Translation: Court Judgment in Wang Aizhong Political Tweeting Case

Translator's Notes:

• I have translated the crime that Wang Aizhong was convicted of (寻衅滋事罪) as "disturbing the peace." Other translators use "picking quarrels and provoking trouble."
• The court did not specify what Wang Aizhong shared on social media that disturbed the peace.  Here are his last three tweets that he posted prior to his detention on May 28:
• On May 26, Wang retweeted a post by the New York Times linking to the Chinese language version of an article titled "Biden Orders Intelligence Inquiry Into Origins of Virus."
• On May 26, Wang posted "Someone logged into my telegram account. Their attacks on private communication software and surveillance is getting more and more insane.
• On May 24, Wang quote tweeted a post by the Wall Street Journal to the Chinese language version of an article titled "Belarus Faces EU Flight Ban for Grounding Ryanair Plane With Dissident." Wang added "Some folks really have guts. Certain other countries could stand to learn something from them."
  

People's Court of Tianhe District, Guangzhou, Guangdong

Criminal Judgment

(2022) Yue 0106 Criminal First Instance No. 377

The public prosecution agency was the People's Procuratorate of Tianhe District

Defendant Wang Aizhong, male, born on December 13, 1976, Han nationality, university degree, household registration in Guangzhou City. On May 28, 2021, he was taken into custody in connection with this case. He was taken into criminal detention the following day, and he was formally arrested on July 6 of the same year. He is currently being held in custody at the Tianhe District Detention Center in Guangzhou.

Defense counsel Ge Wenxiu is a lawyer at the Guangdong Lucheng Dingbang Law Firm.

Defense counsel He Weimin is a lawyer of Guangdong Jingguo Law Firm.

In the Sui Tian Procuratorate Criminal Prosecution (2022) No. Z10 Indictment the People's Procuratorate of Tianhe District, Guangzhou, Guangdong, charged defendant Wang Aizhong with committing the crime of disturbing the peace, and on January 27, 2022 it filed a public prosecution with this Court. This Court accepted the case and formed a collegial panel in accordance with the law, convened pretrial conferences, and tried this case with hearing in open court. The People's Procuratorate of Tianhe District, Guangzhou, Guangdong assigned procurators Huang Haifeng, Liu Qiwei, He Qian to appear in court in support of the indictment. Defendant Wang Aizhong and his defense counsel He Wenxiu were in court to participate in the proceedings. Hearings in this case have now concluded.

The public prosecution agency charged: Since January 2019, defendant Wang Aizhong did, in the eastern part of the Tianhe District in the city where he lives, repeatedly use "wall-climbing" methods on the Internet to repost false reports from foreign media, and added his own statements with fake information, and distributed them on his WeChat official account and on foreign social software, thereby causing a disturbance and misleading the public. On May 28, 2021, defendant Wang Aizhong was apprehended by investigators at his residence and brought to justice.

In order to prove the aforementioned facts, the public prosecution agency produced or read in court the Decision to Establish a Case, search and seizure materials, remote network inspection work records, screenshots of social software content, the testimony of witness Wang Mounan and others, the statement of the defendant, and other evidence. The public prosecution agency believed that defendant Wang Aizhong fabricated and disseminated fake information, creating a disturbance and causing severe chaos in public venue order, and he should bear criminal liability for the offense of disturbing the peace. It requested this Court pass sentence in accordance with the law.

Defendant Wang Aizhong's defense counsel proffered: Wang Aizhong's statements on overseas online platforms did not exceed the boundaries stipulated by law. The public prosecution agency failed to prove that Wang Aizhong's actions caused severe chaos in the cyberspace, and Wang Aizhong did not constitute the crime of disturbing the peace.

It was ascertained at trial: Since January 2019, defendant Wang Aizhong did on several occasions post and repost a large volume of fake information on domestic and foreign Internet platforms, creating an offensive social influence and severe chaos in public order.

The aforementioned facts have been confirmed by the following evidence presented and examined in court during the trial, and are determined by this Court:

1. The Police Report Acceptance Registration Form, the Decision to Establish a Case, and the apprehension process confirmed the circumstances of the case establishment and apprehension of defendant Wang Aizhong.

The search and seizure materials confirmed: When the police apprehended defendant Wang Aizhong, they seized an Apple mobile phone from him; in the search of Wang Aizhong's residence [OBSCURED IN ORIGINAL], they found an ASUS laptop, a Microsoft tablet, and an Apple mobile phone. All of the above items were seized.

3. Screenshots of defendant Wang Aizhong’s Twitter and WeChat account interfaces, and WeChat information provided by Tencent confirmed: Wang Aizhong’s Twitter account is “王爱忠@wangaizhong”; the name of the WeChat account is "A Wang Aizhong", the nickname is "Wang Aizhong D", and the username is WeChat is "wangaizhong2023".

Defendant Wang Aizhong signed and affirmed this.

4. The remote network inspection work records confirmed: The investigative agency remotely fixed and extracted the content of the tweets posted by the Twitter account "王爱忠@wangaizhong."

5. The screenshots of Twitter and Wechat Moments confirmed that defendant Wang Aizhong posted a large amount of fake information on social software, causing severe chaos in public order.

Defendant Wang Aizhong carried out signing and affirming some of the screenshots.

6. Defendant Wang Aizhong's household registration information and criminal record investigation materials confirmed the identity of defendant Wang Aizhong. On February 23, 2013, he was sentenced to administrative detention for participating in an illegal assembly; on May 28, 2014, he was criminally detained for publishing rumors on the Internet, and was later released on bail.

7. The testimonies of witnesses Wang Doenan, Chen Doeyun, and Wan Doeming confirmed: Wang Aizhong's WeChat account is "wangaizhong2023" and his Twitter account is "王aizhong@wangaizhong."

Witness Chen Doeyun carried out signing and affirming Wang Aizhong's WeChat account, Twitter account, and screenshots of his WeChat Moments interface. Witness Wan Doeming identified Wang Aizhong and carried out signing and affirming the relevant screenshots of his Moments content.

8. The statement of defendant Wang Aizhong: I posted about some high profile social incidents on WeChat Moments and Twitter, which came from self-media such as Weibo. The WeChat account I use is qingshan1995, and I have also used wangaizhong2023 and wangaizhong, and the associated mobile phone number is [INTENTIONALLY OMITTED]. My Twitter account is @wangaizhong, and my nickname is "王爱中." I have posted relevant information on WeChat Moments and Twitter, and the account is only used by myself, and others do not know my account and password. I am posting relevant information using my mobile phone.

Regarding the opinion proffered by defendant Wang Aizhong and the defense counsel that he is not guilty, based on an investigation, Wang Aizhong used the aforementioned WeChat and Twitter accounts to disseminate fake information relating to State policies and major domestic events on the Internet, creating a disturbance and misleading the public, and the relevant information was widely read And reposted, with dangerous consequences that created severe chaos in public order.

The opinion proffered by Wang Aizhong and his defense counsel that he is not guilty is not established and is not adopted by this Court.

This Court finds that defendant Wang Aizhong intentionally fabricated fake information, or knowingly disseminated fake information on the Internet, causing disturbances, and creating severe chaos in public order. His actions constitute the crime of disturbing the peace. With respect to the public prosecution agency's charge, the facts were clear and the evidence was reliable and copious, and the charged offense is established and is adopted by this Court. After Wang Aizhong was brought to justice he made truthful statements regarding the primary criminal facts, and may be given a lighter punishment in accordance with the law. In accordance with Articles 293(1)(iv), 67(3), and 64 of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China" and Article 5 of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Handling of Defamation Through Information Networks and Other Criminal Cases," the judgment is as follows:

1. Defendant Wang Aizhong committed the crime of disturbing the peace, and is sentenced to a fixed term imprisonment of three years (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 May 28, 2021 to May 27, 2024).

2. The seized mobile phones used as tools in the crime shall be confiscated (the aforementioned items are currently seized by the Tianhe District Branch of the Public Security Bureau of Guangzhou, and the bureau will carry this out).

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 Intermediate People's Court of Guangzhou. A written appeal should be submitted with one original and two copies of the appeal brief.

Chief Adjudicator Liang Xiaowen
Adjudicator Zhang Kai
Adjudicator Zhu Lu

May 18, 2023

Clerks Chen Min and Mai Yingjie

 

广东省广州市天河区人民法院

刑事判决书

(2022)粤0106刑初377号

公诉机关广东省广州市天河区人民检察院。

被告人王爱忠,男,1976年12月13日出生,汉族,大学文化程度,户籍地广州市天。因本案于2021年5月28日被ustory,次日被刑事拘留,同年7月6日被逮捕。现羁押于广州市天河区看守所。 

辩护人葛文秀,广东律成定邦律师事务所律师。

辩护人何伟民,广东经国律师事务所律师。

广东省广州市天河区人民检察院以穗天检刑诉[2022]Z10号起诉书指控被告人王爱忠犯寻衅滋事罪,于2022年1月27日向本院提起公诉。本院受理后依法组成合议庭,召开了庭前会议,公开开庭审理了本案。广东省广州市天河区人民检察院指派检察员黄海锋、刘其维、何倩出庭支持公诉。被告人王爱忠及辩护人葛文秀到庭参加诉讼。现已审理终结。

公诉机关指控,被告人王爱忠自2019年1月起,在其居住的本市天河区东,多次通过网络“翻墙”手段,将境外媒体的不实报道转载并配上其添加虚假信息的言论,发表在其微信公众号、境外社交软件上,起哄闹事,混淆视听。2021年5月28日,被告人王爱忠在其住所附近被侦查人员抓获归案。

为证明上述事实,公诉机关当庭出示或宣读了立案决定书、搜查及扣押材料、网络远程勘验工作记录、社交软件内容截图、证人王某楠等人的证言,被告人的供述等证据。公诉机关认为,被告人王爱忠编造、散布虚假信息,起哄闹事,造成公共场所秩序严重混乱,应以寻衅滋事罪追究其刑事责任。提请本院依法判处。

被告人王爱忠及辩护人提出:王爱忠在境外网络平台发表言论没有超过法律规定的边界,公诉机关未能证实王爱忠的行为造成网络空间严重混乱,王爱忠不构成寻衅滋事罪。

经审理查明:自2019年1月起,被告人王爱忠多次在境内外网络平台上发布、转载大量虚假信息,造成恶劣社会影响和公共秩序严重混乱。

上述事实,有经庭审举证、质证的下列证据证实,本院予以认定:

1.受理报警登记表、立案决定书、抓获经过证实本案立案及抓获被告人王爱忠的情况。

2.搜查及扣押材料证实:民警抓获被告人王爱忠时从其身上查获1部苹果手机;在王爱忠住处[OBSCURED IN ORIGINAL]房搜查发现1部华硕笔记本电脑、1台微软平板电脑和1部苹果手机。上述物品均予以扣押。

3.被告人王爱忠的推特及微信账号界面截图、腾讯公司提供的微信资料证实:王爱忠的推特账号为“王爱忠@wangaizhong";微信账号名称为“A王爱忠”,昵称“王爱忠D”,微信号"wangaizhong2023".

被告人王爱忠已签认。

4.网络远程勘验工作记录证实:侦查机关对推特账号“王爱忠@wangaizhong”发文内容进行远程固定和提取。

5.推特及微信朋友圈截图证实:被告人王爱忠在社交软件发布大量虚假信息,造成公共秩序严重混乱。

被告人王爱忠对其中部分截图进行签认。

6.被告人王爱忠的户籍资料及前科协查材料证实被告人王爱忠的身份情况。其于2013年2月23日因参与非法集会被处以行政拘留;2014年5月28日在网络发布谣言信息被刑事拘留,后取保候审。

7.证人王某楠、陈某云、万某明的证言证实:王爱忠的微信号是“wangaizhong2023”,推特账号是“王爱忠@wangaizhong”。

证人陈某云对王爱忠的微信，推特账号及微信朋友圈界面截图进行签认;证人万某明辨认出王爱忠,并对相关朋友圈内容截图进行签认。

8.被告人王爱忠的供述:我在微信朋友圈、推特发了一些社会热点事件,来自微博等自媒体上自称是当事人或家属的“爆料”。我使用的微信账号是qingshan1995,还用过wangaizhong2023、wangaizhong,关联的手机号码为[INTENTIONALLY OMITTED]。我的推特账号是@wangaizhong,昵称是“王爱忠”。我曾在微信朋友圈及推特发表过相关的信息,账号只有我自己在使用,其他人不知道我的账号和密码。我是使用手机发布相关信息。

关于被告人王爱忠、辩护人所提无罪意见,经查,王爱忠使用上述微信及推特账号在信息网络上散布涉及国家政策、国内重大事件的虚假信息,起哄闹事,混淆视听,相关信息被大量阅读和转发,已造成公共秩序严重混乱的危害后果。王爱忠及辩护人所提无罪意见不成立,本院不予采纳。

本院认为,被告人王爱忠故意编造虚假信息,或者明知是虚假信息而在信息网络上散布,起哄闹事,造成公共秩序严重混乱,其行为已构成寻衅滋事罪。公诉机关指控的事实清楚、证据确实、充分,指控的罪名成立,本院予以采纳。王爱忠归案后如实供述主要犯罪事实,可依法从轻处罚。依照《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百九十三条第一款第(四)项、第六十七条第三款、第六十四条以及《最高人民法院、最高人民检察院关于办理利用信息网络实施诽谤等刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第五条的规定,判决如下:

一、被告人王爱忠犯寻衅滋事罪,判处有期徒刑三年(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,即从2021年5月28日起至2024年5月27日止)。

二、扣押的作案工具手机二部予以没收(上述物品现扣押干广州市公安局天河区分局,由该局执行)。

如不服本判决,可在接到判决书的第二日起十日内,通过本院或者直接向广东省广州市中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 梁晓文
审判员 张凯
审判员 朱璐

二〇二三年五月十八日

书记员 陈敏 麦英杰

Examples of PRC Government Regulation of Online Public Sentiment

On January 18, 2023 the Central Cyberspace Affairs Commission posted an announcement on its website that was launching a "Special Action to 'Loudly and Clearly Improve the Internet Environment  for the 2023 Spring Festival" (中央网信办启动“清朗·2023年春节网络环境整治”专项行动). . The goals of the "special action" included:

• "curbing the spread of bad culture" (遏制不良文化传播);
• "creating a positive, civilized and healthy online public opinion atmosphere for the Spring Festival" (营造积极向上、文明健康的春节网络舆论氛围).

The "special action's" targets included:

• Standardizing the management of information about entertainers that is presented online;
• Dealing with "Internet celebrity" bloggers who have a history of sensationalizing bad conduct and deliberately focusing on the ugly side of things;
• Investigating people who flaunt wealth online and clean up information that deliberately flaunts extravagant lifestyles and maliciously speculates about concealed wealth;
• Preventing the rendering of gloomy emotions;
• Controlling the spread of anxiety and exaggerating the dark side of society by publishing false information such as returning home notes and returning home experiences.

On March 12, 2023, the CAC posted on its website the "Notice on Launching a Special Action to 'Loudly  and Clearly Strictly Rectify the Chaos of 'Personal Media'" (关于开展“清朗·从严整治‘自媒体’乱象”专项行动的通知). The target of the "special action" included "harmful information" on "key platforms such as social networking, short video, and webcasting." Examples of "harmful information" included:'

• Selecting high-profile topics such as the private economy and publishing "controversial and misleading remarks to incite opposition and tear-up the social consensus."
• Creating harmful information that damages the image of the Party and government.

Translated Excerpts from the 2018 "Program for Deepening Reforms of Party and State Institutions"

 On March 21, 2018, the official website of the government of the People's Republic of China published the text of the "Program for Deepening Reforms of Party and State Institutions" (深化党和国家机构改革方案). Articles 11, 35, and 36 of the Program are translated below.

(11) News and publishing work shall be centralized under the Central Propaganda Department. In order to strengthen the Party's concentrated and centralized leadership over news and public opinion work, strengthen the management of publishing activities, and develop and prosper the socialist publishing industry with Chinese characteristics, the news and publishing management responsibilities of the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television are assigned to the Central Propaganda Department. When dealing with outsiders the Central Propaganda Department will identify itself as the State Press and Publication Administration (National Copyright Administration).

After the adjustment, the main responsibilities of the Central Propaganda Department in terms of press and publication management are to implement the Party's propaganda work guidelines, formulate management policies for the press and publication industry and supervise their implementation, manage press and publication administrative affairs, make overall plans, guide and coordinate press and publication undertakings, industrial development, supervise and manage the content and quality of publications, supervise and manage the printing industry, manage copyrights, manage publication imports, etc.

（十一）中央宣传部统一管理新闻出版工作。为加强党对新闻舆论工作的集中统一领导，加强对出版活动的管理，发展和繁荣中国特色社会主义出版事业，将国家新闻出版广电总局的新闻出版管理职责划入中央宣传部。中央宣传部对外加挂国家新闻出版署（国家版权局）牌子。

调整后，中央宣传部关于新闻出版管理方面的主要职责是，贯彻落实党的宣传工作方针，拟订新闻出版业的管理政策并督促落实，管理新闻出版行政事务，统筹规划和指导协调新闻出版事业、产业发展，监督管理出版物内容和质量，监督管理印刷业，管理著作权，管理出版物进口等。

(35) Establish the State Administration of Radio and Television. In order to strengthen the Party's centralized and unified leadership over news and public opinion work, strengthen the management of important propaganda positions, firmly grasp the leadership of ideological work, and give full play to the role of radio and television media as the Party's mouthpieces, establish the State Administration of Radio and Television on the basis of the radio and television management responsibilities of the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television, as an institution directly under the State Council.

Its main responsibilities are to implement the Party's propaganda principles and policies, formulate policies and measures for radio and television management and supervise their implementation, make overall plans, guide and coordinate the development of radio and television undertakings and industries, promote the reform of systems and mechanisms in the field of radio and television, supervise, manage, and screen the radio and television content and quality of online audio-visual programs, be responsible for the import, collection, and management of radio and television programs, and coordinate and promote the work of going global in the field of radio and television.

The State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television is no longer retained.

（三十五）组建国家广播电视总局。为加强党对新闻舆论工作的集中统一领导，加强对重要宣传阵地的管理，牢牢掌握意识形态工作领导权，充分发挥广播电视媒体作为党的喉舌作用，在国家新闻出版广电总局广播电视管理职责的基础上组建国家广播电视总局，作为国务院直属机构。

主要职责是，贯彻党的宣传方针政策，拟订广播电视管理的政策措施并督促落实，统筹规划和指导协调广播电视事业、产业发展，推进广播电视领域的体制机制改革，监督管理、审查广播电视与网络视听节目内容和质量，负责广播电视节目的进口、收录和管理，协调推动广播电视领域走出去工作等。

不再保留国家新闻出版广电总局。

(36) Establish China Central Radio and Television Station. Adhering to the correct direction of public opinion, attaching great importance to the construction and innovation of communication methods, and improving the dissemination, guidance, influence, and credibility of news and public opinion are important starting points for firmly grasping the leadership of ideological work. In order to strengthen the Party's centralized construction and management of important public opinion positions, enhance the overall strength and competitiveness of radio and television media, promote the integrated development of radio and television media and emerging media, and accelerate the construction of international communication capabilities, CCTV (China Global Television Station), the Central People's Radio Station, and China Radio International are integrated, and the China Central Radio and Television Station is established as a public institution directly under the State Council under the leadership of the Central Propaganda Department.

The main responsibilities are to publicize the Party's theory and line principles and policies, coordinate and organize major propaganda reports, organize radio and television creation and production, produce and broadcast high-quality radio and television products, guide social hot spots, strengthen and improve public opinion supervision, promote the development of multimedia integration, strengthen international Communication capacity building, tell Chinese stories, etc.

The establishment of China Central Television (China International Television Station), China Central People's Broadcasting Station, and China International Radio Station is revoked. The original call signs are retained internally, and the unified call sign externally shall be "Voice of China."

（三十六）组建中央广播电视总台。坚持正确舆论导向，高度重视传播手段建设和创新，提高新闻舆论传播力、引导力、影响力、公信力，是牢牢掌握意识形态工作领导权的重要抓手。为加强党对重要舆论阵地的集中建设和管理，增强广播电视媒体整体实力和竞争力，推动广播电视媒体、新兴媒体融合发展，加快国际传播能力建设，整合中央电视台（中国国际电视台）、中央人民广播电台、中国国际广播电台，组建中央广播电视总台，作为国务院直属事业单位，归口中央宣传部领导。

主要职责是，宣传党的理论和路线方针政策，统筹组织重大宣传报道，组织广播电视创作生产，制作和播出广播电视精品，引导社会热点，加强和改进舆论监督，推动多媒体融合发展，加强国际传播能力建设，讲好中国故事等。

撤销中央电视台（中国国际电视台）、中央人民广播电台、中国国际广播电台建制。对内保留原呼号，对外统一呼号为“中国之声”。

How Many People Have Been Punished for Political and Religious Speech in China?

In 2022, I published "State Prosecutions of Speech in the People’s Republic of China: Cases Illustrating the Application of National Security and Public Order Laws to Political and Religious Expression," (https://ssrn.com/abstract=4168412), a free casebook containing my translations of over 100 documents produced by agencies of the government of the People's Republic of China between 1998 and 2020. Each of those documents reflected the outcome of a case where a PRC citizen was subjected to some form of punishment by the PRC government for their political or religious speech.

As I was compiling the casebook, I was concerned that readers might be misled into believing that it represented a comprehensive accounting of all the people who had been imprisoned for their political and religious speech in the PRC. I was therefore careful to note in the introduction that it was not a "complete" collection of every case involving freedom of expression: 

The sheer volume of state prosecutions of offenses involving speech in the PRC would make assembling a complete collection of translations impossible for an individual such as myself. Indeed, it would seem that a dedicated researcher could fill at least one volume solely with cases involving individuals subjected to administrative detention for referring to police as "dogs." By my estimation, based on a brief review of the documents in my archives, there are dozens of additional court judgments that meet the criteria discussed below, but which I lack the time and resources to translate. (p. 6). 

The "criteria" I mentioned was that I had only included cases where:

• The conduct for which an individual was prosecuted was exclusively or primarily "speech," where "speech" is defined broadly to include conduct such as publishing social media posts, essays, and books, as well as encouraging people to engage in "speech plus" conduct such as joining associations and protesting in public venues.
• The speech being prosecuted related only to political or religious issues and actors.
• The outcome would have been different under U.S. "constitutionalism."
  

In addition to those cases in my archive at the time I published "State Prosecutions," the PRC government has continued to prosecute people for speech related conduct. Here are some of the examples of which I am aware:

• On November 7, 2022, a court sentenced artist Wang Yuwen and his wife Wang Liqin to four years and 30 months imprisonment, respectively, for social media posts that incited subversion of state power.
• On December 28, 2022, a court sentenced house Christian worshiper Long Kehai to two years imprisonment for social media posts that disturbed the peace.
• On February 10, 2023, a court sentenced Ruan Xiaohuan, the writer behind the "Program-Think" blog (编程随想的博客  https://program-think.blogspot.com/) to seven years imprisonment for blog posts that incited subversion of state power.
• On March 31, 2023, a court sentenced civil rights lawyer Qin Yongpei to five years imprisonment for social media posts that incited subversion of state power.
• On April 10, 2023, a court sentenced civil rights lawyers Ding Jiaxi and Xu Zhiyong to 12 and 14 years imprisonment, respectively, for subversion.

So the question alluded to in "State Prosecutions" remains: How many people in the PRC have had their rights to freedom of speech and publication (as those rights are understood in the U.S. and similar jurisdictions) violated by the PRC government?

The easiest way to answer this question is "Everyone who has lived in the PRC since its founding." This is because, notwithstanding the fact that the PRC Constitution explicitly grants citizens the right to freedom of "speech" and "publication," the PRC government imposes prior restraints on the publication of every newspaper, magazine, and book of any type, enforced by local governments and overseen by a central government agency responsible for all press and publication in the PRC. PRC courts have held that it is irrelevant whether or not the content of the publications is legal, or that a defendant had no intent to earn a profit. Rather, the only criteria is whether the defendant engaged in publishing without first obtaining authorization from the government. For example, in 2009 a Beijing court imprisoned four individuals for one to three years on the grounds that they printed The Bible and "other books of a religious nature" without the authorization of the press and publication agency. The court stated:

[A]n intent to obtain illegal revenue is not a necessary prerequisite for the crime of illegal operation of a business. Rather, all book publishing and printing must be authorized by publishing agencies pursuant to a signed Book and Periodical Printing Commission and in accordance with strict registration procedures. 

See: Shi Weihan, Tian Hongxia, Li Fengshan, Zhou Xin, Cheng Xiaojing, Lü Yuequan & Li Zong Criminal Judgment, (2009) Hai Criminal First Instance No. 594 (石维翰, 田红霞, 李凤山, 周鑫, 程小京, 吕跃全, 李棕刑事判决书, (2009) 海刑初字第594号), "State Prosecutions," pp. 91-107.

A slightly smaller number of people, though still in the hundreds of millions, have had their constitutional right to freedom of expression violated by the PRC government's use of the Great Firewall of China to restrict people in the PRC from accessing information online. I personally experienced this censorship as early as 2003 while in an Internet cafe in Beijing. I described the experience in the Congressional-Executive Commission on China's 2003 Annual Report as follows:

Tests performed by Commission staff indicate that systems providing this type of increasingly fine-tuned censorship have already been deployed at some Internet cafes. Specifically, Web pages containing sensitive content on sites that are otherwise accessible begin loading, but before they are completely visible the page is replaced by a message informing the user that the content the user is trying to access is forbidden. The browser is then automatically redirected to a government-authorized general interest Web site, but the user is not told why the site was prohibited or to whom an appeal should be submitted to have the prohibition removed.

https://www.cecc.gov/publications/annual-reports/2003-annual-report

One could argue, however, that many, if not most, people in the PRC have never attempted to exercise their right to publish (online or off), and have never wanted to read a publication or website that the PRC government has banned, censored, or blocked, and therefore those people have not had their rights violated by the PRC government's prior restraint and Internet censorship regimes.

Another way to answer this question would be to count every person that has been subjected to any form of State-imposed punishment for exercising their constitutional right to freedom of expression. This would be impossible, however, because these punishments take so many forms, including:

• "Inviting People to Tea": Wu Gan, who was sentenced to eight years imprisonment for committing the crime of subversion of state power in 2017, wrote: "'Drinking tea' usually refers to being interviewed by public security or state security officials because of your speech or your civic actions." See "Wu Gan's Self-Defense and Examples of His 'Subversive' Writings." http://blog.feichangdao.com/2022/03/wu-gans-self-defense-and-writings.html
• "Knock and Warn" and "Education and Salvation": This term (in Chinese: 敲打告诫, 教育挽救) is used by PRC police to describe how they make repeated visits to people's homes and call them into police stations to issue warnings and pressure them to sign "guarantees." For example, in 2017 PRC police repeatedly undertook "knock and warn" and "education and salvation" work with the poet Wang Zang, ultimately pressuring him to sign a letter promising he would not "publish words and images on foreign websites that damage the reputation and image of the State." See "Translation: Wang Yuwen & Wang Liqin Inciting Subversion Police Prosecution Recommendation." http://blog.feichangdao.com/2023/01/translation-wang-yuwen-and-wang-liqin.html
• Harassing Family Members: In early 2016, PRC authorities arrested civil rights lawyer Wang Quanzhang on suspicion of committing the crime of subversion of state power. Later that year his wife, Li Wenzu reported that government authorities were preventing her from renting an apartment and sending her child to kindergarten. See "Photo of Weeping Wife of Jailed Chinese Lawyer Wang Quanzhang Disappears From Sina Weibo." http://blog.feichangdao.com/2016/09/photo-of-weeping-wife-of-jailed-chinese.html
• Disbarment: Civil rights lawyer Wang Yu was detained at the same time as other lawyers at the Fengrui Law Firm (see "State Prosecutions," Chapter 6, Associations: The "7.09" Rights Defenders), but there is no indication Wang was criminally prosecuted. Instead, the government canceled Wang's certificate to practice law on the grounds that, after the government shut down the Fengrui Law Firm, she was not employed by another law firm.
• Threatening Livelihoods: In 2020, shortly after Qinghua University constitutional law scholar Xu Zhangrun published a series of articles critical of the PRC government's response to the COVID pandemic, his employer fired him from the job that he had held for two decades, confiscated his pension and all accrued benefits, withdrew his accreditation as an educator and demanded that he vacate his apartment on the university campus. See "A Farewell to My Students." https://www.chinafile.com/reporting-opinion/viewpoint/farewell-my-students
• Tax Audits: In 2009, shortly after civil rights lawyer Xu Zhiyong published a report that challenged China's official explanation that the deadly riots that broke out across Tibet in March 2008, were inspired by "overseas forces," the PRC government served his Gong Meng Consulting Company Limited with a "Notice of Tax Administrative Sanctions" imposing fines of 1,420,000 yuan (about USD 200,000). See "Xu Zhiyong Detained (Again), China's Web Sites Censor It (Again)." http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/07/xu-zhiyong-detained-again-chinas-web.html
• Party Disciplinary Actions: In 2016, a Beijing district committee of the Communist Party of China "pledged severe intraparty penalties for Ren Zhiqiang, a celebrity blogger and property developer whose accounts were closed for allegedly spreading illegal information." According to state-sponsored media, the CPC issued a circular saying Ren, "has been releasing illegal information and making inappropriate comments online, resulting in a vile influence and damage to the party image." See "Party Puts Ren Zhiqiang on One Year Probation for Online Posts." http://blog.feichangdao.com/2016/05/party-puts-ren-zhiqiang-on-one-year.html
• Extended Detention: In April 2011, the artist Ai Weiwei was detained at the Beijing Airport and his assistant, Wen Tao, was grabbed off the street by four plain clothes officers. Ai and Wen were released in June and were not charged.

Adding to the difficulty of using these punishments as a measuring tool is the fact that most of these punishments doubtless go unreported.

In addition to the foregoing, in the PRC the police can impose formal punishments, including issuing written citations and fines, as well as ordering individuals to serve time in detention, without a trial before a judge. The legal basis for this is provided by the "Public Security Administrative Punishments Law." That law states that if an act "disrupts public order, hampers public security, infringes upon the rights of persons and property, or hampers social administration" but is not serious enough to warrant criminal punishment, public security authorities can impose punishments including warnings, fines, revocations of licenses, and "administrative detention." These punishments are meted out directly by the police.

Several examples of the police using administrative punishments to punish constitutionally protected freedom of expression can be found in "State Prosecutions," Chapter 10: Seditious Libel on Social Media. For example, in 2017, a court found that police did not violate Feng's rights by subjecting him to five days administrative detention for referring to Xi Jinping as "fat pig," "steamed bun," and "spendthrift" in WeChat posts.

Unfortunately, there is no single publicly available official resource that might provide insight into how many similar cases there might be. While some provincial governments do provide online databases of administrative punishments, they have been censored to remove evidence of people being punished for speech-related conduct (see "Disappearing Government Records Show Police Ordering People, Companies to Stop Using Foreign VPNs" http://blog.feichangdao.com/2020/11/disappearing-government-records-show.html).

The best resource I am aware of is a list compiled by the operator of the @SpeechFreedomCN Twitter account. According to that list, there are at least 1,800 publicly reported cases of people being subjected to administrative punishments for speech related conduct. See: "Inventory of Literary Inquisition Incidents in China in Recent Years" (中国近年文字狱事件盘点).  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CQBeBpP2-A45lw-zr6mneDuPtSBNWg_8KqgXpWMLcbo/edit#gid=0.

In many jurisdictions around the world one could come up with a more precise answer to the question by determining how many people had been formally convicted and imprisoned by the judiciary for speech related conduct in the modern era. Unfortunately this is difficult, if not impossible, to determine for the PRC, because the PRC government deliberately censors information relating to its prosecutions of speech. I have described this in a previous blog post: "Censorship of Court Judgments in the PRC." https://blog.feichangdao.com/2022/11/censorship-of-court-judgments-in-prc.html.

Just because it is impossible to determine the exact number of convictions does not mean that it is not worthwhile to attempt to come up with a reasonable approximation. Such an approximation would be helpful in furthering meaningful and constructive discussions of what "freedom of expression" (and the lack thereof) means in the PRC today (as opposed to historically). In order to provide a framework for such discussions it would first be helpful to determine what we mean by "today" by defining the relevant time period.

A good starting point is the late 1990's, for two reasons. First, this is when PRC revised its criminal law and changed how it defined certain crimes that had previously been commonly used to punish speech conduct. For more on this see "Imprisonment for Crimes No Longer in the Criminal Law," Dui Hua, December 20, 2017. https://www.duihuaresearch.org/2017/12/imprisonment-for-crimes-no-longer-in.html.

The second reason to set the late 1990's as a good starting point is because that was when the PRC government began punishing people for using the Internet, where so much of today's political and religious discourse takes place. The PRC first connected to the global Internet in 1994 (see http://en.internet.cn/history/history2.html), and almost immediately the PRC government began convicting people of crimes related to using it for speech conduct. For example, in 1998 a PRC court found Wang Youcai guilty of subversion on the grounds he drafted and shared documents via email that "argued for such things as 'gaining political rights, revising the Constitution, eliminating one party rule' and 'establishing a constitutional democratic political system and establishing a system where political power is divided.'" A translation of his court judgment can be found on p. 115 of "State Prosecutions."

Having established that a useful time period would be from the late 1990's to the present, there is one resource that could potentially be used to give us a rough approximation of the number of people in the PRC who have had their rights to freedom of speech and freedom of publication violated by the PRC government: the Congressional-Executive Commission on China's Political Prisoner Database ("PPD")  https://www.ppdcecc.gov.

In the PPD each political prisoner's record is assigned one or more "issues" reflecting what the Commission's staff believed the individual was detained for. One of those categories is "Freedom of Opinion and Expression." Using a downloaded version of the PPD, it would appear that there are at least 5,000 records of individuals detained between 1997 and 2023 that were assigned the issue "Freedom of Opinion and Expression."

When considering whether that number is useful in answering the question posed above, one should keep in mind that it is arguably both under and over-inclusive. With respect to the former, it necessarily excludes cases for which there was never any public reporting, or which the Commission was unaware of or elected to exclude. For example, I was unable to locate any cases included in Appendix II of State Prosecutions, "Individuals Imprisoned for Posting on Twitter," in the PPD.

With respect to the latter, the database includes cases (roughly half of the total) where individuals were detained and released without any indication of their having been formally punished (either administratively or criminally). For example, the PPD includes a record for Chen Pingfu (陈平福 - CECC Record Number: 2013-00392), who was detained and indicted for inciting subversion of state power for publishing 34 articles online with titles such as "Those Intending to Stay the Tide of Democracy Are Opposing the Will of God" and "Official Power is at the Heart of Autocracy, Civil Rights are the Heart of Democracy." Ultimately, however, the procuratorate withdrew its indictment. One could therefore argue that, while Chen may have been a political prisoner during the period of his detention, his rights were, in the end, upheld and not violated.

So, how to answer the question: "How many people in the PRC have had their rights to freedom of speech and publication violated by the PRC government?" My view, based on my familiarity with the available data, is the answer is "it depends on what you are counting":

• All of China’s 1.4 billion population is subjected to prior restraints on publishing, which would almost certainly be considered unconstitutional in every developed country.
• All of China’s over 800 million Internet users are subjected to the Great Firewall’s censorship of most major foreign social media and major English and Chinese language news websites.
• Since the late 1990’s, the number of people who have been subjected to informal and administrative punishments by government agencies for exercising their constitutional right to freedom of expression is likely in the tens of thousands.
• Since the late 1990’s, the number of people who have been detained for exercising their constitutional right to freedom of expression is likely somewhere in the area of 10-20 thousand.
• Since the late 1990’s, the number of people who have been imprisoned after being convicted for crimes for exercising their constitutional right to freedom of expression is likely in the thousands.

Translation: Civil Rights Lawyer Xu Zhiyong's Statement to the Court

Translator's Notes:

• Xu Zhiyong (许志永) is a PRC civil rights lawyer who co-founded the New Citizens' Movement (中国新公民运动) along with fellow civil rights lawyer Ding Jiaxi (丁家喜).
  
• Xu has been the target of government prosecutions for over a decade, and the government's attempts to silence him have been covered extensively by this blog: http://blog.feichangdao.com/2022/03/xu-zhiyongs-li-qiaochu-indictment.html.
• The text below is Xu's statement published shortly before a court was expected to issue a verdict in his trial for subversion in connection with meetings he and Ding held with other activists in 2019.
• The Chinese version was created by running an image posted by Ding's wife on Twitter on April 8, 2023 (https://twitter.com/luoshch/status/1644179129237925892) through OCR software. I have tried to proof the OCR version, but some errors in transcription may remain. 
• There are other translations of Xu's statement available from Chinese PEN (https://www.chinesepen.org/english/xu-zhiyonga-beautiful-china-a-statement-on-court) and China Change (https://chinachange.org/2023/04/09/a-democratic-china-must-be-realized-in-our-time-we-cannot-saddle-the-next-generation-with-this-duty-xu-zhiyongs-court-statement/).

 Xu Zhiyong's Statement to the Court

A Glorious China

I long to have a dream. A glorious China, both beautiful and free, just and blessed. That is, a democratic China. Where all that is under heaven remains that under heaven which belongs to the people under heaven. Where it is not the country of one clan and one Party, but a country of the actual people. Where power is derived from the ballot box, not from the barrel of a gun.

Where the people regularly elect members of parliament, mayors, governors, and presidents, and the power is vested in the people, owned by the people, governed by the people, and enjoyed by the people. From then on, the people are no longer a fig leaf for a dictator, no longer the unknown ants in the reincarnation of a dynasty, but the true masters of the country. From then on, the rulers are no longer high-ranking occupiers, but humble service providers. They compete fairly and the people choose the best. From then on, regime change is no longer a bloodbath of swords and shadows, but a celebratory festival of the people.

When the path of righteousness is followed, then all under heaven will exist for the common good. After three thousand years, the Chinese nation will surely climb out of the Three Gorges of history and make its way toward a modern civilization. Democratic China is within our generation's reach, and we absolutely shall not pass the responsibility on to the next generation.

Such is a China ruled by law. A legislative democracy, where the people elect their own representatives. Laws are enacted through democratic procedures to represent the interests of the greatest number of people. There are no evil laws imposed on the people by the rulers, and no extrajudicial laws in the name of discipline and rules. Law enforcement is strict, and the people elect the government to enforce the law for the people. No individual or organization is above the law, and no weak person is outside the protection of the law. The judiciary is fair, judges are independent, there is no ruler except the law, and justice is adjudicated by law and conscience.

From then on, the law is no longer a tool of class dictatorship, but a measure of fairness and justice. From then on, judges are no longer the handles of the knives of privilege and centralization, but the patron saints of justice. From then on, all under heaven is ruled by law, all power is in the rule of law and order, the people believe in the rule of law, and fairness and justice floods the land.

Such is a free China. I loathe a society where power is rampant and human nature is distorted. A few bureaucrats decide what 1.3 billion people believe in, what they say, what news they listen to, and what movies they watch. They have built a high cultural firewall to isolate China from the civilized world. They feed millions of network supervisors, network police, and network commentators, and stifle the voice of the people. They use hundreds of millions of cameras and big data to create an airtight monitoring network, leaving Chinese people standing naked before their power. They have even invaded people's spiritual world, burning crosses, demolishing Buddhist schools, and forcing new local religions into exile.

There is no absolute freedom, but this certainly cannot justify wantonly strangling freedom. There are universal standards for human civilization, that is, these are the rights and freedoms written down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as in the Constitution of China. These cannot remain blank pieces of paper forever.

I yearn for a nation that is free, a China where beasts of the powers-that-be don’t run rampant. Where we have freedom of belief, and your religious and ideological beliefs are matters of a personal nature, in which the powers-that-be cannot interfere. Where we have freedom of speech, and  There is no mass deletion of posts and accounts, there is no area that is off limits to political speech, and no one will be imprisoned for expressing political opinions. Where we have freedom of public participation, there are no false and manipulated elections, no "inappropriate remarks," and everyone has the freedom to form parties, associations, and participate in public affairs. Where we have freedom of personal life, there are no ubiquitous eyes of Big Brother, and everyone who stands before the powers-that-be enjoys privacy and dignity. In a free China, the people are like sprouts growing vigorously in spring, supporting the reborn civilization of the ancient East. Everyone is free from the distortions of power, lives in reality, and grows into their best selves.

There is no absolute freedom, and the Chinese people have no rights. It is tragic that it has become common sense for Chinese people to look for  connections when they have to get something done. Unfairness exists in every country, but China is different. There is no independent judiciary, no free media, no dissenting voices. Anti-corruption remains the official path for rulers to eliminate dissidents. The greatest  injustice in China is its autocracy, where a privileged group monopolizes all power of the State and the lifeblood of the economy. High oil prices, high housing prices, high taxes, and everywhere exploitation. The people are overwhelmed, while the exploiters say they are losing money year after year.

I yearn for a country that is fair and just, a China that is not permeated by relationships based on  privilege. Where power is held in check by the people, and untainted and honest officials act, not to grow rich, but to serve the public. Where there is equal education that does not depend on one’s household registration, and everyone, urban and rural, rich and poor, has equal opportunities to receive an education. Public schools do not distinguish between key and ordinary, and parents are free from the anxiety of choosing a school. Where there is a fair opportunity to choose a job, regardless of one’s beliefs, party, or gender, and public positions are open to everyone on an equal basis. Where everyone can find a suitable position and create their own happy life without relying on powerful relationships. Where there are fair pensions, regardless of whether one is in the city or the countryside, or is a civil servant or an employee, and the ratio of pensions to on-the-job salaries is roughly equal. Where the elderly in the poorest villages also have pensions sufficient to live a decent life. Where there is equal medical care, regardless of whether you are an official or  a civilian, and there is free medical care for serious illness, and no one becomes impoverished because of illness again.

In a China based on the public interest, the strong are constrained, and the weak are safeguarded. Everyone performs their duties, everyone does their best, and everyone gets what they deserve. There is not so much anger and anxiety from the cradle to the grave, and everyone has a happy smile on their faces. That is a China full of love. I loathe a society that is guarded, indifferent, and self-harming, where everyone learns from childhood not to trust strangers. So many years of poisoned milk powder, waste oil, fake vaccines, and poisoned meat. Everyone dons thick masks as a precaution against one another, and detours around the elderly who have fallen to the ground. Every society has human indifference, but nothing like China. The foundation of this country is class struggle, and it is the barrel of a gun that never tires of fighting. From state power to the jungle, there is no bottom line, and society has lost the cornerstone of conscience. After many years of materialism, people's spiritual world is barren. When people's hearts have abandoned the spiritual world that lies on the other side, love becomes like a spring without a source.

I yearn for a nation full of love, a China free from memories of fear and shadows. A nation of faith  that respects heaven, loves people, and believes that God is watching. Where there is a belief that life has a common root, and springs from the same spiritual source, and one day will return there. In this world there is no devil, only people of different backgrounds who experience joy, differences, divisions, and injuries. We sink into the joys and sorrows of our respective roles, and look back at our different choices and different roles on the ground from a high place. There is no hatred, only compassion. Love yourself, practice this world, perfect soul; love relatives and friends, the love of life, there is also gratitude; love strangers, smile at each other; love enemies, only sympathy without hatred, hostility and bound souls; love all beings, the spirit of all things ; Love the endless world. In a China full of love, there are no devils, no enemies, and no dark jungles. We are sincere, simple, and kind, with clean faces, clear eyes, and innocent smiles. That is our China reborn.

For more than 2,000 years, China has been enveloped by the haze of the Qin Dynasty. Even with the renaissance of the Tang and Song Dynasties, the backwardness of modern times was inevitable. The root of the rebirth of Chinese civilization lies above us, and it is there we find the God of all,1 the rich spiritual world of ancestors, and a China with the warmth of spring and blossoming flowers. All of this flows into the trend of modern democracy and science, and is reborn as a glorious Eastern civilization. For thousands of years, different civilizations have followed different paths to reach today's global village, and there are enormous differences in the spiritual worlds residing under the same roof. Conflicts based on different religions and civilizations have emerged, and humanity needs a new path to move toward the future together. This is the manifest destiny of China. Providence has bequeathed to us a spiritual wilderness from which a new civilization may grow. The spiritual sustenance we dedicate to mankind is not the bamboo slips in the graves of our ancestors, but the revelation heeded by our generation: Achieve an understanding of nature and yourself in a higher place. This is God's new philosophical belief ushering in a new era of civilization, that is a China that is admired by the world, and a China that is certain to become the greatest country in the world. This is certain to come to pass after autocracy has ended in China, and it is free and democratic.

1.3 billion people working together to create the most advanced technology, the most splendid culture, and the most prosperous economy in the world. Having a strong military, we will not occupy land or plunder resources. Rather, we will only take up arms where tyranny and injustice abide. Having the most advanced ideology and culture, we will not depend on might to promote it. Rather the world will be attracted to it owing to its merits, and it will spread to the four corners of the world.

Anyone, whether it is a person or a country, who follows the creed "There are no permanent friendships, only permanent interests" is doomed to fail. Diplomacy is about mutual benefit and win-win results. Furthermore, it is a moral imperative. Autocrats and traitors will never be our friends. For those people who are still struggling under the iron heel of dictatorship, we have the responsibility to extend a helping hand and help them share in human civilization. This is both a moral responsibility and self-preservation.

We have the courage to let go of the historical burden of the physical and mental harms done to us by other countries during the 20th century. A great nation that is truly confident will not indulge in the pain of history forever, and we will work together to create a glorious future for Asia. To developed countries, we will offer mutual benefit, cooperation, and competition to jointly create a new world order of freedom and democracy. People need a world government to maintain peace, protect the environment, provide disaster relief, and explore outer space.

Who was it that caused us to be born in China? One does not need a reason to love this country, it is a seed planted by God deep within every soul. To love China is to strive to make her more glorious. I have been jailed three times, all for a glorious China. For the first time, they accused the non-profit public welfare organization Open Constitution Initiative of tax evasion. The second time, they accused us of disrupting public order by promoting local college entrance examinations for the children of immigrants. This time, I am accused of subverting state power because I espoused a dream of a glorious China and advocated that everyone should be a citizen. Is it subversive to conduct oneself as a true citizen? Is it subversive to put their core values into practice by pursuing democracy and freedom? Is it subversive to sing rise up and refuse to be slaves in the March of the Volunteers? Such is the hypocrisy and absurdity of their regime. Such is its corruption.

I consider it an honor to suffer for liberty, justice, and love. I do not believe that the foundation of national rejuvenation can be built on a quicksand of lies; I do not believe that power politics and slavery are the eternal destiny of the Chinese nation. I do not believe that the spring breeze of freedom will always be blocked by the high wall; I do not believe that there will be an eternal night with no tomorrow. For more than 30 years, from a boy running wildly in a blizzard to waiting for dawn before dawn, my life has been on the same road. This tortuous and bumpy road has continued the dream of the sages. "Beautiful China" is the struggle and regret of Mr. Sun Yat-sen's life; it is Lin Juemin's sad last words written to his wife; it is the song of youth of Lin Zhao and Yu Luoke who died for China; The student's weeping blood declared. For more than a century, the Chinese nation has experienced ups and downs on the road to modern civilization. Now the sacred mission falls on the shoulders of our generation.

For more than 30 years, from a boy running wildly in a blizzard, to waiting for the daybreak before the dawn, my life has been on the same path. This tortuous and bumpy path has continued the dream of the sages.

"A Glorious China" is Mr. Sun Yat-sen's legacy of struggle and regret; they are the sad final words that Lin Juemin wrote to his wife; it is the youthful song of Lin Zhao and Yu Luoke who died for China; it is the weeping declaration of the students in Tiananmen Square in 1989. For more than a century, the Chinese nation has experienced ups and downs on the road to modern civilization. Now the sacred mission falls upon the shoulders of our generation.

Citizens and compatriots, the world is on an inexorable path. The rising sun of the rebirth of Eastern civilization is poised to burst forth, and the three thousand years of great changes will come to fruition in our generation. Let us take up this great era as citizens, and bid welcome to a China in the warm full bloom of Spring!

许志永法庭陈述:美好中国

我想有一个梦想,美好中国,美丽且自由,公正、幸福。那是民主中国。天下仍是天下人之天下,非一族一党之江山,真正人民的国家,政权出自选票,而非枪杆子。

人民定期选举议员、市长、省长、总统,权为民所赋,民有、民治、民享。从此,人民不再是独裁者遮羞的幌子,不再是王朝轮回中默默无闻的蝼蚁,而是国家真正的主人。从此,执政者不再是高高在上的占领者,而是谦卑的服务者,他们公平竞争,人民择优聘任。从此,政权更替不再刀光剑影,血雨腥风,而是人民节日的庆典。

大道之行,天下为公,三千年了,中华民族必将走出历史的三峡,走向现代文明。民主中国,就在我们这一代,绝不把责任推给下一代。

那是法治中国。立法民主,人民选出自己的代表。通过民主程序制定法律,代表最大多数人利益。没有统治者强加于人民的恶法,也没有纪律、规矩之名的法外之法。执法严明,人民选出政府执法为民,没有任何个人和组织凌驾于法律之上,也没有任何弱者在法律保护之外。司法公正,法官独立,除了法律,没有别的上司,以法律和良心公正裁判。

从此,法律不再是阶级专政的工具,而是公平正义的尺度。从此,法官不再是特权集权的刀把子,而是正义的守护神。从此,法治天下,所有权力都在法治秩序中,人民以法治为信仰,公平正义如大水滔滔。

那是自由中国。我厌恶权力横行,人性扭曲的社会。少数官僚决定13亿人信什么主义,说什么话语,听什么新闻,看什么电影。他们筑起高文化防火墙,隔离了中国与文明的世界。豢养数百万网监、网警、网评员,扼杀人民的声音。他们用数亿摄像头和大数据打造密不透风的监控网,使国人在权力面前,如同赤身裸体。他们还侵入人们的精神世界,焚烧十字架,拆毁佛学院,迫使本土新宗教流亡世界。

没有绝对自由,但这绝对不是恣意扼杀自由的理由。人类文明有普世的标准,那是写在世界人权宣言,也写在中国宪法里的自由权利,不能永远是一张白条。

我渴望一个自由的国度,没有权力怪兽横行的中国。我们有信仰自由,信什么宗教,什么主义是个人天性,权力不得干涉。我们有言论自由。没有大规模删帖封号,政治言论无禁区,再也不会有人因为表达政见而身陷囹圄。我们有公共参与自由。没有虚假的被操控的选举,没有“妄议”,每个人都有组党、结社、参与公共事务的自由。我们有个人生活自由。没有老大哥无处不在的眼睛,每个人在权力面前有隐秘、有尊严。自由中国,人民如春天蓬勃生长的嫩芽,托起古老东方重生的文明。每个人免于权力扭曲,活在真实之中,成长为最好的自己。

没有绝对的自由,中国人没有权利。可悲的是,有事找关系成了中国人的常识。每个国家都有不公平,而中国不一样。没有独立的司法,没有自由的媒体,没有不同的声音。反腐仍为统治者清除异己的官之道。中国最大的不公平是专制,一个特权集团垄断全部国家权力和经济命脉。高油价、高房价、高税收,处处盘剥。人民不堪重负,而盘剥者却说自己年年亏损。

我渴望一个公平、正义的国家,没有特权关系弥漫的中国。有受人民制约的权力,清白廉洁、当官不为发财而是为公共服务;有公平的教育,不分户籍、城乡与贫富,每个人都有平等受教育的机会。公立学校不分重点与普通,家长们免于择校的焦虑;有公平的择业机会,不分信仰、党派、性别,公共职位平等的向所有人开放,每个人不需靠权力关系,只需靠才能品德就能找到合适的位置,创造自己幸福的生活:有公平的养老,不分城市、乡村、公务员、企业,养老金与在职工资比例大体相等,最贫穷的乡村里的老人也有养老金足以过上体面的生活;有公平的医疗,不分官员、平民,大病免费医疗,再也不会有人因为生病而贫困。

公益中国,强有制约、弱有保障,各司其职、各尽其能,各得其所。从摇篮到墓地没有那么多愤怒焦虑,每个人脸上幸福的笑容,那是充满爱的中国。我厌恶戒备,冷漠,互害的社会,从小被教育不要相信陌生人。毒奶粉,地沟油,假疫苗,瘦肉精荼毒多年。人人带着厚厚的面具彼此戒备,看到老人倒在地上绕道走。每个社会都有人情冷漠,而中国不一样。这个国家的根基是阶级斗争,是兵不厌诈的枪杆子。包括国家权力与丛林,毫无底线,社会失去了良心的基石。唯物主义教化多年,人们的精神世界一片荒芜,而人心离弃了彼岸的精神世界，爱便成了无源之水。

我渴望一个充满爱的国度,没有恐惧记忆、阴霾笼罩的中国。一个有信仰的民族,敬天、爱人,头顶三尺有神明。相信生命同根,源自同一精神家园,也归向那里。在此世经历不同的角色为体验幸福,有差别,有分歧、有伤害,而没有魔鬼。我们沉入自己的角色悲欢,亦在高处回望地上的自己不同的抉择和不同的角色。没有仇恨,唯有慈悲。爱自己,修行此世,完美灵魂;爱亲人朋友,生命之爱,亦有感恩;爱陌生人,彼此微笑;爱仇敌,只有同情没有嗔恨、敌意与捆绑的灵魂;爱众生,万物之灵;爱生生不息的尘世。充满爱的中国,没有魔鬼,没有敌人,没有黑暗丛林。我们真诚、简单、善良,一张张干净的脸,澄净双眸,纯真笑容,那是我们重生的中国。

2000多年,秦之阴霾笼罩华夏。虽有唐宋复兴,近代的落后实属必然。中华文明重生的根在上头,那里有昊天上帝,有祖先丰美的精神世界,有春暖花开的中国,融入近代民主科学之潮流,重生为辉煌的东方文明。数千年来,人类不同族群沿着不同的道路走到今日的地球村,同一屋檐下精神世界巨大差异。基于不同宗教、文明的冲突已经出现。人类需要新的道路一起走向未来,这是中华的天命,上天留下这片精神旷野,为长出新文明。我们奉献给人类的精神食粮不是祖先墓地的竹简,而是我们这一代聆听的启示:在更高处认识自然,认识自己。这是上帝新的哲学信仰引领新文明时代,那是世人景仰的中国,中国一定会成为世界上最伟大的国家。那一定是专制结束之后,自由、民主的中国。13亿人共同发出激情活力,创造出世界上最发达的科技,最灿烂的文化,最繁荣的经济。我们有强大的军事,不会占领土地,掠夺资源,只为世上还有暴政与不义等待我们仗剑天涯。我们有最先进的思想文化,不靠强力推广,而是靠它自身的魅力吸引世界,传播四方。
“没有永远的朋友,只有永远的利益”以此为信条,做人一定失败,国家也一样。外交有互利共赢,更有道义担当,独夫民贼永远不是我们的朋友。对于那些至今仍在专制铁蹄下挣扎的人民,我们有责任伸出援手,帮助他们分享人类文明。这是道义责任亦是自身救赎。

20世纪,给我们身心伤害的国家,我们有勇气放下历史包袱。一个真正自信的大国不会永远沉湎于历史的伤痛,我们携手共创亚洲的美好未来;对于发达国家,我们有互利、有合作、有竞争,共同缔造自由民主世界新秩序。人们需要世界政府以维护和平,保护环境,救助灾害,探索外太空。

谁让你生在中国呢?对这个国家的爱是不需要理由的,那是上天根植于每一个灵魂深处的一粒种子。爱中国就要努力使她更美好。为美好中国我一生三次入狱:第一次。他们指控公盟一个从无盈利的公益机构偷税;第二次,他们指控我们推动随迁子女就地高考扰乱公共秩序;这一次因为表达美好中国的梦想,倡导大家做公民,我被指控颠覆国家政权。做真公民就是颠覆?践行他们的核心价值观,追求民主自由就是颠覆?唱义勇军进行曲,起来不愿做奴隶的人民就是颠覆?他们的政权何其虚伪荒诞,何等腐朽不堪。为自由、公义、爱,我以受苦为荣耀。我不相信谎言的流沙之上能够筑起民族复兴的大厦;我不相信强权与奴役是中华民族永恒的宿命;我不相信自由的春风永远隔离在高墙之外:我不相信漫漫长夜永无明日。30多年了,从暴风雪中狂奔的少年到黎明之前静待天明,我的人生走在同一条路上,这曲折坎坷的路延续了先贤的梦想。“美好中国”那是孙中山先生一生的奋斗与遗憾;那是林觉民写给妻子的痛心绝笔;那是林昭、遇罗克们以身殉中华的青春之歌:那是1989天安门广场上莘莘学子的泣血宣告。一个多世纪了,在通往现代文明的道路上中华民族历经坎坷磨难。如今神圣使命落在我们这一代人的肩上。

公民们,同胞们,世界潮流浩浩荡荡。东方文明重生之朝阳即将喷薄而出,三千年之大变局将在我们这一代完成。让我们以公民的姿态扛起来伟大时代,迎接春暖花开的中国!