Thread by @PM_Thornton

澎湃 on the overturning of the Henan High Court's decision on compensation for 吴春红： “a rare case in which the Supreme Court has changed its judgment on the compensation decision of the Provincial High Court." 最高法为何将吴春红精神损害抚慰金增加52万元？thepaper.cn/newsDetail_for…

Wu Chunhong's case was described by The Economist in this article last year: Righting wrongs – #China is growing more willing to review dodgy convictions economist.com/china/2020/07/…

Wu Chunhong, a villager from Henan who was convicted of the intentional homicide of a 3 year-old boy, had his conviction overturned due to insufficient evidence after spending 16 years in detention "as the chain of evidence in his case was not complete to prove his conviction".

Upon his release, Wu filed for more than 18.72 million yuan ($2.64 million) in compensation to the Henan High People's Court, including 9.73 million yuan for wrongful detention & 5 million yuan for mental anguish.

The court awarded Wu a less amount-- total compensation of just over 2.62 million yuan, including 1.94 million yuan for wrongful imprisonment, and 680,000 yuan for mental anguish; and issued a formal apology, but rejected his other claims.

However, the Supreme Court has awarded Wu 1.2 million yuan, an increase of 520,000 yuan, an amount that exceeds 60% of the total compensation, the first time it has done so since issuing new guidelines on assessing state liability for mental anguish claims.

In arriving at its decision, the Supreme Court said it had taken into account that fact that Wu had been detained more than 15 years; that his ability to work had been curtailed, leaving his family in poverty; the long and tortuous criminal appeals process;

In addition, Wu now suffers from a range of ailments, including blindness in one eye, all of which are detrimental to his quality of life, and now requires daily care.

Although the court concluded that the liability of the provincial court's misjudgement and wrongful detention did not extend to Wu's current helth circumstances, "due consideration should be given when determining the specific amount of relief on grounds of mental anguish.”