Chinese Law Prof Blog

Editor: Donald C. Clarke
George Washington University Law School

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Thursday, December 31, 2009

Top 10 crackdowns of 2009

Here's the list (in English) from the China Daily.

December 31, 2009 in Commentary | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Life imitates art: cruel murders in coal mines

This is the kind of thing that makes it hard to maintain a principled opposition to the death penalty.

Chinese police have arrested nine people suspected of trafficking mentally disabled people from Leibo County in southwest China' Sichuan Province to other areas and then murdering them in coal mines to blackmail the mine owners, police said Wednesday.

The rest of the story is here.

If you follow Chinese cinema, you'll think right away of Li Yang's (李杨) excellent movie Blind Shaft (盲井). Here's the Wikipedia plot summary:

Song Jinming (played by Li Yixiang) and Tang Zhaoyang (Wang Shuangbao) are professional con artists, running an intricate scam they have perfected through repeated practice. They find a naive young man looking for work, and convince him that they have arranged three lucrative coal mining jobs for themselves and a relative. The relative has not arrived in time, leaving a gap which they generously offer to the victim, on the condition that he pretend to be the missing relative. After a few days of working in the mine, they murder the victim, and by making the murder look like an accident, they use his death to extort compensation money from the mine's management.

December 31, 2009 in Commentary, News - Chinese Law | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

The Guardian on Akmal Shaikh's mental condition

Was Akmal Shaikh's mental condition such as to warrant decreased or even no culpability? We will never know for sure. The legal system that just executed him seemed uninterested in the question; the courts refused to order, or allow, a psychiatric evaluation. (This is not, of course, to say that psychiatry is infallible.) Was there a prima facie case to be made that Shaikh had serious mental problems that warranted further investigation? Here the answer is pretty clearly yes. Check out this story from The Guardian.

December 30, 2009 in Commentary, News - Chinese Law | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Verdict in Liu Xiaobo case: English translation

Here's an English translation (with Chinese text appended) of the Dec. 25, 2009 verdict against Liu Xiaobo. A couple of interesting points:

1. There are no allegations of anything other than pure speech.

CORRECTION (Dec. 31, 2009): A colleague has pointed out that this is not correct. The verdict states:

Between September and December 2008, the defendant Liu Xiaobo colluded with others to draft and concoct the "Charter 08", that proposed views such as "eliminate the monopoly of one party on the exercise of political power", "to create a Chinese federation under the framework of democratic constitutional system of governance", seeking to incite the overthrow of state power. Liu Xiaobo collected the signatures of over 300 people and sent "Charter 08" together with the signatures in an email to websites outside of the borders of mainland China publish it on websites outside the borders of mainland China such as "Democratic China" and "The Independent Chinese Pen Association".

On the whole, however, I believe the main charges still relate to pure speech.

2. I'm struck by the extent of government fears about Liu's impact despite the apparent lack of interest (as far as the evidence shows) that the wider world showed in Liu's on-line writings. Athough the verdict claims that Liu used the internet in order to take advantage of the wide circulation and broad social impact it could offer, none of the offending articles cited in verdict had been visited more than several hundred times. The most popular got 748 clicks; the least popular got 57 clicks. Not exactly a prairie fire.

Many thanks to the translator, who wishes to remain anonymous.

(Here's an alternate source for the translation.)

December 30, 2009 in Commentary, News - Chinese Law, People and Institutions | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

My China-side blog closed

Blog-closed

As some readers may know, this blog is blocked inside of China. As a workaround, I set up a blog inside the Great Firewall on Sina.com. Such a blog can't be blocked, but the blog host (acting on its own or under direction from the authorities) can of course delete individual entries, and if fed up can delete the whole blog. This has apparently now happened. I'll see if I can get anyone to tell me the specific reason (I'm not optimistic) and report back.

December 29, 2009 in Commentary, News - Miscellaneous | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Chinese government rejects foreign pressure, saves national honor

Not wishing to fall below the standard set by Arkansas in the execution of the mentally pathetic (Ricky Ray Rector, who saved the dessert from his last meal "for later"), the Chinese state executed Akmal Shaikh today. (Actually, this beats Arkansas, since Rector was a killer, whereas Shaikh's crime was non-violent.)

December 29, 2009 in Commentary, News - Chinese Law | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Jerome Cohen on the Akmal Shaikh case

Akmal Shaikh is a UK citizen sentenced to death in China for drug smuggling. His sentence was recently confirmed by the Supreme People's Court, and he is due to be executed this Tuesday. The problem is that he is pretty clearly mentally ill. (The drugs were apparently in a suitcase given to him by others to take to China; he was told they were going to make him a pop star there. And there's more, but I don't have space or time to go into it here.) Despite pleas by the British government to take this into account, the Chinese government insists that there is insufficient evidence of his mental illness - possibly because his defense counsel were denied the opportunity to introduce expert evidence on his behalf. As I was getting on a plane in Beijing on Dec. 23rd, I picked up a copy of the nationalistic 环球时报 (Global Times), which saw the UK government's protest as a hypocritical plea for special treatment for foreigners. "西方人不是最强调`法律面前人人平等‘吗?” (Don't the Westerners most emphasize "all are equal before the law"?), asked the reporter (this wasn't even an op-ed piece!) sarcastically. The Global Times insists that "the trial process was extremely careful" (审判过程非常慎重); perhaps this is its way of understanding the fact that when Shaikh insisted on presenting his defense himself on appeal, his rambling and incoherent statement caused the judges to burst into laughter at him. But maybe I'm being unfair; it could be referring to the 30-minute trial at which he was originally convicted.

Apparently China's government feels that national honor depends on executing this pathetic and deluded man. Here's Prof. Jerome Cohen's recent comment on the matter, from the Dec. 23rd issue of the South China Morning Post (reprinted here with permission from Prof. Cohen):

Arbitrary justice
Ignoring its own laws, China is set to execute a Briton with an apparent history of severe mental illness
 
Jerome A. Cohen
Dec 23, 2009     
 
China's Supreme People's Court has just announced a death penalty decision of great importance to the British government and the European Union, as well as Chinese and foreign human-rights advocates. In September 2007, Akmal Shaikh, a British subject of Pakistani descent, was detained at Urumqi airport in Xinjiang on charges of drug smuggling. He was convicted and sentenced to death in October 2008 and now confronts execution next Tuesday.

In a country that executes thousands every year, his case would be unexceptional - were it not for his alleged history of severe mental illness.

Although transparency is lacking in this case, as in so many others on the Chinese mainland, it appears that Central Asian smugglers, manipulating Shaikh's delusional ambitions to become a pop star in China, persuaded him to take in a suitcase containing 4kg of heroin.

Chinese legislation exempts from criminal responsibility someone unable to recognise or control his misconduct, and provides for reduction of punishment in cases of partial mental capacity. But Shaikh's 30-minute first instance trial ignored this major aspect of justice.

By the time of Shaikh's second instance trial, on May 26, the London-based rights organisation, Reprieve, had sent British forensic psychiatrist, Dr Peter Schaapveld, to Urumqi in the hope of conducting an examination that would confirm Shaikh's condition and inform the court's review. Unfortunately, without explanation, Schaapveld was denied an interview with Shaikh. He was also not permitted to attend the judicial hearing.

Moreover, the authorities, which had initially indicated that they would allow a local doctor to evaluate Shaikh, changed their mind. The reviewing court thus had the benefit of no expert opinion on this crucial issue. It did, however, apparently allow the defendant the opportunity, against the advice of his lawyers, to deliver a rambling, often incoherent, statement that caused the judges to openly laugh at him.

The second instance court affirmed Shaikh's death sentence and, although both his fitness to stand trial and his mental state at the time of the offence were in doubt, the Supreme People's Court has now agreed.

Yet there has been no indication that the mental condition of the condemned has ever been professionally evaluated, despite concerns expressed by the British government and the EU, as well as Reprieve and other organisations that have compiled massive evidence that Shaikh has long suffered from a serious bipolar disorder.

According to Schaapveld, Shaikh's condition very likely produced a delusional psychosis that enabled professional drug smugglers to manipulate him to act as their unwitting agent.

In these circumstances, one might have expected the Supreme People's Court to comply with Chinese law and international legal standards by requiring a thorough mental evaluation of Shaikh before rendering a final judgment.

However, in some recent highly publicised capital cases, in which mentally disturbed defendants were charged with heinous offences such as multiple murders, the Supreme People's Court failed to insist on psychological evaluations in accordance with fair procedures. Last year's execution of police-killer Yang Jia is only the most notorious illustration.

Yet, Chinese courts have sometimes met the challenge. Several years ago in Beijing, for example, an American, ultimately diagnosed as a paranoid-schizophrenic, killed his Chinese wife because of the delusion that she was poisoning him. The trial court called for a thorough examination by experts at a local mental hospital.

After careful study, six specialists submitted a report that recognised the severity and relevance of the defendant's mental condition. When the victim's family objected to their conclusion, the court sought a second evaluation by another group of experts. When they rendered a similar opinion, the court reduced what would otherwise have been a death sentence to a prison term of 15 years. Although a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity might have been warranted, and would have resulted in the defendant's confinement in a facility more likely to offer better treatment than a prison, at least his life was spared.

Sadly, it is now too late for a similar evaluation in Shaikh's case, although British clemency pleas may yet succeed. In any event, the National People's Congress should enact legislation that will confirm detailed procedural protections to guarantee a fair and accurate mental assessment whenever the defence reasonably requests.

Professor Jerome A. Cohen is co-director of NYU School of Law's US-Asia Law Institute and adjunct senior fellow for Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations. See also www.usasialaw.org.

December 27, 2009 in Commentary, News - Chinese Law | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

China adopts Tort Law

The National People's Congress Standing Committee adopted a tort law on Saturday, Dec. 26th. It comes into effect in July. Here's the full text.

December 27, 2009 in News - Chinese Law | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, December 26, 2009

Mo Shaoping profiled in the New York Times

Periodically I post profiles of well-known figures in the Chinese law world (but usually only when someone else writes them). Here's a profile of attorney Mo Shaoping in the Dec. 22 issue of the New York Times. It was Mo's firm, by the way, that defended Liu Xiaobo. As fellow attorney Pu Zhiqiang wrote bitterly back in 2004, "Lawyer Mo Shaoping . . . has with a succession of defeats become the glory of his profession." (Pu was being bitter about the legal system, not about Mo.)

December 26, 2009 in People and Institutions | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Liu Xiaobo sentenced to 11 years

Liu Xiaobo, one of the key figures behind the Charter 08 document, was sentenced to 11 years on December 24th on charges of incitement to subversion. According to the New York Times report,

Mr. Liu has been held in secret for more than a year and his lawyers were given less than two weeks to prepare their defense. The trial on Wednesday lasted two hours and was closed[.]

I guess all that work at the front end paid off at the back end. In a sign of confidence in the justice of its case, the Chinese government has reportedly issued orders restricting search results for the term "11年" (11 years). Here's what you get from google.cn (subject to these orders); here's what you get from google.com (not subject to these orders).

Here's a copy of the verdict (Chinese only; full text appended below just in case it disappears from the web site provided here).

Remember that this is the first-instance judgment. Liu may still appeal. This does not mean that the higher court could on its own decide that the lower court's verdict was wrong; it's impossible to believe that the proceedings in this case are not subject to high-level political direction. But if the government changes its mind about the proper sentence, an appeal is the proceeding through which that would be done.

*   *   *   *   *

Text of Verdict in Liu Xiaobo Case

刘晓波一审判决书

北京市第一中级人民法院刑事判决书

(2009)一中刑初字第3901号

公诉机关北京市人民检察院第一分院。

被告人刘晓波,男,53岁(1955年12月28日出生),汉族,出生土吉林省长春市,博士研究生文化,无业,户籍所在地辽寧省大连市西岗区青春街5号2-1-2号,暂住北京市海淀区七贤村中国银行宿舍10号楼1单元502号。1991年1月因犯反革命宣传煽动罪被免予刑事处分;1996年9月因扰乱社会秩序被处劳动教养三年。因涉嫌犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪于2008年12月8日被拘传,12月9日被监视居住,2009年6月23日被逮捕。现羈押在北京市第一看守所。

辩护人丁锡奎,北京莫少平律师事务所律师。

辩护人尚宝军,北京莫少平律师事务所律师。

北京市人民检察院第一分院以京一分检刑诉(2009)247号起诉书指控被告人刘晓波犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,于2009年12月10日向本院提起公诉。本院依法组成合议庭,公开开庭进行了审理,北京市人民检察院第一分院指派检察员张荣革、代理检察员潘雪楮出庭支持公诉,被告人刘晓波及其辩护人丁锡奎、尚宝军到庭参加诉讼。现已审理终结。

北京市人民检察院第一分院起诉书指控,被告人刘晓波出于对我国人民民主专政的国家政权和社会主义制度的不满,自2005年以来,通过互联网先后在“观察”、“BBC中文网”等境外网站上发表《中共的独裁爱国主义》、《难道中国人只配接受“党主民主”》、《通过改变社会来改变政权》、《多面的中共独裁》、《独裁崛起对世界民主化的负面效应》、《对黑窑童奴案的继续追问》等煽动性文章。在文章中造谣、诽谤︰“自从中共掌权以来,中共歷代独裁者最在乎的是手中的权力,而最不在乎的就是人的生命”;“中共独裁政权提倡的官方爱国主义,是‘以党代国’体制的谬论,爱国的实质是要求人民爱独裁政权、爱独裁党、爱独裁者,是盗用爱国主义之名而行祸国殃民之实”;“中共的这一切手段,都是独裁者维持最后统治的权宜之计,根本无法长久地支撑这座已经出现无数裂痕的独裁大厦”。并煽动︰ “通过改变社会来改变政权”;“自由中国的出现,与其寄希望于统治者的‘新政’,远不如寄希望于民间‘新力量’的不断扩张”。

2008年9月至12月间,被告人刘晓波还伙同他人起草、炮制了《零八宪章》,提出“取消一党垄断执政特权”、“在民主宪政的架构下建立中华联邦共和国”等多项主张,试图煽动颠覆现政权。刘晓波在征集三百余人签名后,将《零八宪章》及签名用电子邮件发给境外网站,在“民主中国”、“独立中文笔会”等境外网站上公开发表。

被告人刘晓波作案后被查获归案。

北京市人民检察院第一分院向本院向本院移送了指控被告人刘晓波犯罪的证人证言,现场勘验、检查笔录,电子数据司法鉴定意见书等证据。认為被告人刘晓波的行為触犯了《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第二款之规定,已构成煽动颠覆国家政权罪,罪行重大。提请本院依法判处。

被告人刘晓波在法庭审理中辩称︰自己无罪,自己只是行使宪法赋予公民言论自由的权利,自己所发表的批评性言论,并未给他人带来实际损害,也没有煽动颠覆国家政权。

被告人刘晓波的辩护人在法庭审理中提出的辩护意见是︰公诉机关指控刘晓波撰写的六篇文章及《零八宪章》没有造谣、诽谤、诬蔑的内容。刘晓波所发表的文章属于公民言论自由、表达个人观点的范畴,不构成煽动颠覆国家政权罪。

经审理查明,被告人刘晓波出于对我国人民民主专政的国家政权和社会主义制度的不满,于2005年10月至2007年8月间,在其暂住处北京市海淀区七贤村中国银行宿舍10号楼1单元502号,以撰写并在互联网“观察”、“BBC中文网”等网站发表文章的方式,多次煽动他人颠覆我国国家政权和社会主义制度。刘晓波在发表的《中共的独裁爱国主义》、《难道中国人只配接受“党主民主”》、《通过改变社会来改变政权》、《多面的中共独裁》、《独裁崛起对世界民主化的负面效应》、《对黑窑童奴案的继续追问》文章中诽谤︰“自从中共掌权以来,中共歷代独裁者最在乎的是手中的权力,而最不在乎的就是人的生命”;“中共独裁政权提倡的官方爱国主义,是‘以党代国’体制的谬论,爱国的实质是要求人民爱独裁政权、爱独裁党、爱独裁者,是盗用爱国主义之名而行祸国殃民之实”;“中共的这一切手段,都是独裁者维持最后统治的权宜之计,根本无法长久地支撑这座已经出现无数裂痕的独裁大厦”。并煽动︰“通过改变社会来改变政权”;“自由中国的出现,与其寄希望于统治者的‘新政’,远不如寄希望于民间‘新力量’的不断扩张”。

2008年9月至12月间,刘晓波又伙同他人撰写了题為《零八宪章》的文章,提出“取消一党垄断执政特权”、“在民主宪政的架构下建立中华联邦共和国”等多项煽动性主张。刘晓波伙同他人在征集三百余人对文章的签名后,将《零八宪章》及签名用电子邮件发给境外网站,在“民主中国”、“独立中文笔会”等境外网站上公开发布。刘晓波在互联网站发布的上述文章,被多家网站链接、转载并被多人瀏览。

被告人刘晓波作案后被查获归案。

上述事实,有下列经庭审举证、质证的证据在案证实,本院予以确认。

1、证人刘霞的证言证明︰她是刘晓波的妻子,与刘晓波共同居住在北京市海淀区七贤村中国银行宿舍10号楼1单元502号,家中一共有三台电脑,其中一个台式机,两个笔记本电脑。因為她根本不懂电脑。刘晓波使用电脑主要是写文章和上网,家里只有她和刘晓波两个人单独住,没有其他人,平时家里也不怎幺来客人,刘晓波有聚会也基本都是到外面去。家里的电脑以什幺形式上网她不清楚,是2001年底刘晓波联系安装的。她和刘晓波平日的生活来源就是刘晓波写东西的稿费,刘晓波在银行以她的名字开户,稿费不定期的匯到帐户里,她每月不定期的去银行取钱。

2、中国银行股份有限公司北京市分行和木樨地支行出具的《开户证明》和《银行匯款单据》证明︰刘晓波的妻子刘霞的银行账户接收和支取过境外匯款(外币)。

3、中国联合网络通信有限公司北京市分公司出具的《关于协助对相关数据进行调查的復函》证明︰刘晓波使用的ABSL账号,有上网记录。

4、证人张祖樺的证言证明︰他与刘晓波于2008年年底共同制作完成了《零八宪章》,他也征集了签名,后刘晓波将《零八宪章》发表在境外网站。

5、证人何永勤的证言证明︰2008年12月初,他收到刘晓波发的《零八宪章》的电子邮件,刘晓波让他看后签名,他看后以电子邮件形式回復刘晓波,表示同意签名。

6、证人赵世英的证言证明︰2008年10月份,刘晓波通过网络向他传送了宪章,并征求他的修改意见,让他寻找别人签名,他在一次聚会上拿出宪章给聚会的十多人传看,有四人表示愿签名。刘晓波还通过网络让他到广州征集签名,他到广州征集了五人签名。

7、证人姚博的证言证明︰2008年10月份,刘晓波在一次与他见面时,跟他说了宪章的事,他同意在宪章后签名。

8、证人周舵的证言证明︰2008年11月份的一天,刘晓波到他家给他看了《零八宪章》的文稿,让他帮助修改。刘晓波走后他看了文稿,但没修改。当时没谈签名的事,可后来在网上看到宪章时有他的签名。

9、证人范春三的证言证明︰2008年11月底,他和刘晓波等人一起吃饭时,刘晓波拿出《零八宪章》给他看了,刘晓波问他是否签名,他同意签名。他知道刘晓波在境外的“博讯”、“独立中文笔会”等网站上发表文章,也在网上看到过,刘晓波写的文章内容都是时政评论类的。

10、证人徐君亮、智效民、滕彪的证言证明︰2008年11月至12月间,他们的电子邮箱先后接收到电子邮件《零八宪章》,不知是谁发给他们的,他们分别签名后将《零八宪章》发回了原邮箱。

11、证人王仲夏的证人证言证明︰2008年12月份,他在网上看到了《零八宪章》,他认同文章内容签了名。后他印制了一些《零八宪章》的文化衫,想自己穿和送给别人穿,宣传《零八宪章》。

12、公安机关出具的《搜查笔录》及物证照片证明︰2008年12月8日,公安机关在见证人的见证下,对刘晓波的居住地北京市海淀区七贤村中国银行宿舍10号楼1单元502号进行了搜查,发现并扣压了刘晓波撰写并发送文章到互联网上的工具二台笔记本电脑、一台台式电脑和一份《零八宪章》(征求意见稿)的打印件。

13、北京市网络行业协会电子数据司法鉴定中心出具的《司法鉴定意见书》证明︰2008年12月13日对搜查起获的刘晓波的三台电脑内存储的数据进行了电子数据司法鉴定,鉴定中发现、提取到电子文本《中共的独裁爱国主义》、《难道中国人只配接受“党主民主”》、《通过改变社会来改变政权》、《多面的中共独裁》、《独裁崛起对世界民主化的负面效应》、《对黑窑童奴案的继续追问》和《零八宪章》。

在电脑中的SKYPE聊天软件记录信息中,发现、提取该软件自2008年11月至12月8日间多次发送《零八宪章》及其“征求意见文本”的记录。

14、公安机关出具的现场勘验、检查笔录及工作说明证明︰

(1)2008年12月19日至2008年12月23日,北京市公安局公共信息网络安全监察处一大队,在互联网上发现并下载了暑名“刘晓波”的文章《刘晓波︰中共的独裁爱国主义》,该文章存在于域名為epochtimes.com(大纪元)的网站,该网站服务器位于境外。文章显示发布时间為2005年10月4日。该文章截止至2008年12月23日,在互联网上存在登载或转载该文章的网页链接共计5个。

(2)2008年12月19日至2009年8月3日,北京市公安局公共信息网络安全监察处一大队,在互联网上发现并下载了暑名“刘晓波”的文章《刘晓波︰难道中国人只配接受“党主民主”》, 该文章存在于域名為epochtimes.com(大纪元)和域名為http://www.obseruechina.net/(观察)的网站,网站服务器均位于境外,文章显示发布时间為2006年1月5日和2006年1月6日。该文章截止至2008年12月23日,在互联网上共存在登载或转载该文章的网页链接共计5个,总点击率402次。

(3)、2008年12月20日至2009年8月3日,北京市公安局公共信息网络安全监察处一大队,在互联网上发现并下载了暑名“刘晓波”的文章《刘晓波︰通过改变社会来改变政权》, 该文章存在于域名為epochtimes.com(大纪元)和域名為http://www.obseruechina.net/(观察)的网站,网站服务器均位于境外,文章显示发布时间為2006年2月26日和2006年2月27日。该文章截止至2008年12月23日,在互联网上存在登载或转载文章的网页链接共计5个,总点击率748次。

(4)2008年12月20日至2009年8月3日,北京市公安局公共信息网络安全监察处一大队,在互联网上发现并下载了暑名“刘晓波”的文章《刘晓波︰多面的中共独裁》, 该文章存在于域名為http://www.secretchina.com/(看中国)和域名為http://www.obseruechina.net/(观察)的网站,网站服务器均位于境外,文章显示发布时间為2006年3月13日。该文章截止至2008年12月23日,在互联网上存在登载或转载文章的网页链接共计6个,总点击率512次。

(5)2008年12月20日至2009年8月3日,北京市公安局公共信息网络安全监察处一大队,在互联网上发现并下载了暑名“刘晓波”的文章《刘晓波︰独裁崛起对世界民主化的负面效应》, 该文章存在于域名為http://www.secretchina.com/(看中国)的网站,网站服务器位于境外,文章显示发布时间為2006年5月7日。该文章截止至2008年12月23日,在互联网上存在登载或转载该文章的网页链接共计7个,总点击率57次。

(6)2008年12月20日至2009年8月3日,北京市公安局公共信息网络安全监察处一大队,在互联网上发现并下载了暑名“刘晓波”的文章《刘晓波︰对黑窑童奴案的继续追问》, 该文章存在于域名為http://www.minzhuzhongguo.org/(民主中国)和域名為http://www.renyurenquan.org/(人与人权)的网站,网站服务器均位于境外,文章显示发布时间為2007年8月1日。该文章截止至2008年12月23日,在互联网上存在登载或转载文章的网页链接共计8个,总点击率488次。

(7)2008年12月11日北京市公安局公共信息网络安全监察处一大队,在互联网上发现并下载了标题為《零八宪章》的文章, 该文章存在于域名為http://www.chinesepen.org/(独立中文笔会)的网站,该网站服务器位于境外,显示网络发布时间為2008年12月9日,作者署名為公民群体。同日在域名為boxun.com(博讯)和域名為http://www.minzhuzhongguo.org/(民主中国)的网站,发现并下载了标题為《中国各界人士联合发布<零八宪章>》,网站服务器均位于境外,文章显示发布时间為2008年12月8日和2008年12月9日。上述文章截止至2008年12月12日,在互联网上存在登载或转载该文章的网页链接共计33个,其中境外网站19篇,总点击率5154次,回復158篇。2009年12月9日,在域名為http://www.2008xianzhang.info/(零八宪章)的互联网站发现该网站首页显示截止至2009年12月9日,《零八宪章》签名共计10390人。

(8)、2009年8月14日北京市公安局公共信息网络安全监察处对刘晓波使用的电子邮件进行了核查,经查,刘晓波使用的邮箱属境外,通过密码登录邮箱中核实,邮箱发件箱中最早发件时间為2008-11-25,发送的邮件中有30封涉及发送《零八宪章》。

15、刘晓波签字确认的文章证明︰刘晓波对公安机关网络监管部门下载、保存的文章《刘晓波︰中共的独裁爱国主义》、《刘晓波︰难道中国人只配接受“党主民主”》、《 刘晓波︰通过改变社会来改变政权》、《刘晓波︰多面的中共独裁》、《刘晓波︰独裁崛起对世界民主化的负面效应》、《刘晓波︰对黑窑童奴案的继续追问》、《零八宪章》及从其电脑中提取的电子文本《中共的独裁爱国主义》、《难道中国人只配接受“党主民主”》、《通过改变社会来改变政权》、《多面的中共独裁》、《独裁崛起对世界民主化的负面效应》、《对黑窑童奴案的继续追问》进行了辨认,刘晓波确认辨论的文章是其撰写并发布到互联网上的文章。刘晓波辨论并签字确认的文章,有上述事实认定的煽动性言论。

16、被告人刘晓波的供诉证明︰刘晓波供认其使用电脑撰写上述文章并发布在互联网站上,刘晓波的供述与上述证据可相互印证。

17、公安机关出具的到案经过证明︰北京市公安局于2008年12月8日晚,到刘晓波的住处北京市海淀区七贤村中国银行宿舍10号楼1单元502号将刘晓波抓获。

18、原北京市中级人民法院(1990)中刑字第2373号《刑事判决书》、北京市人民政府劳动教养管理委员会(96)京劳省字第3400号《劳动教养决定书》证明︰刘晓波于1991年1月26日因犯反革命宣传煽动罪被免予刑事处分;1996年9月26日因扰乱社会秩序被处劳动教养三年。

19、公安机关出具的身份证明材料证明了被告人刘晓波的姓名、住址等身份情况。

本院认為,被告人刘晓波以推翻我国人民民主专政的国家政权和社会主义制度為目的,利用互联网传递信息快、传播范围广、社会影响大、公眾关注度高的特点,采用撰写并在互联网上发布文章的方式,诽谤并煽动他人推翻我国国家政权和社会主义制度,其行為已构成煽动颠覆国家政权罪,且犯罪时间长,主观恶性大,发布的文章被广為链接、转载、瀏览,影响恶劣,属罪行重大的犯罪分子,依法应予从严惩处。北京市人民检察院第一分院指控被告人刘晓波犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪的事实清楚、证据确实、充分,指控罪名成立。对于被告人刘晓波在法庭审理中提出的辩解及其辩护人发表的辩护意见,经查,本案庭审查明的事实和证据,已充分证明刘晓波利用互联网的传媒特点,以在互联网上发表诽谤性文章的方式,实施煽动颠覆我国国家政权和社会制度的行為,刘晓波的行為显已超出言论自由的范畴,构成犯罪。故刘晓波的上述辩护及其辩护人发表的辩护意见均不能成立,本院不予采纳。根据被告人刘晓波犯罪的事实、性质、情节和对于社会的危害程度,本院依照《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第二款、第五十五条第一款、第五十六条第一款、第六十四条之规定,判决如下︰

一、 被告人刘晓波犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,判处有期徒刑十一年,剥夺政治权利二年。

(刑期从判决执行之日起计算,判决执行以前先行羈押的,羈押一日折抵刑期一日,即自2009年6月23日起至2020年6月21日止。)

二、 随案移送的刘晓波犯罪所用物品予以没收(请担负后)。

如不服本判决,可在接到本判决书的第二日起十日内,通过本院或直接向北京市高级人民法院提出上述。书面上述的应提交上述状正本一份,副本二份。

审判长贾连春代理审判员郑文伟翟长璽

二****九年十二月二十五日

书记员顾昕

扣押物品处理清单

先烈物品予以没收︰

1、 笔记本电脑(IBM牌T43型)1台

2、 笔记本电脑(联想牌朝阳700Cfe)1台

3、 台式电脑(联想牌家悦型)1台

《零八宪章》征求意见稿(随案卷封存)7页

December 26, 2009 in Commentary, News - Chinese Law | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, December 18, 2009

Three detained in China for tainted milk powder

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

China offers cash incentives to surf porn sites

Actually, this news report says that China's offering cash rewards for those who discover porn sites and report them. But isn't that the same thing?

December 16, 2009 in Commentary, News - Chinese Law | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Is the Antimonopoly Law a protectionist tool?

Not on the basis of what we've seen so far, says Wentong Zheng of SUNY Buffalo Law School in this post on the Antitrust and Competition Policy Blog. Well worth reading.

December 15, 2009 in Commentary, News - Chinese Law | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, December 3, 2009

Rural Development Institute seeks China Country Director for Beijing office

Here's another job opening at RDI:

Rural Development Institute (www.rdiland.org) is hiring a China Country Director in Beijing, China.

RDI is an international nonprofit organization working to secure land rights for the world’s poorest people, those 3.4 billion chiefly rural people who live on less than $2 a day.  For 40 years, RDI professionals have worked with the governments of 40 developing countries, foreign aid agencies, and other partners to design and implement laws, policies, and programs that provide opportunity, further economic growth, and promote social justice. To date, RDI has helped provide land rights to more than 400,000,000 people.

The China Country Director (CCD) will be responsible for helping to define and ultimately for ensuring that the China team meets all RDI’s China program objectives.  The CCD provides leadership, direction, and coordination to China’s program staff in China and ensures coordination with RDI’s staff in the international headquarters to ensure the effective achievement of RDI’s China program objectives.  The CCD will not only lead the overall China program team, but be an active member of that team on various program tasks (research, writing, etc.), including on task teams where s/he plays a supporting rather than a lead role.  The CCD will be responsible – both directly and indirectly through other China team members – for initiating, fostering, and enhancing key partnership relationships with government partners, program partners, and donor partners.  The CCD will be responsible for recommending annual China work plans and budgets to the RDI Management Team and to effectively execute the approved work plans consistent with the budget.  The CCD will provide regular program and financial reports to RDI’s Leadership Team, Board of Directors, and donors.  The CCD will build and maintain a cohesive, effective, collaborative, and collegial China program team.  The CCD will also provide vision, management expertise, information, advice and counsel concerning the affairs of the organization to the President ad CEO.

Qualified candidates will possess;

- Graduate degree in Law, Economics (including Agricultural, Natural Resource or Institutional Economics), Sociology, or a closely related field. Preferred undergraduate degree in area studies, business, anthropology, economics, geography, political science, sociology, or other field related to international development.

- Minimum 10 years overall relevant work experience, a minimum 5 of which should have been in a management position responsible for overall operations of an organization or major program/division as well as revenue generation and/or fundraising.

- Fluency in written and spoken Mandarin.

- Fluency in written and spoken English.

- Strong leadership to set and communicate vision and strategy, team building skills and ability to manage budget processes and P&L.

- Knowledge of public policy, legal, economic, sociological, political, institutional, geographic, and/or anthropological concepts and information.

- Experience in managing senior level relationships – both internal and external – in an international context.

- Communications skills include an ability to make and use distinctions as to types, frequency, tenor, and levels of communications, depending upon the circumstances, audience, recipient, and content.

If you feel you are interested in learning more details about the position, please submit your resume and/or cover letter to resume@smithbryan.com

December 3, 2009 in Internships/Employment Opportunities | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Rural Development Institute seeks rural land rights lawyer for Beijing office

I have received the following announcement:

Rural Development Institute (www.rdiland.org) is hiring a Rural Land Rights Lawyer in Beijing, China.  

RDI is an international nonprofit organization working to secure land rights for the world’s poorest people, those 3.4 billion chiefly rural people who live on less than $2 a day.  For 40 years, RDI professionals have worked with the governments of 40 developing countries, foreign aid agencies, and other partners to design and implement laws, policies, and programs that provide opportunity, further economic growth, and promote social justice. To date, RDI has helped provide land rights to more than 400,000,000 people.

The Rural Land Rights Lawyer will provide legal, policy, and implementation input and expertise on issues involving the land rights of China’s farmers, and especially those of women farmers.  The Lawyer will conduct legal and social science research (both from the desk and in the field), and work with teams to both prepare and present legal education programs, analytical reviews, research papers, draft legislation, regulations, surveys, training programs, presentations, and other products.  As a part of these activities, the Lawyer will manage the related assignments, programs, projects, and tasks, and also pursue private donor funding, fee-for-service opportunities, and public sector grants.  (S)he may also be asked to perform other management and administrative tasks.

Qualified candidates will possess:

- A law degree from an accredited law school.

- Fluency in written and spoken Mandarin.

- Fluency in written and spoken English.

- Minimum of 3 years of public or private sector professional legal work, preferably with experience in legal aid and education or other public interest issues in China.

- Knowledge of legal, economic, sociological, political, institutional, geographic, and anthropological concepts and information.

- Ability to work collaboratively with a range of people at all levels, including those from host country governmental and non-governmental organizations, and other counterparts, clients, donors, and grantors.

- Communications skills include an ability to make and use distinctions as to types, frequency, tenor, and levels of communications, depending upon the circumstances, audience, recipient, and content.

If you are interested in learning more details about the position, please submit your resume and/or cover letter to resume@smithbryan.com

December 3, 2009 in Internships/Employment Opportunities | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)