您的位置: 首页 » 法律资料网 » 法律法规 »

浙江省预防和制止家庭暴力条例

时间:2024-05-11 15:32:11 来源: 法律资料网 作者:法律资料网 阅读:8197
下载地址: 点击此处下载

浙江省预防和制止家庭暴力条例

浙江省人大常委会


浙江省预防和制止家庭暴力条例
——(2010年9月30日浙江省第十一届人民代表大会常务委员会第二十次会议通过)


  第一条 为了预防和制止家庭暴力,保护家庭成员合法权益,维护平等、和睦、文明的家庭关系,根据有关法律、行政法规的规定,结合本省实际,制定本条例。
  第二条 本省行政区域内预防和制止家庭暴力,适用本条例。
  第三条 本条例所称家庭暴力,是指行为人以殴打、捆绑、残害、强行限制人身自由或者其他手段,给其家庭成员的身体、精神等方面造成伤害后果的行为。
本条例所称家庭成员,是指配偶、父母、子女以及其他共同生活的家庭组成人员。
  第四条 家庭成员间应当相互尊重、相互爱护、相互扶持。禁止任何形式的家庭暴力。
  预防和制止家庭暴力,应当坚持预防为主、综合治理、教育与处罚相结合的原则。
  第五条 预防和制止家庭暴力是全社会的共同责任。
  任何单位和个人都有权对正在发生的家庭暴力予以劝阻、制止。
  第六条 各级人民政府应当加强对预防和制止家庭暴力工作的领导,将预防和制止家庭暴力工作作为精神文明建设和社会治安综合治理工作的内容。
预防和制止家庭暴力工作经费由政府财政依法予以保障。
  第七条 县级以上人民政府设立预防和制止家庭暴力委员会或者确定相应机构,负责组织、协调、指导、督促本地区有关部门、单位开展预防和制止家庭暴力工作。
设立预防和制止家庭暴力委员会的,其办事机构设在同级妇女联合会,负责日常工作。
  第八条 公安、民政、司法行政等部门及老龄工作机构应当按照各自职责,做好预防和制止家庭暴力工作。
  妇女联合会、工会、共青团、残疾人联合会及老年人组织等,应当结合各自工作对象的特点,做好预防和制止家庭暴力工作。
  乡(镇)人民政府、街道办事处应当做好辖区内家庭暴力的预防、调解、制止和对受害人的救助工作。
  第九条 各级人民政府应当将预防和制止家庭暴力法律、法规宣传纳入普法工作范围,加强预防和制止家庭暴力的法制宣传教育工作,提高公民预防和制止家庭暴力的法律意识。
  新闻媒体应当采用多种形式,宣传健康文明的家庭风尚和家庭美德,引导全社会树立正确的家庭伦理观念,加强对家庭暴力的舆论监督,营造预防和制止家庭暴力的社会氛围。
  第十条 机关、团体、企业事业单位应当做好本单位的预防和制止家庭暴力工作,及时调解本单位工作人员的家庭纠纷;对家庭暴力行为人给予批评教育,责令改正,并视情节轻重给予相应处理。
  村(居)民委员会应当做好辖区内的预防和制止家庭暴力工作,开展文明家庭创建活动,宣传家庭暴力防范和自我保护的知识。
  人民调解组织应当依法及时调解家庭纠纷,做好家庭矛盾的化解工作。
  第十一条 家庭暴力受害人可以直接或者委托他人向村(居)民委员会、乡镇(街道)综合治理机构、司法所、家庭暴力行为人或者受害人所在单位、妇女联合会、工会、共青团、残疾人联合会及老年人组织等投诉或者求助,也可以向公安机关报案。
  第十二条 接到家庭暴力投诉、求助的单位,应当及时受理,并进行调解和疏导,如实记录家庭暴力行为人的施暴情况和受害人的受害情况。
  对正在实施的家庭暴力,受理投诉、求助的单位应当及时劝阻和制止;事态严重,劝阻、制止无效的,应当及时向公安机关报案。
  第十三条 公安机关应当将涉及家庭暴力的报案纳入110报警服务受理范围,接到家庭暴力报案后,应当及时出警予以制止,并制作处警记录。
公安机关应当在调查取证后根据不同情况,依法对家庭暴力案件作出下列处理:
  (一)情节轻微的,对家庭暴力行为人给予批评教育,告知其实施家庭暴力的法律责任,防止事态扩大;
  (二)违反治安管理规定的,依据《中华人民共和国治安管理处罚法》予以处罚;
  (三)涉嫌犯罪的,及时立案侦查,依法追究刑事责任;属于刑事自诉案件的,告知受害人或者其法定代理人、近亲属向有管辖权的人民法院起诉。
  第十四条 人民法院审理涉及家庭暴力的婚姻案件,对受害人请求损害赔偿的,应当依法予以支持;对符合司法救助条件的家庭暴力受害人,应当依法提供司法救助。
  诉讼期间,家庭暴力案件的受害人因客观原因不能自行收集相关证据而申请人民法院调查收集的,人民法院应当依法调查收集。
  第十五条 诉讼期间,家庭暴力行为人对受害人继续施暴或者以暴力相威胁妨碍诉讼正常进行的,人民法院应当依法及时采取强制措施,保护受害人的人身安全。
  第十六条 人民检察院对公安机关、人民法院办理家庭暴力案件,依法进行监督。
  第十七条 法律援助机构、法律服务机构及其从业人员,应当为符合法律援助条件的家庭暴力受害人提供法律援助。
  司法鉴定机构应当及时受理家庭暴力受害人的伤情鉴定申请,依法出具鉴定结论,并按规定对经济确有困难的受害人减免鉴定费用。
  第十八条 家庭暴力受害人因客观原因不能或者不便向人民法院起诉的,妇女联合会、工会、共青团、残疾人联合会及老年人组织等应当为其向人民法院起诉提供支持和帮助。
  第十九条 监护人对被监护人实施家庭暴力,严重侵犯被监护人合法权益的,其他有监护资格的人、单位可以向人民法院起诉要求变更监护关系或者要求监护人承担相应的法律责任。
  第二十条 医疗机构接诊家庭暴力受害人时,应当做好诊疗记录;对疑因家庭暴力造成重伤或者死亡的,应当及时向公安机关报案。
公安机关、人民检察院、人民法院调查取证时,医疗机构应当据实出具诊断、治疗证明。
  第二十一条 中小学校、幼儿园和其他教育机构,应当为遭受家庭暴力的未成年人提供保护和帮助;必要时,将有关情况及时告知相关单位、组织或者向公安机关报案。
  第二十二条 县级以上人民政府应当指定或者建立庇护场所,为家庭暴力受害人提供庇护和其他必要的临时性紧急救助。
  第二十三条 县级以上妇女联合会应当设置家庭暴力投诉举报电话,及时受理有关家庭暴力的投诉、举报,为家庭暴力受害人提供心理、法律咨询。
  有条件的地方,应当建立公安、民政、司法行政、卫生等部门和老龄工作机构、妇女联合会、工会、共青团、残疾人联合会等参与的协作机制,对经常实施家庭暴力的行为人给予心理疏导、行为矫治,为家庭暴力受害人提供法律咨询、医疗救治、心理疏导等服务。
  必要时,有关部门和组织可以对已经调解、处理的家庭暴力案件开展回访工作,预防家庭暴力案件再次发生。
  鼓励和支持公民、法人和其他组织为家庭暴力受害人提供救助服务。
  第二十四条 各级人民政府对预防和制止家庭暴力工作有突出贡献的单位和个人,应当予以表彰和奖励。
  第二十五条 家庭暴力行为人和受害人所在单位、村(居)民委员会以及妇女联合会、工会、共青团、残疾人联合会等,对家庭暴力的投诉、求助不及时受理、调解,对正在实施的家庭暴力不及时劝阻、制止或者向公安机关报案的,由有关部门或者所在单位对直接责任人员给予批评教育,责令改正,并视情节轻重给予相应处分。
负有制止、处理家庭暴力法定职责的国家机关及其工作人员,对家庭暴力不及时制止或者不依法处理的,由有关部门对直接责任人员给予批评教育,视情节轻重给予相应处分;构成犯罪的,依法追究刑事责任。
  第二十六条 本条例自2011年1月1日起施行。



Stratic Advice on Intellectual Property Investment in Asia

苏冉


IssueⅠ: Legal framework of protection on software copyright in P.R.C and Singapore
A) P.R.C
In conjunction with China’s astonishing economic growth over the past two decades, especially after the entrance to WTO, China has steadily improved its legal framework on Software Copyright by checking and clearing large-scale regulations both in domestic and international activities.
Frankly speaking, China joined in three vital international treaties relate to copyright: the Berne Convention , TRIPs and Universal Copyright Convention. Moreover, China and US signed MOU especially for software in January 1992. All these Conventions are regarded as a milestone to reflect China’s dramatic promotion and strong determination to build a satisfactory environment for foreign software investors.
Similarly to US, P.R.C has chosen to protect software under copyright law rather than trademark, patent, or contract law. One year after Copyright Law Amendment in 2001, Chinese Council corrected its software-specific “Computer Software Protection Rules” , to deal with new problems prevailing in software protection nowadays. Under the Rule, software is defined as two particular types: computer program and their relevant documentation. Furthermore, since MOU came into force, computer software is protected as a literary work. Third, according to the conditional nation treatment here, foreigners are required to comply with “connecting factor”, to sum up, either first publication or nationality/residence of the author in China or in any of these countries ,between the work and China or a country who is a member of the WTO, or the Berne Convention. So, despite your software products first being published in US, you can still enjoy the original copyright and the legal protection on in China.
Except from the above rules, other laws also have supportive stipulation on the protection of software copyrights as follows:
(a)The General Principle of Civil Law, the country’s current basic civil law, has authorized the author’s copyright in general;
(b)The Criminal Code has a section of articles referring to piracy offences, with “Dual Punishment Principle” in front of copyright encroachment;
(c)The newly amended Foreign Trade Law (adopted in Feb).

B) Singapore
The general legal framework of software copyright protection in Singapore is almost the same as P.R.C, but with some characteristics of its own. Actually, different from P.R.C based on Civil law background, laws and litigations in Singapore are principally modeled on the English system under Common law system till nowadays. Pursuant to certain legal revolutions, modern copyright legislation contains the same international conventions as P.R.C: the Berne Conventions, Universal Copyright Convention, and TRIPs. But, Singapore signed ASEAN Framework on Intellectual Property Cooperation and the WIPO Copyright Treaty as a member of ASEAN. Turning to its domestic laws, the latest Copyright Act 1999(revised edition) is the principle one, with some other relevant regulations for enforcement. And it also definites software program into literary work under protection. In addition, Singapore owes large resources of case laws so as to make its legal conditions more particular than that in P.R.C.
The amended Act is first purposed to address issues arising from the use of copyright materials in a digital environment, especially provide legal certainty for the use of copyright in cyberspace. For instance, the extension of concept “reproduction” .Second, the Act plays another role in enhancing performer’s rights, offering two new defenses to allegations of copyright infringement. Therefore, merely surfing the Web doesn’t constitute software copyright infringement, if it’s necessary to browse. Even , Singapore passed the Electronic Transactions Act 1998 to give statutory protection of Network Service Providers. At these points, Singapore seemingly forwards a step further than P.R.C, declining its attention on encouraging the growth of a knowledge-based economy and promoting E-commerce and creative innovations. Last but the most significant point, Singapore and the United State signed a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) on May 6th 2003, and entered it into force from January 1st 2004. Virtually, this is the first FTA between US and an Asia country .So it’s doubtlessly the greatest advantage for Singapore to attract US investors, apart from other Asian countries. They would encourage the entrepreneurship, investment, job creation and growth in our own technology, science and creative industries as well as set the stage for Singapore’s emergence as a global IP hub.

Issue Ⅱ: Implementation on Software Copyright Law in P.R.C and Singapore
Sufficient and effective enforcement is more useful and practical than recorded documents, with no exception to P.R.C and Singapore.
(ⅰ)Role of Government
A)P.R.C
Learned from Annual Report on the Protection of Intellectual Property Right in China during the past 5 years by the head officer Jingchuan Wang in TableⅠ , you can see copyright administration at various levels make remarkable progress in encouraging innovation, promoting industrial development, regulating market order, and even improving the opening-up policy.
As a matter of fact, the People’s Courts, the People’s Prosecution Department, National Copyright Administration Centre and Public Security compose the backbone of the implementation of copyright law in China with civil remedies, criminal sensations and administrative punishments, such as fine. And border enforcement assistance to copyright owners by the Customs and Excise Department is also available.
TableⅠ:
The Administration on Software Copyright In P.R.C
Year Registration Prosecute Cases Resolved Cases Resolved Cases Rate Seized Pirates(M) Top 1 Region of Piracy
1999 1,041 1,616 1,515 93.75% 20.14 Shenzhen
2000 3,300 2,457 1,980 95.30% 32.60 Guangdong
2001 4,620 2,683 2,327 97.52% 61.75 Guangdong
2002 4,860 2,740 2,604 99.02% 67.90 Guangdong
2003 5,020 6,120 5,793 97.64% 73.28 Beijing
Statistics from NCAC (National Copyright Administration Centre
Fortunately, China has begun to regard software as an industry with strategic significance while formulating effective policies in areas including anti-piracy and anti-monopoly. To adapt to the legal framework, China has shifted its attention upon educating software users and strengthening the law. “Government departments are being asked to show a good example in using copyrighted software only and make software budget each year”. For example, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong buy over 3,000 software products every year through public bidding. What’s more, the National Software Government Procurement Regulation will probably act in the near future. Eventually, Chinese government is trying to treat all software companies equal in P.R.C, no matter domestic or foreign countries.
Nevertheless, given China’s vast geography and population, it would be an awesome task for the central government to manage pirating activities throughout the entire country. On the other hand, due to lack of resources, the lack of judicial expertise, the unpredictability of trial outcomes, and large costs, litigation in Chinese courts remains a risky and expensive response to Chinese copyright violations. Another administrative difficulty arises from the increasing decentralization of the Chinese government. Much of China's copyright enforcement takes place at the provincial and local levels; the national government lacks the resources and control to effectively monitor nationwide pirating activity and to impose national enforcement policies.

B) Singapore
Switching to Singapore, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) is its senior administration department, and it leads Singapore to the success in copyright infrastructure. Singapore has announced a number of meaningful standards through requirements for tough penalties to combat piracy and counterfeiting, including, in civil cases, procedures for seizure and destruction of pirated and counterfeit products, and a requirement to provide for statutory and actual damages to remedy such practices. There has been a rule in Singapore that government could only allowed to use copyrighted software since 1996. In order to obtain efficiency, Singapore maintain civil remedies and criminal penalties for circumvention of technology protection measures, and it also has in place implementation allowing for border seizures of infringing articles by customs officials. For example, the copyright infringement is punished with a maximum fine of S$100,000 or five years’ imprisonment or both. So, in comparison to P.R.C, the least time for imprisonment is shorter .But due to the judge’s free power under common law system, the court is increasingly harsh in their sentencing in respect of infringement of copyright. In other words, criminal obligation will become heavier with more limitation in Singapore.
In the contrast with Chinese administrative punishments, Singapore has a large scope of interlocutory remedies to fill in the blank area between civil remedies and criminal sensations, and they are three main types:
(a) the interlocutory injunction---It is an injunction obtained before the trail often with the main objective of maintaining the Stats quo between the parties pending the outcome of the trail. The interlocutory injunction may be in a mandatory or prohibitory form.
(b) the Anton Piller Order---It’s developed from Anton Piller KG v.Mfg Processes Ltd as a safeguard system of evidence for avoiding the defendant to destroy and hide the evidence of copyright infringement, if the plaintiff shows an extremely strong prima facie that his right are being interfered with, or the damage, potential or actual are very serious to the plaintiff, or even there must be clear evidence to proof the defendants faults.
(c) the Norwich Pharmacal Order.---The further expansion of Anton Piller Order to raise over the privilege against self-incrimination from Rank Film Distributors Ltd v. Video Information Centre Virtually . However, case law in Singapore has now established that where the privilege against self-incrimination exists, an undertaking from the plaintiff/ applicant not to use the information obtained in criminal proceedings is not an adequate safeguard for the defendant’s privilege against self-crimination. Singapore courts have also held that they don’t have the power to order that the information be inadmissible in any subsequent criminal prosecution.
Relying on common law foundation, people in Singapore prefer to a lawsuit rather than mediation while more mediation in P.R.C, once in the face of a dispute. Consequently, it would like to be more time and energy consuming somehow, for it costs at least one year of a civil procedure in the High Court of Singapore.
Last but not least, along with legsilation changes, Singapore Administration departments are also mounting a public campaign targeting both consumers and businesses to increase their awareness on the benefits and other implications of the new laws. There’s broad-based public awareness initiatives like the HIP Alliance’s year-long anti-piracy campaign? “The Real thing is the Right thing”, and brain Wave, Singapore’s first reality television show on IP.
(ⅱ)Role of Anti- Piracy Organizations
Both P.R.C and Singapore joined in Business Software Alliance (BSA) ,and WIPO several years ago and established domestic anti-piracy alliances at their own respective locality. The alliances played an active part in combating piracy and protecting the interests of right holders. They always declare laws, promulgate routine reports of current protection on TV, newspapers, and Website and show different points between pirate and authorized products. In the contrast with P.R.C, Singapore has other special disputes resolution organs under its common law system, including the small claims tribunals, E-commerce disputes centre. What’s more, Singapore collaborates with other ASAEN countries to harmonize IP rights with international and regional organizations such as the Office of Harmonization of the Internal Market (OHIM), the European Union, the French National Office of Industrial Property, and IP Australia.
(ⅲ)Introduction of Judgments in Precedent Cases
A) P.R.C
In a landmark verdict on April 16, 1996 against Beijing JuRen Computer, the Beijing No.1 Intermediate Court delivered judgment in favor of the Business Software Alliance (BSA) upholding the plaintiffs' intellectual property rights and ordering the defendant to (a) publicly apologize to the plaintiff; (b) pay over RMB600,000 (US$70,000) in damages, including court costs and accounting costs; (c) pay additional fines directly to the court. The court also ordered the defendant to undertake not to infringe intellectual property rights in the future, and the law enforcement officials to confiscate all computers and software seized during the raid on the defendant's premises. In another case, the same court rendered a judgment against Beijing Giant Computer Co. for software copyright infringement. These were the first cases decided in favor of a US plaintiff in a Chinese court.

大连市特种海产品资源保护管理条例

辽宁省人大常委会


大连市特种海产品资源保护管理条例
辽宁省人大常委会


(1993年12月23日大连市第十一届人民代表大会常务委员会第六次会议通过 1994年1月24日辽宁省第八届人民代表大会常务委员会第六次会议批准 自1994年4月1日起施行)

目 录

第一章 总 则
第二章 特种海产品资源的保护
第三章 特种海产品的增养殖管理
第四章 奖励与处罚
第五章 附 则

第一章 总 则
第一条 为加强特种海产品资源的保护管理,促进渔业向优质、高产、高效方向发展,根据《中华人民共和国渔业法》及有关法律、法规,结合大连市具体情况,制定本条例。
第二条 本条例所称特种海产品是指具有较高经济价值的海参、鲍鱼、扇贝、海胆、香螺、魁蚶等地方名贵海产品。
第三条 大连市特种海产品的资源保护及增养殖、采捕、收购、销售均适用本条例。
第四条 市及县(含县级市、市辖区,下同)人民政府应当把特种海产品的生产和资源保护纳入国民经济发展计划,扩大增养殖规模,鼓励增养殖的科学技术研究,推广科 第五条 市及县水产局是本级人民政府的渔业行政主管部门,其所属的渔政监督管理机构具体负责特种海产品
资源的保护和监督检查等管理工作。
各级公安、工商行政管理等有关部门应按照职责分工,密切配合渔业行政主管部门,依照国家法律、法规和本条例的规定,加强对特种海产品的管理,严格查处破坏特种海产品资源的违法行为。
第六条 从事特种海产品增养殖的单位,可根据需要建立群众性的护渔组织,在县以上渔政监督管理机构的指导下,依法维护其合法权益。

第二章 特种海产品资源的保护
第七条 从事特种海产品采捕的单位和个人,必须持有所在地县以上渔业行政主管部门核发的《区域性专项许可证》,在限定的海区、时限内,按照规定的品种、规格进行采捕,并按规定缴纳渔业资源增殖保护费。
第八条 严禁在禁渔期内采捕特种海产品:
海参,黄海区内六月一日至八月三十一日,渤海区内六月二十日至八月三十一日;
鲍鱼,七月十五日至八月三十一日;
扇贝,五月一日至六月三十日;
海胆,八月十六日至翌年五月三十一日;
香螺,六月一日至八月三十一日;
魁蚶,六月十五日至八月三十一日。
第九条 采捕特种海产品,不得小于下列规格:
海参,鲜品全长十七厘米,一次加工品七厘米,骨参五厘米;
鲍鱼,壳长八厘长(增养殖七厘米);
扇贝,壳长六厘米;
海胆,壳径五厘米;
香螺,壳高八厘米;
魁坩,壳长六厘米。
第十条 经营特种海产品中的海参、鲍鱼必须持有工商行政管理部门核发的水产品营业执照和县以上渔业行政主管部门核发的《专项收购证》。
第十一条 经营特种海产品的单位和个人,不得向无证采捕者、无证收购者收购海参、鲍鱼;不得收购、销售小于可捕规格的特种海产品;不得在禁渔期内收购、销售特种海产品鲜品。
确因科研、教学等特殊需要采捕特种海产品的,需经市渔业行政主管部门批准,并按批准的海区、时限、品种和数量采捕。
第十二条 无《区域性专项许可证》或《专项收购证》的单位和个人,不得向外埠发运海参、鲍鱼。
机场、码头、车站等货运部门,应协助渔政监督管理机构做好海参、鲍鱼的监督检查,并不得为无《区域性专项许可证》或《专项收购证》的单位和个人承运海参、鲍鱼。
第十三条 《区域性专项许可证》、《专项收购证》不得买卖、出租和以其他形式非法转让。

第三章 特种海产品的增养殖管理
第十四条 大连市沿海海域水产品增养殖功能区,由市政府组织有关部门,依据大连市总体规划进行划定。
从事特种海产品增养殖海区的有偿使用,按国家有关规定执行。
第十五条 特种海产品增养殖的海区使用权,实行划区分级审批。大连市城市南部海域、县与县交界的海域经与有关部门和地区协商后,由市渔业行政主管部门审批;涉及公用渔场的海域由市渔业行政主管部门报请上级渔业行政主管部门审批;其他海域由所在地县渔业行政主管部门审
批。
第十六条 特种海产品增养殖的海区使用权受法律保护,任何单位和个人不得侵犯。
增养殖海区使用权的争议,由当事人协商解决;协商不成的,由县以上人民政府裁决。当事人对裁决不服的,可在接到裁决通知之日起三十天内,向人民法院起诉。
使用权争议解决之前,任何一方不得破坏增养殖生产。
第十七条 从事特种海产品增养殖的单位和个人,需经县以上渔业行政主管部门审核批准,领取《增养殖使用证》,在审批的海区内按规定的品种进行增养殖。
第十八条 特种海产品的增养殖生产,应坚持管养采相结合,不得只采捕不管养,不得以任何借口造成增养殖区的荒芜。
第十九条 任何单位和个人不得偷捕、抢夺增养殖区的特种海产品;不得在增养殖海区内从事危害特种海产品增养殖的作业。
第二十条 任何单位和个人均不得擅自向增养殖海区排放和倾倒垃圾、污物及其它有害物质。向增养殖区临近海域排放、倾倒有害物质,必须严格执行国家颁布的排放标准等有关规定。
第二十一条 国家因建设需要收回已经确定给养殖单位和个人使用的增养殖海区,建设单位应按有关规定给予适当补偿。

第四章 奖励与处罚
第二十二条 对认真贯彻执行本条例,在特种海产品资源保护和管理中做出显著成绩的单位、个人,由各级人民政府给予表彰奖励。
第二十三条 违反本条例,有下列行为之一的,由渔业行政主管部门给予处罚:
(一)违反本条例第七条、第八条、第九条规定的,没收其渔具、渔获物和非法所得,责令赔偿资源损失,并按当时当地市场零售价的三至七倍处以罚款;
(二)违反本条例第十条规定无《专项收购证》收购海参、鲍鱼的,没收其收购物,并处一千元至一万元罚款;
(三)违反本条例第十一条第一款规定的,没收其渔获物,并责令其赔偿资源损失五千元至一万元;
(四)违反本条例第十二条第一款规定的,没收其发运的海参、鲍鱼,并按本条第一款、第二款的规定处以罚款;
(五)违反本条例第十二条第二款规定的,没收其运输价款,屡犯的处以运输价款五倍以内的罚款;
(六)违反本条例第十三条规定的,没收其违法所得,吊销《区域性专项许可证》、《专项收购证》,并处三千元至五千元罚款;
(七)违反本条例第十六条第一款、第三款规定的,责令其退出增养殖区,没收其非法所得,赔偿资源损失,并处以实际经济损失五倍以内的罚款;
(八)违反本条例第十七条规定,未领取《增养殖使用证》擅自圈占海区从事特种海产品增养殖的,责令其限期拆除增养殖设施,没收非法所得,并按非法所得额百分之十至百分之十五处以罚款;
(九)违反本条例第十八条规定,造成增养殖区荒芜满一年的,责令其限期开发利用,逾期未开发利用的,吊销《增养殖使用证》;
(十)违反本条例第十九条规定,偷捕增养殖区特种海产品的,没收其渔获物和作案工具,责令赔偿损失,并按当时当地市场零售价十倍以内处以罚款;在增养殖区从事危害特种海产品增养殖作业的,没收其渔获物,并赔偿资源损失费一千元至五千元。
第二十四条 违反本条例,无营业执照收购、销售特种海产品,或违反本条例第十一条第一款规定,在市场上销售小于采捕规格特种海产品的,由工商行政管理部门按有关规定处罚。
第二十五条 违反本条例第二十条规定,造成增养殖海区污染的,由县以上渔政管理部门责令其赔偿资源损失,并按渔业水域污染的有关规定处罚。
第二十六条 偷捕、抢夺特种海产品和阻碍渔政、工商行政管理人员依法执行公务的,由公安机关依照《中华人民共和国治安管理处罚条例》有关规定进行处罚;构成犯罪的,由司法机关依法追究刑事责任。
第二十七条 实施行政处罚,应下达处罚决定书;实施罚没款处罚,应使用财政部门印制的专用票据,罚没款全部上缴财政;没收的物资按国家有关规定处理。
第二十八条 渔政监督管理机构及其检查人员,玩忽职守或者徇私枉法的,由所在单位或上级主管部门给予行政处分;构成犯罪的,由司法机关依法追究刑事责任。
第二十九条 当事人对行政处罚决定不服的,可以在接到处罚通知书之日起十五日内,向作出处罚决定的上一级行政机关申请行政复议,对复议决定不服的,可在接到复议决定书之日起十五日内向人民法院起诉。当事人也可以在接到处罚通知书之日起三十天内直接向人民法院起诉。逾
期不申请复议或者不起诉,又不履行处罚决定的,由做出处罚决定的机关申请人民法院强制执行。在海上作业的,必须先执行有关处罚决定。

第五章 附 则
第三十条 由苗种孵化到养成全部实行人工养殖的特种海产品,不受本条例所规定的禁渔时限、采捕规格的限制。
第三十一条 大连市人民政府可根据本条例制定实施办法。
第三十二条 本条例应用中的具体问题,由大连市人民政府负责解释。
第三十三条 本条例自1994年4月1日起施行。



1994年1月24日