The Supreme People's Procuratorate has released a typical case where a fishery project approved for "slimming fish" farming was used as a cover for large-scale illegal extraction of a strategic non-metallic mineral.

In handling the administrative public interest litigation case concerning illegal mining in Wushi Town, Qujiang District, prosecutors in Shaoguan City, Guangdong Province, referred clues of disciplinary violations to the discipline inspection and supervision authorities. Consequently, 13 responsible individuals received party disciplinary sanctions.

In January 2024, Shaoguan De's Tourism Development Co., Ltd. leased 100 mu of collective land from a village group in Wushi Town, Qujiang District. The company registered it as a facility agricultural land for fishery farming with the Wushi Town government, and the Qujiang District Natural Resources Bureau approved it. On July 9, 2024, it was granted permission to use 29.8 mu of forest land and began construction.

From the start of construction until January 2025, De's Company, under the guise of the "slimming fish project," illegally excavated fluorite ore and other mineral resources. Calculations showed that the illegal extraction of sand and stone resources on the site totaled 63,792.68 cubic meters.

In November 2024, the Shaoguan City People's Procuratorate received an online tip-off forwarded by the Supreme People's Procuratorate. Due to the case's complexity and significance, a special task force was formed to conduct a preliminary investigation jointly with relevant grassroots procuratorates.

During the initial verification, the Qujiang District Natural Resources Bureau provided appraisal reports from two surveying companies, which concluded that all rock minerals in the excavation area were ordinary sand and gravel. The procuratorate reviewed these reports and found the investigation methods to be irregular and incomplete, suspecting the reports were false.

Under the unified command of the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Guangdong Provincial People's Procuratorate, the Shaoguan procuratorate commissioned professional institutions to conduct satellite remote sensing monitoring and analysis of the on-site operations and surface mineral categories. Using a big data platform, field surveys, drone photography, and on-site sample testing, they determined that the excavated sand and stone were mainly fluorite ore and siliceous raw material ore (quartzite), which were largely transported for sale to Ruyuan County and Yingde City in Qingyuan.

The case was referred by the Shaoguan City Procuratorate to the Qujiang District People's Procuratorate, which filed administrative public interest litigation cases against the Qujiang District Natural Resources Bureau and the Wushi Town government in February 2025. Investigators conducted field visits, interviewed villagers, and reviewed complaint records, confirming ongoing ecological damage and that both entities had failed to fulfill their regulatory duties.

During consultations between the procuratorate and the administrative agencies, each side shirked responsibility, delaying emergency response, ecological restoration, and leaving geological disaster risks and ecological harm unaddressed.

In July 2025, the Qujiang District Procuratorate issued procuratorial suggestions to both entities, urging them to enforce mineral regulations, manage hazards, and restore the ecology. Follow-up visits after the suggestion period expired found that the mine pits remained exposed, vegetation damage was unimproved, and no substantial regulatory measures had been taken, with public interest harm persisting.

Due to centralized jurisdiction rules for first-instance administrative cases in Shaoguan, the case was transferred to the Wujiang District People's Procuratorate, which filed an administrative public interest lawsuit on December 10, 2025.

During the trial, the Qujiang District Natural Resources Bureau commissioned a third party to draft an ecological restoration plan, which the Wushi Town government implemented. The restoration project passed final acceptance inspection in May 2026. Joint field reviews by the procuratorate and court, along with drone verification, confirmed the site remediation met expectations.

From late June to early July 2026, the Wujiang District People's Court issued rulings, finding that both administrative agencies had failed to fully perform their regulatory duties before the lawsuit, constituting illegal conduct.

Under the supervision of the Guangdong Provincial Procuratorate, the Shaoguan City Procuratorate's public interest litigation department transferred criminal case leads related to illegal mining to the public security authorities for investigation in January 2025, and is handling a related criminal附带 civil public interest lawsuit, which is currently under review.

Regarding issues of illegal mineral purchases, environmental pollution, and safety violations at a beneficiation plant identified in the case, the Ruyuan County Procuratorate simultaneously urged the emergency management, ecological environment, industry and information technology, and other departments to fulfill their regulatory duties.

On November 28, 2025, based on this case and other illegal mining cases across the city, the Shaoguan City Procuratorate issued a social governance procuratorial suggestion to the Municipal Natural Resources Bureau. This prompted the bureau and relevant departments to launch a full-chain crackdown, targeting 19 cases citywide, organizing remediation at 11 illegal mining sites, and restoring 147 hectares of land.

The Supreme People's Procuratorate has included this case in its list of typical public interest litigation cases for serving and safeguarding the construction of a beautiful China. It noted that for illegal mining activities concealed under legal forms and repeatedly evading detection, procuratorates leverage an integrated case-handling mechanism featuring "unified command by the Supreme Procuratorate, deployment by provincial procuratorates, and coordinated action by city and county procuratorates." They employ a "space-air-ground" three-dimensional evidence collection model to fully uncover illegal facts.

For situations where administrative agencies delay or fail to rectify issues, procuratorates file administrative public interest lawsuits, and the court's rulings confirming illegal conduct serve as a warning to local administrative agencies, promoting legal awareness for lawful administration, full duty performance, and public interest protection. Additionally, case-based supervision delves into systemic regulatory gaps, promoting targeted local crackdowns and systematic solutions to illegal mining issues.

Source: China Youth Daily Client