滕彪文集
[主页]->[独立中文笔会]->[滕彪文集]->[Tales of an unjust justice]
滕彪文集
·沉默的暴行
·中共“长臂”施压 维权律师滕彪妻子被迫离职
·除了革命,中国已经别无道路
·高瑜案件从一开始就是政治操控
·毛式文革与恐怖主义之异同——国内外专家学者访谈
·最高法维护狼牙山五壮士名誉 学者批司法为文宣服务
·滕彪和杨建利投书彭博社 批评美国大选不谈中国人权议题
·“未来关键运动的发起者可能是我们都不认识的人。”
·政治因素杀死了贾敬龙
·中国维权人士在达兰萨拉与藏人探讨“中共的命运”
·黑暗的2016:中国人权更加倒退的一年
·滕彪談廢死
·滕彪:酷刑逼供背後是国家支持的系统性暴力
·在黑暗中尋找光明
·专访滕彪、杨建利:美国新法案 不给人权侵害者发签证
·海内外民主人士促美制裁中国人权迫害者/RFA
·A Joint Statement Upon the Establishment of ‘China Human Rights Accou
·关于成立“中国人权问责中心”的声明
·Group to Probe China's Human Rights Violations Under U.S. Law
·The Long Reach of China to Silence Its Critics
·王臧:极权主义,不止是“地域性灾难”
·Trump has the power to fight China on human rights. Will he use it?
·纪录片《吊照门》
·「吊照门」事件 引发法界震盪
·脸书玩命想进中国/RFA
·中国反酷刑联盟成立公告
·德电台奖冉云飞滕彪获提名
·中国维权律师:风雨中的坚持
·Harassed Chinese rights lawyer still speaking out on Tibetans’ plight
·Beijing Suspends Licenses of 2 Lawyers Who Offered to Defend Tibetans
·VOA连线:中国反酷刑联盟成立,向酷刑说“不”
·Announcement of the Establishment of the China Anti-Torture Alliance
·Chinese Court Upends 13-Year-Old Rape, Murder, Robbery Convictions
·中共迫害律师的前前后后
·Scholars Return to YLS to Discuss Human Rights Advocacy in China
·Abducted Activists
·中国的民间反对运动与维权运动
·Conversation on China’s human rights: Professor provides first hand a
·Exiled Chinese lawyer says the country is moving toward a new totalita
·VOA时事大家谈:抓律师两高人大邀功,保政权司法第一要务
·滕彪讲述被绑架和单独关押的经历
·Chinese human rights lawyer stresses the duty to resist
·山东“刺死辱母者”案,为何引发民意汹涌?/VOA
·关于审查《城市流浪乞讨人员收容遣送办法》的建议书
·Street Vendor’s Execution Stokes Anger in China
·[video]Academic freedom in the East and Southeast
·海外华人学者成立民主转型研究所VOA
·美国律师协会为受难律师高智晟出书/VOA
·郭文貴爆料,為何中國當局反應強烈?
·杨银波:搞滕彪、李和平,我看不过去
·Chinese Rights Lawyer Strikes Back at ABA Over Scuttled Book/WSJ
·China puts leading human rights lawyer on trial for 'inciting subversi
·丧尽天良,709维权律师李和平被灌不明精神药物!
·709案的秘密審訊——酷刑之後,強迫喂藥
·王全璋:被“消失”的中国人权律师
·李和平等709律师被捕期间遭强迫灌药酷刑虐待
·李明哲案成陸對台籌碼
·川普政府吁中共尊重人权 学者促弃绥靖政策
·从709维权律师审判看盘古氏公司庭审秀 习近平是圣君还是反人类罪犯
· 纪念709,推动首届中国人权律师节
·709将成为〝中国人权律师节〞
·美港台人权组织设立709中国人权律师节
·Announcing the Inaugural China Human Rights Lawyers’ Day
·关于举办首届“中国人权律师节”活动的通告
·Why the West treats China with kid gloves
·首届中国人权律师节征集漫画、海报、短视频
·“访民困境与出路”研讨会
·美国CECC中国人权听证会:中共必须被公开羞辱
·Key Moments from CECC hearing “Gagging the Lawyers”
·Gagging the Lawyers: China’s Crackdown on Human Rights Lawyers and It
·多个人权组织及欧盟呼吁取消对刘晓波的限制/VOA
·709律师节与中国人权现况
·中国人权律师节启动 在笑与泪中纪念“709”两周年
·Chinese human rights lawyers remain defiant despite crackdown
·滕彪/夏业良漫谈法律与维权进程
· 萬人簽署08憲章,為什麼唯獨重判劉曉波
·709抓捕兩週年 律師籲持續國際施壓
·挽劉曉波聯
·The Political Meaning of the Crime of “Subverting State Power”
·滕彪/夏业良:公共知识分子和自由主义
·中国民主前路研讨会/RFA
·中国流亡律师滕彪,要做黑暗中的闪电
·Selected Publications/presentations as of 2017/8
·The Costs and Risks of Fighting for Human Dignity and Freedom
·China faces split into seven parts
· A Call for Investigation Into HNA Group’s Activities in the US and L
·王全璋律师竞逐郁金香人权奖:无畏强权 勇气与付出
·〝维稳〞维到联合国?人权观察批中共
·City of Asylum -Interview
·对中共的绥靖政策已致恶果浮现
·China’s top human rights lawyer in exile to speak at Saint Michael’s
·Activist expats raise voices on China rights crackdown
·A Human Rights Lawyer Lifts the Communist Party’s Spell
·Returning to Revolution
·One-man rule? China's Xi Jinping consolidates grip on power
·劉曉波對維權律師的關注
·滕彪:中国自由民权运动与习近平时代
·Kidnap, torture, exile: Dr. Teng Biao shares his story
·維權、佔中與公民抗命
·Arrested, Assaulted and Tortured: Exiled Human Rights Lawyer Details P
·滕彪律师评论郭文贵事件的意义
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
Tales of an unjust justice

   
   by Teng Biao Published 18 October, 2012
   
   http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/world-affairs/2012/10/tales-unjust-justice
   


   New Statesman
   
   
   If it is true that you won’t understand Chinese society through Xinwen Lianbo (Chinese state television’s daily news programme), you should not build a picture of China’s legal system from its laws, either. In many cases, legal clauses have not been properly implemented. What is the state of China’s judiciary? After you have dealt with it at first hand a few times, you will know.
   
   Cai Zhuohua is the pastor of a Christian house church. He and his family were sentenced for printing the Bible and distributing it to other Christians. In 2005, I defended him, along with other lawyers, including Gao Zhisheng. When the trial began, although we did everything we could, Cai’s mother was not allowed to enter the court as a spectator. During the trial, the judge bluntly interrupted the defendant and his lawyers dozens of times. In another case, Wang Bo, a Falun Gong student, and her parents were sentenced to four and five years in prison respectively in 2006, just because they were Falun Gong believers and they had published the truth about their torture on the internet. In our statement of defence, we challenged the entire legal basis of suppressing Falun Gong. After the trial, four enraged court workers lifted me up by my arms and legs, carried me across the high steps and threw me out of the court building. In such cases, the judges have no influence on the judgement, but they are willing to put their names on to the verdict. Evil can only be made real by the acts of individuals. The book Hitler’s Justice: the Courts of the Third Reich describes many cases of Nazi judges “legally” taking evil actions. There are many similar cases in current Chinese judicial practice.
   
   Most judges face a moral dilemma: if they give a judgment according to the wishes of their superiors, they are going against their own legal training and the rule of law. If they give a judgment based on the law and their conscience, then it will affect their promotion opportunities. They may even lose their job or encounter other troubles.
   
   In 2010 I established an NGO, China Against the Death Penalty, specialising in unjust death penalty cases. For example, in the “Gan Jinhua intentional homicide case”, I raised 22 serious doubts about the prosecution evidence. The judge took no notice and sentenced Gan Jinhua to death when important witnesses had not been allowed to testify in court. Surprisingly, the Supreme Court judges also approved the death penalty despite all that. In another death penalty case, four farmers in Leping, Jiangxi Province, were sentenced to death for “murder and rape”. After 11 years in prison, in late 2011, an arrested suspect confessed that he had committed the murder and rape. However, until today, the judicial authorities still refuse to rectify the case. In fact, according to our investigation, the four innocent farmers suffered extremely brutal torture. They were beaten up while hanging, deprived of sleep for a prolonged period of time, burned with a lighter and hit with bricks. They were interrogated by torture and forced to make a “confession” of guilt. The judge sentenced the four men to death, but apart from the oral confession there was no other evidence.
   
   The original motive of the police was that “fatal cases must be solved”. Under this pressure, they wanted to find a scapegoat and get credited and promoted for their service. Judges often yield to or curry favour with Public Security Bureau directors. In the party’s political and legal commission system, directors of the Public Security Bureau can give orders to lead judges. Within the court, lead judges can give orders to all judges. This system is the reason for a large number of unjust verdicts in China.
   
   After the verdict in the Gu Kailai case was announced in August, many people started comparing it with the case of Xia Junfeng, who I also represented. Gu Kailai was given a suspended death sentence for premeditated murder, but Xia Junfeng was sentenced to death for killing in self-defence. What is the reason for this? It is because Gu Kailai is the wife of an eminent official, and Xia Junfeng is a street vendor who was forced to defend himself from a violent urban management officer. This is China’s judiciary – in the case of small civil disputes, justice will still be justice, but as soon as local officials or the government become an issue, then it becomes merely a political game masked by justice.
   
   Thought control
   
   As I have been involved in many human rights cases, my lawyer’s licence has been revoked. China’s lawyers’ associations are almost completely controlled by the government. I have, like many other lawyers, tried to promote democratic elections in the Beijing Lawyers Association, to no avail. Many taking part in pushing for elections suffered reprisals and were stripped of the chance to practise law one by one.
   
   I have been hooded and kidnapped on two occasions. The kidnappers were special police in charge of thought control. They took me to a secret location and started to interrogate me, often involving torture. They would say, “Don’t talk to me about the law!” A Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson,
    Jiang Yu, said: “The law is not a shield.” Her words were widely circulated. Clearly, in China, citizens are unable to rely on the law to protect their legal interests.
   
   There are 200,000 lawyers in China. Few are prepared to stand in sensitive cases and fight actively for human rights. Citizens, however, are becoming braver, including journalists, writers, students and internet users. They have stood up to fight for citizens’ rights in their fields and they are pushing for progress in the rule of law in China.
   
   As the regime is unable to solve the problem of political legitimacy, the crisis in society has intensified. The people demand democracy and their cries for human rights are increasing. I believe that the day China will put the rule of law into practice is not far off, and our efforts are meaningful.
   
   Teng Biao is a lecturer at the China University of Political Science and Law. He is the director of China Against the Death Penalty and a human rights lawyer. At present he is a visiting scholar at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
(2014/03/22 发表)
blog comments powered by Disqus

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场