[Case Summary]This case is a case of state compensation (administrative compensation). Zhang Qiang died of illness while serving his sentence in the ** County Detention Center. His family member, Xiao Xue, entrusted Henglu Law Firm to handle the case.Yuan HangThe lawyer defended the rights of the victim. The public security organ refused to compensate on the grounds of the victim's own illness, and the review decision upheld the original decision. The core dispute is whether the detention center neglected its duties and whether there is a causal relationship between the death and the supervision. The lawyer argued that the detention center's delay in treatment constituted dereliction of duty. The court determined that the public security organ neglected its duties and should bear 10% of the compensation responsibility, revoked the decision not to compensate, and ordered the payment of death compensation, funeral expenses, living expenses, and mental damage compensation totaling 240,284.4 yuan. Legal provisions applied: the State Compensation Law and the Regulations on Detention Centers.

I. Review of the Case

"Can family members apply for state compensation if a loved one dies in a detention center?" and "Who is responsible for the delay in treatment during detention?" are the most worrying questions for families. Xiao Xue and Zhang Qiang are a couple from Guizhou. Zhang Qiang was sentenced to one year in prison for selling national government documents and was serving his sentence in ** County Detention Center. On November 28, 2022, Zhang Qiang died from multiple organ infections and myocarditis leading to multiple organ dysfunction syndrome.

Zhang Qiang suffered from abdominal pain and burning sensation from November 3, 2022. He was treated and prescribed medication on November 6, but returned home. On November 24, he experienced abdominal pain and vomiting again, and could barely walk. He was sent to the hospital for treatment on November 26 and was diagnosed as critically ill. He was pronounced dead on November 28. Xiao Xue repeatedly reminded and urged him to seek medical treatment, but her requests were ignored. To seek justice, Xiao Xue entrusted someone to file a lawsuit against the hospital on her behalf.Yuan HangThe lawyer defended his rights. The public security bureau issued a "Decision on Not Granting State Compensation" on the grounds of his own illness, and the decision was upheld in the review process.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus 1: Whether there is a causal relationship between the death and the supervision of the detention center.Was the death caused by a delay in treatment?
  • Focus 2: Whether the guards neglected to fulfill their duty of providing medical treatment.Not sending the patient to the hospital in time and not informing the family whether the patient needs hospitalization constitutes administrative omission of duty.
  • Focus Three: The proportion of liability for compensation.How to divide the responsibilities between the patient's own illness and the regulatory authorities' negligence in supervision?

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The claimant (family member) alleges that:Before Zhang Qiang was admitted to the detention center, he was in good health. However, after he fell ill, the detention center failed to inform his relatives, did not recommend medical parole, and neglected to perform its duties. The delay in treatment led to his death, for which the detention center should bear responsibility and pay compensation for death, funeral expenses, living expenses, and damages for mental distress.

The compensation-liable authority (the Public Security Bureau) argued that:Zhang Qiang's death was caused by his own illness. The detention center sent him to the hospital for treatment in time and fulfilled its duties, so no state compensation will be granted.

Legal Opinion by Hengluo Law Firm:Yuan HangThe lawyer argued based on the "State Compensation Law" and the "Regulations on Detention Centers" that Zhang Qiang was in good health when he was admitted to the detention center, but the detention center failed to inform his relatives or recommend medical parole after he fell ill, which constituted administrative omission; Zhang Qiang was unable to decide on medical treatment, and the detention center should bear the obligation to provide medical treatment. Combined with evidence such as the "Autopsy Notification Letter", audio recordings, phone reminder records, and hospital videos, Zhang Qiang's death was caused by the detention center's deliberate delay in treatment and dereliction of duty, which had a direct causal relationship with the supervision. Therefore, the detention center should bear the responsibility for state compensation.

IV. Outcome of the case

The court adopted the lawyer's opinion and held that according to Article 26 of the "Regulations on Detention Centers", when sending the patient to the hospital, the doctor mentioned the need for further examination, but the accompanying personnel failed to respond actively, thereby missing the opportunity. The public security bureau was negligent in performing its duties. Zhang Qiang's condition clearly worsened, but he was still not sent to the hospital in time. It is possible that the failure to send him to the hospital in time led to his death, so it should be concluded that the public security bureau had certain supervisory faults and should bear compensation liability. Considering that Zhang Qiang had a history of illness and his death was mainly due to his own reasons, the court determined that the public security bureau should bear 10% of the compensation liability. In accordance with the "State Compensation Law" and relevant judicial interpretations, the court ruled to revoke the "Decision on Refusing State Compensation" and the "Decision on Criminal Compensation Review", and ordered the public security bureau to pay Xiao Xue's death compensation, funeral expenses, living expenses, and mental damage compensation totaling 240,284.4 yuan.

5. Hengluo Law Firm's Reminder

The right to life of detainees is protected by law, and detention authorities have the obligation to provide timely medical treatment. If a detainee dies due to negligence in supervision, the family can apply for state compensation according to the law. This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm [Yuan HangThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101202110286151, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acted as the agent. In this case, the lawyer used the argument of dereliction of duty and causality to help the family obtain state compensation.

VI. Common Questions and Answers about State Compensation Cases

  1. Q: Can family members apply for state compensation if a relative dies in a detention center?
    A: If the detention authority fails to perform its duties and the delay in treatment is causally related to the death, the victim may apply for state compensation according to law, and the compensation obligation organ shall pay the corresponding compensation.
  2. Q: Is compensation provided if death is caused by one's own illness?
    A: If the insured's own illness is the main cause, the insurer may reduce the compensation ratio at its discretion, but if the regulator is at fault, it should still bear corresponding compensation liability.
  3. Q: What should I do if I'm not satisfied with the decision not to grant compensation?
    A: You can apply for a review to the higher-level authority. If you are not satisfied with the review result, you can apply to the court's compensation committee to make a compensation decision.
  4. Q: What items are included in state compensation?
    A: It generally includes death compensation, funeral expenses, living expenses, and compensation for mental distress, etc., which are determined in accordance with the "State Compensation Law".
  5. Q: Is it a dereliction of duty if the detention authority fails to send the detainee to the hospital in time?
    A: If a detained person is in a critical condition but is not sent to the hospital in time or informed of the situation to his/her family, it is generally considered that the authorities have neglected to fulfill their supervisory duties and should bear corresponding responsibilities.