, used [the product] beyond the scope of use indicated on the label. Pesticide The case involves the inspection‑enforcement linkage mechanism in the supervision and law enforcement of agricultural product quality and safety. In this instance, the agricultural product quality and safety regulatory authority identified potential violations through routine monitoring, prompting the comprehensive agricultural administrative law enforcement agency to promptly follow up with enforcement inspections and supervised sampling. Even when the results of the agricultural product sampling met safety standards, the enforcement officers did not lower their guard and walk away; instead, they continued to conduct further inspections. Pesticide Warehouse, Query Pesticide Through the use of ledgers and inquiries with the agricultural production supervisors, it was ultimately determined that the party concerned engaged in practices during the production of agricultural products that exceeded… Pesticide Use of label annotation range Pesticide Illegal acts.
　　Guiding Case No. 5, “Case of a Fish Medicine and Feed Store in Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province, Operating Counterfeit Veterinary Drugs,” involves… Aquaculture Rules for the identification and handling of water-quality improvers, pond‑clearing agents, and other products used in aquaculture. In this case, although the products in question were labeled as non‑pharmaceuticals and aquatic‑environment remediation agents, the indications, functions, and intended uses section of their labels and package inserts explicitly stated that they were effective against… Aquaculture Animals, bacteria, viruses, fungi, and other microorganisms possess inhibitory, lethal, or eliminative functions; accordingly, the agricultural and rural affairs authorities have legally classified them as veterinary drugs. Following further investigation and evidence collection, it was confirmed that no approved product registration number for veterinary drugs had been obtained; therefore, administrative penalties were imposed on the party concerned for trading in counterfeit veterinary drugs.
　　Guiding Case No. 6, “Case of Feed Produced by a Certain Feed Company in Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province, with Content Inconsistent with Label Claims,” addresses the issue of determining the content of active ingredients in feed enforcement. In this case, the feed produced by the party concerned contained active ingredients at levels significantly lower than those indicated on the label, thereby violating relevant feed management regulations and seriously infringing upon the legitimate rights and interests of livestock farmers. The agricultural and rural affairs authorities duly sampled and submitted the problematic feed for testing, and promptly initiated an investigation and imposed administrative penalties based on the test results, effectively preventing such substandard feed from entering the market and safeguarding the interests of farmers.
　　Guiding Case No. 7, “The Case of Xiao and Li in Changsha City, Hunan Province, Engaging in Live Pig Slaughtering Without a Designated Slaughterhouse Permit,” involves a joint investigation mechanism between administrative law enforcement agencies and public security organs. In recent years, driven by substantial profits, illegal and criminal activities involving unauthorized pig slaughtering have occurred from time to time; however, such violations are highly concealed, and constrained by the limitations of enforcement methods, it has been difficult for agricultural and rural affairs authorities to conduct investigations and gather evidence. In this case, based on preliminary fact-finding, the agricultural and rural affairs authority determined that the matter might constitute a criminal offense and accordingly requested the public security organs to intervene at an early stage. This enabled the acquisition of crucial evidence of the suspects’ unlawful conduct, leading to the successful resolution of the case.
　　Guiding Case No. 8, “The Case of Zhang of Xiangtan City, Hunan Province, Who Operated Animals That Were Legally Required to Undergo Quarantine but Were Not,” addresses the rules governing the handling of animals that were legally required to undergo quarantine but were not. In this case, law enforcement officers imposed an administrative penalty on the party for operating live pigs that were subject to mandatory quarantine but had not been quarantined. At the same time, in order to safeguard the party’s interests, and provided that the party met the conditions for supplementary quarantine, the agricultural and rural affairs authorities carried out such supplementary inspection in accordance with the law, thereby conducting enforcement in a manner that minimized harm to the party’s rights and reduced unnecessary economic losses, thus upholding the spirit of the rule of law.
　　Guiding Case No. 9: Luo and Xie of Jiangjin District, Chongqing, for Illegal Fishing Aquaculture The case concerns the rules for handling fishing activities conducted within closed‑season (or closed‑area) zones using prohibited methods such as electric fishing, which severely damage fishery resources. The incident occurred in a no‑fishing area of the Yangtze River. In accordance with the criteria for initiating criminal investigations and prosecuting cases issued by the Supreme People’s Procuratorate and the Ministry of Public Security, fishing is prohibited in closed‑season areas or during closed seasons when prohibited tools or methods are employed. Aquaculture The conduct in question should, in accordance with the law, be subject to criminal liability. Furthermore, pursuant to relevant regulations, the agricultural and rural affairs authorities have entered into an agreement with the party concerned, under which the party is required to purchase fish fry for restocking and release, thereby helping to mitigate and eliminate the adverse consequences of the violation and to restore fishery resources and the ecological environment.
　　Guiding Case No. 10, “The Case of Chen from Tongxiang City, Zhejiang Province, for Illegally Purchasing and Raising Nationally Key Protected Wild Animals,” concerns the handling of prosecutorial recommendations issued by the procuratorial organs to administrative authorities. In practice, when the agriculture and rural affairs authorities discover that an agricultural administrative violation may constitute a criminal offense and is subject to criminal liability under the law, they shall promptly refer the case to the judicial organs. Conversely, with respect to cases referred by the judicial organs to the agriculture and rural affairs authorities, such authorities shall, in accordance with their statutory duties, promptly file a case, conduct an investigation, and render a decision in compliance with the law. In this case, acting on the procuratorial recommendation, the agriculture and rural affairs authorities promptly initiated an investigation and imposed administrative penalties for the wildlife‑protection violation, thereby providing a valuable model for addressing prosecutorial recommendations.