Intermediate Court of Xuzhou, Jiangsu
Criminal Judgment
(2019) Su 03 Criminal First Instance No. 201
****
Translator's Summary: The court found Yu, a lawyer who represented Wang Quanzhang, guilty on the grounds that he "published open letters on the Internet through 'Twitter' and 'Facebook' to attack the State regime and the socialist system. He distorted and fabricated facts about, and sensationalized, hot-button domestic incidents in the name of 'rights defense.' He accepted foreign funds and interviews many times, denied the leadership of the Communist Party of China, denigrated China's governmental and judicial agencies, defamed China's rule of law as being in retreat and human rights as deteriorating, intentionally provoked people who did not know the truth to hate China's current political system, and incited subversion of China's State regime and the overthrow of the socialist order."
The public prosecution agency was the People's Procuratorate of Xuzhou.
****
Defendant Yu Wensheng, male, born [INTENTIONALLY DELETED], 1967, residential ID No. [INTENTIONALLY DELETED], Han ethnicity, undergraduate degree, unemployed, residing in [INTENTIONALLY DELETED], Shijingshan District, Beijing. On January 20, 2018, he was detained by the Public Security Bureau of Beijing, Shijingshan Division on suspicion of committing the crime of obstructing an official in the exercise of their duty. On January 24, 2018, he was taken into criminal detention by the Public Security Bureau of Tongshan District, Xuzhou on suspicion of committing the crime of inciting subversion of state power. On the 27th of that month he was ordered placed under residential confinement at a designated location. On April 19, 2018, the People's Procuratorate of Xuzhou authorized his arrest on suspicion of committing the crimes of inciting subversion of state power and obstructing an official in the exercise of their duty. On the same day the Public Security Bureau of Xuzhou carried out the arrest. He is currently being held in detention at the Xuzhou Detention Center.
Defense counsel Zhao Qiang is a lawyer at the Jiangsu Pengcheng Law Firm.
Defense counsel Yue Song is a lawyer at the Jiangsu Qianlong Law Firm.
In the Xu Procuratorate Prosecution Criminal Indictment (2019) No. 10 indictment, the People's Procuratorate of Xuzhou charged defendant Yu Wensheng with committing the crime of inciting subversion of state power, and filed a public prosecution with this Court. Following the Supreme People's Court's designation of jurisdiction, after this Court opened and docketed the case, on February 11, 2019, it formed a collegial panel in accordance with the law, and on May 9, 2019 tried this case in open court. The People's Procuratorate of Xuzhou assigned Procurator Deputy Director Bao Shuhua, and Procurators Li Qingquan and Rong Hui to appear in court in support of the public prosecution, and defendant Yu Wensheng and his defense counsels Zhao Qiang and Yue Song appeared in court to participate in the proceedings.
During the trial, an extension of time for the trial in this case was granted by the High People's Court of Jiangsu and the Supreme People's Court in accordance with the law. It was also researched by this Court's adjudicative committee. The trial has now concluded.
The People's Procuratorate of Xuzhou charged: Defendant Yu Wensheng, having been affected by the influence of the infiltration of anti-China forces, gradually formed the idea of subverting the State regime and overthrowing the socialist order. Between 2014 and January 2018, Yu Wensheng published open letters on the Internet through "Twitter" and "Facebook" to attack the State regime and the socialist system. He distorted and fabricated facts about, intervened in, and sensationalized sensitive domestic incidents in the name of "rights defense." He accepted foreign funds and interviews, discredited Party and State leaders, denied the leadership of the Communist Party of China, denigrated governmental and judicial agencies, defamed the rule of law as being in retreat and human rights as deteriorating, and incited subversion of China's State regime and the overthrow of the socialist order. The specific facts are described as follows:
1. From July 2014 to 2017, when defendant Yu Wensheng was practicing in Beijing Daoheng Law Firm he acted in several "Falun Gong" cases. Knowing that "Falun Gong" was a cult organization, Yu Wensheng gave interviews to the foreign media outlets "New Tang Dynasty" and "Voice of Hope," and publicly denied the cult nature of "Falun Gong," advocating on its behalf and portraying it in a positive light, and smearing China's persecution of Falun Gong."
2. From July 2015 to August 2017, while the Tianjin judiciary was, in accordance with the law, dealing with the case of lawyers Wang Yu, Wang Quanzhang and others who were suspected of inciting subversion of state power, defendant Yu Wensheng fabricated false facts about the judiciary's "illegal" handling of the case and published them via "WeChat," "Twitter," "Facebook" and other channels, maliciously denigrating China's judiciary.
3. Defendant Yu Wensheng joined the WeChat group of the China Human Rights Lawyers Group in 2014, and in 2015, 2016, and 2017 Yu Wensheng was interviewed three times by foreign media outlets such as "Radio Free Asia" and "New Tang Dynasty" in his capacity as the interview contact of that WeChat group, making false claims that China "has no legal order," and that "the rule of law is in retreat" and "human rights are in retreat," thereby distorting the current status of rule of law in China.
4. From 2015 to 2017, defendant Yu Wensheng used "Twitter" and gave interviews to foreign media outlets to fabricate false statements that he was on "death row" and attacked China's governmental and judicial agencies.
5. From 2014 to 2018, defendant Yu Wensheng gave interviews several times to foreign media outlets such as "Radio Free Asia" and "Voice of America" in which he smeared the government's image and rejected China's political system and legal system. During this period, Yu Wensheng received funding from foreign organizations many times.
6. On the afternoon of October 18, 2017, defendant Yu Wensheng's "Lawyer Yu Wensheng's Open Letter" was posted on foreign websites such as "Facebook" and "Twitter." It denigrated Party and State leaders, and rejected the Party's leadership. The following morning, Yu Wensheng deleted the posts after being interviewed by the Justice Bureau of Shijingshan District, Beijing. On January 16, 2018, Yu Wensheng once again posted the article on "Facebook" and "Twitter." In the early morning of January 18, 2018, Yu Wensheng concocted the "Yu Wensheng's Open Letter on a Proposal to Amend the Constitution" and published it on "Facebook" and "Twitter," rejecting the organizational form of China's existing regime and the leadership of the Party and the socialist system. As of February 1, 2018, the aforementioned two articles were retweeted and liked by hundreds of people, and were reposted and disseminated by many foreign websites such as "Bannedbook.org," "wqw2010.blogspot.com," and "Boxun.com.
In order to prove the aforementioned charged facts, the public prosecution agency provided documentary evidence including the articles published by defendant Yu Wensheng that incited subversion of state power, and a detailed record of bank cards receiving foreign funding; testimony of witnesses Sha Lin, Chen Min, Ji Aihua and others; defendant Yu Wensheng's statement; the voiceprint forensic opinion produced by the Public Security Office of Jiangsu's Material Forensics Center; the remote crime scene investigation, investigation experiments and other records produced by the Public Security Bureau of Xuzhou; audio-visual materials of Yu Wensheng giving interviews to foreign media outlets collected by the Public Security Bureau of Xuzhou, and electronic data.
The People's Procuratorate of Xuzhou maintains that defendant Yu Wensheng used the spreading of rumors, defamation, and other means to incite subversion of state power and the overthrow of the socialist order abroad, that his actions constitute the commission of an offense under the provisions of Article 105(2) of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China," and he should be subject to criminal liability for inciting subversion of state power. At the same time they point out that the subjective malice of defendant Yu Wensheng's subversion of state power was relatively significant, the circumstances of the crime were malicious and involved resisting arrest and violence towards civil police, and in accordance with the law should be subjected to severe punishment.
Defendant Yu Wensheng did not raise any objections to the charged criminal facts and offense, pleaded guilty and repented in court and requested leniency.
The main defense opinions put forward by the defense counsels were: After being taken into police custody Yu Wensheng made truthful statements about the criminal facts and spoke openly about the circumstances. From the time he was taken into police custody through the trial Yu Wensheng showed a good attitude in pleading guilty and repenting in court. They requested leniency.
It was ascertained at trial that, over a long period of time defendant Yu Wensheng, having been affected by the influence of the infiltration of anti-China forces, gradually formed the idea of subverting China's State regime and overthrowing the socialist order. Between 2014 and January 2018, Yu Wensheng published open letters on the Internet through "Twitter" and "Facebook" to attack the State regime and the socialist system. He distorted and fabricated facts about, and sensationalized, hot-button domestic incidents in the name of "rights defense." He accepted foreign funds and interviews many times, denied the leadership of the Communist Party of China, denigrated China's governmental and judicial agencies, defamed China's rule of law as being in retreat and human rights as deteriorating, intentionally provoked people who did not know the truth to hate China's current political system, and incited subversion of China's State regime and the overthrow of the socialist order. The specific facts are described as follows:
I. From July 2014 to 2017, defendant Yu Wensheng, knowing that "Falun Gong" was a cult organization, gave many interviews to the foreign media outlets "New Tang Dynasty" and "Voice of Hope," and publicly denied the cult nature of "Falun Gong," flagrantly advocated on its behalf and portrayed it in a positive light, denigrated China's laws and policies, smeared the image of the government, and vainly attempted to incite subversion of China's State regime.
The aforementioned facts are confirmed by evidence submitted by the public prosecution agency and cross-examined in court, and the following evidence is hereby confirmed by this Court:
1. The article and audio of the interview Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlet "New Tang Dynasty" on September 13, 2016 retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng proved: Yu Wensheng gave an interview to New Tang Dynasty, saying that "The authorities' suppression of Falun Gong for 17 years is completely wrong and it is a political persecution. Now the behavior of the police, procuratorate, and judiciary is a crime."
2. The article and audio of the interview Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlet "Voice of Hope" on December 15, 2016 (with the title"Innocent Falun Gong Practitioners are Being Released in Many Places, the Persecution has Reached the End of the Road") retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation, and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng proved: Yu Wensheng gave an interview to the "Voice of Hope," and when the "Voice of Hope" said "Some people continue to suppress Falun Gong", Yu Wensheng responded, "The police, prosecutors, and law enforcement agencies are pushing each other on the Falun Gong issue. This is a good thing. After all, some people are starting to wake up."
3. The article and audio of the interview Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlet "New Tang Dynasty" on October 4, 2017 (with the title "People in Mainland China Respectfully Wish Master Li Hongzhi and Students a Happy Mid-Autumn Festival") retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng proved: Yu Wensheng gave an interview to "New Tang Dynasty" and said "The Falun Gong group is a very kind-hearted group, which only brings benefits to society, it is not harmful."
4. Defendant Yu Wensheng's statement: The statements he made when he gave interviews to "New Tang Dynasty" and "Voice of Hope" did in fact deny "Falun Gong's" cult qualities had no basis in truth, was an attack on China's legal system, confused public opinion, and made more people dissatisfied with the Party and government and China's legal system. He utilized foreign media outlets because they can incite more people to believe that the Party and government's suppression of "Falun Gong" is wrong, and thereby attack and smear the Party and Government.
II. From July 2015 to August 2017, while the Tianjin judiciary was, in accordance with the law, dealing with the case of lawyers Wang Yu, Wang Quanzhang and others who were suspected of inciting subversion of state power, defendant Yu Wensheng fabricated false facts such as "Wang Yu has been forcibly disappeared and his family has not received any legal documentation," "the public security agency is conducting mass arrests and terrorizing lawyers, its a violation of law and order," and " "the judiciary is illegally blocking meetings." He used "Twitter" and "Facebook" to post, denigrating China's judiciary and intentionally inciting individuals who did not know the truth to become dissatisfied and confrontational, all in order to achieve the goal of inciting subversion of China's State regime.
The aforementioned facts are confirmed by evidence submitted by the public prosecution agency and cross-examined in court, and the following evidence is hereby confirmed by this Court:
1. The article about sending a complaint letter and the article and images regarding the lawyer Wang Quanzhang posted by Yu Wensheng on his "Twitter" account on August 1, 2015 and March 6, 2017, and the article about his lawyer's professional annual inspection and Wang Quanzhang's case he posted on his "Facebook" account on July 29, 2017 retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation proved: In an effort to sensationalize the Wang Quanzhang and other cases, Yu Wensheng concocted a complaint letter saying that "The Ministry of Public Security violated the law and government order, forcibly disappearing Chinese citizens, creating an atmosphere of terror, and committing evil acts against humanity." It was mailed to multiple agencies and spread through "Twitter."
2. The "Yu Wensheng and His Wife Xu Yan: Statement on the Criminal Detention of Lawyer Wang Yu" published on the foreign website "wqw2010.blogspot.com" on July 19, 2015 and the electronic version of that "Statement" extracted from the computer of Yu Wensheng, the article "The Family Members and Lawyers of the Parties Implicated in the 709 Mass Arrests Went to the Tianjin Hexi Detention Center to Demand a Meeting, Terminate the Cases, and Release the People" published on "wqw2010.blogspot.com" on January 8, 2016, and the complaint letter regarding Yu Wensheng's handling of the 709 cases sent to 21 agencies published on "wqw2010.blogspot.com" and "New Tang Dynasty" on March 7 and 8, 2017, respectively, retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation proved: Yu Wensheng's wife issued a statement slandering China Central Television and other media for "rendering judgment before the trial;" Yu Wensheng sent a complaint letter to multiple agencies regarding the Wang Quanzhang case, and used foreign media outlets such as "wqw2010.blogspot.com"and "New Tang Dynasty" to sensationalize it.
3. The article and audio of the interview Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlet "Mirror TV Rule of Law Channel" on August 20, 2017 retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng proved: Yu Wensheng was interviewed by the "Mirror TV Rule of Law Channel" and said "The accusation is that they are inhuman. In fact, as far as fighting a counterattack against the 709 is concerned, it was really me who started the actual counterattack. I was the first person."
4. Defendant Yu Wensheng's statement: On July 19, 2015, he and his wife Xu Yan issued a statement for Wang Yu, condemning China Central Television and Xinhua Net, saying that they had stigmatized lawyer Wang Yu and others by rendering judgment before the trial. On July 31, 2015, they sent a statement to the National People's Congress, the State Council, etc. mailing a complaint letter, accusing the Ministry of Public Security of conducting mass arrests, intimidating lawyers and citizens, rendering judgment before the trial, and acting in an inhuman manner that violated the law and government order. They posted the accusation information on the "Twitter" website. The contents were all his distorted facts, fabricated out of nothing, and the purpose was to arouse people's dissatisfaction with the public prosecutors and the law. His interview with the "Mirror TV Rule of Law Channel" involved the 709 Wang Quanzhang case, and included content about dissatisfaction with China's legal system.
III. Defendant Yu Wensheng joined the "China Human Rights Lawyers Group" WeChat group in 2014, and for three years from 2015 to 2017 Yu Wensheng was interviewed by foreign media outlets such as "Radio Free Asia" and "New Tang Dynasty" in his capacity as the interview contact of that WeChat group, and he repeatedly made false claims that "There is no legal order in China, and inhuman oppression is the main problem," "China's legal system and human rights are regressing, and human rights in China are deteriorating, and human rights violations are on the increase," distorting the status of the rule of law in China, smearing the image of the Party and government, denying the achievements of socialist construction, and intending to overthrow China's current system.
The aforementioned facts are confirmed by evidence submitted by the public prosecution agency and cross-examined in court, and the following evidence is hereby confirmed by this Court:
1. The article and audio of the interview Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlet "Radio Free Asia" on September 13, 2015 retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng proved: When Yu Wensheng gave an interview he said: "What we are facing is inhuman suppression without legal order by the authorities."
2. The article and audio of the interview Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlet "Radio Free Asia" on September 14, 2016 retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng proved: When Yu Wensheng gave an interview he said: "The rule of law in China has not progressed, on the contrary it is increasingly in retreat."
3. The article and audio of the interview Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlet "New Tang Dynasty" on September 14, 2017 retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng proved: When Yu Wensheng gave an interview he said:"The authorities are the ones undermining the rule of law."
4. The "Situation Explanation" produced by the Ministry of Civil Affairs proved: The Ministry of Civil Affairs has not registered the "China Human Rights Lawyers Group" or the "China Human Rights Lawyers Service Group."
5. Defendant Yu Wensheng's statement: Around January 2014, he joined the "China Human Rights Lawyers Group" WeChat group and gave many interviews to foreign media regarding the "Chinese Human Rights Lawyers Group." The statements he made were not based on facts, they distorted facts, spread rumors, and defamed, attacked, and smeared the government.
IV. From 2015 to 2017, defendant Yu Wensheng intentionally fabricated false facts that a "death row" system existed in China, used "Twitter" and accepted interviews with foreign media outlets to spread false statements that he was being held in custody on "death row," and attacked and smeared China's governmental and judicial agencies, intending to incite subversion of China's State regime.
The aforementioned facts are confirmed by evidence submitted by the public prosecution agency and cross-examined in court, and the following evidence is hereby confirmed by this Court:
1. The article and audio of the interview Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlet "Mirror TV Rule of Law Channel" on August 20, 2017 (with the title "Lawyer Without a Firm Yu Wensheng – There is No Safe Place in China"), retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng proved: Yu Wensheng gave an interview to "Mirror TV Rule of Law Channel" and said: "I was imprisoned on death row for 61 days, and I used everything that was used by death row prisoners. Anyone who was put on death row would have succumbed."
2. Yu Wensheng's personal signature "Twitter" account retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation proved: Yu Wensheng made "death row" his personal signature content.
3. The "Situation Explanation" produced by the Beijing No. 1 Detention Center proved: In 2014, Yu Wensheng was held in custody on suspicion of disturbing the peace at the Beijing No. 1 Detention Center, and that Center does not have any dedicated rooms specifically to holding condemned criminals in custody.
4. Defendant Yu Wensheng's statement: Foreign media outlets interviewed him many times. He fabricated the issue of "death row" and spread it to attack China's judiciary, and incite people’s dissatisfaction with the Party and government. He fabricated the existence of a "death row," and it was without factual basis.
V. From 2014 to 2018, defendant Yu Wensheng accepted interviews several times with foreign media outlets such as "Radio Free Asia," "Voice of America" and "New Tang Dynasty," during which he used means such as spreading rumors and defamation to spread statements that smeared the Party's and the government's image and rejected China's political system and legal system, all to achieve the goal of inciting subversion of China's State power and socialist system through international networks. During this period, Yu Wensheng accepted funding from foreign organizations such as Ireland's Front Line Defenders many times.
The aforementioned facts are confirmed by evidence submitted by the public prosecution agency and cross-examined in court, and the following evidence is hereby confirmed by this Court:
1. The article and audio of the interview Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlet "Radio Free Asia" on September 26, 2016 (with the title "The Ministry of Justice Issued a document to Ban Lawyers from Creating Pressure from Public Opinion, Triggering Strong Backlash from the Legal Profession") retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng proved: Yu Wensheng gave an interview to "Radio Free Asia" and said:"The Law Firm Management Measures are like the new National Security Law and Cyber-Security Law. They are all draconian laws and further oppress human rights lawyers."
2. The article and audio of the interview Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlet "Voice of America" on September 21, 2017 (with the title "VOA Connects with Yu Wensheng: Beijing's Two Human Rights Law Firms Have Been Repeatedly Investigated, Is This a New Wave of Suppression of Human Rights Lawyers?") retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng, the testimony of witnesses Chen Min and Peng Mei, and documentary evidence of the 2017 investigation records of the Beijing Shijingshan District Justice Bureau and the Xicheng District Justice Bureau proved: In 2017 the Beijing Shijingshan District Justice Bureau and the Xicheng District Justice Bureau conducted inspections of many law firms such as the Beijing Mo Shaoping Law Firm and the Daoheng Law Firm, Yu Wensheng gave an interview to the "Voice of America" saying this inspection is a targeted suppression of the aforementioned two law firms, and that China's human rights situation continues to deteriorate, and the rule of law continues to deteriorate.
3. The article and audio of the interviews Yu Wensheng gave to the foreign media outlets "New Tang Dynasty" and "Radio Free Asia" on January 17 and 18, 2018 retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation and the text material prepared based on the audio signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng, the documentary evidence Proposal of the Beijing Shijingshan District Justice Bureau on the Cancellation of Yu Wensheng's Lawyer Professional Certificate, and the Decision of the Beijing Municipal Justice Bureau Canceling Yu Wensheng's Lawyer Professional Certificate proved: After his lawyer’s professional certificate was canceled in accordance with the law he was not employed by a law firm for six months, Yu Wensheng accepted interviews with "New Tang Dynasty" and "Radio Free Asia" and said "The cancellation of the lawyer’s certificate can only prove the regime is a rogue regime, and I will not be silent on this," and "China's political parties have not been legally registered and have no legal status. All political parties are illegal organizations."
4. Documentary evidence including an Ireland Front Line Defenders application for funding confirmation form signed and confirmed by Yu Wensheng, Yu Wensheng's Agricultural Bank of China account's receipt of a Western Union remittance from Ireland, a "receipt" for RMB 20,000 from the Hong Kong Human Rights Lawyers Concern Group received by Yu Wensheng for acting as counsel in the Zhu Yingdi case collected from Yu Wensheng's laptop computer, the chat records with Xiaojun VAL from the SKYPE account used by Yu Wensheng, transaction details of Yu Wensheng's China Construction Bank bank card, Xu Yan's immigration records from 2016 to 2017, and Yu Wensheng's statement proved: Yu Wensheng accepted financial assistance from the "Ireland Front Line Defenders" organization many times.
5. Defendant Yu Wensheng's statement: When he gave an interview to "Radio Free Asia" he mentioned that the National Security Law, Charity Law, and NGO related laws and regulations are all evil laws, and the new administrative measures were intended to suppress human rights lawyers, and China does not have human rights. This was actually him smearing the Party and the government, expressing his dissatisfaction with the Party and the government. He also said that all political parties in China are illegal organizations, which was a rejection of China's existing Party system. When he gave an interview to the "Voice of America" he said law firms would be purged before the 19th National Congress, and there will be no progress in human rights after the 19th National Congress. He gave an interview to "New Tang Dynasty" and said the cancellation of his lawyer's license was a way for the authorities to suppress him, which can only prove that this regime is a rogue regime.
VI. On the afternoon of October 18, 2017, defendant Yu Wensheng's "Lawyer Yu Wensheng's Open Letter" was posted on "Facebook" and "Twitter." It denigrated Party and State leaders, and rejected the Party's leadership. On January 16, 2018, Yu Wensheng once again posted that article on "Facebook" and "Twitter." In the early morning of January 18, 2018, Yu Wensheng concocted the "Yu Wensheng's Open Letter on a Proposal to Amend the Constitution" and published it on "Facebook" and "Twitter," rejecting the organizational form of China's existing regime and the leadership of the Party and the foundations of the socialist system. As of February 1, 2018, the aforementioned two articles were retweeted and liked by hundreds of people, and were reposted and disseminated by many foreign websites such as "Bannedbook.org," "wqw2010.blogspot.com," and "Boxun.com.
The aforementioned facts are confirmed by evidence submitted by the public prosecution agency and cross-examined in court, and the following evidence is hereby confirmed by this Court:
1. An article with the title "Lawyer Yu Wensheng's Open Letter" posted by Yu Wensheng on his Twitter and Facebook accounts on January 16, 2018, and an article with the title "Yu Wensheng's Open Letter on a Proposal to Amend the Constitution" posted by Yu Wensheng on his Twitter and Facebook accounts on January 18, 2018, which were reported on over 10 foreign websites including "wqw2010.blogspot.com," "Boxun.com," and "Bannedbook.org," and were retrieved by the public security agency through remote crime scene investigation proved: Yu Wensheng published two open letters via "Twitter" and "Facebook," which were reposted by many foreign websites.
2. The electronic evidence inspection records of the public security agency on Yu Wensheng’s two laptop computers, and the utilization investigation experiments of the "Twitter" and "Facebook" account registration proved that the "Twitter" and "Facebook" accounts that published statements that incited subversive were used by Yu Wensheng himself.
3. Testimony of witnesses Gao Weihua, Ji Aihua, Chen Min, and Sha Lin, staff of the of Shijingshan District Justice Bureau, and Lu Kai and Wang Weicivil police at the Public Security Bureau of Beijing, Shijingshan Division, audio and video recordings and written records of Shijingshan District Justice Bureau's interview with Yu Wensheng, and Yu Wensheng's Commitment Letter proved:On October 18, 2017 Yu Wensheng was interviewed by the Shijingshan District Justice Bureau, and admitted he posted the aforementioned opened letters.
4. Defendant Yu Wensheng's statement: At about two o'clock in the afternoon on October 18, 2017, he used his mobile phone to compose the article "Lawyer Yu Wensheng's Open Letter" at his home, and used wall-climbing software to post the article on "Facebook" and "Twitter." He wrote that since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, unjust imprisonment and corruption have been rampant. This was a rejection of the 97-year history of the founding of the Communist Party of China and the 68-year history of the founding of the government, and was a kind of making something out of nothing. The Lei Yang Incident, Qing'an Incident, and the suppression of the New Citizens that were listed were are all distortions of the facts. The goal was to reject China's existing system and smear the Party and the government. Regarding the articles on amending the Constitution on Facebook and Twitter, the purpose of proposing constitutional amendments was to deny the leadership of the Communist Party of China, deny the system of multi-party cooperation under the leadership of the Communist Party of China, deny the Party's leadership of the army, and deny China's electoral system.
In order to prove the charged criminal facts, the public prosecution agency submitted comprehensive evidence to this Court including evidentiary materials such as defendant Yu Wensheng's statement regarding his subjective intent to incite subversion of state power, Yu Wensheng's Statement of Repentance and remote crime scene investigation records, electronic evidence investigation records, voice identification forensic opinions, the description of the case resolution process, audio and video recording materials of Yu Wensheng's apprehension, testimony of witnesses Liu Yang, Fan Jingsheng, and other civil police officers, search records, list of seized items, and Permanent Residential Population Information Inquiry Forms, all of which were produced and examined in court, and their probative value is confirmed by this Court.
This Court finds defendant Yu Wensheng incited subversion of state power and the overthrow of the socialist order by spreading rumors and defamation and other means, his actions constitute the crime of inciting subversion of state power, the facts charged by the People's Procuratorate of Xuzhou that defendant Yu Wensheng committed the crime of inciting subversion of state power are clear, the evidence is reliable and copious, and the charged offense is established. The opinion proffered by the public prosecution agency the subjective malice was relatively significant, the circumstances of the crime were malicious and involved resisting arrest and violence towards civil police, and in accordance with the law should be subjected to severe punishment is sustained.
The opinion proffered by defense counsel that defendant Yu Wensheng was able to truthfully state criminal facts at all stages from investigation and pre-prosecution examination through the trial, has been frank about the circumstances, and showed a good attitude in pleading guilty and repenting in court, and in accordance with the law he should be shown leniency, is established.
Based on the principle that the punishment should be proportional to the crime and a comprehensive consideration of the criminal facts, nature, circumstances, and the degree of harm to society in this case, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 105(2), 55(1), 56(1), 67(3), and 64 of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China," the judgment is as follows:
1. Defendant Yu Wensheng committed the crime of inciting subversion of state power, and is sentenced to a fixed term imprisonment of four years and three years deprivation of political rights.
(The prison term is to be calculated starting on the day the judgment is executed, and each day in custody prior to the execution of the judgment shall count as one day of the prison term, that is from April 19, 2018 to March 1, 2022.)
2. The relevant items used in the commission of the crime seized in this case shall be confiscated in accordance with the law and turned over to the national treasury.
If any party does not accept this judgment, they may within 10 days after the second day after receiving this written judgment bring an appeal through this Court or directly to the High People's Court of Jiangsu. A written appeal should be submitted with one original and two copies of the appeal brief.
Chief Adjudicator Qiu Xuefeng
Adjudicator Liu Mingwei
Adjudicator Sun Xi
June 17, 2020
Judge's Assistant Li Tongda
Clerk Wang Yan
江苏省徐州市中级人民法院
刑事判决书
(2019)苏03刑初20号
公诉机关江苏省徐州市人民检察院。
被告人余文生,男,1967年[INTENTIONALLY DELETED]生,居民身份证号码[INTENTIONALLY DELETED],汉族,本科文化,无业,住北京市石景山区[INTENTIONALLY DELETED],因涉嫌犯妨害公务罪,2018年1月20日被北京市公安局石景山分局刑事拘留;因涉嫌犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,2018年1月24日被徐州市铜山区公安局刑事拘留,当月27日被该局指定居所监视居住;因涉嫌犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,妨害公务罪,2018年4月19日经江苏省徐州市人民检察院批准逮捕,同日由徐州市公安局执行逮捕,现羁押于徐州市看守所。
辩护人赵强,江苏彭城律师事务所律师。
辩护人岳松,江苏乾隆律师事务所律师。
江苏省徐州市人民检察院以徐检诉刑诉[2019]10号起诉书指控被告人余文生犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,向本院提起公诉。经最高人民法院指定管辖,本院2019年2月11日立案受理后,依法组成合议庭,于2019年5月9日公开开庭审理了本案,江苏省徐州市人民检察院指派副检察长鲍书华,检察员李清泉,荣辉出庭支持公诉,被告人余文生及其辩护人赵强,岳松到庭参加诉讼。审理期间,本案经江苏省高级人民法院、最高人民法院批准,依法延长审限,并经本院审判委员会研究,现已审理终结。
江苏省徐州市人民检察院指控:被告人余文生受反华势力渗透影响,逐渐形成颠覆我国国家政权,推翻社会主义制度的思想,2014年至2018年1月间,余文生通过“推特”“脸书”等途径在互联网发布攻击国家政权和社会主义制度的公开信;以“维权”为名,歪曲,捏造事实,插手,炒作国内敏感案事件;接受境外资助和采访,抹黑党和国家领导人,否定中国共产党的领导,诋毁政府和司法机关,诽谤法治倒退,人权恶化,煽动颠覆我国国家政权,推翻社会主义制度,具体事实分述如下:
一、2014年7月至2017年,被告人余文生在北京市道衡律师事务所执业期间,代理多起“法轮功”案件,余文生在明知“法轮功”为邪教组织的情况下,接受“新唐人”“希望之声”等境外媒体采访,公开否定“法轮功”的邪教性质,对其进行宣扬和美化,污蔑中国迫害“法轮功”。
二、2015年7月至2017年8月,被告人余文生在天津市司法机关依法办理律师王宇,王全璋等人涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权案期间,捏造司法机关“违法”办案等虚假事实,通过“微信”“推特”“脸书”等途径发布,恶意诋毁我国司法机关。
三、2014年被告人余文生加入中国人权律师团微信群,2015、2016、2017年余文生以该微信群采访联系人的身份三次接受“自由亚洲”“新唐人”等境外媒体采访,妄称中国“毫无法律秩序法治倒退人权倒退”,歪曲我国法治现状。
四、2015年至2017年,被告人余文生通过“推特”和接受境外媒体采访,捏造自己被羁押在“死囚牢”的不实言论,攻击我国政府和司法机关。
五、2014年至2018年,被告人余文生多次接受“自由亚洲”“美国之音”等境外媒体的采访,抹黑政府形象,否定我国政治制度和法律制度。期间,余文生多次接受境外组织资助。
六、2017年10月18日下午,被告人余文生地的“余文生律师的公开信”,在“脸书”“推特”等境外网站上发布,诋毁党和国家领导人,否定党的领导。次日凌晨,余文生被北京市石景山区司法局约谈后删帖,2018年1月16日,余文生再次将该文在“脸书”“推特”上发布,2018年1月18日凌晨,余文生炮制“余文生关于建议修改宪法的公开信”,在“脸书”“推特”上发布,否定我国现有政权组织形式,否定党的领导和社会主义制度。
截至2018年2月1日,上述两篇文章被数百人转推点赞,被“参与网”“维权网“博讯网”等多家境外网站转起,传播。
为证明上述指控事实,公诉机关提供了被告人余文生发表的煽动颠覆国家政权的文章,接受境外资助的银行卡明细记录等书证,证人沙霖,陈敏、纪爱华等人的证言,被告人余文生的供述,江苏省公安厅物证鉴定中心出具的声纹鉴定意见,徐州市公安局出具的远程勘验、侦查实验等笔录,徐州市公安局提取的余文生接受境外媒体采访的视听资料,电子数据等证据。
江苏省徐州市人民检察院认为,被告人余文生以造谣,诽谤等方式在境内外煽动颠覆国家政权,推翻社会主义制度,其行为触犯了《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第二款的规定,应当以煽动颠覆国家政权罪追究其刑事责任,同时提出被告人余文生煽动颠覆国家政权主观恶性较大,犯罪情节恶劣、为抗拒抓捕又暴力致伤民警,依法应予严惩。
被告人余文生对指控的犯罪事实及罪名均不持异议,当庭认罪悔罪,请求从轻处罚。
辩护人提出的主要辩护意见是:余文生到案后如实供述了法犯罪事实,具有坦白情节;余文生归案后直至庭审认罪悔罪态度好。请求从轻处罚。
经审理查明,被告人余文生长期受反华势力渗透影响,逐渐形成颠覆我国国家政权,推翻社会主义制度的思想。2014年至2018年1月间,被告人余文生通过“推特”“脸书”等途径,在互联网发布攻击我国国家政权和社会主义制度的公开信;以“维权”为名,歪曲、捏造事实,炒作社会热点案事件;多次接受境外媒体采访,否定中国共产党的领导,诋毁我国政府和司法机关,诽谤我国法治倒退,人权恶化,意图挑起不明真相的人仇视我国现行政治制度,煽动颠覆我国国家政权,推翻社会主义制度。具体犯罪事实分述如下:
一、2014年7月至2017年,被告人余文生在明知“法轮功”系邪教组织的情況下,多次接受“新唐人”“希望之声”等境外媒体采访,公开否定“法轮功”邪教性质,公然宣扬和美化“法轮功”,诋毁国家法律政策,抹黑政府形象,妄图煽动颠覆我国国家政权。
上述事实,有公诉机关提交并经庭审举证、质证,本院予以确认的下列证据证实:
1.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的境外媒体“新唐人”2016年9月13日报道采访余文生的文章和音频、余文生签字确认的根据该音频整理的文字材料证明:余文生接受“新唐人”采访,称“当局对法轮功十七年来的打压是完全错误的,是政治迫害,现在公检法的行为是犯罪”。
2.公安机关通过远程勘验調取的境外媒体“希望之声”2016年12月15日报道采访余文生的文章和音频(题目为“多地无罪释放法轮功学员,迫害已穷途末路”),余文生签字确认的根据该音频整理的文字材料证明:余文生接受“希望之声”采访,针对“希望之声“称“有些人对法轮功还是继续打压”,余文生回应“公检法部门在法轮功问题上互相推透,是一件好事,毕竟有些人在觉醒”。
3.公安机关通过远程勘验取的境外媒体“新唐人2017年10月4日报道采访余文生的文章和音频(题目为“大陆民众恭祝李洪志大师和学员中秋快乐”),余文生签字确认的根据该音频整理的文字材料证明:余文生接受“新唐人”采访,称“法轮功群体是一个非常善良的群体,对社会只有益处,没有害处”。
4.被告人余文生供述:其接受“新唐人”“希望之声”采访时发表的相关言论实际上是否定“法轮功”的邪教性质,没有依据本实,是对中国法制的攻击,混淆视听,让更多的人对党和政府及中国法制产生不满,其通过境外媒体传播能煽动更多的人认为党和政府对“法轮功”的打压是错误的,进而攻击、抹黑党和政府。
二、2015年7月至2017年8月,被告人余文生在天津市司法机关依法办理王宇,王全璋等人涉嫌犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪一案期间,捏造“王宇被强迫失联,家人未收到任何法律文书”“公安机关大规模抓捕,恐吓律师,违法乱政”“司法机关违法阻止会见”等虚假事实,通过“推特”“脸书”等公开发布,诋毁我国司法机关,意图煽动不明真相人员产生不满和对抗,达到煽动颠覆我国国家政权的目的。
上述事实,有公诉机关提交并经庭审举证、质证,本院予以确认的下列证据证实:
1.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的余文生2015年8月1日,2017年3月6日在其“推特”账号上发表的关于寄发控告函的文章,2017年8月16日发表的关于关注王全璋律师的文章及配图,2017年7月29日在其“脸书”上发表的关于其律师职业年检及王全璋案件的文章证明:余文生为炒作王全璋等案,炮制控告函,称“公安部违法乱政,强迫中国公民失踪制造恐怖气氛,行反人类之恶行”,向多部门邮寄,并通过“推特”等传播。
2.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的境外网站“维权网”2015年7月19日刊登的《余文生,许艳夫妇:关于王宇律师被刑事扣留的声明》,从余文生电脑提取到该《声明》电子版,“维权网”2016年1月8日刊登的文章《709大抓捕当事人家属,律师前往天津河西看守所要求会见,撒案,放人》,“维权网”“新唐人”分别于2017年3月7日,8日对余文生就709案向21家单位寄发控告函进行的报造证明:余文生夫妇发表声明诬蔑中央电视台等媒体“未审先判”;余文生此王全璋案多家单位寄发控告信,并通过“维权网”“新唐人”等境外媒体炒作。
3.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的境外媒体“明镜电视法治台”2017年8月20日报道采访余文生的文章和音视频,余文生签字确认的根据该音视察整理的文字材料证明:余文生接受“明镜电视法治合”采访,称“控告他们反人类,实际上打向了709的反击战,真正的反击战等于是我开始的,我是第一人”。
4.被告人余文生供述:2015年7月19日,其与妻子许艳一起为王宇发声明,谴责中央电视台和新华网,说他们未审先判污名王宇律师等。2015年7月31日共向全国人大、国务院等邮寄控告信,控告公安部大规模抓捕,恐吓律师,公民,未审先判,违法乱政的反人类行为,并把控告的信息发送到“推特”网站,这些內容都是其歪曲事实,无中生有捏造的,目的是引起人民对公检法的不满。其接受“明镜电视法治台”采访,涉及到709王全璋案,还有对中国法制不满等内容。
三、2014年被告人余文生加入“中国人权律师团”微信群,2015至2017年余文生连续三年以该微信群采访联系人的身份,接受“自由亚洲电台”“新唐人”等境外媒体采访,多次妄称“中国现在毫无法律秩序,反人类的打压是面临的主要问题”“中国法制倒人权倒退人权在中国越来越恶化,侵犯人权事件越来越多”,歪曲我国法治现状,抹黑党和政府形象,否定社会主义建设取得的成果,意图源动推翻我国现行制度。
上述事实,有公诉机关提交并经庭审举证、质证,本院予以确认的下列证据证实:
1.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的境外媒体“自由亚洲电台”2015年9月13日报道采访余文生的文章和音频,余文生签字确认的根据该音频整理的文字材料证明:余文生接受采访时称“所面临的就是当局毫无法律秩序的,人类的打压”。
2.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的境外媒体“自由亚洲电台”2016年9月14日报道采访余文生的文章和音频、余文生签字确认的根据该音频整理的文字材料证明:余文生接受采访时称“中国的法治没有进步,而且越来越倒退”。
3.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的境外媒体“新唐人2017年9月14日报道采访余文生的文章和音频,余文生签字确认的根据该音频整理的文字材料证明:余文生接受采访时称:“当局是法治破坏者”。
4.民政部出具的《情况说明》证明:民政部未登记“中国人权律师团”“中国保障人权律师服务团”。
5.被告人余文生供述:大约2014年1月,其加入“中国人权律师团”微信群,就“中国人权律师团”因年献辞多次接受境外媒估采访,所发表的言论没有事实依据,是歪曲事实,造谣诽谤,攻击,抹黑政府。
四、2015年至2017年,被告人余文生故意捏造中国存在“死半”制度的虚假事实,通过“推特”和接受境外媒体采访的方式,发表其被羁押在“死囚牢”的不实言论,攻击抹黑政府和司法机关,意图煽动颠覆我国国家政权。
上述事实,有公诉机关提交并经庭审举证、质证,本院予以确认的下列证据证实:
1.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的境外媒体“明镜电视法治台”2017年8月20日报道采访余文生的音视频(题目为“无所律师余文生——在中国没有安全的地方”),余文生签字确认的根器该音视频整理的文字材料证明:余文生接受“明镜电视法治台”采访,称“我关死囚牢里61天,用的都是死囚用过的东西,只要进了死囚牢,任何人都屈服”。
2.公安机关通过远程勘验取的余文生“推特“账号个性签名证明:余文生将“死囚牢”作为其个性签名內容。
3.北京市第一看守所出具的《情况说明》证明:2014年余文生因涉嫌寻衅滋事被羁押在北京市第一看守所,该所未设立死刑犯专门羁押室。
4.被告人余文生供述:境外媒体多次对其进行采访,其编造“死囚牢”问题进行传播,攻击中国司法机关,煽动人民对党和政府不满,其是编造存在“死囚牢”,没有事实依据。
五、2014年至2018年,被告人余文生多次接受“自由亚洲电台”“美国之音”“新唐人”等境外媒体采访,在采访过程中以造谣、诽谤方式发表抹黑党和政府形象,否定我国政治制度和法律制度的言论,通过国际互联网传播达到煽动颠覆我国国家政权和社会主义制度的目的。期间,余文生多次接受“爱尔兰前线卫士”等组织的资助。
上述事实,有公诉机关提交并经庭审举证,质证,本院予以确认的下列证据证实:
1.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的境外媒体“自由亚洲电台“2016年9月26日报道采访余文生的文章和音频(题目为“司法部发文禁律师制造舆论压力,引发律界强烈反弹”)、余文生签字确认的根据该音频整理的文字材料证明:余文生接受“自由亚洲电台”采访,称“律师事务所管理办法像新的国安法,网络安全法,它们都属于恶法,是进一步打压人权律师”。
2.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的境外媒体“美国之音”2017年9月21日报道采访余文生的文章和音频(题目为“VOA连线余文生:北京两人权律所連查,对人权律师的新一波打压?"),余文生签字确认的根器读音類整理的文字材料,证人陈敏,彭妹的证言,书证北京市石景山区司法局、西城区司法局2017年检查记录证明:2017年北京市石景山区司法局、西城区司法局对北京莫少平律师事务所、道衡律师事务所等多家律所的行检查,余文生接受“美国之音”采访,称此次检查是对上述两律所的针对性打压,中国的人权状况继续恶化,法治继续恶化。
3.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的境外媒体“新唐人”“自由亚洲电台"2018年1月17日,18日分别报道采访余文生的文章和音频、余文生签字确认的根据上述音频整理的文字材料,书证北京市石景山区司法局关于注销余文生律师职业证的建议书,北京市司法局关于注销余文生律师毕业证书的决定证明:因过六个月未被律所聘用被依法注销律师执业证书后,余文生先后接受“新唐人”“自由亚洲电台”采访,称“律师证被注销只能证明这个政权是个流氓政权,我不会就此沉寂”“中国的政党没有经过法律登记,在法律上没有地位,所有政党都属于非法组织”。
4.书证由余文生签字确认的爱尔兰前线卫士申请资助确认单,余文生农行账户收自爱尔兰的西联汇款收汇单,从余文生笔记本电脑中提取的余文生代理朱瑛娣案获得香港维权律师关注組资助人民币2万元的“收条”,余文生用其SKYPE账号和小君VAL的聊天记录,余文生建行卡交易明细,许艳2016年至2017年出入境记录,余文生的供述证明:余文生多次接受“爱尔兰前线卫士”等组织的资助。
5.被告人余文生供述:其接受“自由亚洲电台”采访时提到国安法、慈善法,NGO方面的法律規定都是恶法,新的管理办法是对人权律师的打压,中国没有人权,这实际上是其对党和政府的抹黑,表达其对党和政府的不满;其还说中国所有的政党都是非法组织,是在否定中国现有的政党制度。其接受“美国之音”采访时称十九大之前会对律师事务所进行整肃,十九大之后人权不会有什么进步,其接受“新唐人”采访称其律师证被注销是当局打压的一种方式,只能证明这个政权是个流氓政权。
六、2017年10月18日下午,被告人余文生炮制“余文生律师的公开信”,诋毁我国党和国家领导人,否定党的领导,分别在“脸书”“推特”上发布,2018年1月16日,余文生再次将该文在“脸书”“推特”上发布,2018年1月18日凌晨,余文生炮制“余文生关于建议修改宪法的公开信”,否定我国现有政权组织形式,否定党的领导和社会主义根本制度,分别在“脸书”“推特”上发布,截至2018年2月1日,上述两篇文章被数百人转推点赞,被“参与网维权网“博讯网”等多家境外网站转载、传播。
上述事实,有公诉机关提交并经庭审举证、质证,本荒予以确认的下列证据证实:
1.公安机关通过远程勘验调取的余文生2018年1月16日分别在其“推特“脸书”账号上发表的题为“余文生律师的公开信”的文章、余文生2018年1月18日分别在“推特”“脸书”账号上发表的题为“余文生关于建议修改宪法的公开信”的文章,“维权网”“博讯网”“参与网”等10余个境外网站对两篇公开信的报道证明:余文生通过“推特”“脸书”发表两篇公开信,境外多家网站行转载报道。
2.公安机关对余文生的两部笔记本电脑进行电子证据检查记录,“推特“脸书”账号注册使用侦查实验证明:发表煽动颠覆言论的“推特”“脸书”账号系余文生本人使用。
3.证人北京市石景山区司法局工作人员高维华,纪爱华、陈敏、沙霖,北京市公安局石景山分局民警凯、王伟的证言,北京市石景山区司法局约谈余文生的录音录像,笔录和余文生承诺书证明:2017年10月18日晚,余文生被北京市石景山区司法局约谈,承认发表上述公开信。
4.被告人余文生供述:2017年10月18日下午两点钟左右,其在家中用手机编辑了“余文生律师的公开信”一文,并用翻墙软件把文章发布到“脸书”“推特”上,其在文章中写到十八大以来冤狱横生,贪腐横行,这是对中国建党97年历史和建政68年历史的否定,是一种无中生有;列举的雷阳事件,庆安事件,镇压新公民等事件都是歪曲事实,目的是否定中国现有的体制,抹黑党和政府,关于修宪的文章其是在“脸书”“推特”上发布的,其建议修宪的目的是否定中国共产党的领导,否定中国共产党领导下的多党合作制度、否定党对军队的领导,否定中国的选举制度。
为证明指控的犯罪事实,公诉机关向法庭提交了被告人余文生关于煽动颠覆国家政权主观故意的供述,余文生自书悔过书以及远程勘验笔录,电子证据检查笔录,声音同一性鉴定意见,发破案经过说明,抓获余文生的录音录像资料,证人刘洋,樊京生等执法民警的证言,搜查笔录,扣押清单,常住人口信息查询表、证明材料等综合证据,均经庭审举证,质证,其证明效力本院予以确认。
本院认为,被告人余文生以造谣,诽谤等方式煽动颠覆国家政权,推翻社会主义制度,其行为已构成煽动颠覆国家政权罪,徐州市人民检察院指控被告人余文生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。公诉机关提出被告人余文生煽动颠覆国家政权主观恶性较大,犯罪情节恶劣,为规范抓捕又暴力致伤民警,依法应予严惩的意见成立;辩护人提出被告人余文生从侦查,审查起诉到审判各阶段均能够如实供述犯罪事实,具有坦白情节,当庭认罪悔罪态度好,依法从轻处罚的意见成立。根据罪责刑相适应原则,综合考虑本案犯罪事实、性质、情节以及对于社会的危害程度,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、第六十七条第三款、第六十四条之规定,判决如下:
一、被告人余文生犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,判处有期徒刑四年,剥夺政治权利三年。
(刑期从判决执行之日起计算,判决执行以前先行羁押的,羁押一日折抵刑期一日;指定居所监视居住的,监视居住二日折抵刑期一日,即自2018年4月19日起至2022年3月1日止。)
二、扣押在案的供犯罪所用的相关财物依法予以没收,上缴国库。
如不服本判决,可在接到判决书的第二日起十日內,通过本院或者直接向江苏省高级人民法院提出上诉。书面上诉的,应当提交上诉状正本一份,副本二份。
审判长 邱学锋
审判员 刘明伟
审判员 孙析
二0二0年六月十七日
本件与原本核对无异
法官助理 李通达
书记员 汪艳
