Translation: Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing Inciting Subversion Judgment

 On July 7, the "@FreeXueBing" Twitter account posted a link to the court judgment in the inciting subversion case of Huang Xueqin (黄雪琴) and Wang Jianbing (王建兵). While PRC domestic media did not report on the judgment, foreign media covered it extensively:

• Guilty Verdict for Chinese Activists Who Gave #MeToo Victims a Voice, New York Times
• Chinese #MeToo journalist, activist jailed in crackdown on civil society, Washington Post
• Chinese #MeToo journalist Sophia Huang Xueqin and labour activist Wang Jianbing jailed, Australian Broadcasting Corporation

The reason for the PRC media's silence can be attributed to the fact that the PRC government suppresses discussion of the Metoo movement, as evidenced by this screenshot taken on June 23, 2024, several days Huang and Wang were convicted of inciting subversion, showing Sina Weibo was censoring the "metoo" hashtag.

The PRC government's position on Metoo and Huang Xueqin is reflected in this editorial published in the English edition of the Communist Party sponsored Global Times titled "West's undisguised intention of using MeToo movement to create antagonism in China":

The #MeToo movement is closely linked to foreign forces, and is also taken advantage of by some anti-China groups or figures. For example, Huang Xueqin, the "#MeToo activist, women's rights activist and independent journalist in China" - as introduced on her Wikipedia page - initiated a survey on Chinese women journalists' experience on sexual harassment in 2017. 

A full translation of the court judgment, along with an OCR'd version of the document posted online, is included below.  

Some observations on the judgment itself:

• There are a lot of black-bar redactions in the judgment, and it is not clear if they were done by the court, the people who posted the judgment, or both. Given that there are places in the judgment where the court adopted its standard obfuscation methods (e.g., "某" and "*"), it seems reasonable to assume the black-bar redactions were done by the people who posted the judgment.
• There is nothing in the judgment that could deemed "analysis," legal or otherwise. Instead, the judgment consists mostly of long recitations of "evidence" that what Huang and Wang said incited people to subversion, but with no examples of what they actually said. The following is typical of how the judgment offers vague characterizations (in this case, coming from a witness) of how what Huang and Wang said that fell outside the boundaries of "free speech" under Article 35 of the Constitution:

The class criticized China's problems, stimulated domestic young people's dissatisfaction with the State system, instilled in the participants theories and methods of subverting the State regime to ultimately achieve the country's democratic transformation with a "non-violence movement."

• Huang's defense counsel argued that Huang had been subjected to "extended interrogations" and that her statements should be excluded. The court dismissed this with a single sentence: "it was found that each interrogation by the investigating agencies in this case guaranteed the necessary rest time for the two defendants, the transcripts signed and sealed by the two defendants can confirm their authenticity, and the two defendants have not retracted their confessions of the acts involved in the case."

 The following is a list of some of the actions which, based on this court judgment, do not fall within the scope of "freedom of expression" in the PRC:

• Advocating changing the PRC's current government structure (even peacefully).
• Teaching people to confront government agents/officials (even through non-violent means).
• Discussing social topics in a manner that might cause people to become dissatisfied with the PRC government or the Communist Party.
• Making verbal attacks on the PRC's political system or policies.
• Posting images that make fun of PRC leaders.
• Saying negative or "inappropriate" things ("smearing" "vilifying" "denigrating") about the PRC government or the Communist Party.
• Instilling thoughts in others with bad political purposes.

Intermediate People's Court of Guangzhou
Criminal Judgment
(2022) Yue 01 Criminal First Instance No. 298

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

Defendant Huang Xueqin, female, born [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL], Han ethnicity, college education, household registration [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL], Guangdong. On September 19, 2021 she was taken into custody in connection with this case, she was taken into criminal detention the following day, and she was arrested on October 27 of the same year. She is currently being held in detention at the Guangzhou No. 1 Detention Center.

Defense counsel Qiu Hengyu is a lawyer at the Beijing Yingke (Guangzhou) Law Firm.

Defense counsel Wan Miaoyan is a lawyer at the Sichuan Ding Law Firm.

Defendant Wang Jianbing, male, born [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL], Han ethnicity, college education, household registration [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL], Gansu. On September 19, 2021 he was taken into custody in connection with this case, he was taken into criminal detention the following day, and he was arrested on October 27 of the same year. He is currently being held in detention at the Guangzhou No. 1 Detention Center.

Defense counsel Xiao Yunyang is a lawyer at the Guizhou Yutai Law Firm.

In the Procuratorate Criminal Indictment (2022) No. Z11 indictment, the People's Procuratorate of Guangzhou charged that defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing committed the crime of inciting subversion of state power, and on August 11, 2022 filed a public prosecution with this Court. After this Court docketed the case it formed a collegial panel in accordance with the law, and tried this case with hearings in open court. The People's Procuratorate of Guangzhou assigned procurators Zhu Jialin and Cai Yingying to appear in court in support of the prosecution. Huang Xueqin and her defense counsels Qiu Hengyu and Wan Miaoyan, and Wang Jianbing and his defense counsel Xiao Yunyang were in court to participate in the proceedings. The trial in this case has now concluded.

The public prosecution agency charged: Since 2019, defendant Huang Xueqin did on many occasions on Internet platforms and social media both inside and outside national borders post inciting articles and statements that distorted and attacked our country's government, and attacked and denigrated our country's political system and advocated ideologies that subverted the State regime. In March 2021, while participating in a certain foreign online press conference, Huang Xueqin publicly made inciting statements attacking and denigrating our country's State regime. From May 2020 to February 2021, Huang Xueqin accepted recruitment by a foreign organization member and participated in online "non-violence movement" trainings, and knowing that the course contained content that incited subversion of our country's State regime, she nevertheless introduced it, lured others to participate, and assisted in calling the roll and playing the courseware, and during the training she actively assisted in the "non-violence movement" training activities. From December 2020 to May 2021, Huang Xueqin used foreign video conferencing software to organize and open a "Ten Lessons" project training, using major events and social movements both inside and outside national borders as content to incite participants to become dissatisfied with our country's State regime.

After graduating from college, defendant Wang Jianbing did on many occasions take part in foreign Internet groups whose purpose was to subvert our country's State regime such as the "China Local Jasmine Revolution Volunteer Corps China Jasmine Revolution Volunteer Corps" and the "June 4th Massacre Memorial Hall," and did on many occasions post or repost false statements and articles on foreign social media and Internet platforms that attacked our country's political system and government. From May to October 2020, Wang Jianbing received online "non-violence movement" trainings while studying in the United Kingdom.

Beginning in November 2020, defendants Wang Jianbing and Huang Xueqin acted in league with fellow defendant Chen [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] Xiang (being handled in a separate case) to utilize foreign communication software to post meeting information, and regularly gathered many people to organize meetings at Wang Jianbing's rental residence, Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, taking advantage of the opportunity to discuss social issues and incite participants to become dissatisfied with our country's State regime.

On September 19, 2021, public security agencies apprehended defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing near defendant Wang Jianbing's rental residence.

In order to prove the aforementioned facts, the public prosecution agency presented or read out in court physical evidence such as photos, documentary evidence, witness testimony, the statements and justifications of defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing, forensic opinions, investigation records, inspection records, identification records, audio-visual materials, electronic data, and other evidence.

The public prosecution agency believed that defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing  disregarded the laws of the State and used manufacturing rumors, defamation and other means to incite subversion of state power and the overthrow of the socialist system, their actions were the commission of an offense under Article 105(2) of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China," the criminal facts were clear, the evidence was reliable and copious, and they should bear criminal liability for the crime of inciting subversion of state power. In view of the fact that Wang Jianbing voluntarily and truthfully made statements regarding the facts of the crime, raised no objections to the alleged facts of the crime, and was willing to accept criminal punishment, the procedures for confession of guilt and acceptance of punishment were applied to Wang Jianbing. It recommended that Wang Jianbing be sentenced to three to four years in prison and his property be confiscated. In accordance with the provisions of Article 176 of the "Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" it requested this Court impose punishment in accordance with the law.

Defendant Huang Xueqin essentially acknowledged the criminal facts charged by the public prosecution agency, but argued that she herself lacked the intent to incite subversion of state power, and no crime was constituted. Defense counsel Qiu Hengyu proffered the following defense opinions:

1. Investigating agencies designated a portion of the evidence in this case as classified, and the classification procedures violated the law. Many of the signatures on the remand certificates in this case were not the signatures of the investigators themselves, and they did not match the signatures on the interrogation transcripts, so there exists issues relating to extended interrogations. The Explanation of Circumstances issued by the public security agencies was unable to prove that all of the evidence had been submitted to the court, so there exists the issue of concealing evidence.

2. Defendant Huang Xueqin did not have the intent to commit the crime of inciting subversion of state power, and there is no evidence proving either that Huang Xueqin actions were an offense, or that anyone subverted the State regime at the instigation of Huang Xueqin.

3. The relevant statements and social activities of Huang Xueqin fell within the scope of freedom of speech.

In summary, it was requested this Court declare Huang Xueqin not guilty.

Defense counsel Wan Miaoyan proffered the following defense opinions: Defendant Huang Xueqin subjectively lacked the intent to incite subversion of state power, and objectively did not engage in actions that incited subversion of state power. His actions did not constitute the commission of a crime. It was requested this Court declare Huang Xueqin not guilty.

Defendant Wang Jianbing acknowledged the criminal facts and offense charged by the public prosecution agency, but argued that at the time of his actions he lacked awareness of their illegality, and requested this Court give him a reduced sentence.

Defense counsel Xiao Yunyang proffered the following defense opinions: Defendant Wang Jianbing's actions had a certain social endangerment, but he did not have the intent to incite subversion of state power, nor were there any acts that incited subversion of state power, they did not constitute the crime of inciting subversion of state power, and may be considered as constituting the commission of another crime. On this basis it was requested this Court issue a just judgment.

It was ascertained at trial:

I. Since 2019, defendant Huang Xueqin did on many occasions on Internet platforms and social media both inside and outside national borders post inciting articles and statements that distorted and attacked our country's government, and attacked and denigrated our country's political system and advocated ideologies that subverted the State regime. In March 2021, while participating in a certain foreign online press conference, Huang Xueqin publicly made inciting statements attacking and denigrating our country's State regime.

The aforementioned facts have been confirmed by the following evidence presented and examined in court by the public prosecution officials, and are affirmed by this Court:

1. The relevant written materials collected by the public security agencies from defendant Huang Xueqin's USB drive and notebook computer authored or posted by her confirmed: For a long time, Huang Xueqin maintained a hostile attitude toward the leaders of the Communist Party of China and our country's socialist system, she possessed the subjective goal of subverting the State regime and overthrowing the socialist system, and posted or reposted many articles and statements on many domestic and foreign media that attacked the leadership of the Communist Party of China and our country's socialist system.

2. A digital conference invitation and remuneration receipt retrieved by public security agencies confirmed: On March 2, 2021, while giving a speech at an online conference held by a foreign organization, defendant Huang Xueqin made statements that attacked our country's socialist system and received remuneration.

3. Relevant statements and images posted by defendant Huang Xueqin on her "[REDACTED] Book" social media software collected by public security agencies confirmed: Since 2019, Huang Xueqin posted a large number of articles, statements, and images on "[REDACTED] Book" social media that vilified and denigrated our country's socialist system.

4. Articles distributed by defendant Huang Xueqin that public security agencies downloaded from a certain China Taiwan website confirmed: Huang Xueqin distributed a large number of inciting articles on that website that distorted and attacked our country's government.

5. The online collection work records produced by the public security agencies confirmed: Public security agencies collected online a large number of inciting statements and articles posted and distributed by Huang Xueqin under the name "Feyton" (Huang Xueqin's pen name) on "[REDACTED] Book," China Hong Kong "[REDACTED] Media," and a certain China Taiwan website that distorted and attacked our country's government.

6. Testimony of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] confirmed: From 2019 to 2021, defendant Huang Xueqin posted a large number of inappropriate statements on the "[REDACTED] Book" account that denigrated our country's State regime.

7. Defendant Huang Xueqin's statements and justifications as well as signed and acknowledged photographs, proved:

(1) She published articles on foreign media platforms inciting Hong Kong residents to resort to violence against the government. In 2020, she used the pseudonym "Feyton" to publish several inciting articles on "[REDACTED] Media" that distorted and attacked our country's government.

(2) From March 1 to 3, 2021, she spoke at an online conference held by a foreign organization, making statements that attacked and denigrated our country's socialist system and received a certain compensation. Defendant Huang Xueqin signed and acknowledged the anti-China articles, statements, and screenshots of images she posted and distributed on several foreign media outlets, and signed and acknowledged the materials in the USB drive that were captured by public security agencies at the time she was apprehended.

II. From May 2020 to February 2021, defendant Huang Xueqin participated in online "non-violence movement" trainings given by foreign staff member Hua Doe. The course introduced the successful experiences and failed lessons of foreign "non-violence movements" in subverting regimes, and advocated and instilled ideologies, strategies, and methods to subvert the leadership of the Communist Party of China and our country's State regime. Huang Xueqin, knowing full well that the course was intended to promote the "non-violence movement" in our country and that it contained content that incited subversion of our country's State regime, nevertheless introduced it, pursued others to participate, carried out roll calls and played courseware during the trainings, and actively assisted Hua Doe to organize training activities such as "non-violence movements" that incited subversion of our country's State regime.

The aforementioned facts have been confirmed by the following evidence presented and examined in court by the public prosecution officials, and are affirmed by this Court:

1. Screenshots of the website of the foreign organization "China Rights In Action" provided by public security agencies, as well as the complete website content collected online and the annual tax returns filed by the "China Rights In Action" organization with the United States Internal Revenue Service, confirmed:

(1) "China Rights In Action" was founded in New York, USA in March 2013. The organization introduces to China the experience, people, and events of "non-violence movements" that have successfully transformed various countries from dictatorships to democracies in order to enhance and promote the strategic application of "non-violent" resistance in China.

(2) The organization's website contains numerous videos, articles, and other content that advocates for subverting our country's government.

(3) The organization's responsible person is Hua Doe, who is outside the borders of China.

2. Information on the online course schedule and screen recordings of a "non-violence movement" course taught by Hua Doe and organized by the foreign organization "China Rights In Action" provided by public security agencies confirmed:

(1) From November 14, 2020 to February 6, 2021, Hua Doe taught 14 online courses on "non-violence movements" with the purpose of subverting the State regime. The content included the history of the formation of "non-violence movements," and its theory, practice, and relationship to democratic transformation. The course introduced cases of color revolutions in various countries and incited the audience to "launch a movement in a non-violent way," and overthrow our country's government and subvert our country's State regime.

(2) Defendant Huang Xueqin actively spoke in the trainings, assisted in playing the courseware, and verified the identities of the attendees.

3. Hua Doe's lectures on "non-violence movements" and some screen recordings and screenshots of the online course provided by witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] and others confirmed: During the course, defendant Huang Xueqin incited the audience to launch a movement through "non-violent means," overthrow our country's government, and subvert our country's State regime.

4. Hua Doe's "non-violence movement" course questionnaire collected in a USB drive collected by public security agencies provided by witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] confirmed: The "non-violence movement" course that defendant Huang Xueqin participated in was mainly aimed at people in the fields of labor and women's rights, and incited the audience to initiate movements through "non-violent" means, overthrow our country's government and subvert our country's State regime.

5. The (voice print) forensic opinion produced by the public security forensic agency confirmed: The statements of "A-ha" in the screen recording of Hua Doe's online class on "non-violence movement" were made by defendant Huang Xueqin.

6. Testimony and identifications, as well as signed and acknowledged transcripts of witnesses [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] proved:

(1) From the end of October to the beginning of November 2020, defendant Huang Xueqin invited [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] to participate in the online "non-violence movement" trainings given by Hua Doe. [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] participated in the online trainings using foreign conferencing software through the introduction of a friend. In 2020, [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] participated in the online trainings using foreign conferencing software through the introduction of Huang Xueqin.

(2) When Hua Doe was giving a lecture, Huang Xueqin assisted in playing the presentation PPT, taking roll calls before classes, taking daily leave and attendance checks, and verifying the identities of the class attendees. Huang Xueqin was similar to a teaching assistant in the training, and helped Hua Doe find students.

Witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] identified defendant Huang Xueqin.

Witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] signed and acknowledged the online "non-violence movement" trainings, signed and acknowledged screenshots of PPT courses reposted by his mobile phone, and signed and acknowledged members of his foreign communication software "mutual aid community" and group chat content.

7. Testimony and identifications and signed and acknowledged transcripts of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] proved: In 2020, (s)he browsed the official website of "China Rights In Action" through the introduction of others. The website had a large number of cases, books, and documentaries about other countries overthrowing their State regimes, trying to incite the audience to implement these revolutions and movements in our country's territory to change the State regime. (S)he used foreign conferencing software to participate in an online "non-violence movement" training session given by Hua Doe through a link posted by others on the foreign communication software. Defendant Huang Xueqin, nicknamed "A-ha," also participated in the training course.

Witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] signed and acknowledged images showing how (s)he used a foreign communication software account.

8. Testimony of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] proved: (S)he participated in online "non-violence movement" trainings given by Hua Doe. The trainings mainly involved non-violent movements and theories, and the participants would discuss together after the class.

9. Defendant Huang Xueqin's statements and justifications proved: In July 2019, she met Hua Doe in China Taiwan through a friend's introduction, and attended a human rights course training organized by Hua Doe in Taiwan. Defendant Wang Jianbing also attended the training. During the 2020 pandemic, she participated in the online "non-violence movement" trainings taught by Hua Doe, and helped Hua Doe to take the roll, play the courseware PPT, and answer questions in the course. In the recording of the course, the voice of "A-ha" was her own.

III. From December 2020 to May 2021, defendant Huang Xueqin organized and opened a "Ten Lesson Project Training" according to the content and methods of online "non-violence movement" trainings, using foreign video conferencing software. During the training, Huang Xueqin not only taught the class herself, but also invited Hua Doe and others as lecturers, using major events and social movements both inside and outside national borders as content to instill ideologies and methods of subverting the State regime, inciting participants to be dissatisfied with our country's State regime.

The aforementioned facts have been confirmed by the following evidence presented and examined in court by the public prosecution officials, and are affirmed by this Court:

1. The "Ten Lesson Project" course schedule collected by public security agencies from defendant Huang Xueqin's USB drive confirmed: From December 2020 to May 2021, Huang Xueqin used foreign video conferencing software to organize two sessions of "Ten Lesson" project training. The course mainly focused on major domestic and foreign events, social movements, etc. The second session had reached the seventh lesson, and the remaining three lessons had not been completed.

2. Defendant Huang Xueqin's "Ten Lesson Project Training" poster collected by public security agencies from witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]'s USB drive confirmed: Huang Xueqin posted a poster on the Internet, recruiting specific groups of people as targets for training, and planning and launching a "Ten Lesson" project training.

3. An email from defendant Huang Xueqin stating that 15 students had signed up for ten classes and some of Huang Xueqin's reply emails collected by public security agencies from defendant Huang Xueqin's mailbox confirmed: From December 2020 to May 2021, Huang Xueqin organized two "Ten Lesson" project training sessions using foreign conferencing software. Huang Xueqin introduced the class time, method, content, and precautions to the trainees and conducted post-class exchanges.

4. Defendant Huang Xueqin's post-lesson reflections sent to her by a student of the "Ten Lesson" project [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] and others collected by public security agencies from defendant Huang Xueqin's mailbox confirmed: Participants of the "Ten Lesson" project said they were deeply touched after listening to the course, and the content of the course provided the audience with much inspiration for "non-violent resistance" to the government.

5. Huang Xueqin's email to "Shitang and others" and her reply emails collected by public security agencies from defendant Huang Xueqin’s mailbox confirmed: Huang Xueqin arranged for the lecturer [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] to lecture on January 30, 2021 from 10:00 to 12:00 in her "Ten Lesson" project using foreign conferencing software, [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL].

6. Testimony of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] proved: One night before April 2021, defendant Huang Xueqin invited [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] to give a class in the "Ten Classes” online sharing event through software. (S)he followed the link sent by Huang Xueqin and entered a chat room and spoke for about an hour, with about ten students.

7. Testimony and signed and acknowledged transcripts of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] proved: Defendant Huang Xueqin asked them to design the "Ten Lessons" propaganda poster.

8. Testimony and signed and acknowledged transcripts of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] proved: Around November 2020, (s)he saw the "Ten Lessons" poster while surfing the Internet. After signing up, (s)he contacted the organizer through foreign communication software and attended the class through foreign conferencing software. The content of the class mainly criticized China's problems, stimulated domestic young people's dissatisfaction with the State system, instilled in the participants theories and methods of subverting the State regime to ultimately achieve the country's democratic transformation with a "non-violence movement." In February 2021, (s)he sent their learning experience to the other party's email address as requested by the other party.

9. Testimony of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] proved: The content of the "Ten Lessons" involved the "non-violence movement" in various countries. Defendant Huang Xueqin was the organizer, responsible for posting course information, introducing the teachers, and requesting them to write their reflections after the class. Huang Xueqin explained the "non-violence movement" abroad to the students, instilling similar thoughts with bad political purposes.

10. Testimony of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] proved: In the second half of 2020, (s)he saw a "Ten Lessons" poster on WeChat Moments, contacted defendant Huang Xueqin, and took a class through conference software. The content of the class involved women's rights and other related topics.

11. Defendant Wang Jianbing's statements and justifications proved: He knew that defendant Huang Xueqin organized "Ten Lessons" for some young people, but he did not participate in the course.

12. Defendant Huang Xueqin's statements and justifications and signed and acknowledged transcripts proved: From December 2020 to May 2021, she used foreign video conferencing software to organize and launch the "Ten Lesson" project training. She taught it herself and invited foreign organization members such as Hua Doe as instructors, using some hot button major events and social movements that occurred both inside and outside national borders as entry points, mainly directed at instilling in domestic college students and social minority groups ideas and methods of subverting the State regime, inciting participants to be dissatisfied with our country's State regime, and interacting with the trainees through email.

Defendant Huang Xueqin signed and acknowledged "Ten Lessons" posters and photographs, and signed and acknowledged emails written by trainees after receiving "Ten Lessons" training.

IV. After graduating from university, defendant Wang Jianbing joined foreign Internet groups such as the "China Local Jasmine Revolution Volunteer Corps China Jasmine Revolution Volunteer Corps" and "June 4th Massacre Memorial Hall" with the purpose of subverting our country's State regime. He did on many occasions post or repost on foreign social media and Internet platforms false statements and articles attacking our country's political system and the government. From May to October 2020, Wang Jianbing received online "non-violence movement" trainings from Hua Doe while studying in the United Kingdom.

The aforementioned facts have been confirmed by the following evidence presented and examined in court by the public prosecution officials, and are affirmed by this Court:

1. Online collection work records issued by public security agencies, screenshots of emails collected from defendant Wang Jianbing foreign's mailbox approving him to join the "China Local Jasmine Revolution Volunteer Corps China Jasmine Revolution Volunteer Corps" and the June 4th Massacre Memorial Museum" groups, as well as containing a large number of articles and links inciting subversion of our country's State regime confirmed: After graduating from university, Wang Jianbing joined the foreign Internet groups mentioned above with the purpose of subverting our country's State regime and collected articles and statements that discredited our country's government and policies.

2. Online collection work records issued by public security agencies and portions of reposted, commented, and liked contents collected from defendant Wang Jianbing's "[REDACTED] Book," confirmed:

(1) Wang Jianbing reposted several false statements and articles attacking our country's political system and government on "[REDACTED] Book."

(2) Wang Jianbing's "[REDACTED] Book" account followed and commented on multiple foreign organization and media accounts that aim to subvert our country's State regime.

3. Defendant Wang Jianbing's notebook and a portion of the materials and images it contained which were seized by public security agencies confirmed: Wang Jianbing's aforementioned notebook contained a large number of statements and images that attacked our country's political system and government.

4. Screenshots of some directories and printouts of some files totaling 38 pages, produced and posted by the "China Rights in Action" organization and collected by public security agencies from the hard disk of defendant Wang Jianbing's computer confirmed: Wang Jianbing's computer contained a large number of documents and images containing false statements attacking our country's political system and government.

5. "Non-violence movement" online courseware and the mind map printouts produced and posted by the the "China Rights in Action" organization after the course, totaling 47 pages, collected by public security agencies from defendant Wang Jianbing's portable hard drive confirmed: Wang Jianbing participated in the online "non-violence movement" trainings of the "China Rights in Action" organization and conducted in-depth study.

6. Defendant Wang Jianbing's statements and justifications and signed and acknowledged transcripts proved:

(1) In 2006, after graduating from university and starting work, he gradually accepted the ideas of foreign anti-China personnel. In 2019, he went to the UK to study through a foreign non-governmental organization. During this period, he participated in the online "non-violence movement" trainings given by Hua Doe through the introduction of defendant Huang Xueqin, and in accordance with Hua Doe's requests, he combined the training content with his own experience to create multiple mind maps.

(2) He applied to join anti-China groups such as the "China Local Jasmine Revolution Volunteer Corps China Jasmine Revolution Volunteer Corps" and "June 4th Massacre Memorial Hall," and through "[REDACTED] Book" he followed or liked many accounts, articles, and statements that defamed our country's government and policies, and reposted posts that defamed our country's image, government, policies, and divided our country.

(3) Since 2015, due to his dissatisfaction with the government, he has reposted some critical posts that smear our country's image, are anti-government, and subvert our country's State regime on the foreign "[REDACTED] Book" and "[REDACTED] ter" to show his approval. At the same time, he followed and liked some accounts and posts by "Taiwan independence" and "Hong Kong independence" organizations and personnel, and supported many people who incited subversion of our country's State regime. On February 10, 2018, he reposted images and "jokes" on "[REDACTED] ter" that cast extremely sarcastic smears on our country's leaders.

Defendant Wang Jianbing signed and acknowledged the printouts of files from his computer hard drive, including a book revised by "China Rights In Action," Hua Doe's "China Rights In Action" courseware, and the mind map he made after class. He signed and acknowledged the emails from anti-china groups agreeing to his joining and other screenshots of emails involved in the case. He signed and acknowledged some reposted, commented, followed, etc. contents of his "[REDACTED] Book" and "[REDACTED] ter" accounts.

V. Since November 2020, defendants Wang Jianbing and Huang Xueqin acted in league with co-defendant Chen [REDACTED] Xiang (being handled in a separate case) to use foreign communication software to post information about gatherings, regularly assembling many people to organize gatherings at Wang Jianbing's rental residence, Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, etc., and took the opportunity to discuss social topics to incite participants to become dissatisfied with our country's State regime.

On September 19, 2021, public security agencies apprehended defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing near defendant Wang Jianbing's rental residence.

The aforementioned facts have been confirmed by the following evidence presented and examined in court by the public prosecution officials, and are affirmed by this Court:

1. The Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou "House Lease Contract" and testimony provided by Chen Doe 2 (defendant Wang Jianbing's landlord) confirmed: On November 1, 2020, Chen Doe 2 rented Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road to Wang Jianbing through an agency for a period of one year at a monthly rent of RMB 2,600.

2. A March 23, 2021 email sent by defendant Huang Xueqin to Wang Jianbing collected by public security agencies from defendant Wang Jianbing's mailbox and a large amount of information from Huang Xueqin to Wang Jianbing collected by public security agencies from the mobile phone carried by Wang Jianbing confirmed: Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing, organizers of the "202 Sharing Session," discussed how to share various "non-violence movements" through the "202 Sharing Session" to consolidate the relationship between existing participants, expand the scope of participants, and incite participants to be dissatisfied with our country's State regime.

3. A March 23, 2021 email sent by co-defendant Chen [REDACTED] Xiang to Wang Jianbing collected by public security agencies from defendant Wang Jianbing's mailbox confirmed: Chen [REDACTED] Xiang and Wang Jianbing, as organizers of the "202 Sharing Session," organized the "202 Sharing Session" in order to expand the community which could carry out subsequent political movements, an event that incited subversion of our country's State regime.

4. Messages sent by Wang Jianbing, information sent by Wang Jianbing to [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL], information sent by Huang Xueqin to Wang Jianbing, "Night Cruise" member list," "citizen Leads 202" group chat records, articles, and screenshots sent by [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL], "Chorus," "Night Cruise," and "Steer Water" group chat records, chat records between Wang Jianbing and [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL], and other photographic content extracted by public security agencies from defendant Wang Jianbing's mobile phone confirmed:

(1) The "Night Cruise" group had 39 members, Wang Jianbing, "Xiang water," and Huang Yueliang were the administrators.

(2) Wang Jianbing sent information to [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] and others, inviting them to attend the "202 Sharing Session."

(3) Wang Jianbing, Huang Xueqin, and others organized the "Night Boat" and "Steer Water" groups, and took the opportunity to discuss social topics to incite participants to be dissatisfied with our country's State regime, teach anti-detection methods, and exchange information on how to carry out incitement activities to subvert our country's State regime.

5. The list of content shared in the "202 Sharing Session" which the public security agencies sorted out of the relevant materials confirmed: Defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing organized the "202 Sharing Session" and used the opportunity to discuss social topics to incite participants to express dissatisfaction with our country's State regime.

6. "Night Cruise" group information sent through a certain foreign communication software collected by public security agencies confirmed: Defendant Wang Jianbing referred to defendant Huang Xueqin as "Yellow Moon." Huang Xueqin chatted with members under the nickname "Little Lazy," and posted false statements attacking our country's political system and the government, inciting participants to be dissatisfied with our country's government and socialist system.

7. On-site inspection work records produced by public security agencies confirmed: On September 19, 2021, public security agencies conducted an inspection of Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, and seized some items involved in the case.

8. Testimony, identifications, and signed and acknowledged transcripts of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] (a "202 Sharing Session" participant) proved: At the end of November 2020, he started to participate in the "202 Sharing Session" organized by defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing through the introduction of others. The gathering was fixed at about 7:30 to 10 pm every Thursday night, and a (chat) group was set up. Wang Jianbing set up a "burn after reading" function. The purpose of setting up a group was to avoid Internet supervision. If you wanted to participate in the training course, you had to join the group, otherwise you would not know the course time. Every time you participated in an event, and any time someone was sharing Wang Jianbing would ask everyone to turn off their mobile phones, draw the curtains, and ask everyone not to take photos or videos, etc. Wang Jianbing said that the "202 Sharing Session" event was planned and organized by him, Huang Xueqin, and Chen [REDACTED] Xiang. Every event was organized by Wang Jianbing. On many occasions during the activities different instructors incited participants to increase their hostile attitude toward the police and the government, incited participants to carry out protest actions, and struggle against our country's government and the police, and this would lead to earth-shaking changes in the social structure. Huang Xueqin told stories about movements in other countries, hoping to launch a similar movement in China to change the State regime, spread awareness of resistance to participants, and incite people from all walks of life to engage in resistance movements.

Witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] identified defendants Wang Jianbing and Huang Xueqin, signed and acknowledged images contained in Wang Jianbing "[REDACTED] Book" account, signed and acknowledged the address and photographs of the "202 Sharing Session" that Wang Jianbing and Huang Xueqin organized.

9. Testimony, identifications, and signed and acknowledged transcripts of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] ("202 Sharing Session" participant) proved: He participated in the "202 Sharing Session" organized at Wang Jianbing's home five times through an introduction by [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]. "Night Cruise" mainly posted the theme of the gathering and supplemented the feelings of the relevant individuals after each event. The group owner was Wang Jianbing, and the information was posted by him. Huang Xueqin spread awareness of resistance at the sharing sessions and incited the participants to subvert our country's State regime.

Witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] identified defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing and signed and acknowledged photographs relating to Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou.

10. Testimony, identifications, and signed and acknowledged transcripts of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] ("202 Sharing Session" participant) proved: Introduced by a friend, (s)he regularly went to defendant Wang Jianbing's home every Thursday to participate in meetings. The meetings used a chat group set up foreign chat software. The chat software needed to "climb the wall" to be used. In order to avoid domestic network supervision, the administrators Wang Jianbing, Chen [REDACTED] Xiang, and Huang Xueqin set up a "burn after reading function." The "202 Sharing Session" event was organized by Chen [REDACTED] Xiang, Wang Jianbing, and Huang Xueqin. The purpose was to win over vulnerable groups and spread their ideology and idea of dissatisfaction with the government system. At the end of June 2021, Chen [REDACTED] Xiang, Wang Jianbing, and Huang Xueqin also held a sharing session at a coffee shop near the Xiaogang subway station. Huang Xueqin made inciting statements at the meeting that distorted and attacked our country's government's anti-pandemic policies.

Witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] identified defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing, and the witness and other participants in the "202 Sharing Session" events. [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] signed and acknowledged the "Night Cruise" group and Wang Jianbing and co-defendant Chen [REDACTED] Xiang in the group and signed and acknowledged images of the cafe where the sharing session was held in late June 2021 on Dianping.com and photographs of the cafe's interior.

11.Testimony of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] ("202 Sharing Session" participant) proved: (S)he met defendant Huang Xueqin through a lecture WeChat group, and attended a meeting held by Huang Xueqin and defendant Wang Jianbing in a rental house near Zhongda University on Xingang West Road. The meeting was attended by joining the "Night Cruise" group using foreign chat software, and Huang Xueqin, Wang Jianbing, and Chen [REDACTED] set the "burn after reading" function.

12. Testimony, identifications, and signed and acknowledged transcripts of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] proved: (S)he was introduced to defendant Wang Jianbing by the co-defendant Chen [REDACTED] Xiang. Wang Jianbing added them to a group called "Night Cruise," which posted some meeting times, locations, and event theme information so that group members could go and participate when they were free, but (s)he did not participate. The witness identified defendant Wang Jianbing, signed and acknowledged photographs of the "Night Cruise" group (s)he joined, and photographs of their own foreign communication software account.

13. Defendant Huang Xueqin's statements, justifications, and identifications, and signed and acknowledged transcripts proved: In mid-2021, defendant Wang Jianbing borrowed about RMB 70,000 from her. Since the end of 2020, she, Wang, and others held regular gatherings every Thursday at Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, and formed a "Night Cruise" group through foreign communication software. At the gatherings, she introduced the "non-violence movement" of other countries, posted false statements attacking our country's government and social system, etc., inciting participants to take various "non-violent ways" to confront and oppose the government.

Defendant Huang Xueqin identified defendant Wang Jianbing, co-defendant Chen [REDACTED] Xiang, and witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]. Huang Xueqin signed and acknowledged photographs of the "Night Cruise" group in her mobile phone and signed and acknowledged screenshots of emails she sent to Wang Jianbing.

14. Defendant Wang Jianbing's statements and justifications and signed and acknowledged transcripts proved:

(1) In October 2020, after returning from the United Kingdom, he applied analytical tools he learned from the Hua Doe course to the practice of "non-violence movements," and based on this, he perfected the idea of ​​"202 Sharing Session," believing that gatherings could be used to incite minority groups within the country to subvert our country's State regime. In accordance with the content of the Hua Doe course and his own work experience, he made a mind map, and based on the concept of an NGO, he and defendant Huang Xueqin and co-defendant Chen [REDACTED] Xiang jointly managed and planned the "202 Sharing Session," which he was responsible for convening and hosting. In November 2020, in order to facilitate the development of activities, he, Chen, and Huang used foreign communication software to establish a group called "Night Cruise" with about 30 to 40 contacts. He was the group owner, and Chen, Huang and others were in the group, among which "Huang Yueliang" was Huang Xueqin, and "Xiang WATER" was Chen [REDACTED] Yang. The group regularly posted gathering times, and the participants were mainly friends brought by those three people. The group members gathered every Thursday at Room 202, No. 147-149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou. In order to prevent detection and maintain confidentiality, the "Night Cruise" and other groups set up a function to burn communication records after 24 hours. His private chats with Huang and Chen were also set to be burned after 24 hours. The sharing session mainly incited participants' dissatisfaction with our country's State regime by sharing sensitive topics. In December 2020, in order to better operate the "Night Cruise" group and discuss some issues within"Night Cruise," he established the "Steer Water" group. "Steer Water" means helmsman, which means the one steering the ship. There were only three members: himself, Huang, and Chen. The main discussions were about the development of the "Night Cruise" activities, theme sharing, discussion format, and what kind of people to find to participate in the "202 Sharing Session" and other related issues. Among them, Huang mainly talked about the direction of "Night Cruise" and event-related issues; Chen mainly talked about action-oriented suggestions, and he was mainly responsible for organizing activities and recruiting people. After changing the number, he changed the group name to "Lying Flat Beans," but the function and role remained unchanged. He organized "Night Cruise" with Huang because first, he and Huang had taken Hua Doe's class together; and second, Huang had participated in "MeToo," and he felt that the two would have a common language, and he also felt that Huang was a trustworthy person. He organized "Night Cruise" with Chen because the two had held an offline sharing event for three or four months from August to December 2019, and the location was where Chen lived. The event was also organized by him because he did not want to invest his energy in things like chatting, but preferred to invest his energy in taking some small actions. So this gathering and discussion event was led by him. Before the incident, a total of about 20 to 30 "202 Sharing Sessions" were held, of which about 20 were themed. During that period, he, Huang, and Chen all posted inciting statements that attacked our country's government and socialist system. Because he felt that the activities they organized, the people they invited, or the topics they shared were sometimes sensitive, participants were asked to turn off their phones or switch to flight mode to prevent monitoring by the police.

(2) Among the cash tracked down and seized by public security agencies, 100,000 yuan was borrowed from Huang and Chen a few months before the incident. From July to August 2021, Huang lent him a total of 60,000 yuan in cash in several installments. Chen moved to Huangpu for temporary residence before leaving China Hong Kong at the end of July 2021, and gave him 33,000 yuan in cash at one time. When borrowing the money, he told the two that it was for living expenses and funds for the "202 Sharing Session," and he originally planned to continue the "202 Sharing Session." He planned to use 40,000 yuan of the borrowed money to repay debts. Of the remaining 60,000 yuan, 10,000 yuan was used for "soft funds" and the other 50,000 yuan was used for "202 Sharing Session" funds and living expenses. He used cash because of his personal habit [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL].

(3) The rent for the room he rented, Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, was RMB 2,600 per month.

After signing and acknowledged photos, defendant Wang Jianbing signed and acknowledged the screenshots of the surveillance video downstairs of his residence, Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou. He signed and acknowledged the contents of all his hard drive files. He signed and acknowledged the photos in the album of the seized iPhone. He signed and acknowledged the list of members, logo, and icon of the "Night Boat" group. He signed and acknowledged the copy of the contents of his diary. He signed and acknowledged two reports published by "China Rights in Action" that incited subversion of our country's State regime.

The following comprehensive evidence presented by public prosecution officials in court, cross-examined by the court, and affirmed by this Court confirmed:

1. The case registration form, case filing decision, and case process prepared by public security agencies confirmed:

(1) On August 23, 2021, public security agencies opened a case for investigation.

(2) On September 19, 2021, public security agencies near Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou apprehended Huang Xueqin, Wang Jianbing.

2. The household registration documents of defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing retrieved by the public security agencies confirmed: At the time of the incident, Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing were both adults with the ability to bear full criminal responsibility.

3. The entry and exit records of defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing, passports, Hong Kong and Macau travel permits, and Huang Xueqin's Taiwan travel permit retrieved by the public security agencies confirmed:

(1) From 2018 to 2019, Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing frequently traveled to China Hong Kong. From July 26 to August 7, 2019, Huang Xueqin traveled to China Taiwan.

(2) From November 23, 2019 to October 9, 2020, Wang Jianbing traveled to and from the United Kingdom.

4. The search warrants, search records, lists of seized items, seized items return lists, and related evidence photographs produced by the public security agencies confirmed:

(1) On September 19, 2021, public security agencies conducted a personal search of defendant Huang Xueqin and seized the items involved in the case. On February 22, 2022, public security agencies returned some of Huang Xueqin's items to his family.

(2) At about 12:00 on September 19, 2021, public security agencies conducted a personal search of defendant Wang Jianbing and seized the items involved in the case.

(3) On September 19, 2021, public security agencies searched Wang Jianbing's temporary residence at Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, and seized Wang Jianbing's Dell notebook computer, wireless router, RMB 104,450 in cash, Wang Jianbing's personal ID card, bank card, notebook, postcards, mobile hard drives, and other items.

5. Electronic data inspection records prepared by public security agencies confirmed:

(1) Public security agencies inspected a computer, two mobile hard drives, a USB drive, and a mobile phone belonging to Huang Xueqin, and collected electronic data involved in the case.

(2) Public security agencies inspected five computers, two gateway routing devices, two voice recorders, three surveillance cameras, and six mobile phones seized from Wang Jianbing, and collected electronic data and audio-visual materials involved in the case.

6. The fund flow records of defendant Huang Xueqin's accounts in the above-mentioned banks, the fund flow records of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]'s accounts in Bank of Communications, the fund flow records of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]'s accounts in China Merchants Bank Co., Ltd. and Industrial and Commercial Bank of China from January 1, 2020 to December 30, 2021 retrieved by public security agencies from China Merchants Bank Co., Ltd. Guangzhou Branch, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Guangdong Branch, China Construction Bank Co., Ltd., and Bank of Communications Co., Ltd. confirmed:

(1) During the aforementioned period, Huang Xueqin's bank account had multiple personal remittances or online bank remittances exceeding RMB 5,000, and the transaction parties were mainly [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] and others.

(2) On January 30, 2021, witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]'s account transferred RMB 19,285 to [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]'s account.

(3) From November 10, 2020 to March 24, 2021, [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]'s account did on many occasions transfer funds to Huang Xueqin's account, ranging from RMB 4,866 to RMB 19,285. On January 30, 2021, [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]'s account received RMB 19,285 from [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]'s account, which was transferred to Huang Xueqin's account on the same day.

7. Testimony of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] confirmed: [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] from October 20, 2020 to March 24, 2021, Huang collected a total of RMB 63,443.7 through [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]'s Bank of Communications cards. On June 18, 2021, Huang collected RMB 19,222 through [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]'s "Alipay." After receiving the above money, he transferred it to Huang, who said that the money was remuneration for freelance translations on the WeChat platform.

8. Testimony, identifications, and signed and acknowledged transcripts of witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] proved: On January 30, 2021, [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] asked [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] to transfer RMB 19,285.

Witness [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL] identified a signed and acknowledged transfer record of RMB 19,285 to Hua Doe using his China Merchants Bank account.

9. Defendant Huang Xueqin's statements and justifications proved: After the National Day in 2020, Hua Doe paid her a total of US$6,000 in two installments to have her translate half of the content of a book called "Revolutionary [ONE OR MORE CHARACTERS OMITTED BY THE COURT] Illustrations." She received several transfers from foreign media and Hua Doe through his Bank of Communications account. The money from "[REDACTED] Media" was for manuscript fees and some article editing fees, and the money from Hua Doe was for the translation of "Revolutionary [ONE OR MORE CHARACTERS OMITTED BY THE COURT] Illustrations."

Regarding the defense opinions proffered by Huang Xueqin's defense counsel on procedural matters in this case, the comprehensive evaluation is as follows: First, regarding the defense counsel's suggestion that public security agencies employed extended interrogations and requested that all statements of Huang Xueqin be excluded, it was found that each interrogation by the investigating agencies in this case guaranteed the necessary rest time for the two defendants, the transcripts signed and sealed by the two defendants can confirm their authenticity, and the two defendants have not retracted their confessions of the acts involved in the case. It can be seen that the statements made by the two defendants during the investigation phase were their true intentions, and the defendants' statements collected by the investigating agencies in accordance with the law can be adopted as evidence for the final decision. Second, the defense counsel proffered the opinion that the procedure for classifying confidential evidence in this case was illegal. An investigation found that when they classified some of the evidence involved in this case the investigating agencies strictly followed the provisions of the "Law of the People's Republic of China on Guarding State Secrets" in terms of subject and procedure, and provided relevant classification approval documents as evidence. The defense counsel's opinion is clearly unfounded. Third, in response to the defense counsel's opinion that some of the interrogation times on the "arrest warrant" did not correspond to the interrogation records and that the signatures of the investigators on the interrogation records were different, an investigation found that there was no evidence in this case that the investigating agencies omitted to transfer evidence that proved the defendant's crime is minor or innocent. The fact that some of the interrogation times on the "Arrest Certificate" do not have corresponding interrogation records cannot prove that the investigation was illegal. In addition, the signature of the investigator on the "Arrest Certificate" is the registered signature when the arrest was processed. There is currently no relevant regulation that the signature must be written by the investigator himself. In summary, Huang Xueqin's defense counsel's defense opinions on this matter are all insufficiently justified, and are not adopted by this Court.

Regarding the determination of the nature of the behavior of defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing. An investigation found that Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing had long been influenced by the infiltration of foreign anti-China hostile forces. They did on many occasions receive training in the reactionary ideology of the "non-violence movement" and gradually formed a hostile attitude toward and against our country's current political system. They actively participated in the anti-China hostile forces' intention to subvert our country's State regime through "color revolutions" despite knowing that they were actively involved. They had the subjective intention of subverting the State regime and overthrowing the socialist system. Objectively speaking, Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing had long adopted methods such as manufacturing rumors and defamation, and had on many occasions posted or reposted articles and statements on the Internet that denigrated our country's government and the socialist system, advocated ideologies that subverted the State regime, and deluding and inciting others to overthrow our country's State regime. Huang Xueqin not only assisted Hua Doe in organizing training activities, but also worked with Wang Jianbing to recruit college students and marginalized groups to conduct online "non-violence movement" trainings in China. Since November 2020, Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing acted in league with co-defendant Chen [REDACTED] Xiang at Room 202, No. 149, Xingang West Road, Haizhu District, Guangdong, Guangzhou, and did on many occasions jointly organize and plan "202 Sharing Sessions'' to incite others to subvert our country's State regime and overthrow the socialist system. In summary, the actions of both defendants meet the elements of the crime of inciting subversion of state power. Huang Xueqin, Wang Jianbing, and their respective defense counsels' justifications and defense opinions on the nature of the two defendants' actions are insufficiently justified, and are not adopted by this Court.

This Court finds that defendants Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing used manufacturing rumors, defamation, and other means to incite subversion of state power and the overthrow of the socialist system, and that their actions constitute the crime of inciting subversion of state power. The criminal facts charged by the public prosecution agency were clear, the evidence was reliable and copious, and the offense was established. Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing colluded with foreign institutions, organizations, and individuals to commit acts that incited subversion of state power and they should be given a heavier punishment in accordance with the law. In the joint crime, Wang Jianbing provided the venue for the event, Huang Xueqin provided some subsequent funding, and the two defendants jointly planned the themes and methods of the event, actively recruited specific participants, and took turns to serve as hosts and give lectures on some topics. In the above activities, they were organizers, leaders, and active implementers, and were the principal offenders. They should be punished according to all the crimes they participated in, organized, and directed. After Wang Jianbing was brought to justice he was able to basically make statements about his criminal acts, confessed guilt and accepted punishment, and can be given a lighter punishment in accordance with the law. The public prosecution agency believes that the range of sentencing proposed by Wang Jianbing is appropriate and it is adopted by this Court. The defense opinions of Huang Xueqin, Wang Jianbing, and their respective defense counsel that are consistent with the above-mentioned conviction and sentencing determinations are adopted by this Court. Other dissenting opinions are not adopted. Based on the nature, circumstances, and degree of social endangerment of Huang Xueqin's and Wang Jianbing;s criminal facts, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 105(2), 106, 25(1), 26(1) and (4), 67(3), 55(1), 56(1), 47, 64, and 113(2) of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China" and Article 15 of the "Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China," the judgment is as follows:

1. Defendant Huang Xueqin committed the crime of inciting subversion of state power and is sentenced to a fixed term imprisonment of five years, four years deprivation of political rights, and confiscation of RMB 100,000 in personal property (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 September 19, 2021 to September 18, 2026).

2. Defendant Wang Jianbing committed the crime of inciting subversion of state power and is sentenced to a fixed term imprisonment of three years and six months, three years deprivation of political rights, and confiscation of RMB 50,000 in personal property (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 September 19, 2021 to March 18, 2025).

3. The illegal gains of 10,000 Philippine pesos from defendant Huang Xueqin is confiscated. RMB 100,000 seized by public security agencies from defendant Wang Jianbing as personal property used for the crime is confiscated. Huang Xueqin's computer, two mobile hard disks, a USB drive, a mobile phone and Wang Jianbing's five computers, two gateway routing devices, two voice recorders, three surveillance cameras, and six mobile phones seized as tools for committing crimes are confiscated. Wang Jianbing's RMB 4,450 is seized as the object of his property penalty execution (the above were all executed by the seizing agency).

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

Chief Adjudicator Gong Fan
Adjudicator Chen Juntao
Adjudicator Liao Qiuping

June 13, 2024

Judge's Assistant Wang Zhi
Clerk Wu Tao
Yuan Pinzhen

广东省广州市中级人民法院
刑事判决书
(2022)粤01刑初298号

公诉机关广东省广州市人民检察院。

被告人黄雪琴,女,[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]日出生,汉族,大学文化,户籍地[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]广东省。因本案于2021年9月19日被羁押,次日被刑事拘留,同年10月27日被逮捕。现羁押于广州市第一看守所。

辩护人邱恒榆,北京市盈科(广州)律师事务所律师。

辩护人万淼焱,四川鼎律师事务所律师。

被告人王建兵,男,[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]日出生,汉族,大学文化,户籍地[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]甘肃省。因本案于2021年9月19日被羁押,次日被刑事拘留,同年10月27日被逮捕。现羁押于广州市第一看守所。

辩护人萧云阳,贵州宇泰律师事务所律师。

广东省广州市人民检察院以检刑诉[2022]Z11号起诉书指控被告人黄雪琴、王建兵犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,于2022年8月11日向本院提起公诉。本院受理后,依法组成合议庭,公开开庭审理了本案。广州市人民检察院指派检察员朱珈琳、蔡莹莹出庭支持公诉,黄雪琴及其辩护人邱恒榆、万淼焱,王建兵及其辩护人萧云阳均到庭参加诉讼。现已审理终结。

公诉机关指控:自2019年以来,被告人黄雪琴多次在境内外网络平台、社交媒体上发布歪曲、攻击我国政府的煽动性文章和言论,攻击、诋毁我国政治制度,宣扬颠覆国家政权的思想。2021年3月,黄雪琴在参加某境外新闻线上会议时,公开发表攻击、诋毁我国国家政权的煽动性言论。2020年5月至2021年2月,黄雪琴受境外组织人员纠集,参与“非暴力运动”网课培训,在明知该课程含有煽动颠覆我国国家政权内容的情况下,仍介绍、拉拢他人参加,并在培训过程中协助点名、播放课件等,积极协助开展“非暴力运动”培训活动。2020年12月至2021年5月,黄雪琴利用境外视频会议软件组织、开设“十堂课”项目培训,以境内外重大事件、社会运动等为内容,煽动参加人员对我国国家政权的不满。

被告人王建兵大学毕业后,先后加入具有颠覆我国国家政权目的的“中国地茉莉花革命志愿军团中国茉莉花革命志愿军团“六四大屠杀纪念馆”等境外网络群组,并多次在境外社交媒体和网络平台上发布或转发攻击我国政治制度与政府的不实言论和文章。2020年5月至10月,王建兵在英国学习期间接受“非暴力运动”网课培训。

2020年11月起,被告人王建兵、黄雪琴伙同同案人陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥(另案处理)利用境外通联软件发布聚会信息,定期召集多人在王建兵租住处广州市海珠区新港西路149号202房等地组织聚会,借讨论社会话题之机,煽动参加人员对我国国家政权的不满。

2021年9月19日,公安机关在被告人王建兵租住处附近抓获被告人黄雪琴、王建兵。

为证实上述事实,公诉机关当庭出示或宣读了物证照片,书证,证人证言,被告人黄雪琴、王建兵的供述和辩解,鉴定意见,勘验、检查、辨认笔录,视听资料,电子数据等证据。

公诉机关认为,被告人黄雪琴、王建兵无视国家法律,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,其行为触犯了《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第二款,犯罪事实清楚,证据确实、充分,应当以煽动颠覆国家政权罪追究刑事责任。鉴于王建兵自愿如实供述犯罪事实,对指控的犯罪事实没有异议,愿意接受刑事处罚,据此对王建适用认罪认罚从宽制度,建议对王建兵判处三年至四年有期徒刑,并处没收财产。根据《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》第一百七十六条的规定,提请本院依法判处。

被告人黄雪琴对公诉机关指控的犯罪事实基本予以认可,但辩称自己没有煽动颠覆国家政权的故意,不构成犯罪。辩护人邱恒榆提出如下辩护意见:

1.侦查机关将本案部分证据定为机密,定密程序违法;本案提押证上多处签名并非侦查人员本人签名,且与提讯笔录上的签名不能吻合,存在疲劳审讯的问题;公安机关出具情况说明无法证明已将所有证据提交给法庭,存在隐匿证据问题。

2.被告人黄雪琴没有煽动颠覆国家政权罪的故意,也无证据证明黄雪琴有构罪行为;且无人因接受黄雪琴的煽动而实施颠覆国家政权行为。

3.黄雪琴的相关言论和社会活动属于言论自由范畴。

综上,请求法院宣告黄雪琴无罪。

辩护人万淼焱提出如下辩护意见:被告人黄雪琴主观上缺乏煽动颠覆国家政权的故意,客观上未实施煽动颠覆国家政权行为,其行为不构成犯罪。请求法院宣告黄雪琴无罪。

被告人王建兵对公诉机关指控的犯罪事实与罪名均予以认可,但辩称其行为时缺乏违法性认知,请求法院对其从轻判处。

辩护人萧云阳提出如下辩护意见:被告人王建兵的行为有一定社会危害,但其没有煽动颠覆国家政权的故意,也无任何煽动颠覆国家政权行为,不构成煽动颠覆国家政权罪,可考虑构成其他犯罪。据此请求法院作出公正判决。

经审理查明:

一、自2019年以来,被告人黄雪琴多次在境内外网络平台、社交媒体上发布歪曲、攻击我国政府的煽动性文章和言论,攻击、诋毁我国政治制度,宣扬颠覆国家政权的思想。2021年3月,黄雪琴在参加某境外新闻线上会议时,公开发表攻击、诋毁我国国家政权的煽动性言论。

上述事实,有经公诉人当庭举证,并经法庭质证,本院予以确认的下列证据证实:

1.公安机关从被告人黄雪琴U盘、笔记本电脑中提取的其所撰写或发布的相关文字材料,证实:长期以来,黄雪琴敌视中国共产党的领导,敌视我国社会主义制度,具有颠覆国家政权,推翻社会主义制度的主观目的,在境内外多家媒体上发布或转发多篇攻击中国共产党领导与我国社会主义制度的文章与言论。

2.公安机关调取的某数字会议邀请函与酬金收条,证实:2021年3月2日,被告人黄雪琴在境外组织举办的某线上会议上演讲,发表攻击我国社会主义制度的言论并获取报酬。

3.公安机关从被告人黄雪琴“某书”社交软件上提取其所发布的相关言论、图片,证实:2019年以来,黄雪琴在“某书”社交媒体上发布大量污蔑、诋毁我国社会主义制度的文章、言论及图片。

4.公安机关从中国台湾某网站上下载的被告人黄雪琴所发表文章,证实:黄雪琴在该网站上发表了大量歪曲、攻击我国政府的煽动性文章。

5.公安机关制作的网络在线提取工作记录,证实:公安机关在线提取了被告人黄雪琴在“某书”、中国香港“某传媒”、中国台湾某网站等以黄雪琴、“费顿”(黄雪琴笔名)署名发布与发表的大量歪曲、攻击我国政府的煽动性言论与文章。

6.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的证言,证明:2019年至2021年,被告人黄雪琴在“某书”账号上发布大量诋毁我国国家政权的不当言论。

7.被告人黄雪琴的供述和辩解及签认照片,证明:

(1)其在某境外媒体平台上发表文章,煽动中国香港居民采取暴力方式对抗政府。2020年,其用笔名“费顿”在“某传媒”发表多篇歪曲、攻击我国政府的煽动性文章。

(2)2021年3月1日至3日,其在境外组织举办的某线上会议上演讲,发表攻击、诋毁我国社会主义制度的言论并获取一定报酬。被告人黄雪琴签认其在数家境外媒体上所发布与发表的反华文章、言论、图片截图;签认公安机关抓获其时所缴获U盘内的资料。

二、2020年5月至2021年2月,被告人黄雪琴参加境外人员华某主讲的“非暴力运动”网课培训,该课程通过介绍国外“非暴力运动”颠覆政权的成功经验和失败教训,宣扬、灌输颠覆中国共产党领导和我国国家政权的思想、策略、方法。黄雪琴在明知该课程旨在将“非暴力运动”推广至我国并含有煽动颠覆我国国家政权内容的情况下,仍介绍、拉扰他人参加,并在培训过程中实施点名、播放课件等行为,积极协助华某组织开展“非暴力运动”等煽动颠覆我国国家政权的培训活动。

上述事实,有经公诉人当庭举证,并经法庭质证,本院予以确认的下列证据证实:

1.公安机关提供的境外组织“中国权利在行动”网站截图及在线提取网站完整内容及“中国权利在行动”组织在美国国家税务局报备的年度税务报表内容,证实:

(1)“中国权利在行动”组织于2013年3月成立于美国纽约,该组织将各国“从独裁到民主”成功转型的“非暴力运动”经验、人物和事件介绍到中国,以提高和促进“非暴力”抗争在中国的策略性应用。

(2)该组织网站包含大量宣扬顛覆我国政权的视频、文章等内容。

(3)境外人员华某系该组织负责人。

2.公安机关提供的境外组织“中国权利在行动”所组织由华某主讲的“非暴力运动”网课课程表及录屏相关内容,证实:

(1)2020年11月14日至2021年2月6日,华某主讲的14堂以颠覆国家政权为目的的“非暴力运动”网课,内容包括“非暴力运动”的形成历史、理论、实践及与民主转型关系等。该课程通过介绍各国颜色革命案例,煽动听课者以“非暴力”方式发起运动,推翻我国政府、颠覆我国政权。

(2)被告人黄雪琴在该培训中积极发言、协助播放课件、核对听课者身份。

3.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]等人提供的华某主讲的“非暴力运动”课件及网课部分录屏、截图,证实:被告人黄雪琴参与该课程期间,煽动听课者通过“非暴力”方式发起运动,推翻我国政府、颠覆我国政权。

4.公安机关从证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]提供U盘中提取的华某主讲的“非暴力运动”课程调查表,证实:被告人黄雪琴所参与的“非暴力运动”课程,主要针对劳工、女权等领域人员,煽动听课者通过“非暴力”方式发起运动,推翻我国政府、颠覆我国政权。

5.公安鉴定机构出具的(声纹)鉴定意见,证实:华某主讲的“非暴力运动”网课录屏中“阿哈”的发言系被告人黄雪琴所说。

6.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的证言及辨认与签认笔录,证明:

(1)2020年10月底至11月初,被告人黄雪琴邀请华某参加主讲的“非暴力运动”网课培训;通过朋友介绍使用境外会议软件参加了该网课培训;2020年,通过黄雪琴介绍,使用境外会议软件参加该网课培训。

(2)华某讲课时,黄雪琴协助播放演示PPT,负责课前点名、日常请假考勤、核查上课人员身份。黄雪琴在培训中类似于助教,并帮华某找学员。

证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]辨认出被告人黄雪琴。

证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]签认“非暴力运动”网课培训课件;签认其使用手机转发PPT课件的截图;签认其境外通联软件“互助社”群成员与群聊内容。

7.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的证言与签认笔录,证明:2020年,其通过他人介绍浏览了“中国权利在行动”官网,该网站有大量其他国家推翻政权的案例、书籍、纪录片,试图煽动受众在我国境内实施这些革命以及运动使政权更替。其通过境外通联软件上他人发布的链接,使用境外会议软件参加了一期华某主讲的“非暴力运动”网课培训,昵称为“阿哈”(被告人黄雪琴)也有参加该次培训课程。

证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]签认其使用境外通联软件账号通联情况照片。

8.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]证言,证明:其曾参加过华某主讲的“非暴力运动”网课培训,培训主要涉及非暴力运动和理论,课后听课人员会一起讨论。

9.被告人黄雪琴的供述和辩解,证明:2019年7月,其经朋友介绍在中国台湾认识华某,并在台湾参加了华某组织的某人权课程培训,被告人王建兵也参加了该次培训。2020年疫情期间,其参加华某主讲的“非暴力运动”网课培训,并在课程中帮华某点名、播放课件PPT,还曾回答过问题。在该课程录音中“阿哈”的声音是其本人。

三、2020年12月至2021年5月,被告人黄雪琴按照“非暴力运动”网课培训的内容、方法,利用境外视频会议软件,组织、开设“十堂课”项目培训。培训中,黄雪琴不但本人授课,还邀请华某等人作为授课者,以境内外重大事件、社会运动等为内容,灌输颠覆国家政权的理念和方法,煽动参加人员对我国国家政权的不满。

上述事实,有经公诉人当庭举证,并经法庭质证,本院予以确认的下列证据证实:

1.公安机关在被告人黄雪琴的U盘内提取的其开设“十堂课”项目课程表,证实:2020年12月至2021年5月,黄雪琴利用境外视频会议软件组织两期“十堂课”项目培训。课程主要以境内外重大事件、社会运动等颠覆国家政权的方法为内容,其中第二期已上到第七课,剩余三次课未完成。

2.公安机关在证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的U盘中提取的被告人黄雪琴“十堂课”项目培训海报,证实:黄雪琴在网络上发布海报,招揽特定人群作为培训对象,策划、开设“十堂课”项目培训。

3.公安机关在被告人黄雪琴邮箱中提取到[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]等15名学员报名“十堂课”的邮件以及黄雪琴部分回复邮件,证实:2020年12月至2021年5月,黄雪琴利用境外会议软件组织了两期“十堂课”项目培训。黄雪琴向学员介绍上课时间、途径、内容、注意事项并进行课后交流等。

4.公安机关从被告人黄雪琴邮箱中提取到“十堂课”项目学员[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]等人发给黄雪琴的课后感,证实:“十堂课”项目参加学员均表示听课后深受触动,课程所传授内容为受众提供了“非暴力”对抗政府的众多启示。

5.公安机关在被告人黄雪琴邮箱中提取到黄雪琴发给“十堂等人的邮件及回复邮件,证实:黄雪琴约课”授课人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]在2021年1月30日10时至12时通过境外会议软件在其“十堂课”项目中授课,[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL].

6.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的证言,证明:2021年4月前某天晚上,被告人黄雪琴通过软件邀请请[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]在“十堂课”网上分享活动中讲一堂课。其按黄雪琴发来链接进入一个聊天室讲了大概一个小时,其中大概十个学员。

7.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]设计“十堂课”宣传海报。

8.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的证言及签认笔录,证明:被告人黄雪琴请其的证言,证明:2020年11月前后,其上网时看到“十堂课”宣传海报,报名后通过境外通联软件与组织者取得联系并通过境外会议软件上课。上课内容主要以批判中国的问题为主,激发国内年轻人对国家体制不满,给参加者灌输颠覆国家政权的理论与方法,最终以“非暴力运动”实现国家民主转型。2021年2月,其按照对方要求发送学习心得给对方邮箱。

9.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的证言,证明:“十堂课”内容涉及各国“非暴力运动”等内容。被告人黄雪琴是组织者,负责发布课程信息、介绍上课老师,还要求其写课后感想。黄雪琴向学员讲解国外的“非暴力运动”,灌输类似思潮,带有不好的政治目的。

10.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的证言,证明:2020年下半年,其在微信朋友圈看见“十堂课”海报,联系被告人黄雪琴后通过某会议软件上课,上课内容涉及女权等相关内容。

11.被告人王建兵的供述和辩解,证明:其知道被告人黄雪琴面向一些年轻人组织了“十堂课”,但其未参加该课程。

12.被告人黄雪琴的供述和辩解及签认笔录,证明:2020年12月至2021年5月,其利用境外视频会议软件组织、开设“十堂课”项目培训。其通过本人授课及邀请境外组织成员华某等人员作为授课者,以境内外发生的一些热点重大事件、社会运动等为切入点,主要向境内大学生、社会少数群体灌输颠覆国家政权的理念与方法,煽动参加人员对我国国家政权的不满,并与学员通过电邮进行互动交流。

被告人黄雪琴签认“十堂课”海报照片,签认学员接受“十堂课”培训后所写学习心得相关电子邮件等。

四、被告人王建兵大学毕业后,先后加入“中国地茉莉花革命志愿军团中国茉莉花革命志愿军团”“六四大屠杀纪念馆”等以颠覆我国国家政权为目的的境外网络群组,多次在境外社交媒体和网络平台上发布或转发攻击我国政治制度与政府的不实言论和文章。2020年5月至10月,王建兵在英国学习期间接受了华某的“非暴力运动”网课培训。

上述事实,有经公诉人当庭举证,并经法庭质证,本院予以确认的下列证据证实:

1.公安机关出具的在线提取工作记录及从被告人王建兵境外邮箱内提取的“中国地茉莉花革命志愿军团中国茉莉花革命志愿军团六四大屠杀纪念馆”群组批准其加入的邮件截图及大量煽动颠覆我国国家政权的文章、链接等邮件内容,证实:王建兵大学毕业后,先后加入上述以颠覆我国国家政权为目的的境外网络群组并收集关注抹黑我国政府、政策的文章和言论。

2.公安机关出具的在线提取工作记录及从被告人王建兵“某书”“某特”账号提取部分转发、评论、关注的内容,证实:

(1)王建兵在“某书”上转发了多篇攻击我国政治制度与政府的不实言论和文章。

(2)王建兵“某书”账户关注、评论多个以颠覆我国国家政权为目的的境外组织及媒体的账户。

3.公安机关扣押的被告人王建兵笔记本及其中部分内容实物图片,证实:王建兵上述笔记本中有大量攻击我国政治制度与政府的不实言论与图片。

4.公安机关从被告人王建兵电脑内提取的硬盘部分目录截图及硬盘部分文件打印件共38页,证实:王建兵电脑內有大量包含攻击我国政治制度与政府的不实言论的文档与图片。

5.公安机关从被告人王建兵移动硬盘内提取的“中国权利在行动”组织制作发布的“非暴力运动”网课课件及其课后制作的思维导图打印件共47页,证实:王建兵参加了“中国权利在行动”组织的“非暴力运动”网课培训并进行了深入学习研究。

6.被告人王建兵的供述和辩解及签认笔录,证明:

(1)2006年,其大学毕业参加工作后逐渐接受境外反华人员的理念。2019年,其通过境外非政府组织赴英国学习,在此期间通过被告人黄雪琴介绍参加了华某主讲的“非暴力运动”网课培训,并根据华某要求结合培训内容与自身经历制作多份思维导图。

(2)其申请加入“中国地茉莉花革命志愿军团中国茉莉花革命志愿军团“六四大屠杀纪念馆”等反华群组,并通过“某书”“某特”关注或点赞了很多抹黑我国政府、政策的账号、文章和言论,并转发抹黑我国形象、政府、政策,分裂我国的帖子。

(3)从2015年开始,其因对政府不满,在境外的“某书”和“某特”上不时转发一些批评、抹黑我国形象,反政府以及颠覆我国政权的帖文以表认同,同时关注、点赞一些“台独”“港独”组织与人员账号与帖文,声援多名煽动颠覆我国政权的人员。2018年2月10日,其在“某特”上转发了极度映射讽刺抹黑我国领导人的图片和“段子”。

被告人王建兵签认其电脑硬盘中文件打印件,包括“中国权利在行动”所修订书籍、华某“中国权利在行动”课件及其制作的课后思维导图;签认反华群组同意其加入的邮件及其他涉案邮件截图;签认其“某书”“某特”账号部分转发、评论、关注等内容。

五、2020年11月起,被告人王建兵、黄雪琴伙同同案人陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥(另案处理)利用境外通联软件发布聚会信息,定期召集多人在王建兵租住处广州市海珠区新港西路149号202房等地组织聚会,借讨论社会话题之机,煽动参加人员对我国国家政权的不满。

2021年9月19日,公安机关在被告人王建兵租住处附近抓获被告人黄雪琴、王建兵。

上述事实,有经公诉人当庭举证,并经法庭质证,本院予以确认的下列证据证实:

1.证人陈某2(被告人王建兵的房东)提供的广州市海珠区新港西路149号202房《房屋租赁合同》复印件及证言,证实:2020年11月1日,陈某2通过中介公司将新港西路149号202房租给王建兵,租期一年,租金每月人民币2600元。

2.公安机关从被告人王建兵邮箱中提取的2021年3月23日被告人黄雪琴发给王建兵的邮件及从王建兵随身携带手机内提取黄雪琴发给王建兵的大量信息,证实:黄雪琴和王建兵作为“202分享会”组织者,就如何通过开展“202分享会”分享各类“非暴力运动”,从而实现稳固现有参与者关系,扩大参与人员范围,并煽动参加人员对我国政权的不满进行沟通交流。

3.公安机关从被告人王建兵邮箱中提取的2021年3月23日同案人陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥发给王建兵的邮件,证实:陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥和王建兵作为“202分享会”组织者,为实施后续政治运动扩大社群需要而组织“202分享会”这一煽动颠覆我国国家政权的活动。

4.公安机关从被告人王建兵随身携带手机内提取的王建兵发给的信息、黄雪琴发送给王建兵的信息、“夜航船”成员列表、“citizen带领着202群聊天记录”、[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]等人发送的文章截图、“大合唱“”夜航船”“艄水”群聊天记录、王建兵与[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的聊天记录等内容照片,证实:

(1)“夜航船”群组共39个成员,王建兵、“祥water”、黄月亮是管理员。

(2)王建兵曾发送信息给[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]等人,邀请对方参加“202分享会”。

(3)王建兵、黄雪琴等组织“夜航船”“艄水”群组中,借讨论社会话题之机,煽动参加人员对我国政权的不满,传授反侦查方法,交流如何开展煽动颠覆我国政权活动等内容。

5.公安机关根据相关材料梳理的“202分享会”分享内容列表,证实:被告人黄雪琴、王建兵组织“202分享会”借讨论社会话题之机,煽动参加人员对我国国家政权的不满。

6.公安机关在境外某通讯软件上提取的“夜航船”群组发送消息,证实:被告人王建兵把被告人黄雪琴备注为“黄月亮”;黄雪琴以“小懒”的昵称与成员聊天,发布攻击我国政治制度与政府的不实言论,煽动参与人员对我国政府及社会主义制度的不满。

7.公安机关制作的现场勘验检查工作记录,证实:2021年9月19日,公安机关对广州市海珠区新港西路149号202房进行勘查扣押了部分涉案物品。

8.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL](“202分享会”参加者)的证言及辨认、签认笔录,证明:2020年11月底,其通过他人介绍开始参加被告人黄雪琴、王建兵组织的“202分享会”活动。该聚会固定在每周四晚大概7点30分到10点,并有建(聊天)群,王建兵设置有“阅后即焚”。建群就是为躲避网络监管,要参加培训课程就要加群,否则不知道课程时间。每次参加活动时,只要有人分享的时候,王建兵就会要大家关手机,把窗帘拉上,要大家不要拍照录像等。王建兵说“202分享会”的活动是他和黄雪琴、陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥共同策划、组织的。每一次活动都是王建兵组织的,在[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]所参加的多次活动中,不同的授课者煽动参与人员增加对警察和政府的敌视,煽动参加人员开展抗争行动,与我国政府与警察进行斗争,使得社会结构发生翻天覆地的变化。黄雪琴通过讲述他国运动,想在中国搞一样的让政权更替的运动,向参与人员传递传播抗争意识,煽动各个方面群体的人搞抗争运动。

证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]辨认出被告人王建兵、黄雪琴。[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]签认王建兵“某书”账号内容图片;签认王建兵、黄雪琴组织“202分享会”的地址及场所照片。

9.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL](“202分享会”参加者)的证言及辨认、签认笔录,证明:其经[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的介绍5次参加王建兵家组织的“202分享会”活动。“夜航船”主要发布聚会活动的主题内容,补充每次活动后相关人员的感想。群主是王建兵,信息由他发布。黄雪琴在分享会上传递传播抗争意识,煽动参与人员颠覆我国政权。

证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]辨认出被告人黄雪琴、王建兵。证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]签认广州市海珠区新港西路149号202房相关照片。

10.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL](“202分享会”参加者)的证言及辨认、签认笔录,证明:其经朋友介绍每周四定期到被告人王建兵家参加聚会。聚会使用境外聊天软件,设置了聊天群。该聊天软件需要“翻墙”使用,为躲避国内网络监管,管理员王建兵、陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥、黄雪琴设置了“阅后即焚”功能。“202分享会”活动由陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥、王建兵、黄雪琴三人组建,目的是想拉拢弱势群体,传播他们对政府体制不满的思想理念。2021年6月底晚上,陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥、王建兵、黄雪琴还在晓港地铁站附近某咖啡店举办分享会,黄雪琴在会上发布了歪曲、攻击我国政府抗疫政策的煽动性言论。

证人 [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]辨认出被告人黄雪琴、王建兵、证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]等参加“202分享会”活动的人。 [REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]签认“夜航船”群及群中王建兵、同案人陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥;签认2021年6月下旬举办分享会的咖啡厅在大众点评上的图片及该咖啡厅内部照片。

11.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL](“202分享会”参加者)的证言,证明:其通过某个讲座微信群认识被告人黄雪琴,参加了黄雪琴、被告人王建兵在新港西路中大附近一间出租屋的聚会。该聚会用境外聊天软件加入“夜航船”群参加,并被黄雪琴、王建兵、陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥设置了“阅后即焚”。

12.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的证言及辨认、签认笔录,证明:其经同案人陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥介绍认识被告人王建兵。王建兵将其拉入一个叫“夜航船”的群里,群里会发布一些聚会的时间、地点和活动主题信息,让群里人员有空就可以前往参与,但其未参与。

证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]辨认出被告人王建兵。[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]签认其加入的“夜航船”群组照片及其本人某境外通联软件账号照片。

13.被告人黄雪琴的供述和辩解及辨认、签认笔录,证明:2021年中,被告人王建兵曾向其借款约人民币70000元。2020年底以来,其和王等人每周星期四定期在广州市海珠区新港西路149号202房举行聚会,并通过某境外通联软件组建“夜航船”群,其在聚会上通过介绍他国的“非暴力运动”、发布攻击我国政府及社会制度的不实言论等,煽动参加者采取各种“非暴力”方式对抗政府。

被告人黄雪琴辨认出被告人王建兵、同案人陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥、证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]黄雪琴签认其手机内“夜航船”群组照片;签认其发给王建兵的邮件截图。

14.被告人王建兵的供述和辩解及签认笔录,证明:

(1)2020年10月,其从英国回国后,将从华某课程中学到的某分析工具运用到“非暴力运动”实践中,并据此完善了“202分享会”的想法,认为可利用聚会这种形式在境内煽动少数群体颠覆我国政权。其根据华某课程内容,结合自己工作经验制作了思维导图,并按照做NGO思路与被告人黄雪琴、同案人陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥共同经营和策划了“202分享会”,由其负责召集、主持。2020年11月,为便于活动开展,其与陈、黄利用境外通讯软件构建了一个叫“夜航船”的群,联系人约30至40人。其是群主,陈、黄等人都在群里,其中“黄月亮”是黄雪琴,“祥WATER”是陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥。该群会定期发布聚会时间,参加人员主要是三人分别带来的朋友,群内人员每周四到广州市海珠区新港西路147-149号大院202房聚会,为反侦查和保密,“夜航船”等群设置了24小时后焚毁通联记录功能,其与黄、陈的私人聊天也设为24小时后焚毁。该分享会主要通过分享敏感话题,煽动参加人员对我国国家政权的不满。2020年12月,为更好运作“夜航船”群,商量“夜航船”内的一些问题,其成立“艄水”群,“艄水”是船工的意思,寓意掌舵,成员只有其、黄、陈三人。主要讨论“夜航船”活动开展、主题分享、讨论形式、找什么人员参加“202分享会”等相关问题。其中,黄主要讲关于“夜航船”方向性、事件性问题;陈主要讲行动性建议;其主要负责组织活动和拉人员,换号码后就改群名为“躺平豆”,功能作用不变。其与黄一起组织“夜航船”,一是其与黄一起上过华某的课;二是黄搞过“MeToo",觉得两人会有共同语言,也觉得黄是值得信任的人。其跟陈一起组织“夜航船”是因为两人在2019年8月至12月就搞过三四个月的线下分享活动,地点在陈住的地方。活动也由其组织,因不想投入精力到聊天这种事情,更愿意把精力投入到搞些小行动。所以这个聚会聊天活动由其做主导。案发前,“202分享会”总共办了20至30场左右,其中大约20次是有主题的,期间其与黄、陈均发布了攻击我国政府及社会主义制度等煽动性言论。因其觉得所组织的活动、请的人或有时分享的议题敏感,所以要求参加人员关机或调成飞行模式,防止被警方监视。

(2)其被公安机关查扣现金中,有人民币100000元是案发前几个月向黄和陈借的。2021年7月到8月黄分几次总共借给其60000元现金;陈于2021年7月底出境中国香港前搬去黄埔暂住,一次性给其33000元现金。借钱时,其跟两人说是作为生活费和“202分享会”经费,其原打算把“202分享会”继续做下去。所借钱准备用40000元还债,剩下60000元,其中10000元用于“软某基金”,另外50000元用于“202分享会”经费和生活费。其使用现金是因为个人习惯[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]。

(3)其租住的广州市海珠区新港西路147-149号大院202房,每个月租金2600元人民币。

经签认照片,被告人王建兵签认其住所广州市海珠区新港西路149号202房楼下监控视频截图;签认其所有的硬盘文件内容;签认被扣押iPhone手机中相册照片;签认“夜航船”群组成员列表、LOGO和图标;签认其日记内容复印件;签认“中国权利在行动”发布的两篇煽动颠覆我国政权的报告。

本案另有经公诉人当庭举证,并经法庭质证,本院予以确认的下列综合证据证实:

1.公安机关制作的受案登记表、立案决定书、到案经过,证实:

(1)2021年8月23日,公安机关立案侦查;

(2)2021年9月19日,公安机关在广州市海珠区新港西路149号202房附近抓获黄雪琴、王建兵。

2.公安机关分别调取的被告人黄雪琴、王建兵户籍证明材料,证实:案发时,黄雪琴、王建兵均系具备完全刑事责任能力的成年人。

3.公安机关调取的被告人黄雪琴、王建兵出入境记录、护照、往来港澳通行证、黄雪琴往来台湾地区通行证,证实:

(1)2018年至2019年期间,黄雪琴、王建兵频繁往返中国香港;2019年7月26日至8月7日,黄雪琴往返中国台湾。

(2)2019年11月23日至2020年10月9日,王建兵往返英国。

4.公安机关制作的搜查证、搜查笔录、扣押清单、扣押物品发还清单及相关物证照片,证实:

(1)2021年9月19日,公安机关对被告人黄雪琴进行人身搜查,并对涉案物品进行扣押。2022年2月22日,公安机关已将扣押黄雪琴本人部分物品发还其家属。

(2)2021年9月19日12时许,公安机关对被告人王建兵进行人身搜查,并对涉案相关物品进行扣押。

(3)2021年9月19日,公安机关对王建兵暂住地广州市海珠区新港西路149号202房进行搜查,扣押王建兵持有的Dell笔记本电脑、无线路由器、现金人民币104450元、王建兵个人身份证、银行卡、笔记本、明信片、移动硬盘等物品。

5.公安机关制作的电子数据检查笔录,证实:

(1)公安机关对所扣押被告人黄雪琴的一台电脑、二个移动硬盘、一个U盘、一部手机进行检验,提取到涉案电子数据。

(2)公安机关对所扣押被告人王建兵的五台电脑、二个网关路由设备、二支录音笔、三个监控摄像头、六部手机进行检验,提取到涉案电子数据和视听资料。

6.公安机关从招商银行股份有限公司广州分行、中国工商银行广东省分行、中国建设银行股份有限公司、交通银行股份有限公司调取的2020年1月1日至2021年12月30日期间,被告人黄雪琴在上述银行账户资金流水、证人在交通银行账户资金流水、证人在招商银行股份有限公司、中国工商银行账户资金流水,证实:

(1)上述期间内,黄雪琴的上述银行账户发生多笔金额超过人民币5000元的个人汇款或网银汇款,交易对象主要为[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]等人。

(2)2021年1月30日,证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]账户转账人民币19285元至账户。

(3)2020年11月10日至2021年3月24日期间,[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]账户多次转账给黄雪琴账户,金额从人民币4866元至19285元不等。其中2021年1月30日,[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]账户收到[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]账户转账人民币19285元,同日转至黄雪琴账户。

7.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的证言,证明:[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]2020年10月20日至2021年3月24日,黄通过[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]交通银行卡共收取人民币63443.7元;2021年6月18日,黄通过[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]“支付宝”收取人民币19222元。其收到上述钱款后再转给黄,黄称这些钱是在“freelancer”微信平台上做翻译的酬金。

8.证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]的证言及辨认、签认笔录,证明:2021年1月30日,[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]曾让[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]转账人民币19285元。

证人[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]辨认出[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]签认其使用招商银行账户帮华某转账给[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]人民币19285元的转账记录。

9.被告人黄雪琴的供述和辩解,证明:2020年国庆后,华某分两次共支付美金6000元让其翻译一本名叫《革命*图》的书籍一半内容。其通过[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]交通银行账户接收过来自境外媒体及华某的几笔转账,其中来自“某传媒”的钱是稿费和一些文章编辑费,来自华某的钱是翻译《革命*图》费用。

关于黄雪琴辩护人就本案程序性事项提出的辩护意见,综合评判如下:第一,对辩护人提出公安机关存在疲劳审讯,要求排除黄雪琴所有供述的意见,经查,本案侦查机关的每次讯问均保障了两名被告人的必要休息时间,两名被告人签字捺印的笔录可以证实其真实性,且两名被告人目前对自己所实施的涉案行为并未翻供。可见,两被告人在侦查阶段的供述均系其真实意思表示,侦查机关依法收集的被告人供述可作为定案证据采纳。第二,对辩护人提出本案涉密证据定密程序违法的意见。经查,侦查机关对本案部分涉案证据进行定密,在主体、程序上均严格依照《中华人民共和国保守国家秘密法》等规定进行,并提供了相应的定密审批文件予以佐证,辩护人的意见明显理据不足。第三,针对辩护人提出《提押证》上部分提讯时间无对应讯问笔录且与讯问笔录上侦查人员的签名笔迹存在差异的意见。经查,本案现无任何证据显示侦查机关遗漏移送证明被告人罪轻或无罪的证据材料,《提押证》上部分提讯时间无对应讯问笔录并不能证明侦查行为违法,且《提押证》上侦查人员的签名系办理提押时的登记签名,目前并无相关规定该签名必须由侦查人员亲笔书写。综上,黄雪琴辩护人就此所提辩护意见均据理不足,本院不予采纳。

关于被告人黄雪琴、王建兵行为性质的认定。经查,黄雪琴、王建兵长期受境外反华敌对势力的渗透影响,多次接受“非暴力运动”反动思想培训,逐渐形成敌视和反对我国现行政治制度的反动思想,明知反华敌对势力意图通过“颜色革命”颠覆我国政权而积极参与其中,具有颠覆国家政权,推翻社会主义制度的主观故意。客观上,黄雪琴、王建兵长期采取造谣、诽谤等方式,在网络上多次发布或转发诋毁我国政府及社会主义制度的文章和言论,宣扬颠覆国家政权思想,蛊惑、煽动他人推翻我国国家政权。黄雪琴不但协助华某组织培训活动,还与王建兵一起组织、招收在校大学生及社会边缘群体,在境内开展“非暴力运动”网课培训。自2020年11月以来,黄雪琴、王建兵伙同同案人陈[REDACTED IN ORIGINAL]祥在广东省广州市海珠区新港西路149号202房,先后多次共同组织、策划开展“202分享会”,通过该活动煽动他人颠覆我国国家政权,推翻社会主义制度。综上,两被告人的行为均符合煽动颠覆国家政权罪的犯罪构成要件。黄雪琴、王建兵及其各自辩护人对两被告人行为性质的辩解与辩护意见均据理不足,本院不予采纳。

本院认为,被告人黄雪琴、王建兵以造谣、诽谤及其他方式煽动颠覆国家政权,推翻社会主义制度,其行为均已构成煽动颠覆国家政权罪。公诉机关指控的犯罪事实清楚,证据确实、充分,罪名成立。黄雪琴、王建兵与境外机构、组织、人员相勾结,实施煽动颠覆国家政权的行为,依法应从重处罚。在共同犯罪中,王建兵提供活动场地,黄雪琴提供部分后续资金,两被告人共同策划该活动主题与开展方式,积极招募特定参加人员,轮流担任主持人并主讲部分主题,在上述活动中均系组织者、领导者、积极实施者,系主犯,应按其所参与或组织、指挥的全部犯罪处罚。王建兵归案后能基本如实供述自己的罪行,并认罪认罚,依法可从轻处罚。公诉机关就王建兵提出的幅度量刑建议适当,本院予以采纳。黄雪琴、王建兵及其各自辩护人的辩护意见与上述定罪量刑认定一致的部分,本院予以采纳,对其他相左意见不予采纳。根据黄雪琴、王建兵犯罪的事实、性质、情节和对社会的危害程度,依照《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第二款、第一百零六条、第二十五条第一款、第二十六条第一、四款、第六十七条第三款、第五十五条第一款、第五十六条第一款、第四十七条、第六十四条、第一百一十三条第二款,《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》第十五条之规定,判决如下:

一、被告人黄雪琴犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,判处有期徒刑五年,剥夺政治权利四年,并处没收个人财产人民币十万元(刑期自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2021年9月19日起至2026年9月18日止);

二、被告人王建兵犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪,判处有期徒刑三年六个月,剥夺政治权利三年,并处没收个人财产人民币五万元(刑期自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2021年9月19日起至2025年3月18日止);

三、追缴被告人黄雪琴违法所得10000菲律宾比索,予以没收;公安机关扣押被告人王建兵的人民币100000元作为供犯罪所用的本人财物予以没收;扣押黄雪琴的一台电脑、二个移动硬盘、一个U盘、一部手机与王建兵的五台电脑、二个网关路由设备、二支录音笔、三个监控摄像头、六部手机均作为作案工具予以没收;扣押王建兵的人民币4450元作为其财产刑执行对象(以上均由扣押机关代为执行)。

如不服本判决,可在接到判决书的第二日起十日内,通过本院或者直接向广东省高级人民法院提出上诉。书面上诉的,应当提交上诉状正本一份,副本二份。

审判长龚帆
审判员陈骏涛
审判员廖秋平

二0二四年六月十三日

民法場
法官助理王智
书记员吴涛
袁品珍