[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, after an application for government information disclosure is rejected, one can apply for administrative reconsideration or file an administrative lawsuit in accordance with the law. According to Article 30 of the "Regulations on the Disclosure of Government Information of the People's Republic of China" (Decree No. 711 of the State Council, implemented on May 15, 2019), the administrative organ shall respond within 20 working days from the date of receipt of the application; Article 32 stipulates that if the information involves the privacy of third parties, the administrative organ shall seek opinions in writing; Article 37 stipulates that if the information can be processed separately, the administrative organ shall provide the applicant with the parts that can be disclosed. The key to protecting rights lies in verifying whether the reasons such as "the information does not exist" and "involving the privacy of third parties" are valid, and whether the administrative organ has fulfilled its obligation to conduct reasonable searches. One can apply for reconsideration within 60 days from the date of receiving the response, or file a lawsuit within six months. For more details, please refer to the following link:Legal services for land expropriation and demolition, and administrative litigation.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

In scenarios such as land expropriation and demolition, project approval, and fund disbursement, parties often obtain materials such as expropriation announcements, compensation plans, and proof of fund availability through government information disclosure requests, in order to verify the legality of the project and support subsequent rights protection. In practice, applications are often rejected for various reasons: administrative authorities claim that "the information cannot be found"; refuse to disclose information on the grounds of involving third-party rights or personal privacy; return applications on the grounds that the information does not fall within the authority's disclosure responsibilities or that the application content is unclear; or only provide partial materials and refuse to disclose key documents across the board. Many parties do not know how to proceed after receiving the response, missing the 60-day appeal period and six-month litigation period, resulting in passive rights protection. For cases involving the recovery of expropriation compensation, parties can combine the following measures:Creditor-debtor relations and enforcement case servicesCoordinate and promote progress in an integrated manner.

II. Key points of contention

The focus of such disputes centers on three points. First, whether the claim of "information not existing" is true: If the administrative organ merely states in general terms that the information does not exist after searching, without specifying the scope of the search, the search method, or the search tools, it is unclear whether the administrative organ has fulfilled its obligation to conduct a reasonable and careful search, which is the primary issue reviewed by the reconsideration organ and the court. Second, protection of third-party privacy and differentiated processing: If the information contains third-party rights or personal privacy, the administrative organ should seek the third party's opinion in writing. Where the information can be processed in a differentiated manner, the administrative organ should provide the applicant with the parts that can be disclosed, and only conceal or omit the content that cannot be disclosed. It is unlawful to simply refuse to disclose the information in its entirety. Third, procedures and deadlines: Whether the response is made within 20 working days, whether the extension of the deadline is approved, and whether the reconsideration and litigation are filed within the statutory time limits. In the judicial practice of the Beijing region, the review of the administrative organ's obligation to provide evidence in reconsideration and administrative litigation has become increasingly strict, and the number of cases where the administrative organ is revoked for refusing to provide evidence in a general manner has significantly increased.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

Attorney He Ningning once represented a case of government information disclosure review: The client, Liu ***, whose house was located within the scope of the overall development and transformation project of a village in Luoyang City, only received part of the resettlement transitional allowance after the house was expropriated. To verify the legality of the expropriation project and clarify the insufficient payment of the transitional allowance, on April 13, 2026, Liu *** submitted a request for government information disclosure to the district people's government, requesting the disclosure of five materials, including the house expropriation announcement, the resettlement compensation plan and announcement, the proof of the availability of resettlement compensation funds, the proof of the availability of transitional allowance funds and their disbursement situation, and the transitional allowance disbursement ledger. After receiving the request, the district government extended the response deadline and issued the "Reply Letter on Government Information Disclosure Application" on June 8, 2026, providing only the text of the compensation and resettlement plan, claiming that three pieces of information did not exist, and refusing to disclose all materials related to the transitional allowance on the grounds of involving third-party rights and personal privacy. Attorney He Ningning argued that: According to Article 36(4) of the "Regulations on Government Information Disclosure", the administrative organ should provide evidence to explain the search process when claiming that the information does not exist; According to Article 32 of the "Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law", the full availability of compensation funds is a prerequisite for expropriation, and the disclosure of funds and disbursement materials is a necessary condition for the client to safeguard their compensation rights; According to Articles 32 and 37 of the "Regulations on Government Information Disclosure", personal privacy information should be handled with written consent from the third party and differentiated treatment should be applied. Refusing to disclose all materials directly violates Article 37 of the "Regulations on Government Information Disclosure". Subsequently, Attorney He Ningning represented Liu *** to file an administrative review with the Luoyang Municipal People's Government, requesting the revocation of the reply letter and ordering a new response. After review, the review organ found that the district government had fulfilled its reasonable and cautious search obligation for the three pieces of information that did not exist, but the transitional allowance funds availability proof was an overall fund settlement document and did not involve personal privacy. The disbursement ledger and allocation records could also be handled with anonymized and de-identified methods to differentiate and process them. Directly refusing to disclose all materials violated Article 37 of the "Regulations on Government Information Disclosure", and the "one-size-fits-all" approach in the reply letter was legally revoked. The case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.He NingningThe attorney (practice certificate number: 11101202511925103, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The legal basis includes Article 30 of the "Regulations on the Disclosure of Government Information of the People's Republic of China" (State Council Decree No. 711, implemented on May 15, 2019) (replies within 20 working days, and the deadline may be extended by no more than 20 working days with approval), Article 32 (third-party opinions), Article 36 (replies), and Article 37 (differential treatment); the provisions of the "Administrative Review Law of the People's Republic of China" (amended in 2023 and implemented on January 1, 2024) on applying for review within 60 days from the date of knowing the administrative act; and the provisions of the "Administrative Litigation Law of the People's Republic of China" (amended on June 27, 2017) on a direct suing period of six months. Practical suggestions: When applying, try to specify the document name, document number, and acquisition method as clearly as possible; after receiving the reply, check the deadline, reasons, and scope of provision item by item; for "information not existing," you can request an explanation of the search method and apply for correction; for refusal to answer involving privacy, you can claim differential treatment; apply for review within 60 days or sue within six months, and simultaneously fix supporting materials such as collection announcements and compensation plans. For criminal violation clues, you can combine them with other materials.Criminal defense and criminal case filing servicesJudge it separately.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Reminder

The disclosure of government information is a fundamental means of obtaining evidence for rights protection in expropriation cases. A rejected response does not mean the end of the process. Parties should pay attention to three points: First, keep track of deadlines. If the 60-day review period and the six-month litigation period pass, they may lose their remedies. Second, focus on the "reason" rather than emotions. They should verify and check whether the obligations of retrieving information, distinguishing between different types of handling, and ensuring the availability of third-party procedures are fulfilled. Third, coordinate the progress of information disclosure with compensation negotiations, investigation applications, and litigation procedures to avoid working in isolation. If the response is vague or key materials are denied, it is recommended to engage professional lawyers as soon as possible to apply pressure through multiple channels, including review, litigation, or applications for official investigations.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If the government rejects the request for disclosure of information, can one win the appeal or lawsuit against it?

Whether support can be obtained depends on whether the reasons for the response are tenable. If the administrative organ merely states in general terms that "the information does not exist" without being able to explain the scope and method of the search, or refuses to respond to the information that can be processed separately, the review organ and the court will usually determine that it has failed to perform its duties in accordance with the law and applied the law incorrectly, and there is a high possibility of revoking or ordering a new response; if the response is factually clear, the procedure is legal, and the processing is properly differentiated, there is a high possibility of maintaining it. The outcome of the case depends on the facts, evidence, and application of the law, and no one can unilaterally guarantee victory or defeat. It is recommended to first obtain a written response and a search explanation, and then evaluate the protection plan.

Q2: What evidence do I need to prepare for protecting my rights?

The core materials include: an application form for government information disclosure and mailing receipts (to prove the application time and content); a written reply issued by the administrative organ (to prove the reasons and time limit for the reply); the announcement of the expropriation and compensation plan for the project involved (the supporting information should exist); the expropriation compensation agreement or the record of transitional fee payment (to prove the interest relationship); and the communication records of the reply being overdue or refused. The materials should be organized around the four points of "I have an interest relationship—the information should exist—the reasons for the reply are not valid—I seek remedies according to legal procedures", forming a complete chain.

Q3: If I hire a lawyer to handle the appeal or litigation, what would the approximate cost be?

Administrative reconsideration itself does not charge fees. For the first-instance litigation of administrative cases, the litigation fees are paid according to the "Method for the Payment of Litigation Fees", generally 50 yuan per case for general administrative cases, and 100 yuan per case for trademark, patent, and maritime administrative cases, which shall be borne by the losing party. Lawyer's fees are determined through negotiation between the law firm and the client based on the complexity of the case, the workload, and the amount of the subject matter, usually charged on a per-case or per-stage basis, with no unified government pricing. Some cases can be incorporated into the main case of compensation collection for joint processing, thereby spreading the cost. It is recommended to clarify the charging items, stages, and refund conditions with the law firm before entrusting them, and to evaluate the expected benefits and costs to initiate the procedure rationally.

Q4: How long does it usually take from applying to receiving the results?

The pace of the process depends on the choice of procedures. The administrative organ has a response period of 20 working days, which can be extended by no more than 20 working days upon approval; for those who are not satisfied with the response and apply for reconsideration, the reconsideration organ generally makes a decision within 60 days from the date of acceptance, and the period may be extended by 30 days if the case is complex; for those who directly file an administrative lawsuit, the first-instance ordinary procedure shall be concluded within six months, and the summary procedure shall be concluded within 45 days; for appeal cases, the second-instance procedure generally takes three months. Looking at the whole process, simple cases may take several months, and complex cases may span over multiple years. It is recommended to initiate the process in a timely manner within the statutory time limit to avoid delaying it and missing the opportunity.

Q5: What exactly should I do in the first step?

It is recommended to proceed in four steps: First, submit an application for information disclosure in writing, specifying the document name, document number, and acquisition method, and retain the mailing receipt; Second, after receiving the reply, check the reply deadline, reasons, and scope of provision item by item, and record reasons such as "non-existence" and "involving privacy"; Third, within 60 days from the date of knowing the reply, apply for administrative reconsideration to the reconsideration organ, or initiate administrative litigation to the people's court with jurisdiction within six months; Fourth, simultaneously organize supporting materials such as the expropriation announcement, compensation plan, and transitional fee records, and, if necessary, engage a lawyer to conduct an evaluation. For cases involving land expropriation and demolition, multiple approaches, such as applying for investigation, can also be used to advance the process.

The above answer is based on the judicial practice in Beijing. The judicial interpretation in other provinces and cities may vary. For specific cases, please refer to the local rules and evidence situation.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Land expropriation and demolition legal services·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If a dispute arises, please consult a practicing lawyer in a timely manner.