Chinese Court Hears 36-Year-Old Gold Seizure Case

A court in Yantai, Shandong province, has held an evidence hearing in a case where nearly 844 grams of gold have been held by police for 36 years, after the owner’s application for its return was rejected twice by public security authorities. The Yantai Intermediate Court conducted the formal hearing on July 29, 2026, and will issue a written judgment at a later date, according to The Paper.

A Seizure From a Bygone Era

The case dates back to April 2, 1990, when Miao Shengqiang and his father went to a villager’s home in Longkou City to sell gold they had refined themselves. They were arrested by Longkou Public Security Bureau on suspicion of “speculation” (投机倒把罪) — a crime from China’s planned economy era that criminalized private commercial activities. The charge was abolished in 1997 when China revised its Criminal Law.

Police seized 843.9822 grams of raw gold and a motorcycle. The motorcycle was returned that same month, but the gold was never given back. Miao was detained for nine days and then released, receiving three handwritten receipts documenting the seizure but no formal disposition order for the gold. The receipts recorded the gold in vague terms — “one piece” and “seven pieces” — with a total weight but no indication of purity.

Two Rejections Before the Court

For over three decades, the gold remained in police custody without any formal resolution. In December 2025, after learning that a fellow villager had successfully reclaimed seized gold, Miao applied for state compensation to Longkou PSB.

His application was rejected on February 13, 2026, on the grounds that “the compensation request does not fall within the scope of state compensation.” Miao appealed to Yantai Public Security Bureau, which upheld the rejection on April 30, 2026, but corrected the legal reasoning, stating that the application had exceeded the two-year statutory limitation period under China’s State Compensation Law.

Miao then turned to the Yantai Intermediate Court, submitting a formal application through his lawyer, Zhang Tieyan, on May 25, 2026, as reported by Sina Finance.

The Core Legal Dispute

At the July 29 evidence hearing, the court identified two central questions: whether the State Compensation Law applies to a seizure that occurred before it took effect in 1995, and whether the gold should be returned.

Longkou PSB argued that Miao’s actions constituted speculation, that the gold was illegally sourced and should have been confiscated. The bureau claimed that while the criminal investigation was concluded, the case has never been formally closed. Yantai PSB maintained that the original arrest and seizure were carried out within legal authority.

Miao’s legal team countered that because police never provided formal documentation that the gold had been processed or disposed of, the seizure remains in a “continuous state” — a legal doctrine that would bring the case under the State Compensation Law and nullify any statute of limitations argument.

Key Precedents

The case draws on a landmark 2021 ruling by the Ministry of Public Security in the Ma Guanghui case, where the Ministry established that if authorities cannot prove they formally processed seized property and notified the owner, the seizure is considered continuous. The Ministry ordered the return of 5,183 grams of gold that had been held since 1994.

More recently, in June 2026, a related case involving Pan Yongjia was resolved when police in Liaoning returned 2,859.2 grams of gold after 30 years, following public attention to the case.

What’s Next

The judge declared the evidence hearing concluded, and the Yantai Intermediate Court will issue a written judgment at a date yet to be announced. Legal observers say the decision could set an important precedent for dozens of similar historical asset seizure cases across China, where citizens have struggled for decades to reclaim property seized under laws that no longer exist.