The "Sea Palace" Fine Controversy – The Ultimate Revelation of the "Sea Palace" Case (Part 8)
Part One: "Rich Tycoon" Guo XX and His "Sea Palace"
[6] 7. The Fine Storm
Guo's floating island structure, due to its perfection, luxury, and seclusion, gradually earned the nickname "Maritime Palace" from curious media professionals, gaining widespread fame. Over time, it not only attracted tourists but also drew the attention of government authorities. Because of its elaborate and complex construction, which far exceeded the needs of fishing, leisure, and dining functions typically developed on simple fish rafts, it formally violated the provisions of the "Sea Area Use Management Law" regarding marine functional zoning. Additionally, to leverage the protection of the bay's topography to avoid strong typhoons, the mooring position of the floating island structure underwent several adjustments and changes during the experimental construction process. The Ocean Bureau of Longgang District, Shenzhen, initiated an investigation in 2008 and issued a "Notice of Administrative Penalty Hearing" to Maritime Elite Entertainment Co., Ltd. on October 14, 2008, proposing a fine of 711,000 yuan for the "Maritime Palace." Following an application from Maritime Elite Entertainment Co., Ltd., the Ocean Bureau held a hearing on January 13, 2009, and then made a formal decision on February 13, 2009, determining that the "Maritime Palace" illegally occupied 1.58 hectares of sea area. The supervising entity (Shenzhen Maritime Elite Entertainment Co., Ltd.) was subjected to an administrative penalty of 497,700 yuan and ordered to restore the sea area to its original state within a specified period (Figures 24, 25, 26).
On one hand, there was the real threat of administrative punishment; on the other, there was the urgent need for Guo and his associates to scale up and promote development based on the success of small-scale experiments. They once again submitted a report to the marine authorities of Longgang District, proposing to develop the tourism resources of Dongshan Bay and grow the tourism industry. The Longgang District Fishery Administration replied that the sea area was subject to marine functional zoning restrictions and was still designated as an aquaculture zone, and that the authority to change the marine functional zoning rested with the municipal and provincial governments. Guo then submitted reports to the municipal and provincial authorities. By early 2009, when leaders from the courts of Guangdong Province and Shenzhen City came for a joint inspection, they concluded that Guo's innovation, which enhanced the added value of marine functions, was a bold exploration of future marine usage models, and they agreed in principle to issue Guo a sea area use certificate. At that time, Li Zhujiang, the then Director of the Guangdong Provincial Oceanic Administration, issued two "pilot first" instructions on Guo's request reports (Figures 27, 28).
Guo, based on the written instructions from the leaders of the Guangdong Provincial Oceanic Administration, submitted another application report for the right to use sea areas to the Shenzhen Municipal Oceanic Administration. The municipal administration accepted the application report and required them to supplement and refine details such as the sea area zoning maps, intended functions, and future planning. Before formally approving and issuing the sea area use certificate, the municipal administration sought the opinion of the Longgang District Oceanic Administration, under whose jurisdiction the sea area fell. The district administration reported the issue that the previous administrative penalty concerning the "Sea Palace" had not been enforced, and proposed the principle of "penalty first, then certification." Faced with such indifference, evasion, and delay from government departments at all levels, Guo, who had been tirelessly advocating for his dream of a floating island at sea with great enthusiasm, for the first time truly felt helpless, aggrieved, and dissatisfied. To say Guo felt helpless is because, despite twice securing the understanding, support, and written approvals from provincial-level supervisory authorities, he still could not smoothly obtain a legal permit for his floating island project. To say Guo felt aggrieved is because he had always firmly believed that this creation, completed with immense effort and substantial investment, was truly a tremendous contribution to the nation and society, yet no government department or official had the courage to formally recognize it legally. To say Guo felt dissatisfied is because, over the years, he and his team had repeatedly approached government departments to request, report, and communicate in order to obtain the legal sea area use certificate, and their floating island project had developed to its current scale and level only with the verbal support of leaders at various levels. Now that the rice was already cooked, not only had they failed to receive the long-promised legal status from the government, but they were also subjected to harsh administrative penalties without justification, which was truly unacceptable.
As the saying goes, "The county official is not as powerful as the clerk on the ground." Not to mention directives from provincial leaders, even resolutions from the Party Central Committee and the State Council often turn out to be "a silver-like spearhead that looks good but is useless" when they reach the grassroots. Administrative penalties are often closely tied to the departmental interests of grassroots law enforcement agencies. Although the slogan of "enforcing the law for the people" is shouted loudly, the theory and practice of institutional economics have long proven that any law enforcement department has its own private interests. Guo and his colleagues did not take the administrative penalty decision of the Longgang District Ocean Bureau seriously or fulfill it in a timely manner, which further delayed the process of applying for the sea area use right certificate for the offshore floating island development project. On the other hand, the Longgang District Ocean Bureau did not "drop the case" as instructed by the provincial bureau leaders, nor did it immediately enforce the administrative penalty decision. Instead, it was not until November 5, 2009, that it lawfully applied to the Longgang District People's Court for compulsory enforcement against the Maritime Elite Entertainment Co., Ltd. After receiving the court's "Enforcement Notice," the Maritime Elite Entertainment Co., Ltd., which could no longer delay, paid the fine on January 27, 2010. But by then, the fierce storm of public opinion had already begun to attack the "Sea Palace." Subsequent developments proved that the delayed payment of the fine also contributed to some extent to the passive and beleaguered situation that the "Sea Palace" later encountered (Figures 29-32).
(To be continued)
