Home > News content

Should Huawei be responsible for the detention of former employee Li Hongyuan? There are many differences in the field of law

via:CnBeta     time:2019/12/3 1:00:39     readed:37

In the case of Li Hongyuan, a former employee, who was detained for severance compensation, Huawei's practice was criticized by many parties.In 2018, Li Hongyuan, a former employee of Huawei's network energy inverter business, was reported by Huawei for leaking trade secrets and extortion after receiving 300000 yuan of severance compensation from his former colleague's private account. After Li Hongyuan was detained and arrested for 251 days, Shenzhen procuratorate decided not to prosecute him due to unclear criminal facts and insufficient evidence. In October this year, Li Hongyuan received more than 100000 yuan of state compensation.

In an exclusive interview with extreme day, Li Hongyuan said that the most direct basis he provided to the police was a recording of more than two hours. The recording content was the process of negotiating the compensation amount with the relevant person in charge of Huawei's human resources department, proving that he didn't blackmail the compensation amount by "reporting fraud". "My suffering has always been a case of injustice.". His wife told the surging news that she had not yet considered whether she would sue Huawei and hoped the other party would apologize.

On the evening of December 2, Huawei responded to the Li Hongyuan incident, saying that "Huawei has the right and obligation to report the suspected illegal acts to the judicial authorities based on the facts. We respect the decisions of the judiciary, including the public security organs, the procuratorates and the courts. If Li Hongyuan thinks his rights and interests have been damaged, we support him to use legal weapons to protect his rights and interests, including suing Huawei. This also embodies the spirit of the rule of law that everyone is equal before the law ".

Should Huawei bear the corresponding legal responsibility for the detention of Li Hongyuan? There are big differences among senior lawyers.

Mr. You Yunting, senior partner of Shanghai Dabang law firm, pointed out to Sina law, "I think Mr. Li can investigate the legal liability of false accusation and frame up to Huawei and relevant responsible persons, including criminal liability and civil liability. Criminal liability refers to that Huawei staff, knowing that it does not constitute extortion to infringe business secrets, still report to the public security organ The relevant procuratorial organ shall bear the corresponding criminal responsibility for providing false report materials, which violates the criminal law. Civil liability refers to that Huawei and its staff can be held responsible for the economic loss compensation if they falsely accuse Mr. Li of causing personal injury. "

However, lawyer Yang Zhaoquan, director of Beijing wino law office, disagreed, saying to Sina FAQ, "Huawei reported to the public security bureau that employees were held in innocent custody for 251 days. Huawei's behavior is undoubtedly despised and outraged morally. However, Huawei will not bear civil or criminal liability. Although the reason for the detention of employees is Huawei, whether they are closed or not is the judgment and decision made by the public security organ based on the evidence. The final responsibility, of course, lies with the decision-making organ. As long as Huawei does not forge evidence and Huawei staff do not provide false testimony, Huawei will not constitute a false accusation. Huawei's civil liability has no legal and factual basis. "

Lawyer Zeng Jie, partner of Guangqiang law firm and director of the center for the defense and research of illegal fund-raising crime, thinks, "first of all, the false accusation and frame up must be the intentional so-called false accusation and frame up crime, which refers to the act of fabricating facts, making false accusations, intending to frame up others and making others subject to criminal investigation. The intention here must be that the actor has a positive intention subjectively, and has a false act of reporting and fabricating facts objectively. This subjective intention is different from the reporter's wrong understanding of law and fact.

For example, "I don't know the law, I think I've been blackmailed, I'm just reporting to the police to try", which is not the subjective intention of false accusation and frame up. Therefore, in this case, the most crucial evidence for whether the reporter constitutes a false accusation or frame up depends on whether the materials for reporting the case, including physical evidence, documentary evidence and records are deliberately falsified. This case is the stage of examination and prosecution, and the prosecution decides not to prosecute. This means that Mr. Li's lawyer has obtained all the file materials of this case. If there is evidence suspected of false accusation and frame up by the reporter in these materials, Mr. Li can entrust a lawyer to organize materials and evidence to actively report and provide evidence.

From the civil point of view, it is quite difficult for Mr. Li to file a lawsuit to claim compensation. First, Mr. Li was wrongly detained, and the compensation for the loss of personal freedom has been borne by the relevant procuratorate. Second, other losses, including the loss of expected income, can not be counted as direct losses, but only as indirect losses. At present, there are no relevant laws and regulations in China There are clear regulations. "

Lawyer's Tip: how to deal with disputes with the company due to dismissal?

As an ordinary employee, if there is a labor dispute with the company due to dismissal, what evidence should be collected? Lawyer you Yunting pointed out that the evidence of signing the labor contract, such as the original contract, attendance records, social security evidence, payroll and other allowance records, should be collected by the parties concerned. At the same time, in addition to the relevant recording, wechat, email, attendance form, other evidences for the service of the unit, such as the contract signed by the agent, the power of attorney given by the unit, etc., also have legal effect.

He reminded that in labor disputes involving dismissal and layoff, the most likely dispute is the illegal termination against the will of employees, such as the termination of the labor contract when the unit does not pay the termination compensation. If this happens, employees can defend their rights through arbitration or complain to the labor law enforcement team.

With regard to "N 1" and "2 N", what circumstances can employees make appropriate compensation? Yu Yunting's lawyer pointed out that, mainly in accordance with the labor contract law, if the contract is terminated under legal circumstances, such as the expiration of medical treatment, the inability to work twice, and the failure to notify workers 30 days in advance, the economic compensation shall be N. 1. If the labor contract is rescinded illegally, it is the usual termination contract that does not meet the legal conditions. The employee has the right to ask the unit to pay 2n compensation, or to require the unit to continue to perform the labor contract. The outcome of the relevant compensation negotiations should form a separation compensation agreement.

China IT News APP

Download China IT News APP

Please rate this news

The average score will be displayed after you score.

Post comment

Do not see clearly? Click for a new code.

User comments