Criminal Law Responses To The Illicit Trade In Endangered Medicinal Plants Exported From China
Legal Framework
Before we examine cases, a brief context:
Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China:
Article 151: Criminalizes smuggling of rare or endangered plants. Penalties depend on the seriousness and quantity.
Article 344: Criminalizes illegal harvesting, transporting, selling, or damaging nationally protected plants.
Key Concepts:
Rare/endangered plants: Wild plants under national protection or listed under CITES (Appendices I and II).
Medicinal plants: Often slow-growing, high-value, and vulnerable to illegal trade.
Enforcement Challenges: Identification of species, cross-border trade (mail/e-commerce), and distinguishing wild vs. cultivated plants.
Case 1: The Wuxi Succulent Smuggling Case (2015)
Facts:
A syndicate smuggled over 1,200 endangered succulent plants, including rare cacti, from Germany into China. The species included cacti listed under CITES Appendix I/II.
Legal Issues:
Were these plants classified as “rare plants” under Article 151?
Did the quantity and method of smuggling justify a severe sentence?
Analysis:
Courts confirmed that CITES-listed plants are treated as “珍稀植物” (rare/endangered).
International cooperation between customs authorities was critical in tracking the smuggling network.
Outcome:
The ringleaders received imprisonment ranging from 3 to 5 years.
This case emphasized that rare plant smuggling is a serious crime with international implications.
Case 2: Shen et al. Mail Smuggling Case (2014–2015)
Facts:
Defendants used international postal services to smuggle CITES-listed cacti into China. Total value: ~598,000 RMB.
Legal Issues:
Is mail-based smuggling treated differently from traditional cross-border smuggling?
How to determine the seriousness of the offense for sentencing?
Analysis:
Courts applied Article 151, treating mail smuggling equally seriously.
“Serious circumstances” were defined based on the number of specimens, rarity, and total value.
Outcome:
Defendants were convicted; sentences included imprisonment and fines.
Established a precedent for prosecuting e-commerce/mail-based plant trafficking.
Case 3: Lophophora Williamsii (乌羽玉) Smuggling Case (2016)
Facts:
12 specimens of Lophophora williamsii, a rare cactus containing mescaline, were smuggled into China.
Legal Issues:
Should prosecution apply criminal law for rare plants or drug-related offenses?
Analysis:
Courts opted to prosecute under Article 151 (rare plant smuggling).
The plant’s psychoactive properties were noted but did not trigger drug charges.
Outcome:
Defendants received 1.25–3 years imprisonment with some suspended sentences.
Highlighted the intersection of plant protection law and controlled substances law.
Case 4: Illegal Harvesting of Medicinal Trees (Article 344 Enforcement)
Facts:
A company illegally harvested several protected trees used for medicinal purposes, including rare ginseng varieties.
Legal Issues:
Were the trees classified as “国家重点保护植物” (nationally protected plants)?
Was the offense serious enough for criminal liability?
Analysis:
Article 344 was applied due to illegal harvesting and high ecological impact.
Forestry authorities determined species’ protected status.
Outcome:
The company managers received 3–5 years imprisonment; the harvested material was confiscated.
Reinforced criminal protection for wild medicinal plants beyond smuggling.
Case 5: Supreme Court Guiding Case on Biodiversity Protection (2022)
Facts:
Defendants illegally sold nationally protected plants, threatening local biodiversity.
Legal Issues:
How to weigh biodiversity harm in sentencing?
Should public interest and ecological impact be emphasized?
Analysis:
Court emphasized “ecological damage” and public interest.
Criminal responsibility was upheld to deter future violations.
Outcome:
Defendants received prison sentences; the case was designated a “guiding case” for lower courts.
Established jurisprudential guidance for future plant protection prosecutions.
Case 6: Illegal International Introduction of Rare Medicinal Plant (2023)
Facts:
Defendant imported a rare medicinal plant species without a permit, violating national protection laws.
Legal Issues:
Did unauthorized import constitute smuggling?
How to determine the ecological and economic risk?
Analysis:
Court applied Article 151 for smuggling of rare plants.
Factors considered: rarity, market value, ecological risk, and intent.
Outcome:
Defendant sentenced to 2 years imprisonment and fined.
Case highlighted enforcement against illegal importation, even if domestic cultivation existed.
Key Takeaways Across Cases
Legal Basis: Articles 151 (smuggling) and 344 (illegal harvesting/sale) are primary for endangered medicinal plants.
CITES Integration: International species listings guide domestic prosecution.
Modern Smuggling: Mail, e-commerce, and cross-border networks are main methods.
Dual Nature Plants: Plants with medicinal and psychoactive properties may intersect different laws.
Judicial Commitment: Top courts issue guiding cases to strengthen biodiversity protection.
Sentencing Factors: Species rarity, quantity, ecological impact, and market value influence punishment severity.
RELATED Blog
comments