[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    滕彪文集
[主页]->[独立中文笔会]->[滕彪文集]->[China’s blind Justice]
·An Editor Speaks Out: Teng Biao, Darkness Before Dawn, and ABA
·The legal system is a battleground, and there’s no turning back
·A Call for a UN Investigation, and US Sanctions, on the Human Rights D
·警察街头扫描手机内容 新疆式维稳监控扩散
·The banned religious group that has China worried
·人间蒸发 强制失踪受害者日 家属焦急寻人
·An Open Letter on Ilham Tohti’s Life
·918 RESIST Xi Jinping
·The United Nations, China, and Human Rights
· Alphabet City Q&A with Teng Biao
·The Xinjiang Initiative
·欧洲议会通过议案 促中共关闭新疆「集中营」
·China’s global challenge to democratic freedom
·彭斯講話揭新篇 預示對華政策大轉變
·彭斯講話揭新篇 預示對華政策大轉變
·欧洲议会通过议案 促中共关闭新疆「集中营」
·Chinese clients of New York ‘asylum mill’ lawyers face deportation t
·「千人计划」再受挫折 美籍华人学者涉儿童色情罪案及间谍活动
·"Vous pouvez facilement devenir fou"
·新西兰政治献金丑闻 中共渗透引关注
·CCP’s involvement in higher education and on university campuses -
·新疆181座集中营 批量采购手铐电棍
·中共制造民族分裂 尊重维吾尔人民族自决权
·China Builds More Prisons in Xinjiang/RFA
· China’s global challenge to democratic freedom
·Global Information and Democracy Commission
·International Declaration on Information and Democracy
·Global communication and information space: a common good of humankind
·UN review is critical chance for countries to change China's narrative
·China’s ‘Perfect Dictatorship’ and Its Impact
·中共否认普世人权价值 外界吁警惕
·中国医疗专家因涉嫌参与非法活摘 被拒参加国际会议
·憂間諜活動 美擬加強對中國留學生背景調查
·華為掌門女兒孟晚舟加國被捕 被指違美國對伊朗制裁令
·Person of the Week
·广西维权律师建民间模拟法庭 力阻冤假错案
·夢遊畫展 "Dream Wandering" Exhibition
·民運鬥士海波、滕彪 曼哈頓辦「夢游畫展」
·六四後北京加強監控 滕彪指現時離民主比1989年更遠
·Nearly 30 years after Tiananmen, China has tightened control
·联国人权专家关注黄琦健康 维权人士斥无异慢性谋杀
·Chinese rights lawyer fires his own state-appointed lawyer in a dramat
·美中建交40年 面臨前所未有轉捩點
·中国审查蔓延美国硅谷 八九学运前领袖领英帐号一度被封杀
·新疆模式扩展 阿拉伯文化成打击目标
·中共判加拿大人死刑 能换回孟晚舟吗?
·The fight for Chinese rights
·安排「中国商人」会见桂民海女儿 瑞典驻华大使丢职回国受查
China’s blind Justice

   By Li Jinsong, Zhang Lihui, Li Fangping, Teng Biao, and Xu Zhiyong
   The Asian Wall Street Journal
   SEPTEMBER 13, 2006

    Chen Guangcheng, a blind advocate for the rights of Chinese villagers, recently made headlines around the world when he was sentenced to four years and three months in prison. But, as his chosen lawyers, we were prevented from presenting a fair defense by obstacles erected by Chinese authorities. A local court imposed unacceptable terms on us defending our client at his August 18 trial. Before the trial, we had been detained by police, intimidated, and one lawyer was not freed until the trial was over. Except for Mr. Chen’s three brothers, no other members of the public, not even his wife and mother, were allowed to attend the two-hour hearing.
    That’s why we are using these columns to outline the defense that was never presented in court, and explain how our client was convicted of crimes he did not commit. In those closed-door proceedings, Chinese officials punished Mr. Chen for disclosing their own criminal activities--forcing villagers to undergo sterilizations and forced abortions, even though these are officially illegal under Chinese law.
    Had we not been barred from the courtroom, we would have argued that the trial was unlawful. The two government-appointed lawyers, whom Mr. Chen refused to accept, had never met him before the trial nor read any of the files on his case. They did not offer any defense during the hearing, but merely repeated everything the prosecutors said.
    The pre-trial process also violated Chinese law and infringed basic human- rights principles. A self-taught lawyer, Mr. Chen has long helped the disabled and peasants fight illegal taxes and environmental pollution. In June 2005, he filed a class-action lawsuit accusing local officials in Yinan County in northeastern Shandong Province, of forcing peasants to undergo abortions or sterilizations in order to meet birth-control quotas. Two months later, Yinan officials placed Mr. Chen under house arrest. Then in March this year he was taken away by police. When we were finally allowed to meet Mr. Chen in June, he told us that police had verbally abused him, threatened his life, and once deprived him of sleep for three days.
    Ever since the first of us took on Chen’s case in September last year, we have been pressured by local authorities to drop it. When we refused to do so, we were beaten and intercepted by government officials as we tried to carry out investigations and collect evidence.
    Both of the charges on which Mr. Chen was convicted are groundless. The first, “intentional destruction of property,” is based on a clash on Feb. 15 this year between villagers and police, who had beaten another villager protesting Mr. Chen’s illegal house arrest. But it was local officials, rather than Mr. Chen, who were responsible for “inciting” this incident by carrying out that beating. People we interviewed said the villagers did no more than push police vehicles into a roadside ditch, and that they only acted in this way because police refused to take the victim’s grandmother to hospital, after she passed out on hearing of the beating.
    As for the second charge of “gathering crowds to obstruct traffic,” once again it was the police rather than Mr. Chen who were responsible for this. On March 11, guards used by the local authorities to enforce the house arrest beat up another villager trying to meet Mr. Chen. Angry villagers then clashed with the guards and succeeded in getting Mr. Chen out of his house so that he could accompany them to the local government offices to protest. As they tried to get rides into town, police and guards surrounded them and temporarily stopped traffic until they could wrestle Mr. Chen and two other villagers into police cars, and take them into custody.
    The prosecutors introduced testimony from other detained villagers, accusing Mr. Chen of “inciting” property destruction. But lawyers representing these villagers were never allowed to meet with them. Nor were they allowed to cross-examine these “witnesses.” Family members of these villagers, who were detained for supporting Mr. Chen, said that they were mistreated in jail and forced to testify against Mr. Chen.
    The real criminal suspects in this case are the officials responsible for obstructing justice and undermining the country’s legal reform. These local officials could hardly have acted with such contempt and disregard for the law unless they had been given the green light by authorities higher up in the government. Nonetheless, in appealing Mr. Chen’s case to a higher court, we will act on the assumption that the country’s legal system can, without official interference, deliver a fair verdict and remedy wrongs. This may prove to be too optimistic. But we can only find out by fighting for justice, case by case, one client at a time.
    Messrs. Li Jinsong, Zhang, Li Fangping, Teng and Xu are Beijing-based lawyers.

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.