Article 52: Can the door of the court be opened?

On September 8th, Feng Xinghui issued a signature article stating that after the Third Intermediate People's Court of Shanghai on its administrative prosecution "neither filed a case nor made a ruling" he filed a lawsuit against the Shanghai Municipal Government in accordance with Article 52 of the Administrative Litigation Law.

It’s not about discussing who loses and wins first, it’s about asking the courts whether to let citizens go to court first.

Article 52 of the Administrative Procedure Law covers cases where "neither a case is filed nor a decision is made" and allows the parties to prosecute the people's court at a higher level.

24 years of property dispute, final card at the "entry"

According to Mr. Fong’s public material, the dispute originated from 5,774 discs seized during the Shanghai police handling case in

1. he argued that the property was worth 2 million yuan and was not returned or explicitly disposed for a long time after the criminal procedure ended. In 2025, he submitted an application to the Shanghai Municipal Government and subsequently applied for administrative reconsideration; its materials said that the relevant proceedings did not receive entity response within the legal deadline.

In 2026, he turned to administrative lawsuits, saying that the Three Chinese Chambers of Shanghai had not filed a case for a long time after receiving the lawsuits, nor had they made a ruling that would allow him to appeal according to law.

Why Procedures Are More Important Than Case Conclusions

In a system of administrative litigation that runs normally, the court can entirely ultimately judge the plaintiff for a defeat, but the court must first handle the lawsuit in the way permitted by law.

The proceedings should leave at least four traces that can be checked:

• when the court received the prosecution material;
• whether it was registered and whether correction was requested;
• whether a decision was made if it was not accepted;
• whether the parties could enter an appeal or other remedy procedure accordingly.

If the citizen is not faced with a defeat, but with a long absence of decision, then judicial remedies are more difficult to deal with: Without a judge, there is no normal judicial remedies; without a written decision, authority is more difficult to review.

Article 52 The real examination shall be carried out by the Superior Court.

Feng Jinghui, citing Article 52, filed a lawsuit against the Shanghai High Court, making the matter very specific. The Shanghai High Court does not have to accept the full claim of Feng Jinghui about the facts of the case, but it must face a institutional question: if the lower court does not have a long-term "discretion", does the law really exist for the parties to design a higher-level remedy?

In recent years, China has repeatedly emphasized the registration system and the protection of property rights by law, but the credibility of these systems cannot be proved only by policy documents, but must be tested by the least convenient, longest and most easily delayed cases.

The rule of law is not to guarantee citizens win the lawsuit, but to guarantee that power cannot replace the decision with silence. If the Shanghai High Court makes clear procedures in accordance with the law, regardless of the outcome, at least let the dispute return to the legal track that can be reviewed, debated, can be remedied; if Article 52 facing "no dispute" still cannot be initiated, then the article itself will be empty by reality.