Sunday, May 7, 2023

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.

Saturday, May 6, 2023

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”。

Monday, April 17, 2023

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.

Saturday, April 15, 2023

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

Translator's Notes:

 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!

Sunday, April 9, 2023

Translation: Civil Rights Lawyer Ding Jiaxi's Statement to the Court

Translator's Notes: 

  • Ding Jiaxi (丁家喜) 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 Xu Zhiyong (许志永).
  • Ding first became the target of government prosecution in 2013, when he and Xu Zhiyong were arrested, and eventually imprisoned, for their roles in small demonstrations in Beijing calling for equal social and educational benefits for migrant workers in Beijing. 
  • The text below is Ding's statement published shortly before a court was expected to issue a verdict in his trial for subversion in connection with meetings he and Xu 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/1644501747635826690) through OCR software. I have tried to proof the OCR version, but some errors in transcription may remain.

Ding Jiaxi's Statement to the Court 

Autocracy Shall Perish

If we start counting from the Xinhai Revolution of 1911, more than 110 years have passed, and after several generations of sacrifices, the Chinese people are still living in a state of political oppression, economic control, and ideological enslavement. Dictators and their privileged interest groups continue to use high-tech means to strengthen their autocratic rule. But civilization is driving the course of history with mighty force. A battle between democracy and autocracy is unfolding. Their lifelong dictatorship and long-term delusions of one-party dictatorship are coming to an end, and China's social transformation is approaching day by day.

It has always been our sincere desire to avoid social turmoil and people's suffering during the transition period. We are convinced that the most stable model for China's transformation is one of peace, rationality, and non-violence. I have faced many doubts, encountered many difficulties, and suffered many setbacks. I have personally been tortured. None of this will change my steadfast philosophy.

All Chinese who care about the future of the nation need to entrust our generation with an historic responsibility. This responsibility is to eradicate autocracy and build a beautiful China. This requires us to overcome the fear in our hearts, speak loudly for justice, resolutely oppose dictators, resolutely oppose privileged interest groups, and reject their authoritarian rule. As long as we work together, the light of freedom, democracy, and the rule of law will surely shine over the land of China!

Dramatic changes are imminent for China. Even as my body sits within high walls, I can clearly feel that the footsteps of civilization like rousing thunder! I picture the scene like this: The Chinese people will awaken from extreme slavery, see through the various forms of righteousness they have woven together with moral lies, and see the truth clearly. The privileges of dictators and their privileged interests groups will collapse as soon as the people cease to trust and submit to their autocratic rule.

I have always believed this: They have endeavored to reverse engineer the historical experience of the progress of human civilization, blocking 1,000 possibilities for the collapse of an autocratic regime. Nevertheless, it remains the case that autocratic regimes will collapse in 1,001 ways. That is the law of history.

Let's start the countdown: five, four, three, two, one... 

丁家喜法庭陈述:专制必亡

从辛亥革命算起,时间过去了一百一十多年,经历了几辈人的牺牲,中国人民依然生活在政治上受压迫、经济上受控制,思想上受奴役的状态。独裁者及其特权利益集团,不断用高技术手段强化他们的专制统治。但是文明正以强大的力量推动着历史的进程。一场民主与专制的战役正在展开,他们的终身独裁和长期一党专政的妄想正在走向末日,中国的社会转型正在日益临近。

避免转型时期的社会动荡和人民的痛苦,一直是我们的真诚愿望。我们确信,和平理性非暴力是中国转型的最为稳定的模式。面对很多质疑,遇到很多困难,遭受很多挫折,以及个人被酷刑折磨,都不会改变我坚守的理念。

所有关心民族前途的中国人,都需要授起我们这一代人的历史责任,这个责任就是根除专制,建设美好中国。这需要我们克服心中的恐惧,大声地发出正义的呐喊,坚决地反对独裁者,坚决地反对特权利益集团,拒绝他们的专制统治。只要我们一起努力,自由之光,民主之光和法治之光一定会照亮神州大地!

中国的巨变迫在眼前,即使身在高墙之内,我也能清晰地感觉到,文明的脚步如同惊蛰的雷声!我看到了这样一幅景象:中国人民将从极度奴役中清醒过来,看透他们用道德谎言编织的各种公义,看清事实真相。只要人民不再信任和服从他们的专制统治,独裁者和其特权利益集团的特权就会崩溃。

我一直认为:他们非常卖力的反向学习了人类文明进步的历史经验,堵死了专制政权垮台的1000种可能,但专制政权依然会以1001种方式垮台,这是历史的规律。

让我们开始倒计时:五,四,三,二,一……

Sunday, April 2, 2023

Translation: Qin Yongpei Inciting Subversion Police Prosecution Recommendation

Translator's Note:  Qin Yongpei was a civil rights lawyer who first became a target of police investigations in 2015 during the "7.09 Crackdown." Police detained him in 2019 and on March 31, 2023 a court sentenced him to  five years imprisonment and three years deprivation of political rights for inciting subversion of state power on the grounds that he used social media to "sow doubt amongst the populace about our country's State regime and socialist system." While the court's judgment did not specify which social media posts caused such doubts to be sown, the police's prosecution recommendation listed the content of several Sina Weibo and Twitter posts that it deemed "reactionary":

  • "The most terrifying thing about Chinese characteristics is that evil controls everything," 
  • "The sun is already setting on Chinese characteristics," 
  • "Chinese characteristics are a wellspring for hooligans," 
  • "The people's congress system is the most shocking system in the world and it is the root of corruption," 
  • "Mainland China has chosen a road of no return," 
  • "All power belongs to the people, as is the case in Taiwan, but it does not work in mainland China," 
  • "Corruption with Chinese characteristics has rotted at the root, and their days are numbered..."
  • "100 years is too long, they still want to live for generations to come ....." 
  • "If they won't die, we won't have a good life," 
  • "Action can change China, and they are most afraid that ordinary people will stand up and fight together …"

Below is a full translation of the police's prosecution recommendation. The Chinese version was created by running images of the court judgment through OCR software. I have tried to proof the OCR version, but some errors in transcription may remain.

Public Security Bureau of Nanning, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region

Indictment Opinion

Nan Public Indictment (2020) No. GB001

Criminal suspect Qin Yongpei, male, born September 12, 1969, personal ID No. [INTENTIONALLY OMITTED], Han ethnicity, college education, native of Heng County, Guangxi, household registration No. 2, Jiangbin East Road, Hengzhou Township, Hengxian County, Guangxi, currently residing at No. 1603, Unit 2, Building 2, No. 38, Xining Road, Xixiangtang District, Nanning, formerly managing lawyer of the Guangxi Baijuming Law Firm. In May 2018, criminal suspect Qin Yongpei's lawyer's practice license and lawyer's practice certificate were revoked by the District Justice Department in accordance with the law on the grounds that the obtained his lawyer qualification and lawyer's practice certificate illegally. On November 1, 2019, criminal suspect Qin Yongpei was taken into criminal detention by the Public Security Bureau of Nanning on suspicion of committing the crime of inciting subversion of state power. Based on an authorization from the People's Procuratorate of Nanning, on December 3, 2019, this office carried out his arrest. He is currently being held in custody at the Nanning No. 1 detention center in Guangxi.

The case of criminal suspect Qin Yongpei being suspected of disturbing the peace, defamation, and inciting subversion of state power, was discovered by the public security agency in the course of its work. In the process of investigating, the Xixiangtang Precinct of the Public Security Bureau of Nanning and the Public Security Bureau of Nanning opened cases and carried investigations on July 15, 2015 and October 15, 2019, respectively. Criminal suspect Qin Yongpei was apprehended and brought to justice on November 1, 2019. The investigation in this case has now concluded.

Following an investigation in accordance with the law it has been ascertained:

Owing to his own personal reasons, criminal suspect Qin Yongpei developed a hatred of the Communist Party. He believed that he had been subjected to unfair treatment in cases in which he was acting as a lawyer. After joining a "China human rights lawyers service group" he fell under the influence of Western democratic ideology, and developed resentful thoughts toward China's people's democratic dictatorship, the State regime and the socialist system and public power. He vented his personal dissatisfaction with the State regim and socialist system.

Since 2015, Qin Yongpei has successively registered 78 accounts on Sina.com, including: "Guangxi Lawyer Qin Yongpei," "Baijuming Lawyer Qin Yongpei," "Baijuming Brotherhood," "Pei Gongjun Guishang," "Missing You Positive Energy," "Bare-headed Qin Yongpei," "Bai Juming Black Stone," "Guangxi Fengshui Master," "Taishan Controversy," and "Nanning Fengshui Master."

Without considering the consequences, he edited, posted, and reposted over 900 reactionary statements on the Internet that wantonly manufactured rumors and defamed, including: "The most terrifying thing about Chinese characteristics is that evil controls everything," "The sun is already setting on Chinese characteristics," "Chinese characteristics are a wellspring for hooligans," "The people's congress system is the most shocking system in the world and it is the root of corruption," "Mainland China has chosen a road of no return," "All power belongs to the people, as is the case in Taiwan, but it does not work in mainland China," "Corruption with Chinese characteristics has rotted at the root, and their days are numbered..."

Beginning in May 2017, he downloaded the foreign "Twitter" APP software on his mobile phone, registered and logged in through "wall climbing" methods, and used "Twitter" to post more than 20,000 tweets. It has been ascertained that currently more than 180 inciting statements were published, including "100 years is too long, they still want to live for generations to come ....." "If they won't die, we won't have a good life," and "Action can change China, and they are most afraid that ordinary people will stand up and fight together …," inciting subversion of state power and the overthrow the socialist system, and flagrantly attacking and smearing our Party's former and current State leaders.

In addition, criminal suspect Qin Yongpei also actively intervened in and sensationalized certain sensitive and hot-button issues in China, distributed a large number of inciting and demagogic statements on the Internet, flagrantly engaging in manufacturing rumors, defaming, and inciting others to subvert China's State regime and socialist system, attacking the State legal system, and using public opinion to incite and provoke dissatisfaction and confrontation toward government agencies and judicial agencies at all levels among Internet users who do not know the truth. Since 2015, over a long period of time, he posted a large number of statements on the Internet about incidents such as the Nanning Beibu Gulf building materials market dispute case, the Liuzhou Cheng Jie illegal business case, the Yulin Tan Aijun case, the Heilongjiang Qing'an County train station shooting incident, the Wenzhou Zhang Kai case, and the Changsha Xieyang disrupting court order case, maliciously sensationalizing, distorting facts, and wantonly engaging in manufacturing rumors and defamation, inciting Internet users to pay attention, and provoking people who did not know the truth to hate the State regime and government agencies. This severely jeopardized national security and social stability and severely smeared the image of Party and government agencies, causing severe chaos in social order and public order, causing an extremely offensive political influence.

The evidence determining the aforementioned criminal facts is:

Case acceptance registration forms, Decision to Open a Case, Apprehension Process, household registration evidence, search warrants, search records, materials seized in the case, evidence collection materials, electronic data, electronic evidence investigation records, documentary evidence and screenshots, remote crime scene investigation work records, crime scene investigation records, photographs from the scene, schematic diagrams of the scene, criminal suspect Qin Yongpei's statement and justification, and witness testimony.

The aforementioned criminal facts are, clear, the evidence is reliable and copious, and is sufficient to reach a determination. After being taken into police custody, although criminal suspect Qin Yongpei cooperated with the public security agency to investigate the case, he refused to plead guilty and admit punishment, and it is recommended that the judiciary deal with him more harshly in accordance with the law.

In summary of the foregoing, criminal suspect Qin Yongpei engaged in activities such as manufacturing rumors, defamation, and other means to incite subversion of state power and the overthrow the socialist order, this was 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 is suspected of committing the crime of inciting subversion of state power. In accordance with  the provisions of Article 162 of the "Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China," the case will be transferred to the prosecution agency for pre-prosecution examination.

It is hereby addressed to the People's Procuratorate of Nanning, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region  

Public Security Bureau of Nanning

Attachments:

1. 5 volumes (868 pages) of case files.

2. Criminal suspect Qin Yongpei is currently being held in custody at the Nanning No. 1 detention center in Guangxi.

March 3, 2020
 

广西壮族自治区南宁市公安局

起诉意见书

南公诉字【2020】GB001号


犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛,男,1969年9月12日生,身份证号[INTENTIONALLY OMITTED],汉族,大学文化,籍贯广西横县,户籍所在地广西横县横州镇江滨东路2号,现住南宁市西乡塘区西宁路38号2栋2单元1603号,原系广西百举鸣律师事务所主任律师。2018年5月,犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛因违法获得律师资格和律师执业证书,被区司法厅依法撤销律师执业许可、注销律师执业证书。犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛因涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权罪于2019年11月1日被南宁市公安局刑事拘留,经南宁市人民检察院批准,我局于2019年12月3日对其执行逮捕,现羁押在广西南宁市第一看守所。

犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛涉嫌寻衅滋事、诽谤、煽动颠覆国家政权一案,由公安机关在工作中发现。经过审查,南宁市公安局西乡塘分局、南宁市公安局分别于2015年7月15日、2019年10月15日立案进行侦查。犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛于2019年11月1日被抓获归案,该案现已侦查终结。

经依法侦查查明:

犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛因其个人原因而对共产党产生仇恨,认为其作为律师在代理的案件中遭到不公平的对待,并在加入“中国人权律师服务团”后受西方民主思想的影响,对我国人民民主专政国家政权和社会主义制度及公权力产生怨恨思想,并发泄其个人对国家政权和社会制度的不满。

自2015年以来,覃永沛先后在新浪网注册名为:“广西律师覃永沛”、“百举鸣律师覃永沛”、“百举鸣兄弟会”、“沛公军桂上”、“正能量就缺你”、“光头覃永沛”、“百举鸣黑石”、“广西风水大师”、“泰山之争”、“南宁风水师”等78个账号,在互联网上不计后果大肆造谣、诽谤,编辑发表、转载:“中国特色最可怕的地方就是邪恶控制了一切”、“中国特色已经日落西山”、“中国特色就是流氓出身”、“人民代表大会制度是世界上最令人震惊的制度是贪污腐败的根源”、“中国大陆选择的是一条不归路”、“一切权力属于人民,台湾地区就是如此,不过在中国大陆是行不通的”、“中国特色的腐败已经烂到根部,他们时日不多了...”等反动言论900多条,2017年5月开始其在手机上下载境外“推特”APP软件,通过“翻墙”方式注册和登陆使用“推特”发表2万余条推文,现查明其发表的:“100年太久,它们还想千秋万代......”“它们不死,我们就没有好日子过”、“行动能改变中国,它们最怕老百姓一起站出来抗争...”等煽动性言论180多条,煽动颠覆国家政权,推翻社会主义制度,公然攻击和污蔑我党已故和现任的国家领导人。

此外,犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛还积极插手和炒作国内一些敏感、热点案事件,在互联网上大量发表带有煽动、蛊惑性质的言论,公然进行造谣、诽谤,煽动他人颠覆我国国家政权和社会主义制度,攻击国家法律制度,利用舆论煽动、挑起不明真相的网民对各级政府机关和司法机关产生不满和对抗情绪,2015年以来其针对南宁市北部湾建材市场济纠纷案、柳州市程洁非法经营案、玉林谭爱军案、黑龙江庆安县火车站枪击事件、温州市张凯案、长沙谢阳扰乱法庭秩序等案事件,长期在互联网上大量发布言论,恶意炒作,歪曲事实,大肆进行造谣、诽谤、煽动网民关注,挑起不明真相的人对国家政权及政法机关的仇视,严重危害国家安全和社会稳定,严重抹黑了党政机关的形象,造成社会秩序和公共秩序严重混乱,造成极为恶劣的政治影响。

认定上述犯罪事实的证据有:受案登记表,立案决定书,抓获经过,户籍证明,搜查证、搜查笔录、扣押的涉案物品,调取证据材料,电子数据,电子证据检查笔录,书证截图,远程勘验工作记录,现场勘验笔录、现场照片,现场平面示意图,犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛供述和辩解,证人证言等。

上述犯罪事实清楚,证据确实、充分,足以认定。犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛到案后,虽配合公安机关开展案件调查,但其拒不认罪认罚,建议司法机关依法予以从重处理。

综上所述,犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛以造谣、诽谤及其他方式煽动颠覆国家政权,推翻社会主义制度的行为,触犯了《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第二款之规定,涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权罪。依据《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》第一百六十二条之规定,拟将此案移送审查起诉。

此致

广西壮族自治区南宁市人民检察院

南宁市公安局

附:1、本案卷宗5卷868页。

2、犯罪嫌疑人覃永沛现羁押在南宁市第一看守所。

二〇二〇年三月三日
 

Saturday, April 1, 2023

Translation: Long Kehai Disturbing the Peace with Tweets Court Judgment

Translator's Notes: 

  • The Chinese version was created by running images of the court judgment through OCR software. I have tried to proof the OCR version, but some errors in transcription may remain.
  • Long Kehai is a Christian jailed for tweets that "insulted State leaders" and "denigrated the Party."
  • Consistent with recent practice, the court said nothing about what content disturbed the peace, so below I have translated some of the last tweets he posted just before he was detained on August 1, 2022.

On June 12, 2022, Long was subjected to 10 days administrative detention for possession of materials that advocated terrorism and extremism for "viewing and commenting" on a video on WeChat. Shortly after his release he posted an image of the detention decision on Twitter saying: 

"A video that exposes and criticizes the crimes of war against humanity is regarded as possessing items that promote violence and terror. This is putting every Internet user in mainland China in danger of being imprisoned at any time for no reason⚠️, it is really terrifying."

 https://twitter.com/egdMcLfnT735D3z/status/1549285542529236992


On July 27, 2022, Long posted the following comment when someone tweeted a photoshopped image of Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping engaged in a sex act:

"This kind of picture is indecent. One cannot let oneself be guided by hatred to live immersed in bitterness. Knowing Jesus Christ on the cross as the redemption sacrifice of love, the truth is in the love of the Lord! It is very valuable to have a brave and critical attitude towards any sinful people and things, but as a natural person, one should adopt a humanistic spirit of equality and respect for others. I'm an old fan! May the blessing of God and the love of Jesus Christ and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit be with you and your family!"

The following is Long's final tweet before his detention, posted on July 29, 2022:

"I just received a call. The State Security Bureau of Huixian County, Longnan, Gansu arrived in Baoji last night at one o'clock, and they're looking to arrange time to talk to me. What could be so urgent, its got me feeling uneasy. This kind of constant disturbance by the Party police has me at the end of my rope. Can't they let people in this country have some semblance of a normal life?"

https://twitter.com/egdMcLfnT735D3z/status/1552813095525171200


People's Court of Wei County, Gansu

Criminal Judgment

(2022) Gan 1227 Criminal First Instance No. 79

The public prosecution agency was the People's Procuratorate of Wei County.

Defendant Long Kehai, male, Han ethnicity, born June 1, 1996, resident identity card No. [INTENTIONALLY OMITTED], high school education, native of Jianyang, Sichuan, household registration No. 059, Jialing Village, Jialing Township, Huixian County, Longnan, Gansu, currently residing on the first floor of the staff building of Jialing Railway Station, Jialing Township, Huixian County, unemployed. On July 30, 2022, it was announced by the Public Security Bureau of Wei County that he was being taken into criminal detention on suspicion of committing the crime of disturbing the peace, and it executed taking him into criminal detention on August 1 of the same year. Based on an authorization by the People's Procuratorate of Wei County, he was arrested on August 12, 2022 by the Public Security Bureau of Wei County. He is currently being held in detention at the Wei County detention center.

On November 22, 2017, he was issued an administrative fine of 200 yuan by the Public Security Bureau of Wei County for making up fictitious facts that disrupted public order.

On June 28, 2018, he was subjected to 10 days administrative detention by the Public Security Bureau of Wei County for making up fictitious facts that disrupted public order.

On August 18, 2020, he was sentenced to a fixed term imprisonment of one year and six months by the People's Court of Weibin District, Baoji, Shaanxi for committing the crime of disturbing the peace. On September 20, 2020 he was released upon completion of his sentence.

On July 8, 2021, he was subjected to 10 days administrative detention by the Public Security Bureau of Wei County for making up fictitious facts that disrupted public order.

On June 12, 2022, he was subjected to 10 days administrative detention by the Public Security Bureau of Wei County for possession of materials that advocated terrorism and extremism.

Defense counsel Zhang Keke is a lawyer at the Hubei Penglai Law Firm.
In the Wei Procuratorate Criminal Indictment (2022) No. 65 indictment the People's Procuratorate of Wei County charged defendant Long Kehai committed the crime of disturbing the peace, and on October 20, 2022 it filed a public prosecution with this Court. Following an examination this Court applied standard procedures in accordance with the law and held public hearings at trial in this case. People's Procuratorate of Wei County Procurator Sang Yun appeared in court in support of the public prosecution. Defendant Long Kehai and his defense counsel Zhang Keke was in court to participate in the proceedings. The trial has now concluded.

The People's Procuratorate of Wei County charged: Since March 13, 2022, defendant Long Kehai used a Twitter account registered with his personal phone number 13892709912, nickname: "Long Kehai 3," account number @egdMcLfnT735D3z, to post tweets (posting and reposting in Twitter are both tweets) and comments that attacked and insulted the Communist Party of China, former State leaders, current State leaders, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and the legal system, human rights in China, and the Chinese government's epidemic prevention policy, denigrating the Party and the government.

As of 19:18 on August 26, 2022, Long Kehai was following 180 people and there were 218 followers of Long Kehai's account.

Long Kehai sent a total of 67 tweets (texts) insulting the Communist Party of China, State leaders, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and the legal system, and human rights in China, and 17 tweets (texts) attacking and insulting the Chinese government's epidemic prevention policy. Of these 84 articles (texts) with pictures and words, 78 were retweets of other people's articles (texts). The retweeted articles were quoted 425 times, and were retweeted 16,920 times and liked 52,650 times. Long Kehai’s twitter account’s original articles had 5 screenshots and 6 articles, which were quoted 23 times, retweeted 16 times, and liked 91 times.

Long Kehai commented on other people's Twitter articles a total of 47 times, and of these 42 articles attacked and insulted the Communist Party of China, State leaders, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and the legal system, and human rights in China. These 42 articles were quoted 2,916 times, retweeted 6,927 times, and liked 20,478 times.

Defendant Long Kehai's Twitter comments were quoted 6 times, retweeted 4 times, and liked 76 times.

The evidence determining the aforementioned facts is as follows:

1. Physical evidence: One OPPOR11 mobile phone.

2. Documentary evidence: Case Acceptance Registration Form, Decision to Open a Case, Notice of Jurisdiction Designation, Detention Warrant, Detention Decision, Arrest Authorization Decision, Arrest Warrant, 11 pages of Twitter screenshots and an investigation report on tweets and comments posted by Long Kehai from the National Security Brigade of the Public Security Bureau of Wei County, screenshots of tweets and comments posted by Long Kehai, administrative punishment decisions, criminal judgment, ruling documents, Proof of Release Upon Sentence Completion, pre-custodial medical examination certificate, the process of how the defendant came into police custody, proof of household registration, search warrants, and evidence transfer materials.

3. Defendant Long Kehai's statement and justification.

4. Electronic investigation records and photos, 125 transcripts and web page screenshots collected online from the Internet by the Cyber-Security Brigade of the Public Security Bureau of Wei County, and screenshots of Twitter posts.

5. Audio-visual materials: 8 optical disks, including 6 optical disks of recorded interrogations, and 2 optical disks of Twitter data collected of Long Kehai forwards and comments.

In order to vent his emotions, defendant Long Kehai did, on multiple occasions, utilize information networks to insult former and current State leaders and others, and denigrate the Party and the government, that the circumstances were offensive, undermined social order, and his actions were the commission of an offense under the provisions of Article 293(2) paragraph 2 of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China." The criminal facts are clear,evidence is reliable and copious, and he should bear criminal liability for the crime of disturbing the peace.

Defendant Long Kehai is a recidivist, and in accordance with the provisions of Article 65(1) of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China" he should be given a heavier punishment.

In accordance with the provisions of Article 176 of the "Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" a public prosecution is filed, and it is requested to pass sentence in accordance with the law.

Defendant Long Kehai argued: All of the indictment's charges against me fail to meet the requirements of the law. I was not insulting, I was merely exhorting. I do not admit that I committed a crime.

Defendant Long Kehai's defense counsel argued:

1. Defendant Long Kehai's conduct did not disturb the peace. The indictment charged Long Kehai's conduct was the commission of an offense under the provisions of Article 293(1) paragraph 2. Looking at this clause, the offense of disturbing the peace refers to conduct that makes trouble in a public venue, creates a disturbance, causing severe chaos in public venue order; pursuing, obstructing, berating, or intimidating another party under offensive circumstances; or extorting or willfully damaging or appropriating public or private property where the circumstances are severe. First, the regulation refers to public places rather than a network environment. Second, cyberspace is not what is meant as a public venue under criminal law. Third, Long Kehai did not and could not have caused disorder in a public venue.

2. The indictment repeatedly charged Long Kehai with conduct that was insulting and denigrating, and this is completely divorced from the facts. First, Long's Twitter mainly consisted of reposts, with few comments. Second, its content has yet to be determined or confirmed to have statements that were fake, concocted, defamatory, or berating. Third, it did not name names or target specific individuals, and it was basically aimed at ordinary people or unspecified groups of people.

3. As regards jurisdiction, given the perpetrator crossed Chengdu, Hainan, and Baoji, Shaanxi, the Public Security Bureau of Longnan should have reported to the inter-provincial Ministry of Public Security to decide which investigative agency would accept it. The Public Security Bureau of Longnan had no authority to determine the jurisdiction of a case that may be investigated by Baoji, Shaanxi, where he generally resides.

It was ascertained at trial that: Since March 13, 2022, defendant Long Kehai used a Twitter account registered with his personal phone number 13892709912, nickname: "Long Kehai 3," account number @egdMcLfnT735D3z, to post tweets (posting and reposting in Twitter are both tweets) and comments that attacked and insulted the Communist Party of China, former State leaders, current State leaders, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and the legal system, human rights in China, and the Chinese government's epidemic prevention policy, denigrating the Party and the government.

As of 19:18 on August 26, 2022, Long Kehai was following 180 people and there were 218 followers of Long Kehai's account.

Long Kehai sent a total of 67 tweets (texts) insulting the Communist Party of China, State leaders, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and the legal system, and human rights in China, and 17 tweets (texts) attacking and insulting the Chinese government's epidemic prevention policy. Of these 84 articles (texts) with pictures and words, 78 were retweets of other people's articles (texts). The retweeted articles were quoted 425 times, and were retweeted 16,920 times and liked 52,650 times. Long Kehai’s twitter account’s original articles had 5 screenshots and 6 articles, which were quoted 23 times, retweeted 16 times, and liked 91 times.

Long Kehai commented on other people's Twitter articles a total of 47 times, and of these 42 articles attacked and insulted the Communist Party of China, State leaders, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and the legal system, and human rights in China. These 42 articles were quoted 2,916 times, retweeted 6,927 times, and liked 20,478 times.

Defendant Long Kehai's Twitter comments were quoted 6 times, retweeted 4 times, and liked 76 times.

The evidence determining the aforementioned facts is as follows:

1. Physical evidence: One OPPOR11 mobile phone.

2. Documentary evidence: Case Acceptance Registration Form, Decision to Open a Case, Notice of Jurisdiction Designation, Detention Warrant, Detention Decision, Arrest Authorization Decision, Arrest Warrant, 11 pages of Twitter screenshots and an investigation report on tweets and comments posted by Long Kehai from the National Security Brigade of the Public Security Bureau of Wei County, screenshots of tweets and comments posted by Long Kehai, administrative punishment decisions, criminal judgment, ruling documents, Proof of Release Upon Sentence Completion, pre-custodial medical examination certificate, the process of how the defendant came into police custody, proof of household registration, search warrants, and evidence transfer materials.

3. Defendant Long Kehai's statement and justification.

4. Electronic investigation records and photos, 125 transcripts and web page screenshots collected online from the Internet by the Cyber-Security Brigade of the Public Security Bureau of Wei County, and screenshots of Twitter posts.

5. Audio-visual materials: 8 optical disks, including 6 optical disks of recorded interrogations, and 2 optical disks of Twitter data collected of Long Kehai forwards and comments.

The aforementioned evidence was provided by the prosecution, and the evidence was examined in court. Defendant Long Kehai and his defense counsel objected to some of the evidence. This Court finds the evidence provided by the public prosecution agency was of legal provenance, the content was objectively factual, was capable of forming a complete chain of evidence, has evidentiary force, is affirmed in accordance with the law, and can be used as the basis for a judgment.
This Court finds: In order to vent his emotions, defendant Long Kehai did, on multiple occasions, utilize information networks to insult former and current State leaders and others, and denigrate the Party and the government, that the circumstances were offensive, undermined social order, and his actions were the commission of an offense under the provisions of Article 293(2) paragraph 2 of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China." The criminal facts are clear,evidence is reliable and copious, and he should bear criminal liability for the crime of disturbing the peace. The offense charged by the public prosecution agency is established, and shall be sustained.

Regarding the issue of evidence collection by the public security agency raised by defense counsel, based on an investigation, an investigating agency collected the evidence involved in the case, there was nothing inappropriate, and this defense opinion is not accepted.

Regarding the opinion of defendant Long Kehai and his defense counsel that Long Kehai's actions do not constitute the commission of crime, based on the evidence in this case, in order to vent his emotions defendant Long Kehai did, on multiple occasions, utilize network information to insult former and current State leaders and others, and denigrate the Party and the government. He flouted State laws and social morals, the circumstances were offensive, his actions constitute the commission of the crime of disturbing the peace, and therefore this defense opinion is not accepted.

Defendant Long Kehai is a recidivist, and in accordance with the law he should be given a heavier punishment.

In accordance with the provisions of Articles 293(1) paragraph 2, 65, and 64 of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China," Article 3(1) of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of Disturbing the Peace Cases," and Article 5(1) 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," and based on the research  conclusions of this Court's adjudicative committee, the judgment is as follows:

1. Defendant Long Kehai committed the crime of disturbing the peace,and is sentenced to a fixed term imprisonment of two 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 July 30, 2022 to July 29, 2024.)

2. One OPPOR11 mobile phone used as an instrument in the commission of the crime is confiscated and destroyed in accordance with the law.

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 Longnan, Gansu. A written appeal should be submitted with one original and two copies of the appeal brief.

Chief Adjudicator Lin Fuqiang
Adjudicator Wang Dongwen
Adjudicator Luo Aijun

December 28, 2022

Judge's Assistant Li Panpan
Clerk Yin Yuzhao

甘肃省徽县人民法院

刑事判决书

(2022)甘1227刑初79号


公诉机关徽县人民检察院。

被告人龙克海,男,汉族,1966年6月1日出生,居民身份证号码622630196606011472,高中文化程度,籍贯四川省简阳市,户籍地甘肃省陇南市徽县嘉陵镇嘉陵村059号,现住徽县嘉陵镇嘉陵火车站职工楼一楼,无业。因涉嫌寻衅滋事罪,于2022年7月30日被徽县公安局宣布刑事拘留,同年8月1日被执行刑事拘留;经徽县人民检察院批准,于2022年8月12日被徽县公安局逮捕,现羁押于徽县看守所。2017年11月22日,因虚构事实扰乱公共秩序被徽县公安局行政罚款200元;2018年6月28日,因虚构事实扰乱公共秩序被徽县公安局行政拘留十日:2020年8月18日,因犯寻衅滋事罪被陕西省宝鸡市渭滨区人民法院判处有期徒刑一年六个月,2020年9月20日刑满释放;2021年7月8日,因虚构事实扰乱公共秩序被徽县公安局行政拘留十日;2022年6月12日,因非法持有宣扬恐怖主义、极端主义的物品被徹县公安局行政拘留十日。

辩护人张科科,湖北朋来律师事务所律师。

徽县人民检察院以徽检刑诉[2022]65号起诉书指控被告人龙克海犯寻衅滋事罪,于2022年10月20日向本院提起公诉。本院审查后,依法适用普通程序,公开开庭审理了本案,徽县人民检察院检察员桑云出庭支持公诉。被告人龙克海及其辩护人张科科到庭参加了诉讼,现已审理终结。

徽县人民检察院指控:2022年3月13日以来,被告人龙克海通过本人使用电话号码13892709912注册推特账号,昵称为:“龙克海3”,账号为@egdMcLfnT735D3z,通过发推(推特中发布和转发同为发推)和评论,攻击、辱骂中国共产党、前国家领导人、现国家领导人、中国特色社会主义制度及法制体系、中国人权和中国政府防疫政策,诋毁党和政府。截止2022年8月26日19时18分,龙克海关注他人180人,龙克海账号粉丝218人。龙克海共发送推辱骂中国共产党、国家领导人、中国特色社会主义制度及法律体系、中国人权发推67篇(张),攻击、辱骂中国政府防疫政策发推17篇(张)。该84篇(张)图文中,其中转推他人文章78篇(张),转推文章被引用共425次,被转推16920次,喜欢52650次;龙克海推特账号原创文章截图5张6篇,被他人引用共23次,被转推共16次,喜欢共91次。龙克海评论他人推特文章共47次,其中攻击、辱骂中国共产党、国家领导人、中国特色社会主义制度及法制体系、中国人权文章42篇。该42篇文章被他人引用共2916次,被转推共6927次,喜欢共20478次。被告人龙克海的推特评论被他人引用共6次,被转推共4次,喜欢共76次。

认定上述事实的证据如下:

1、物证:OPPOR11手机1部;

2、书证:受案登记表、立案决定书、指定管辖通知书、拘留证、拘留决定书、批准逮捕决定书、逮捕证、徽县公安局国保大队对龙克海的推特截图11页、对龙克海发表推文和评论的调查报告、龙克海发布推文、评论截图、行政处罚决定书、刑事判决书、裁定书、刑满释放证明书、羁押前体检书、到案经过、户籍证明、搜查证、外调证据材料等;

3、被告人龙克海的供述与辩解;

4、电子数据检查笔录及照片,徽县公安局网安大队网络在线提取笔录及网页截屏125张、推特发推截图等;

5、视听资料:光盘8张,其中讯问同录光盘6张,提取龙克海转发、评论推特数据光盘2张。

被告人龙克海为发泄情绪,利用信息网络多次辱骂前国家领导人、现国家领导人和他人、诋毁党和政府,情节恶劣,破坏社会秩序,其行为触犯了《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百九十三条第一款第(二)项规定,犯罪事实清楚,证据确实、充分,应当以寻衅滋事罪追究其刑事责任。被告人龙克海系累犯,根据《中华人民共和国刑法》第六十五条第一款之规定,应当从重处罚。根据《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》第一百七十六条的规定,提起公诉,请依法判处。

被告人龙克海辩称:起诉书对我的指控全部不符合法律要求,我不是辱骂,只是规劝,我不承认我犯罪。

被告人龙克海辩护人辩称:

1、被告人龙克海没有寻衅滋事行为,起诉书指控龙克海的行为触犯了刑法第二百九十三条第一款第(二)项之规定。纵观该条款,寻衅滋事罪指的是在公共场所无事生非,起哄闹事,造成公共场所秩序严重混乱的,追逐、拦截、辱骂、恐吓他人,强拿硬要或者任意损毁、占用公私财物,破坏社会秩序,情节严重的行为。首先,该规定指的是公共场所而非网络环境,第二,网络空间也非刑法意义上的公共场所,第三,龙克海没有造成也不可能造成公共场所秩序混乱。

2、起诉书反复指控龙克海有辱骂或诋毁行为,完全偏离事实,第一,龙的推特,主要是转载,鲜有评论。第二,其内容未被鉴定机构认定或证实属于虚假、捏造、诽谤、辱骂言论。第三,没有指名道姓没有指出特定人,基本是针对普通民众或不特定人群。

3、关于管辖权,陇南市公安局在行为人跨越成都、海南及陕西宝鸡多地,应该上报至跨省级的公安部来决定由哪个侦查单位受理,陇南市公安无权决定管辖可能由其经常居住地陕西宝鸡侦查的案件。

经审理查明:2022年3月13日以来,被告人龙克海通过本人使用电话号码13892709912注册推特账号,昵称为:“龙克海3”,账号为@egdMcLfnT735D3z,通过发推(推特中发布和转发同为发推)和评论,攻击、辱骂中国共产党、前国家领导人、现国家领导人、中国特色社会主义制度及法制体系、中国人权和中国政府防疫政策,诋毁当和政府。截止2022年8月26日19时18分,龙克海关注他人180人,龙克海账号粉丝218人。龙克海共发送推辱骂中国共产党、国家领导人、中国特色社会主义制度及法律体系、中国人权发推67篇(张),攻击、辱骂中国政府防疫政策发推17篇(张)。该84篇(张)图文中,其中转推他人文章78篇(张),转推文章被引用共425次,被转推16920次,喜欢52650次;龙克海推特账号原创文章截图5张6篇,被他人引用共23次,被转推共16次,喜欢共91次。龙克海评论他人推特文章共47次,其中攻击、辱骂中国共产党、国家领导人、中国特色社会主义制度及法制体系、中国人权文章42篇。该42篇文章被他人引用共2916次,被转推共6927次,喜欢共20478次。被告人龙克海的推特评论被他人引用共6次,被转推共4次,喜欢共76次。

认定上述事实的证据如下:

1、物证:OPPOR11手机1部;

2、书证:受案登记表、立案决定书、指定管辖通知书、拘留证、拘留决定书、批准逮捕决定书、逮捕证、徽县公安局国保大队对龙克海的推特截图11页、对龙克海发表推文和评论的调查报告、龙克海发布推文、评论截图、行政处罚决定书、刑事判决书、裁定书、刑满释放证明书、羁押前体检书、到案经过、户籍证明、搜查证、外调证据材料等;

3、被告人龙克海的供述与辩解;

4、电子数据检查笔录及照片,徽县公安局网安大队网络在线提取笔录及网页截屏125张、推特发推截图等;

5、视听资料:光盘8张,其中讯问同录光盘6张,提取龙克海转发、评论推特数据光盘2张。

上述证据均由控方提供,均经当庭质证,被告人龙克海及其辩护人对部分证据有异议,本院认为公诉机关提供的证据,来源合法,内容真实,能够形成完整的证据链,具有证据效力,依法予以确认,作为定案依据。

本院认为:被告人龙克海为发泄情绪,利用信息网络多次辱骂前国家领导人、现国家领导人和他人、诋毁党和政府,情节恶劣,破坏社会秩序,其行为触犯了《中华人民共和国《刑法》第二百九十三条第一款第(二)项之规定,犯罪事实清楚,证据确实、充分,应当以寻衅滋事罪追究其刑事责任,公诉机关指控罪名成立,应予支持。关于辩护人提出的公安机关取证问题,经查,侦查机关提取涉案证据,并无不当,对此辩护意见不予采纳。关于被告人龙克海及其辩护人就龙克海的行为不构成犯罪的意见,根据本案证据来看,龙克海为发泄情绪,利用网络信息多次在网络上辱骂前国家领导人、现国家领导人和他人、诋毁党和政府,藐视国家法律和社会公德,情节恶劣,其行为已构成寻衅滋事罪,故对该辩护意见不予采纳。被告人龙克海系累犯,依法应从重处罚。依据《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百九十三条第一款第(二)项、第六十五条第一款、第六十四条,《最高人民法院、最高人民检察院关于办理寻衅滋事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第三条第(一)项,《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》第五条第一款之规定,并经本院审判委员会研究决定,判决如下:

一、被告人龙克海犯寻衅滋事罪,判处有期徒刑二年;(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,即自2022年7月30日起至2024年7月29日止。)

二、作案工具OPPOR11手机1部依法予以没收销毁。

如不服本判决,可在接到判决书的第二日起十日内,通过本院或直接向甘肃省陇南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。

审判长蔺富强
审判员王东文
审判员罗爱军

二〇二二年十二月二十八日

法官助理李盼盼
书记员尹宇昭

Saturday, March 25, 2023

Translation: Ruan Xiaohuan (Program-Think Blogger) Inciting Subversion Court Judgment

Translator's Notes: 

  • Based on public reports, Ruan Xiaohuan was the writer behind the "Program-Think" blog (编程随想的博客  https://program-think.blogspot.com/). Presumably all references in the court judgment "blogs" are to that blog. 
  • The Chinese version was created by running images of the court judgment through OCR software. I have tried to proof the OCR version, but some errors in transcription may remain. 

Second Intermediate People's Court of Shanghai

Criminal Judgment

(2021) Hu 2nd Criminal First Instance No. 67

The public prosecution agency was the People's Procuratorate of Shanghai Branch No. 2.

Defendant Ruan Xiaohuan, male, born June 10, 1977 in Quanzhou, Fujian, Han ethnicity, matriculated university but did not obtain a degree, unemployed, residing in this city at No. 558, Minjing Road, Yangpu District. On May 11, 2021 he was taken into criminal detention in connection with this case, and he was arrested on June 17 of the same year. He is currently being held in detention at the Shanghai Yangpu District detention center.

Defense counsel Lu Peiyu is a lawyer at the Shanghai Ruifa Law Firm.

In the Hu Procuratorate 2nd Criminal Indictment 2 (2021) No. Z18 indictment the People's Procuratorate of Shanghai Branch No. 2 charged defendant Ruan Xiaohuan committed the crime of inciting subversion of state power, and filed a public prosecution with this Court. This Court formed a collegial panel in accordance with the law, and because state secrets were implicated, tried this case with hearings in closed court. The People's Procuratorate of Shanghai Branch No. 2 assigned Procurator Xu Jing to appear in court in support of the public prosecution. Defendant Ruan Xiaohuan and his defense counsel appeared in court to participate in the proceedings. The trial has now concluded. The People's Procuratorate of Shanghai Branch No. 2 charged:

From June 2009 to May 2021, defendant Ruan Xiaohuan, owing to his long-term dissatisfaction with China's political system and social governance model, used his own computer in his residence to write more than a hundred inciting articles that manufactured rumors and defamed with contents that involved attacking and smearing China's current political system, inciting subversion of state power, and intending to overthrow the socialist system. He posted them through foreign Internet platforms, causing offensive outcomes such as a large number of Internet users to browse, comment, repost, and imitate them.

On May 10, 2021, defendant Ruan Xiaohuan was apprehended by public security agents at his residence, and the computer he was logged-into and using was taken into custody at the scene. After being taken into police custody, Ruan Xiaohuan fully confessed to the aforementioned criminal facts.

In order to substantiate the aforementioned charged facts, the public prosecutor read and produced in court relevant evidence, including defendant Ruan Xiaohuan's statement. It believed defendant Ruan Xiaohuan incited subversion of state power and the overthrow of the socialist order through manufacturing rumors, defamation, smearing, and other means, that he was a major offender, that his actions were the commission of an offense under the provisions of Article 105(2) of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China," and that he should bear criminal liability for committing the crime of inciting subversion of state power. After being taken into police custody, Ruan Xiaohuan made truthful statements regarding his criminal conduct, and can be given a lighter punishment. It requests an adjudication in accordance with the law.

Defendant Ruan Xiaohuan did not maintain any objections to the basic facts and the offense charged in the indictment, but he argued that his goal in writing articles implicating politics was a desire to let the country change for the better, and that the number of articles he distributed that incited subversion did not number in the hundreds.

Defense counsel did not maintain any objections to the basic facts and the offense charged in the indictment. At the same time, they proffered that prior to the development of this case defendant Ruan Xiaohuan's ideological understanding had undergone a transformation, and he is not as radical as before, and the number of articles implicating inciting subversion required further verification. After being taken into police custody Ruan Xiaohuan made truthful statements regarding the criminal facts,pleaded guilty and repented in court, and requested Ruan Xiaohuan be given a lighter punishment.

It was ascertained at trial that beginning in June 2009, defendant Ruan Xiaohuan, owing to his dissatisfaction with China's political system and social governance model, used a computer to write more than 100 inciting articles that manufactured rumors and defamed attacking and smearing China's current political system, inciting subversion of state power, and intending to overthrow the socialist system, and he posted them through foreign Internet platforms, causing offensive outcomes such as a large number of Internet users to browse, comment, repost, and imitate them .

On May 10, 2021, public security agents apprehended defendant Ruan Xiaohuan at his residence, and the computer he was logged-into and using was taken into custody at the scene. After being taken into police custody, Ruan Xiaohuan made truthful statements regarding the aforementioned primary criminal facts. 

The evidence proving the aforementioned facts is:

1.The "Decision to Open a Case," "Case Acceptance Form, "Apprehension Process," and "Arrest Process" issued by the public security agency confirmed the case resolution and the process of how the defendant Ruan Xiaohuan came into police custody in this case.

2. The "search warrant," "search record," "list of seized items," "seizure record," "crime scene investigation record," and relevant photographs, and "electronic data on the scene collection record" produced by the public security agency confirmed that, public security agents conducted a crime scene investigation and search of defendant Ruan Xiaohuan's residence in accordance with the law, and there was an Acer laptop computer on the desk in the second bedroom at the scene. The computer was connected to a monitor and a keyboard, and having ascertained by the power light of the computer that it was on, the screen was woken up by shaking the mouse, and a collection of the electronic data in the computer was conducted. Because the relative long period of time the collection took, the machine was transferred to the public security agency without turning off the power to continue to complete the collection work. At the same time, the public security agency also took into custody and seized an Apple mobile phone, a Xiaomi mobile phone, a Huawei laptop, a Toshiba mobile hard drive, USB sticks, keyboards, and other items.

3. The "remote crime scene investigation record" produced by the public security agency confirmed public security agency undertook a network remote crime scene investigation to collect several hundred articles from defendant Ruan Xiaohuan's blog. Included among these were over 100 articles implicating politics.

4. The "forensic report" issued by the public security agency confirmed that, based on forensics, it could not be ruled out that the biological substances in the cotton swabs of the Acer laptop keyboards and external keyboards were left by defendant Ruan Xiaohuan.

5. The "Judicial Forensic Opinion Report" issued by the Shanghai Hong Electronic Data Judicial Forensic Institute and copies of the articles implicating politics confirmed that, based on forensics, more than a dozen virtual machines, hundreds of blog posts, etc. were detected on Ruan Xiaohuan's Acer laptop. ".XML" format files were discovered on the computer.

6."Electronic Data Investigation Experiment Record" and optical discs produced by the public security agency confirmed that, after logging in to the blog as a blogger, you can download and generate a blog post template file in ".XML" format through the "Backup" function of the blog, which stores all the blog post content published by the blog and the configuration information of the blog. Ordinary Internet users browsing the blogs as visitors would not be able to download and generate the aforementioned template files. 

7. The testimony of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] Bei confirmed that the north room in the common residence Bei shares with her husband Ruan Xiaohuan is Ruan's study, and the study and the items in the room are used by him.

8. After being taken into police custody, defendant Ruan Xiaohuan fully confessed to the fact that he used his personal blog over a long period of time to distribute a large volume of articles implicating politics, and inciting subversion of state power and the overthrow the socialist order. Ruan Xiaohuan also undertook to read and sign the over 100 blog posts implicating politics that had been taken into custody, affirming that they were written by him.

All of the foregoing evidence was produced and examined in court, and is confirmed by this Court.

This Court finds defendant Ruan Xiaohuan incited subversion of state power and the overthrow of the socialist system through manufacturing rumors, defamation, and other means, and his actions constitute the commission of the crime of inciting subversion of state power. Ruan Xiaohuan committed crimes over a long period of time, the number of articles he posted was large, their influence was offensive, and constituted a major offense. The offense charged by the public prosecution agency is established. Given that defendant Ruan Xiaohuan made truthful statements regarding the criminal facts after being taken into police custody, in accordance with the law he can be given a lighter punishment. Defense counsel's opinion requesting a lighter punishment be given can be adopted. In accordance with the provisions of Articles 105(2), 113(2), 67(3), 56(1), 55(1), and 64 of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China," the judgment is as follows:

1. Defendant Ruan Xiaohuan committed the crime of inciting subversion of state power, and is sentenced to a fixed term imprisonment of seven years and two years deprivation of political rights, and confiscation of property valued at 20,000 renminbi.

(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 10, 2021 to May 9, 2028.)

2. Tools used in the commission of the crime, including computers and other materials taken into custody, shall be confiscated. 

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 Shanghai. A written appeal should be submitted with one original and one copy of the appeal brief.

Chief Adjudicator Wei Dong
Adjudicator Sun Ye
Adjudicator Zheng Wang

February 10, 2023

Clerk Xia Jing


上海市第二中级人民法院


刑事判决书


(2021)沪02刑初67号


公诉机关上海市人民检察院第二分院。

被告人阮晓寰,男,1977年6月10日出生于福建省泉州市,汉族,大学肄业,无业,住本市杨浦区民京路558号。因本案于2021年5月11日被刑事拘留,同年6月17日被逮捕。现羁押于上海市杨浦区看守所。

辩护人陆培煜,上海睿法律师事务所律师。

上海市人民检察院第二分院以沪检二分二部刑诉[2021]Z18号起诉书指控被告人阮晓寰犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,向本院提起公诉。本院依法组成合议庭,因涉及国家秘密,不公开开庭审理了本案。上海市人民检察院第二分院指派检察员许靖出庭支持公诉。被告人阮晓寰及其辩护人到庭参加诉讼。现已审理终结。上海市人民检察院第二分院指控:

2009年6月至2021年5月期间,被告人阮晓寰因长期对我国政治体制、社会治理模式存在不满情绪,在其居住地内多次使用自用电脑编写百余篇造谣、诽谤的煽动性文章,内容涉及攻击抹黑我国现行政治体制、煽动颠覆国家政权、意图推翻社会主义制度,并通过境外网络平台予以发布,造成大量网民浏览、评论、转发、效仿等恶劣后果。
2021年5月10日,被告人阮晓寰在其居住地被公安人员抓获,并当场查获其正在登陆使用的电脑。阮晓寰到案后,对上述犯罪事实供认不讳。

为证实上述指控事实,公诉人当庭宣读并出示了包括被告人阮晓寰供述在内的相关证据,认为被告人阮晓寰以造谣、诽谤、抹黑等方式煽动颠覆国家政权,推翻社会主义制度,罪行重大,其行为已触犯《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刑事责任,阮晓寰到案后如实供述自己罪行,可以从轻处罚,提请依法审判。

被告人阮晓寰对于起诉指控的基本事实及罪名不持异议,但辩称其写涉政类文章的目的是想让国家变得更好,所发表的具有煽动颠覆性质的文章并没有百余篇。

辩护人对于起诉指控的事实及罪名不持异议,同时提出案发前被告人阮晓寰的思想认识已有所转变,没有最初那样激进,所涉煽动颠覆性质的文章数量有待进一步查实,阮晓寰到案后如实供述犯罪事实,认罪悔罪,请求对阮晓寰从轻处罚。

经审理查明,被告人阮晓寰因对我国政治体制、社会治理模式等存在不满情绪,自2009年6月起,使用电脑编写百余篇造谣、诽谤的煽动性文章,攻击抹黑我国现行政治体制,煽动颠覆国家政权,意图推翻社会主义制度,通过境外网络平台予以发布,造成大量网民浏览、评论、转发等恶劣后果。

2021年5月10日,公安人员在阮晓寰的居住地将抓获,并当场查获阮正在登陆使用的电脑。阮晓寰到案后如实供述了上述主要犯罪事实。
证明上述事实的证据有:

1.公安机关出具的《立案决定书》《受案登记表》《抓获经过》《抓捕经过》证实了本案的侦破以及被告人阮晓寰的到案经过。

2.公安机关制作的《搜查证》《搜查笔录》《扣押清单》《扣押笔录》《现场勘验笔录》及相关照片、《电子数据现场提取笔录》证实,公安人员依法对被告人阮晓寰的居住地进行勘验及搜查,在现场次卧室的书桌上有一台宏基牌笔记本电脑,该电脑连有显示器及键盘,通过该电脑电源灯判断处于开启状态,通过摇动鼠标唤醒屏幕,对电脑内的电子数据进行提取,由于提取时间较长,故采用不关闭电源的方式,移机至公安机关继续完成提取工作。同时,公安机关还查获并扣押苹果手机、小米手机、华为笔记本电脑、东芝移动硬盘、U盘、键盘等物品。

3.公安机关制作的《远程勘验笔录》证实,公安人员通过网络远程勘验,从被告人阮晓寰的博客提取博文数百篇,其中包含百余篇涉政文章。

4.公安机关出具的《鉴定书》证实,经鉴定,不能排除宏基笔记本电脑键盘、外接键盘的棉签涂取物中的生物性物质为被告人阮晓寰所留。

5.上海弘电子数据司法鉴定所出具的《司法鉴定意见书》及涉政文章复印件证实,经鉴定,从被告人阮晓寰的宏基笔记本电脑中检出十余个虚拟机,数百篇博文等;在电脑内发现“.XML”格式文件。

6.公安机关制作的《电子数据侦查实验笔录》及光盘证实,以博主身份登录博客后,能够通过博客自带的“备份”功能下载生成“.XML”格式的博文模板文件,该文件内保存有博客所发布的全部博文内容以及博客的配置信息,普通网民以游客身份浏览博客无法下载生成上述模板文件。
7.证人贝的证言证实,贝和丈夫阮晓寰共同居住地內的北房间系阮的书房,该书房及房内物品均由本人使用。

8.被告人阮晓寰到案后对于其利用个人博客,长期发表大量涉政文章,煽动颠覆国家政权,推翻社会主义制度的事实供认不讳。阮晓寰还对查获的百余篇涉政博文进行了阅看,并签字确认系其本人所写。

以上证据均经庭审质证,本院予以确认。

本院认为,被告人阮晓寰以造谣、诽谤等方法煽动颠覆国家政权,推翻社会主义制度,其行为已构成煽动颠覆国家政权罪,且阮晓寰犯罪时间长,发布文章数量多,影响恶劣,属罪行重大。公诉机关指控罪名成立。鉴于被告人阮晓寰到案后如实供述犯罪事实,依法可以从轻处罚。辩护人请求从轻处罚的意见,可予采纳。依照《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第二款、第一百一十三条第二款、第六十七条第三款、第五十六条第一款、第五十五条第一款、第六十四条的规定,判决如下:

一、被告人阮晓寰犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,判处有期徒刑七年,剥夺政治权利二年,没收财产人民币二万元。

(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,即自二○二一年五月十日起至二○二八年五月九日止。)

二、查获的作案工具电脑等物品予以没收。
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上海市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,副本一份。

审判长 董玮
审判员 孙晔
审判员 王峥

二0二三年二月十日

书记员 夏菁