春妮的周末时光

民主党派联合调研服务京津冀协同发展_我的网站

一 |     

    Liberia-flagged vessel Front Eagle Photo: Courtesy of China's Supreme People's Court Guangzhou Maritime Court recently successfully mediated a 180 million yuan ($25 million) dispute arising from a collision between two oil tankers in waters near the Strait of Hormuz, with both parties agreeing to apply Chinese law and submit their dispute to the Chinese court, the Global Times learned from the court on Sunday.
In 2025, two crude oil tankers collided at the eastern entrance to the Strait of Hormuz, 24 nautical miles off Fujairah, United Arab Emirates, media reported.
Owned by oil tanker operator Frontline, the Liberia-flagged vessel Front Eagle collided with the Antigua and Barbuda-flagged vessel Adalynn on the morning of June 17, 2025.
The Adalynn was damaged in the fire. While the Front Eagle was undergoing repairs in Shenzhen, South China's Guangdong Province, Global Shipping Holding Ltd., which owns the Adalynn, applied to Guangzhou Maritime Court for its arrest. Frontline provided a cash security of 203 million yuan to release the arrest and applied to establish a limitation fund for maritime claims.
The court approved the application and allowed Frontline to establish the limitation fund, setting the amount of the fund at 168 million yuan.
Guangzhou Maritime Court held four pretrial conferences on October 11, 2025, January 12, May 6 and July 13, 2026 to complete preparations for evidence examination, technical investigations and reported the relevant pretrial arrangements to the provincial high court, the Global Times learned from the court. 
The court held a public hearing for the case on July 14, 2026.
No government agency had conducted an investigation into the collision, and no official findings were issued after the accident. Taking into account the unique burden-of-proof challenges in maritime collision disputes, Guangzhou Maritime Court took measures to preserve key evidence when handling the vessel arrest, including navigation logs, AIS data, voyage data recorder (VDR) records and CCTV footage, the court told the Global Times in a statement on Sunday.
Under a process that involves exchanging evidence inventories, sealing materials simultaneously and jointly reviewing them after evidence submissions, the court helped ensure the authenticity of critical records and laid the groundwork for determining the facts of the case.
As the two sides and their respective maritime experts reached sharply different conclusions over liability, the court introduced a maritime technical investigator mechanism, with the consent of both parties, allowing technical experts to participate throughout the proceedings. Drawing on the preserved evidence, investigators reconstructed the collision, assessed the vessels' encounter situation and clarified the parties' respective responsibilities.
Following the hearing, the court facilitated mediation, and the two parties reached a settlement agreement on July 27, 2026. On July 31, the court organized the distribution of the maritime liability limitation fund among creditors involved in the foreign vessel collision dispute and related charter-party disputes. 
Representatives of the Adalynn traveled from overseas to the court to present a letter of appreciation and a commemorative banner in recognition of the court's efforts, according to the court statement. 
After the Guangzhou Maritime Court accepted the case, both parties agreed to apply Chinese law to establish a maritime liability limitation fund and resolve their substantive dispute, breaking away from the long-standing reliance of international shipping disputes on European and US courts and legal systems.
Choice of justice 
Bilov Viacheslav, a representative of Global Shipping Holding Ltd., told the Global Times that the main reason they chose a Chinese court to mediate the case is that "we want absolutely fair, unbiased approach to this issue. Because nowadays in this world, there are some countries which believe that they are authorized to give instruction to all others, which definitely is having influence on the decisions of the judge on the approach to the case."
Viacheslav gave the Chinese court's handling of the case a five-star rating, saying he had expected the dispute to take at least three years to resolve, but the Chinese court settled it within just one year. He also praised the judges and lawyers for their commitment to advancing the case throughout the proceedings.
"The judges and lawyers worked to advance the case with the same level of commitment as I did, even though the case directly concerned my own interests. This left a deep impression on me about litigation in China," Viacheslav said.
The case involved two foreign parties and a collision that occurred near the Strait of Hormuz, with no direct connection to China or Guangzhou Maritime Court initially. The fact that the parties chose to seek vessel arrest in China and agreed to apply Chinese law demonstrates the credibility and appeal of China's maritime judicial system, Wu Guining, vice president of the Guangzhou Maritime Court, who served as the presiding judge of the case, told the Global Times. 
The court also introduced a maritime technical investigator mechanism in the case, an innovation aimed at addressing complex technical issues arising from vessel collision accidents, Wu said, noting that through technical investigations, the court was able to establish the facts of the case more efficiently, highlighting the integration of professional maritime investigation capabilities with China's specialized maritime adjudication system.
The case demonstrates China's ability to handle major, complex and cross-border maritime disputes with professional expertise, Wu said.
The handling of the collision between the two vessels is just one example of how Chinese courts have been dealing with a growing number of foreign-related maritime cases in recent years.
The Global Times learned from China's Supreme People's Court (SPC) in October last year that over the past 40 years, Chinese courts have handled a total of 88,000 foreign-related maritime cases involving parties from 146 countries and regions.
At a lecture held by the SPC on Friday, Shen Hongyu, director of the Fourth Civil Division of the SPC, told the Global Times that in recent years, Chinese courts have become more influential in participating in and promoting global ocean governance reform. Maritime justice serves as an important instrument for practicing the vision of a maritime community with a shared future and for advancing the reform of the global ocean governance system. 
。    日报讯（记者赵建、崔丛丛）近日，省召开民主党派调研协商座谈会。从会上获悉，近两年，各民主党派省委围绕“深入推进京津冀协同发展”开展联合调研，今年甄选确定21个课题，涉及北京（京津冀）国际科技创新中心建设、提升京津冀通勤和出行便利化保障水平、深化京津冀生物医药全产业链协同创新发展等领域，目前已有6篇调研报告报送民主党派中央，以参政履职实效服务协同发展大局。“联合调研是民主党派参政议政的制度性安排，每年由各民主党派省委围绕一个主题，结合自身优势从不同方面开展调研，形成高质量调研成果并报送民主党派中央，借助高层建言‘直通车’渠道，在服务保障重大国家战略实施的同时，助力更好地发展自己。”省委统战部有关负责人介绍。据了解，2025年，联合调研甄选确定15个课题。其中，民革省委“应对人口发展新常态”、民盟省委“京津冀协同推进抗洪用洪”、民建省委“推进京津冀自贸区协同发展”、农工党省委“‘十五五’时期推进京津冀协同发展”等4篇调研报告，被民主党派中央采用并以建言“直通车”形式呈报，得到相关部委研究。各民主党派省委将界别优势与重大国家战略、发展需求紧密对接，主动契合党派中央关注，结合省实际谋划课题切入点。2025年以来，在各民主党派省委努力下，各民主党派中央围绕“京津冀协同发展”“盐碱地综合开发利用”“推进国际科技创新中心建设”“完善生态环境基准体系”等课题来省考察调研达36批次。其中，农工党中央先后两次围绕“深化京津冀生物医药全产业链协同创新发展”到石家庄、秦皇岛、沧州等地调研座谈，为省相关领域工作开展赢得了关注。同时，各民主党派省委分别成立由主委任组长的调研指导组和课题组，加强与政府相关部门、高校、科研院所等合作，深入开展行业论证、学术研讨，促进信息共享、意见互换，形成各类资源有效整合、各方力量互动配合、各种优势有机结合的调研合力。

二 | 民进省委在调研报告修改阶段建立“周推进”机制，课题组向京津冀交通部门、课题领域专家等开展多轮咨询，根据反馈情况完善框架与数据。九三学社省委结合参与九三学社中央“科学座谈会”对调研成果进行研讨论证，不断优化对策建议。

三 | 为更好推进联合调研，省委统战部组织召开选题会、推进会、协商会，积极协调省市县有关部门精选考察地点、全力配合调研，协调省发改委提供需国家层面支持解决的事项20个。在今年联合调研成果协商阶段，就21个调研报告向省发改委、省教育厅、省科技厅等部门广泛征求意见建议共计35条，为各民主党派完善调研报告提供了有价值的参考。立足“十五五”新起点，省委统战部将结合民主党派中央重点关注工作和省委中心工作，与各民主党派省委一起，谋划实施联合调研课题。

Current article:http://www.deshabisaoguonouzuo.cfd/list_6pmvdf/t46.htm

Published on:12:51:07