Examples of Censorship and Sanctions of Speech About Public Events in China

1. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)

According to China's state sponsored media, China's government attempted to cover up the scope of SARS infections during the 2003 outbreak. For example:

On April 3, former Health Minister Zhang Wenkang announced at a press conference held by the State Council Information Office that Beijing had reported 12 SARS cases and 3 deaths by March 31, while repeating again and again that China had effectively controlled the spread of SARS in relevant areas. Minister Zhang, cheerful and smiling, deeply impressed audiences with his comments to a foreign photojournalist who was wearing a gauze mask at the conference: "You are safe here whether you wear the gauze mask or not."  . . . .

On April 10, the World Health Organization (WHO) publicly criticized Beijing's epidemic reporting system, pointing out that few hospitals in Beijing had daily SARS case reports. WHO sent experts to Beijing for investigation. On April 11, Beijing was designated as an infected area. However, the Ministry of Health didn't publish the news. Instead, it maintained the previous day's optimistic statement, saying, "The published epidemic information that day included all diagnosed cases in local and army hospitals." . . . .

On April 20, Vice Minister of Health Gao Qiang announced at a press conference that Beijing reported 339 diagnosed SARS cases and 402 suspected cases. On the same day, Xinhua News Agency said that the CPC Central Committee had dismissed former Health Minister Zhang Wenkang and former Beijing Mayor Meng Xuenong.

See, "A Chinese Doctor's Extraordinary April in 2003," Sanlian Life Weekly, No. 23, translated by China.org.cn staff, June 13, 2003, http://www.china.org.cn/english/2003/Jun/66953.htm.

Besides the lack of experience and an emergency response system at the time of the SARS outbreak, a major reason that the disease took such a big toll on people's lives was the official coverup.

In March 2003, Tong, the respiratory physician, was asked to consult on SARS patients in Beijing along with other doctors. There were dozens, if not hundreds of cases, at the time in Beijing. But the public knew very little of what was really going on.

"I knew that things like this couldn't be kept a secret forever; the truth would come out eventually," said Tong.

There were already rumors around the country about the disease and some people were stocking up on masks, vinegar and cough medicines. But accurate, authoritative information was scarce.

The authorities didn't address the issue until early April, when Zhang Wenkang, health minister at the time, downplayed the situation at a press conference and said there were over 1,000 cases in China and only 13 cases in Beijing. He reassured the public that the disease was under control.

The officials didn't face the truth until Jiang Yanyong, a retired doctor from the PLA General Hospital (also known as 301 Hospital) in Beijing, blew the whistle and told Time magazine that there were many more cases than officials had disclosed. On April 20, health officials updated the number of cases in Beijing to 339 and over 1,800 in the country.

It was an attempt to maintain stability and harmony prior to the annual legislative meetings, analysts later sought to explain the coverups.

See, "Legacy of the SARS outbreak," February 21, 2013, https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/763304.shtml

At that time China's state sponsored media hailed Jiang Yanyong's whistleblowing: "Referring to his speaking out, Professor Jiang said: 'I believe what I did as a doctor has played a certain role in combating the epidemic.'" People's Daily, May 21, 2003,  http://en.people.cn/200305/21/eng20030521_117004.shtml. But as shown by these screenshots below taken on March 8, 2015, Baidu was still censoring search results for "Jiang Yanyong" [蒋彦永], and had banned users from establishing a forum to discuss him.

During 2003, while it was praising Jiang Yanyong, China's government punished other people for posting online about SARS. For example:

• An April 23, 2003 People's Daily report titled "Person Detained for Spreading Rumors of an 'unknown virus spreading in Beijing'" [网上散布'北京有不明疫情蔓延'谣言者被捕] stated: "On April 11, a message posted on the Internet with the signature "Steven Shen" stated that "an epidemic that has not yet been diagnosed" is spreading in Beijing, and has "taken the lives of 143 people." This information is purely a rumor. Beijing has never had an "unknown epidemic" spread. . . . According to the provisions of Article 291 of the Criminal Law, the public security organs have detained and reviewed the perpetrators suspected of fabricating and disseminating the harmful information. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), on April 10 "A growing number of investigative media reports suggest that cases in Beijing military hospitals are not being frankly reported." See: "Update 95 - SARS: Chronology of a serial killer," July 4, 2003. https://www.who.int/csr/don/2003_07_04/en/. 
  

• On May 3, 2003, police in Beijing detained Huang Qunwei for posting articles on the Internet between April 25-27 with titles such as ""Absolutely Reliable News, Shanghai Concealed a Large Number of SARS Cases" and "China has Officially Entered an Economic Crisis Due to SARS." The government would later sentence him to three years imprisonment for fabricating and intentionally publicizing false terrorist information. See, State v. Huang Qunwei, (2003) First Intermediate First Instance No. 14991 [黄群威刑事判决书,（2003）一中刑初字第1499号]. According to the WHO's "Chronology," on April 30, "China, accounting for 3460 probable cases of the global total of 5663, now has more cases than the rest of the world combined."

2.  The 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake

In 2008, China's government censored information and punished several people who shared information about the May 12, 2008 earthquake in Wenchuan, Sichuan. For example:

• China's search engines censored search results relating to the earthquake.  For example, this  screenshot was taken on June 16, 2008, and shows a search on Yahoo.cn for "Wenchuan Earthquake Tangshan Earthquake" [汶川地震 唐山地震] returned no results, just a notice saying "The keywords you entered may implicate content that does not comply with relevant laws and regulations." [你输入的关键字可能涉及不符合相关法律法规的内容]. 

Similarly, this screenshot was taken on June 17, 2008, and shows a search on Baidu for "Earthquake Tofu Dregs Construction" [汶川地震 唐山地震] returned no results, just a notice saying "Search results may implicate content that does not comply with relevant laws, regulations, and policies, and have not been displayed." [搜索结果可能涉及不符合相关法律规定和政策的内容，未予显示].

• According to a July 29, 2019 Xinhua report published on the China Daily website titled "12-year sentence for China dissident on state secrets charge": "Huang [Qi], who founded a website documenting official rights abuses, has been jailed twice before, including in 2008 after advocating for parents whose children were killed in a massive earthquake in the southwestern province of Sichuan. Thousands of students died when their shoddily built schools collapsed, but the government has never made public the results of any investigation or held anyone accountable."

• According to an August 13, 2009 China Daily report titled "Activist on trial for subversion": "Tan Zuoren, who had been investigating the deaths of students in last year's Sichuan earthquake, stood trial yesterday for subversion. Tan, a 55-year-old local resident, was accused of telling lies to foreign media organizations after the quake and so 'greatly staining the image of the government and the Party,' according to the indictment offered by Tan's lawyer Pu Zhiqiang." See, State v. Tan Zuoren, (2009) Cheng Xing Criminal First No. 273 [谭作人刑事判决书, （2009)成刑初字第273号].
  

• On May 18, 2008, Guo Quan was subjected to 10 days administrative detention for using the "5.12" Wenchuan earthquake to assemble dozens of fictitious experts on the Internet on May 13, 2008 in a "China New Democracy Party Disaster Relief Committee" to spread rumors and disturb public order. See, State v. Guo Quan, (2009) Su Intermediate Criminal Second First Instance No. 00021 [郭泉刑事判决书, (2009)宿中刑二初字第0002号].

On May 12, 2011, on the third anniversary of the Wenchuan earthquake, the Southern Metropolitan Daily, published by the Propaganda Department of the Guangdong Communist Party Committee, published an editorial entitled "Cherishing Their Memory as We are Borne on the River of Time. "  [躺在时间的河流上怀念他们]

In our hearts, we lowered our flags to half mast for them. On the day of mourning we called them home and wished them peace. We gathered together all the human evidence of them we could. We read their names together. We promised that we would bear them constantly in mind, never forgetting, over and over again. We did so much, and yet we did too little. Those of you who were lost and did not return, where are you? Can the light we kindle shine across your path? We cannot do more. We can but present steel zodiacs, and offer up porcelain sunflower seeds, symbolic memorials to your lives once so tangible. What else would you wish us to do? 

 The editorial contained several oblique references to Ai Weiwei:

• "Read their names together": a reference to Ai Weiwei's project to post the names of the school children who died in the earthquake on Twitter on their birthdays.
• "Steel zodiacs": a reference to the installation of twelve zodiac animal heads by Ai Weiwei called "Circle of Animals Zodiac Heads." It is an outdoor public sculpture exhibition that opened in May 2011 at the Pulitzer Fountain at the Grand Army Plaza in New York City.
• "Porcelain sunflower seeds": a reference to the installation of millions of hand painted porcelain sunflower seeds by Ai Weiwei that opened at the Tate Modern in 2010.

On the Southern Metropolitan Daily's online edition, the title of the article with the link to the
article was replaced with the characters for "Advertisement" [广告].

The screenshots below show that the online article itself was replaced with a notice saying "Very sorry, this article has already been deleted! "  [很抱歉,该文章已经被删除!]

(Translation of the article by David Bandurski of the China Media Project - http://cmp.hku.hk/2011/05/12/12235)

3. Babies Poisoned by Melamine in Milk Formula

In 2008, 290,000 infants had to be treated for renal complications and 6 others died as a direct result of the  deliberate contamination of infant formula and related dairy products with melamine to make it appear to contain more protein.  21 people were sentenced for their involvement, and two received death sentences. At least four government officials were fired in connection with the scandal. See, "4 officials sacked following baby milk scandal," China Daily, September 17, 2008, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-09/17/content_7034236.htm.

In 2010, Zhao Lianhai was sentenced to 2 1/2 years imprisonment for "disturbing social order" after he started the "Home for Kidney Stone Babies" (结石宝宝之家, jieshibaobao.com) website and attempted to lead parents in getting restitution and treatment for their children who had been poisoned by Sanlu's melamine-tainted milk powder. China's search engines and social media websites censored information about Zhao's case. See, http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/08/searching-for-information-about-milk.html. 

4. The 2011 Wenzhou Train Collision

On July 23, 2011 when two high-speed trains collided on a viaduct in the suburbs of Wenzhou, Zhejiang. The two trains derailed each other, and four cars fell off the viaduct leaving 40 passengers dead and 172 injured. According to a Global Times report published a year later:

Although boasting one of the fastest high-speed trains in the world, the way the Ministry of Railways (MOR) disposed of the wreckage and delayed the results of an investigation into the crash sparked public fury and widespread doubt as to the wisdom of the massive investment in high-speed railways. . . . The investigation report, which was released five months after the deadly crash, blamed the cause on flaws in the trains' operation control system and on an inadequate emergency response by railway authorities. A total of 54 people were identified as being accountable for the crash and received disciplinary punishment. Liu Zhijun and Zhang Shuguang, the former railway minister and deputy chief engineer of the ministry respectively, were mainly said as being to blame and were placed under investigation last year for alleged "severe violation of discipline." But the charges against them are not directly related to the train crash.

See, "Trained the wrong way," Global Times, July 19, 2012, https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/722139.shtm. 

According to a October 18, 2014 Global Times report titled "Railway official sentenced to 'death with reprieve'" https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/886953.shtml:

The Beijing No.2 Intermediate People's Court also deprived Zhang Shuguang, former head of the now defunct Railway Ministry's transportation bureau and deputy chief engineer, of political rights for life and confiscated all his property. According to the court, Zhang took bribes worth more than 47 million yuan from 14 companies between 2000 and 2011, when he was serving in a variety of positions in the ministry. In particular, some 18.5 million yuan was offered by Wuhan Zheng Yuan Railway Electric Co Ltd under the guise of real estate purchases and membership applications to the Chinese Academy of Sciences. In exchange, Zhang would help with contracts related to the sale of trains or parts and the bidding of projects, according to the court.

On July 31 and August 1, 2011, several news outlets published reports claiming Zhang Shuguang [张曙光] was involved in corruption. The screenshots below show that they were deleted within 24 hours.

On July 26, 2011 author and blogger Han Han (韩寒) posted an essay titled "A Country Off the Rails" [脱节的国度] on his Sina Blog . Some excerpts:

You keep asking why they run around like a bunch of lunatics, but they feel that they are paragons of restraint and patience.
You keep asking why they say white is black and black is white, but they feel that they are just telling it like it is.
You keep asking why they shield the murderers, but they feel ashamed they have to give the shaft to their friends-with-benefits.
You keep asking why they cover up the truth, but they feel that they are already very transparent and open.
You keep asking why their lives are so corrupt, but they feel that they lead spartan and simple lives.
You keep asking why they are so arrogant, but they feel that they are profiles in humility.

You feel aggrieved, and they also feel aggrieved. They think that under the rule of the Qing government, ordinary people couldn't even look at TV sets. Now TV sets have entered thousands of households. What great progress this is!
 
They feel that they built this, and they built that, and you don’t care what happens in the process and you don’t care who it is for, as long as you get to use it. You used to take a day and a night to take the train from Shanghai to Beijing. Now, as long as you don’t get struck by lightning, you'll be there in five hours. Why are you not grateful? Why are you so full of doubts?

. . . .

The reason why the country does not progress is because many among them have been measuring themselves by the Mao Zedong and Stalin era, so they always feel that they are too wronged, too open, too fair, too kind, too low profile. It's not easy. They regard the pace of technology enveloping the times as an illusion of their own initiative and openness, so the more you criticize him, the more he desires totalitarianism, and the more you engage in him, the more he misses Mao.
 
A friend in State machine told me: you people are never satisfied. If a literati like you had been around forty years ago, you would have been shot. Now you tell me whether this era is progressive or regressive.

I said, you people are never satisfied. If you offered this point of view ninety years ago, you would have been laughed to death. So you tell me, when all is said and done are we living in an age of progress or what.

你一直问，他们何以如此的丧心病狂，他们却觉得自己已经非常的克制忍让。
你一直问，他们何以如此的颠倒黑白，他们却觉得自己已经非常的公正坦率。
你一直问，他们何以如此的包庇凶手，他们却觉得自己已经非常的愧对炮友。
你一直问，他们何以如此的掩盖真相，他们却觉得自己已经非常的透明开放。
你一直问，他们何以如此的生活腐化，他们却觉得自己已经非常的艰苦朴素。
你一直问，他们何以如此的骄横傲慢，他们却觉得自己已经非常的姿态低下。

你觉得自己很委屈，他们也觉得自己很委屈，他们认为，在清政府的统治下，老百姓连电视机都看不上，现在电视机已经走进了千家万户，这是多大的进步。
 
他们觉得，我们建了这个，我们建了那个，你别管过程中发生了什么，也别管这是给谁献礼，至少你用到了吧。你以前从上海到北京火车要一天一夜，现在只要不被雷劈，五个小时就到了，你为何不感激，为何充满了质疑？

. . . .

国家为什么不进步，是因为他们中的很多人一直在用毛泽东斯大林时代的他们来衡量自己，所以他们永远觉得自己太委屈了，太开明了，太公正了，太仁慈了，太低姿态了，太不容易了。他们将科技裹着时代向前走的步伐当成了自己主动开放的幻象，于是你越批评他，他越渴望极权，你越搞毛他，他越怀念毛。
 
有一个国家机器朋友对我说，你们就是不知足，你这样的文人，要是搁在四十年前，你就被枪毙了，你说这个时代，是进步了还是退步了。

我说，你们就是不知足，你这样的观点，要是搁在九十年前，早就被人笑死了，你说这个时代，他到底是进步了还是。

The screenshot below on the left shows the blog post as it appeared on July 27, 2011, and the screenshot on the right shows that it was deleted several hours later that same day.

 

Another target for censorship were posts on Sina Weibo asking users to vote on certain topics related to the train crash in the days after disaster. The screenshots below show three such posts that were deleted the same day they were posted:

 

"Are You Satisfied with the Handling of the 'Wenzhou Train Collision' Accident?"  (Vote #690625)

 

"Burying the Train Cars, Do You Believe the Rationale?" (Vote #692592)

 

 

"Has the Handling of the 'Wenzhou Train Collision' Accident Left You Satisfied?" ( Vote #695734)

 

5. Babies Poisoned by Mercury in Milk Formula

On June 15, 2012, the state sponsored Global Times reported: "Dairy producer Mongolia Yili Industrial Group Co said yesterday that it has started recalling most of its Quanyou series formula milk powder produced from November 2011 to May 2012 since Wednesday, due to excessive mercury content which is harmful to the nervous system." See, "Yili recalls milk powder," Global Times, June 15, 2012.

The same day China's social media networks began censoring search results for "Yili mercury" [伊利 汞].  See, http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/08/searching-for-information-about-milk.html.

6. The 2012 Beijing Floods

On July 23, 2012, the Global Times reported: "The heaviest rainstorms in 61 years hit the capital over the weekend, resulting in 37 deaths recorded as of 5 pm Sunday, authorities have announced.  A total of 25 people drowned, six were killed by collapsing houses, five by electrocution, and one by lightning strike, the Beijing municipal government said on its Sina Weibo account. Over 1.9 million residents have been affected, officials say." See, "Outdated drainage blamed for flood havoc," Global Times, July 23, 2012, https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/722780.shtml.

Within 48 hours, Sina Weibo began censoring all searches containing the term "death toll." [死亡人数] Articles in China's state sponsored media that contradicted official death toll claims were deleted. See, http://blog.feichangdao.com/2012/07/sina-weibo-censors-searches-relating-to.html and http://blog.feichangdao.com/2012/08/rumor-of-economic-observers-shuttering.html.

7. Beijing Mass Suicide Attempt in 2013

In August 2013 China's state sponsored media reported that ten people tried to commit suicide by drinking pesticide on a busy street near Beijing West Railway Station. Those media reports were deleted and China's social media websites censored results for searches related to the incident. See, http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/12/sina-weibo-censors-searches-about-mass.html and http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/08/chinas-weibos-news-sites-censor-report.html.

8. The 2013 Lushan Earthquake

In April, 20, 2013,  more than 100 people were killed and thousands were injured after a 7.0-magnitude earthquake hit Lushan county in Sichuan.

• On April 22,  China's social media websites began censoring search results for "Fan Jiyue" (范继跃) and "Lushan County Party Secretary" (芦山县委书记) after reports emerged Fan Jiyue, party leader of Lushan county, had taken off an expensive luxury wristwatch prior to participating in a photo-op with  Premier Li Keqiang during quake-relief work on April 21. See, http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/04/2013-sichuan-earthquake-web-sites.html.
  

• On April 23, the state-sponsored Southern Metropolis Daily published an article on its web site entitled "Disaster Victims Blocked by Broken Transportation Lines Assemble to Call Out 'I'm Cold, I'm Hungry'." (交通受阻受灾民众聚集拉幅称“我冷我饿”). According to the article the featured photo showed: "Disaster victims in Lingguan village, Baoxing county, Sichuan, holding up banners saying 'I'm cold I'm hungry' have drawn the attention and support of many." (四川省宝兴县灵关镇，受灾民众举着“我冷饿”的横幅，呼吸各方支持和关注。) The following day China's social media websites began censoring search results for "I'm cold, I'm hungry." See, http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/04/2013-sichuan-earthquake-images-of.html.

9. Chai Jing's 2015 Anti-Pollution Video "Under the Dome"

China's state sponsored media acknowledged that China had severe pollution problems in 2015:

Air pollution has been a major concern for China throughout 2015, a year that marked a new phase in the country's air pollution control efforts, analysts said, after many cities were engulfed by hazardous smog and multiple measures were initiated against air pollution for the first time. After 2015 began with a controversial documentary about the hazards of smog, Under the Dome, the country has seen a rising public awareness of air pollution, as well as more measures from the government to curb the deterioration of air quality. Though Beijing's first-ever pollution red alert came at the end of the year, the country's battle against air pollution has just begun.

See: "Dark clouds still shroud blue skies," Global Times, December 29, 2015, https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/961117.shtml. 

According to the state sponsored China Daily:

Chai Jing's one-year project, Under the Dome, marks a comeback for the former presenter and journalist with China Central Television following the birth of her child. It adds a sentimental touch to a matter of public interest with Chai not only an independent observer but also a concerned mother. . . . "I saw smog through my daughter's eyes," Chai said while presenting her film. She recounted how the little girl was confined indoors, patting the window to vent her frustration at being unable to play outside.

"Former TV anchor on crusade against pollution," China Daily, February 28, 2015, https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2015-02/28/content_19681430.htm

When "Under the Dome" was released in early 2015, China's news media, video, and social media websites censored the video and information about the video. See:

• People's Daily Deletes Special Section on Chai Jing's Pollution Video "Under the Dome" http://blog.feichangdao.com/2015/03/watch-peoples-daily-deletes-special.html
• Sina Weibo Begins Censoring Searches for "Under the Dome" http://blog.feichangdao.com/2015/03/sina-weibo-begins-censoring-searches.html
• Copies of Chai Jing's "Under the Dome" Disappear from Baidu Video Services http://blog.feichangdao.com/2015/03/watch-copies-of-chai-jings-under-dome.html
• Phoenix Joins Baidu in Deleting Chai Jing's Pollution Video "Under the Dome" http://blog.feichangdao.com/2015/03/phoenix-joins-baidu-in-deleting-chai.html
  

10. Protests and Other Public Events

In China people are expected to know that information about public events, even reports of those events by news agencies, may be deemed by police, prosecutors, and judges to be state secrets. See, State v. Zheng Enchong, (2003) Hu No. 2 Intermediate Criminal No. 136 [郑恩宠刑事判决书, (2003)沪二中刑初字第136号]: "Zheng Enchong learned secrets from a police officer surnamed Xu that the Shanghai public security agency was dealing with emergencies arising from a sudden mass incident at the Shanghai Yimin Food Products Factory, he took notes, organized them, and on the morning of the 23rd, faxed a hand-written draft that included the aforementioned secrets from his residence at Puyuan Road to the organization Human Rights in China in New York."

Police in China are empowered by law to punish people without trial for sharing information and opinions about public events. The punishments can range from official reprimands to ordering people to delete information and software, to jailing them for up to 15 days. Some examples:

• In 2013, three days after a woman posted a petition online opposing the construction of a petrochemical plant, police called her in and asked her to delete it. See, http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/05/police-ask-chengdu-woman-to-delete-we.html.
  

• China's police issue administrative punishment reprimands to people they discover using foreign VPNs, and order them to delete the software. See, https://blog.feichangdao.com/2020/11/disappearing-government-records-show.html.
  

• China's police jail people who insult them on social media. See, https://blog.feichangdao.com/2020/11/chinas-police-jailing-people-who-call.html. 
  

Even seemingly minor factual errors about traffic accidents can result in government sanctions. For example, in 2016 China's Internet regulator ordered a public WeChat account shut down because it posted an article with a headline that failed to make it clear that it was sheep, and not people, who died in a traffic accident. That same year a man was jailed for posting that seven people died in a car accident, when in fact only three people had died. See, https://blog.feichangdao.com/2016/02/government-shuts-down-wechat-account.html and http://blog.feichangdao.com/2014/07/internet-user-jailed-five-days-for.html.

Finally, China's news media, search engines, and social media websites censor information about protests, labor unrest, and other public incidents. For example:

• Sina Weibo Censors Searches for Yangzhuang Coal Mine Strike in Feicheng, Shandong - http://blog.feichangdao.com/2014/03/sina-weibo-censors-searches-for.html
  

• Baidu And Tencent Begin Censoring Searches for "Maoming PX" - http://blog.feichangdao.com/2014/04/baidu-and-tencent-begin-censoring.html
  

• State Media Says Reports of Tanks Bound for Maoming False, Baidu Censors "Maoming Tanks" - http://blog.feichangdao.com/2014/04/state-media-says-reports-of-tanks-bound.html
  

• China’s Weibos and News Sites Censor Information About Shoe Factory Strike in Dongguan - http://blog.feichangdao.com/2014/04/chinas-weibos-and-news-sites-censor.html

Translation: Sheng Zhonghua Judgment for Tweets That Disturbed the Peace

Translator' Notes:

• The Chinese text was generated by OCR'ing low-quality images of the original court judgment posted online. I have attempted to identify and correct the typographical errors that may have been introduced in the OCR process. 
• Sheng Zhonghua was convicted for committing the crime of "寻衅滋事." I translate this as "disturbing the peace," while other translators translate it as "picking quarrels and provoking troubles."

People's Court of Ganjingzi District, Dalian

Criminal Judgment

(2020) Liao 0211 Criminal First Instance 459

The public prosecution agency was the People's Procuratorate of Ganjingzi District, Dalian.

Defendant Sheng Zhonghua, male, born March 19, 1980, Citizen ID No. [OBSCURED IN ORIGINAL], Han ethnicity, college education, unemployed, household registration location [OBSCURED IN ORIGINAL], Dalian, Liaoning, current address and household registration[OBSCURED IN ORIGINAL]. On May 15, 2020, he was taken into criminal detention in connection with this case by the Public Security Bureau of Dalian's Ganjingzi Precinct. On June 18, 2020, he was arrested. He is currently being held in detention at the Dalian Detention Center.

Assigned defense counsel was Su Huanhai of the Liaoning LijinLaw Firm.

In the Gan Procuratorate Public Prosecution Criminal Indictment (2020) No. 460 the People's Procuratorate of Ganjingzi, Dalian charged defendant Sheng Zhonghua on suspicion the offense of disturbing the peace, and on September 3, 2020 it 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 Ganjingzi, Dalian assigned prosecutor Zhang Fuli and prosecutor's assistant Liu Zhonglin to appear in court in support of the public prosecution. Defendant Sheng Zhonghua and his defense counsel both appeared in court to participate in the proceedings. The trial has now concluded.

The People's Procuratorate of Ganjingzi, Dalian charged that in March 2019, defendant Sheng Zhonghua registered an account named kinglock@ikinglockjoe on the American social network Twitter (Twitter) website. From March 2019 to June 2019, at his home in [OBSCURED IN ORIGINAL], Dalian, Sheng Zhonghua used this account to climb the wall and log into the Twitter website to repost and disseminate 139 inappropriate remarks and fake information that insulted Party and State leaders and related to major domestic events.

After that account was frozen by the relevant agency due to the aforementioned illegal actions, he registered a Twitter account again in August 2019 named kaxili@kinglock10, and subsequently set up privacy restrictions and proceeded to repost 30 inappropriate remarks and fake information that insulted Party and State leaders and related to major domestic events.

The public prosecution agency provided evidence in support of the charges to this Court including documentary evidence, witness testimony, the defendant's statements and justifications, crime scene investigation, and investigation record.

The public prosecution agency alleged that defendant Sheng Zhonghua created a disturbance in a public venue, causing severe disruption of public order. The criminal facts are clear, the evidence is reliable and copious, and he should bear criminal liability for the offense of disturbing the peace. It requests this Court pass sentence in accordance with the law.

Defendant Sheng Zhonghua did not have any objections to the criminal facts or offense charged by the public prosecution agency, and in court expressed that he would voluntarily admit guilt. He argued that his purpose in going on Twitter was to read foreign information and news, and not all the content revolved around domestic fake information. Among the more than 1,000 messages he forwarded, only more than 100 were about insulting State leaders, accounting for only 10%. Subjectively this was not intentionally reposting remarks that insulted the country's leaders, and he was not aware of this problem when he was reposting. His other account had privacy permissions set up, and was only for him to collect things he liked, and the subjective purpose was not for dissemination.

His defense counsel's defense opinions were in agreement with the defendant's opinion. The defendant was a first time offender with no record. After being taken into police custody he admitted his guilt and his attitude was relatively good, he expressed remorse, and made truthful statements. It was requested that he be given a lighter punishment or shown leniency.

It was ascertained at trial that, in March 2019, defendant Sheng Zhonghua defendant Sheng Zhonghua registered an account named kinglock@ikinglockjoe on the American social network Twitter (Twitter) website. From March 2019 to June 2019, at his home in [OBSCURED IN ORIGINAL], Dalian, Sheng Zhonghua used this account to climb the wall and log into the Twitter website to repost and disseminate 139 inappropriate remarks and fake information that insulted Party and State leaders and related to major domestic events. These triggered a large number of comments, reposts, and likes, creating an offensive influence. On May 14, 2020, the defendant received a telephonic summons from the public security agency, and after being taken into police custody made truthful statements regarding the aforementioned actions.

The aforementioned facts are based on evidence that was subject to an examination by this Court at trial from sources accepted by the Court, including evidence from the case files such as the process of how the defendant came into police custody, documentary evidence such as household registration certificates, criminal record inquiry certificates, entry health checklists, and situation statements, the testimony of witnesses Song [OBSCURED IN ORIGINAL], Su [OBSCURED IN ORIGINAL], Song [OBSCURED IN ORIGINAL] and others, defendant Sheng Zhonghua's statements and justifications, the remote crime scene investigation work records of the Cybersecurity Detachment of the Public Security Bureau of Dalian's Ganjingzi Precinct. It is sufficient to reach a determination.

This Court finds defendant Sheng Zhonghua disseminated information online that he clearly new to be fabricated insults that smeared Party and State leaders, creating a disturbance, causing a severe disruption of public order. His actions constitute the commission of the crime of disturbing the peace. The facts and offenses charged by the public prosecution agency are established. The defendant received a telephonic summons from the public security agency, and after being taken into police custody made truthful statements regarding his acts of having reposted fake information. Although there is justification regarding the nature and subjective understanding of the criminal act he committed, it does not affect the determination that he surrendered himself to authorities, and in accordance with the law he may be given a lighter punishment. The public prosecution agency's sentencing recommendation is appropriate, and shall be adopted. In summary of the foregoing, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 293(1) and 67 of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China" and Article 5 of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Handling of Defamation Through Information Networks and Other Criminal Cases," the judgment is as follows:

Defendant Sheng Zhonghua committed the crime of disturbing the peace, and is sentenced to a fixed term imprisonment of 10 months.

(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 15, 2020 to March 14, 2021.)

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

Chief Adjudicator Gao Yang
People's Assessor Xing Aijuan
People's Assessor Sun Yan

January 29, 2021

Clerk Sun Wenyao

大连市甘井子区人民法院

刑事判决书

(2020)辽0211刑初459号

公诉机关大连市甘井子区人民检察院。

被告人盛中华,男,1980年3月19日生,公民身份号汉族,大学文化,无职业,户籍所在地辽宁省大连市,现住址同户籍地。因本案,于2020年5月15日被大连市公安局甘井子分局刑事拘留,于2020年6月18日被逮捕。现羁押于大连市看守所。

指定辩护人苏环海,辽宁利金律师事务所律师。

大连市甘井子区人民检察院以甘检公诉刑诉[2020]460号起诉书指控被告人盛中华涉嫌寻衅滋事罪,于2020年9月3日向本院提起公诉。本院受理后,依法组成合议庭,公开开庭进行了审理。大连市甘井子区人民检察院指派检察官张富丽、检察官助理刘忠林出庭支持公诉,被告人盛中华及辩护人均到庭参加了诉讼。现已审理终结。

大连市甘井子区人民检察院指控,被告人盛中华于2019年3月在美国社交网络推特(Twitter)网站上注册用户名为kinglock@ikinglockjoe的账号。2019年3月至2019年6月,盛中华在位于大连市的家中,使用该账号网络翻墙登录推特网站转发、散布139条侮辱党和国家领导人以及涉及国内重大事件的不当言论和虚假信息。

该账号因上述违法行为被相关部门冻结后,其于2019年8月再次注册名为卡西麗kinglock10的推特账号,之后设置隐私权限并再行转发30余条侮辱党和国家领导人以及涉及国内重大事件的不当言论和虚假信息。

公诉机关向本院提供了书证、证人证言、被告人的供述与辩解、勘验、检查笔录等证据支持其指控。

公诉机关认为,被告人盛中华在公共场所起哄闹事,造成公共秩序严重混乱,犯罪事实清楚,证据确实、充分,应当以寻衅滋事罪追究刑事责任。提请本院依法判处。

被告人盛中华对公诉机关指控的犯罪事实,罪名均无异议,当庭表示自愿认罪。其辩称上推特是为了看国外的信息和新闻,不都是围绕国内虚假信息的内容,在其转发的1000多条信息中仅有100多条关于侮辱国家领导人信息,只占10%,主观不是蓄意转发侮辱国家领导人的言论,转发时没有意识到这个问题。其另一个帐户设置了隐私权限,仅是因为喜欢收藏,主观目的不是为了传播。

其辩护人的辩护意见为,同意被告人的意见。被告人系初犯,无前科,到案后认罪态度较好,有悔罪表现,并如实供述,请求对其从轻或减轻处罚。

经审理查明,被告人盛中华于2019年3月在美国社交网络推特(Twitter)网站上注册用户名为kinglock@ikinglockjoe的账号。2019年3月至2019年6月期间,盛中华在位于大连市的家中,使用该账号网络翻墙登录推特网站,转发、散布了139条侮辱党和国家领导人以及涉及国内重大事件的不当言论和虚假信息,引发大量评论、转发和点赞,造成恶劣影响。2020年5月14日,被告人经公安机关电话传唤到案后,如实供述了上述行为。

上述事实,有业经庭审质证并经本院审查采信的案件来源、到案经过、户籍证明、前科查询证明、入所健康检查表、情况说明等书证、证人宋苏苏、宋等人的证言、被告人盛中华的供述与辩解、大连市公安局甘井子分局网安大队远程勘验工作记录等证据在卷佐证,足以认定。

本院认为,被告人盛中华明知是编造侮辱、污蔑党和国家领导人的虚假信息,而在信息网络上散布,起哄闹事,造成公共秩序严重混乱,其行为已构成寻衅滋事罪。公诉机关指控的事实及罪名成立。被告人经电话传唤到案后如实供述了转发过不当言论的行为,虽然对其实施犯罪行为的性质及主观认识有辩解,但不影响认定为自首,依法从轻处罚。公诉机关的量刑建议适当,应予采纳。综上所述,依据《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百九十三条第一款、第六十七条、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》第五条之规定,判决如下:

被告人盛中华犯寻衅滋事罪,判处有期徒刑十个月。

(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2020年5月15日始至2021年3月14日止。)

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辽宁省大连市中级人民法院提出上诉。书面上诉的,应交上诉状正本一份,副本两份。

审判长 高扬
人民陪审员 邢爱娟
人民陪审员 孙燕

二零二一年一月二十九日

书记员 孙雯尧

Translation: Judgment in the Case of Citizen Journalist Zhang Zhan's Reporting on the Novel Coronavirus Outbreak in Wuhan

People's Court of Pudong, Shanghai

Criminal Judgment

(2020) Hu 0115 Criminal First Instance No. 4002

The public prosecution agency was the People's Procuratorate of Pudong, Shanghai.

Defendant Zhang Zhan, female, born [INTENTIONALLY DELETED], 1983 in Sanyuan County, Shaanxi Province, Han ethnicity, master's degree, unemployed, household registration [INTENTIONALLY DELETED], Pudong, Shanghai, residing at [INTENTIONALLY DELETED], Pudong New District, Shanghai. In August 2018, she was issued a warning by the Public Security Bureau of Hangkou, Shanghai for using the international Internet to spread incitements of subversion of state power. In April 2019, she was detained for one day by the Public Security Bureau of Pudong, Shanghai for disturbing the peace. In November 2019, she was subjected to 10 days administrative detention by the Public Security Bureau of Huangpu, Shanghai for disturbing public order. On May 15, 2020, she was taken into criminal detention by the Public Security Bureau of Pudong, Shanghai on suspicion of committing the crime of disturbing the peace, and on June 19 of the same year she was arrested in accordance with the law. She is currently being held in detention at the Pudong Detention Center in Shanghai.

Defense counsel Ren Quanniu, of the Henan Guidao Law Firm.

Defense counsel Zhang Keke, of the Hubei Peng Lai Law Firm.

In the Hu Pu No. 1 Procuratorate Criminal Indictment (2020) No. 6701 indictment the People's Procuratorate of Pudong, Shanghai charged defendant Zhang Zhan with committing the crime of disturbing the peace, and on September 16, 2020 filed a public prosecution with this Court. This Court open a case on the same day, and in accordance with the law utilized standard procedures, formed a collegial panel, and tried this case in open court. The People's Procuratorate of Pudong, Shanghai assigned Procurator Chen Gang to appear in court in support of the public prosecution, and defendant Zhang Zhan and her defense counsels Ren Quanniu and Zhang Keke participated in the proceedings. During this time the trial period was extended for three months with authorization from  the First Intermediate People's Court of Shanghai. The trial has now concluded.

The People's Procuratorate of Pudong, Shanghai charged: On February 3, 2020, defendant Zhang Zhan entered Wuhan, Hubei, and subsequently published a large amount of false information in text and video through WeChat, "twitter" (Tui Te), "YouTube" (You Guan) and other online media, and she accepted interviews from foreign media "Radio Free Asia" and "The Epoch Times," and she maliciously hyped up the new coronavirus pneumonia epidemic in Wuhan. The audience was large and the influence was pernicious.

In order to substantiate the aforementioned charges, the public prosecution agency read and produced in court relevant witness testimony, forensic opinions and other documentary evidence. Based on that, it believes that Zhang Zhan should be held criminally liable for disturbing the peace, and requests this Court pass sentence in accordance with the law.

In court during the trial, defendant Zhang Zhan denied the offenses charged in the indictment. Her  defense counsel raised an objections to jurisdiction, and believed that problems existed with the evidence in this case, and that it was not possible to confirm that the information in the text and videos dispatched by defendant Zhang Zhan could be deemed false information, and the the texts dispatched by defendant Zhang Zhan were a record of her personal experience in Wuhan, and there was no fabricated false information, and even if there are certain errors or omissions in the content, it is still within a tolerable range, and the defendant should not be held criminally liable for disturbing the peace.

It was ascertained at trial: On February 3, 2020, defendant Zhang Zhan entered Wuhan, Hubei, and subsequently published a large amount of false information in text and video through WeChat, "twitter" (Tui Te), "YouTube" (You Guan) and other online media, she accepted interviews from foreign media "Radio Free Asia" and "The Epoch Times," and she maliciously hyped up the new coronavirus pneumonia epidemic in Wuhan. The audience was large and the influence was pernicious.

On May 14, 2020, defendant Zhang Zhan was apprehended and brought to justice in Wuhan, Hubei.

The aforementioned facts were produced and examined in court, and were substantiated by this Court based on the following evidence:

1. The testimony of witnesses Huang Qian, Chen Youwen, Cheng Yi, Hou Li, Hao Junfeng, and Wang Gongxi and photographs of relevant articles confirmed that in mid-February 2020 Zhang Zhan used WeChat to send to them and others commentary articles with content that pertained to Wuhan's prevention and control of the novel coronavirus infectious pneumonia epidemic.

2. The testimony of witnesses He Guangyun and Ge Xingfu and WeChat images of articles confirmed that Zhang Zhan posted in her friends circles many documentary and commentary articles with content that pertained to Wuhan's prevention and control of the novel coronavirus infectious pneumonia epidemic.

3. The testimony of witnesses Wang Dingbang and Zhang Ming  and WeChat images of articles confirmed that Zhang Zhan posted in her friends circles and WeChat groups many  documentary and commentary articles that pertained to the prevention and control of the novel coronavirus infectious pneumonia outbreak in Wuhan.

4. The testimony of witness Jiang Fan and the summary of donated materials issued by the Dadongmen Community Residents Committee of Shouyi Road, Wuchang District, the collection of mask materials, the distribution of donated vegetables, the detailed list of distribution of Shouyi Road Street, and the distribution of materials confirmed by Jiang Fan as Wuhan The Secretary of Dadongmen Community, Shouyi Road, Wuchang District, provided a detailed explanation of the epidemic prevention measures, personnel composition, community material supply, government subsidies, and nucleic acid testing in the prevention and control of the novel coronavirus infectious pneumonia epidemic in the community where he is located.

5. The testimony of witness Yang Yi confirmed Yang Yi, as a community security team member of Shouyi Road, Wuchang District, Wuhan City, provided a detailed explanation of the epidemic prevention measures, personnel composition, management methods, distribution of epidemic prevention materials, and nucleic acid testing in the prevention and control of the novel coronavirus infectious pneumonia epidemic in the community where he is located.

6. The testimony of witness  Hu Xiaoping  confirmed  Hu Xiaoping, as an ordinary community resident in Wuchang District, Wuhan City provided a detailed explanation of the epidemic prevention measures, management personnel, distribution of epidemic prevention materials, distribution of daily supplies, and nucleic acid testing in the prevention and control of the novel coronavirus infectious pneumonia epidemic in the community where he is located.

7. The testimony of witness Sun Weijun and relevant WeChat chat records, tomb sales slips, resident death medical proof (inference) certificates confirmed Sun Weijun, as a staff member of Wuhan Longquanshan Xiaoenyuan Co., Ltd. at the Longquanshan Xiaoenyuan Cemetery during the outbreak of the novel coronavirus infectious pneumonia epidemic in Wuhan provided a detainled explanation of the the cemetery sales work process, actual situation and government subsidies. At the same time, he also provided an explanation of the nucleic acid testing carried out in Wuhan during the epidemic.

8. The testimony of witness Zhang Xiaobing confirmed that he is a shopkeeper at the Chuangxiang Shuzhu in Wuchang District, Wuhan. After the outbreak of the novel coronavirus infectious pneumonia epidemic in Wuhan, the government department required his stores to only engage in door-to-door delivery business for epidemic prevention purposes. On March 4, 2020, the staff of the street industry and commerce department discovered that he had not strictly implemented door-to-door delivery regulations, and they decided to seize his business license. After being educated by industry and commerce personnel, he took the initiative to hand over his business license to industry and commerce law enforcement personnel. At the same time, he also provided an explanation of the nucleic acid testing carried out in Wuhan during the epidemic.

9. The search warrants, search records, seizure decision certifications, and seizure lists produced by the Public Security Bureau of Pudong, Shanghai confirmed the circumstances in which public security agency seized defendant’s mobile phone, USB flash drive, SD card, card reader and other items from defendant Zhang Zhan’s residence.

10. The Public Security Bureau of Pudong, Shanghai's remote crime scene investigation records and  electronic data collection and fixation list confirmed the circumstances in which the public security agency collected and affixed the content of Zhang Zhan's "twitter"(Tui Te) and "YouTube"(You Guan), and identified circumstances that did not comport with objective facts.

11. The Judicial Forensic Opinion Report of the Computer Judicial Forensic Department of the Shanghai Honglian Network Technology Company Ltd. confirmed the circumstances of its use of technical methods to collect from defendant Zhang Zhan's mobile phone relevant WeChat friend circle records, chat records, portions of notes, records of portions of "twitter" (Tui Te) posts, videos posted on "YouTube" (You Guan), as well as the number of views, comments, reposts, and likes on "The Epoch Times" and "Radio Free Asia" articles and posts on her "twitter" (Tui Te) account.

12. The relevant administrative punishment decision documents confirmed the circumstances of the defendant's recidivism.

13. The process of how the defendant came into police custody produced by the Public Security Bureau of Wuhan confirmed the circumstances in which the defendant in this case was taken into custody.

14. The population information produced by the Public Security Bureau of Pudong, Shanghai confirmed the defendant's identification.

Regarding jurisdiction in this case, an investigation found that defendant Zhang Zhan's household registration and residence is in Pudong, Shanghai, and based on the provisions of the "Criminal Procedure Law"relating to local jurisdiction, our Court enjoys jurisdiction in this case in accordance with the law.

Regarding the facts in this case, an investigation found that ordinary citizens, grassroots community workers, security personnel, and funeral workers in Wuhan provided detailed witness testimony regarding the circumstances of the specific social conditions, epidemic prevention measures, and material distribution in Wuhan during the epidemic prevention and control period in Wuhan. At the same time, some of the people who featured in content of Zhang Zhan's articles and videos also explained the actual circumstances of the facts in their witness testimony. All of the aforementioned witnesses personally experienced Wuhan's prevention and control of the novel coronavirus epidemic and participated in the situations described in Zhang Zhan's articles and videos. The content of their witness testimony is mutually corroborating, and is able to restore the objective circumstances of the Wuhan epidemic control process. The evidence collection procedures were lawful, and their content is objectively mutually corroborating, and shall be given credence. Therefore, in accordance with the facts as currently ascertained, it can be confirmed that the articles and videos Zhang Zhan posted on WeChat, "twitter" (Tui Te), and "Youtube" (You Guan) and other Internet media, as wel as content of her interviews, did not comport with the actual objective circumstances of Wuhan's actual epidemic prevention and control.

This Court finds that, during the critical period of Wuhan's prevention and control of the novel coronavirus infectious pneumonia epidemic, defendant Zhang Zhan in her capacity as a witness repeatedly used WeChat, "Twitter" (Tui Te), "YouTube" (You Guan) and other Internet media to indiscriminately fabricate and publish documentary and commentary articles and information in text, video, and other formats to distort the circumstances of Wuhan's prevention and control of the novel coronavirus infectious pneumonia epidemic. In addition, she accepted interviews with foreign media Radio Free Asia and The Epoch Times and thereby led to a large number of relevant false information to be spread on domestic and foreign information networks, newspapers ,and magazines, which in fact caused a large number of Internet users to view, comment, and forward. It confused viewers and caused severe disruption of public order, and her actions constitute the commission of the crime of disturbing the peace. With respect to the public prosecution agency's charge, the facts are clear, the evidence is reliable and copious, the offense is established, and the suggested sentence is appropriate. In order for this Court to safeguard social management order, and based on the facts, nature, circumstances, degree of social harm, and recidivist nature of defendant Zhang Zhan's crimes, in accordance with Articles 293(1)(iv) and 64 of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China" and Article 5(2) of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Handling of Defamation Through Information Networks and Other Criminal Cases," the judgment is as follows:

1. Defendant Zhang Zhan committed the crime of disturbing the peace, and is sentenced to a fixed term imprisonment of four years.

(The prison term is to be calculated starting on the day the judgment is executed, and each day in custody prior to the execution of the judgment shall count as one day of the prison term, that is from May 14, 2020 to May 13, 2024)

2. All seized tools used in this case are confiscated 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 First Intermediate People's Court of Shanghai. A written appeal should be submitted with one original and two copies of the appeal brief.

Chief Adjudicator    Ma Chaojie
Adjudicator              Wang Meiling
Adjudicator              Chen Wei

December 28, 2020

Clerk                        Yu Xiaomin

 

上海市浦东新区人民法院

刑事判决书

(2020)沪0115 刑初 4002号

公诉机关上海市浦东新区人民检察院。

被告人张展，女，1983年 [INTENTIONALLY DELETED出生于陕西省三原县，汉族，硕士研究生文化，无业，户籍地上海市浦东新区 [INTENTIONALLY DELETED，住上海市浦东新区 [INTENTIONALLY DELETED。2018年8月因利用国际互联网传播煽动颠覆国家政权行为被上海市公安局虹口分局处警告：2019年4月因寻衅滋事行为被上海市公安局浦东分局 处行政拘留一日；2019年 11月因扰乱公共场所秩序行为被上海市公安局黄浦分局处行政拘留十日。因涉嫌犯寻衅滋事罪于2020年5月15日被上海市公安局浦东分局刑事拘留，同年6月19日被依法逮捕。现羁押于上海市浦东新区看守所。

辩护人任全牛，河南轨道律师事务所律师。

辩护人张科科，湖北朋来律师事务所律师。

上海市浦东新区人民检察院以沪浦检一部刑诉(2020) 6701 号起诉书指控被告人张展犯寻衅滋事罪，于2020年9月16日向 本院提起公诉。本院于同日立案，依法适用普通程序，组成合议庭，公开开庭审理了本案。上海市浦东新区人民检察院指派检察员陈钢出庭支持公诉，被告人张展及辩护人任全牛、张科科参加诉讼。期间，经上海市第一中级人民法院批准，延长审理限期三个月。现已审理终结。

上海市浦东新区人民检察院指控：2020年2月3日，被告人张展进入湖北省武汉市，嗣后多次通过微信、“twitter”(推特)、“YouTube”(油管)等网络媒介以文字、视频等方式发布大量虚假信息，并接受境外媒体“自由亚洲电台”、“大纪元”的采访，恶意炒作武汉市新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情，受众众多，影响恶劣。为证实上述指控，公诉机关当庭宣读并出示了相关证人证言、鉴定意见等书证，据此认为，应当以寻衅滋事罪追究张展的刑事责任，提请法庭依法判处。

庭审中，被告人张展不认可起诉书指控的罪名。其辩护人对管辖权提出异议，并认为在案证据存在瑕疵，无法证实被告人张展是发送的文字、视频信息属于虚假信息。被告人张展所发文字系对其在武汉亲身经历的记录，没有捏造编造虚假信息，即便內容上存在一定错漏，也是在可以容忍的范围，不应以寻衅滋事罪追究被告人的刑事责任。

经审理查明：2020年2月3日，被告人张展进入湖北省武汉市，嗣后多次通过微信、twitter(推特)、YouTube”(油管) 等网络媒介以文字、视频等方式发布大量虚假信息，并接受境外媒体“自由亚洲电台”、“大纪元”的采访，恶意炒作武汉市新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情，受众众多，影响恶劣。

2020年5月14日，被告人张展在湖北省武汉市被抓获到案。

上述事实，有经庭审举证、质证，本院予以确认的下列证据证实：

1.证人黄芊、陈酉雯、程祎、侯丽、郝峻峰、王共喜的证言及相关文章照片，证实张展在2020年2月中旬，通过微信给其等人发送过内容涉及武汉市防控新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情的评论性文章。

2. 证人何光昀、葛幸福的证言及相关微信截图，证实张展在自己的朋友圈内发送多篇內容涉及武汉市防控新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情的记录性、评论性文章。

3. 证人王定邦、张明的证言及相关文章微信截图，证实其等人曾在自己的朋友圈或微信群内转发了张展多篇內容涉及武汉市防控新型冠狀病毒感染肺炎疫情的记录性、评论性文章。

4. 证人江帆的证言及武昌区首义路街道大东门社区居民委员会出具的捐赠物资汇总表、口罩物资领取表、爱心菜分发情况、首义路街分发情况明细表、物资分发表，证实江帆作为武汉市武昌区首义路街道大东门社区书记就其所在的社区在防控新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情中的防疫措施、人员组成、社区物资供给及政府补助补贴发放、核酸检测情况等进行了详细的说明。

5.证人杨毅的证言，证实杨毅作为武汉市武昌区首义路街道社区保安队员就其所在社区在防控新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情中的防疫措施、人员组成、管理方式、防疫物资发放、核酸检测情况等进行了详细的说明。

6. 证人胡筱萍的证言，证实胡筱萍作为武汉市武昌区的普通社区居民就其所在社区在防控新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情中的防疫措施、管理人员、防疫物资发放、生活物资发放、核酸况等进行了详细的说明。

7. 证人孙卫军的证言及相关微信聊天记录、墓穴销售单、居民死亡医学证明(推断)书，证实孙卫军作为武汉市龙泉山孝恩园有限公司的工作人员就龙泉山孝恩园墓地在武汉市发生新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情期间的墓地销售工作流程、实际情况及政府补贴等情况进行了详细的说明。同时，其还就疫情期间武汉市开展的核酸检测情况进行了说明。

8. 证人张晓兵的证言，证实其系武汉市武昌区创享构树猪的店主。武汉市发生新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情后，政府部门出于防疫目的要求其店铺只能做送货上门业务。2020年3月4日，因 其未严格执行配送上门规定被街道工商部门工作人员发现后决定扣押其营业执照，其经过工商人员教育后主动将营业执照交给工商执法人员的情况。与此同时，其还就疫情期间武汉市开展的酸检测情况进行了说明。

9. 上海市公安局浦东分局出具的搜查证，搜查笔录、扣押决定书、扣押笔录、扣押清单，证实公安机关从被告人张展处扣押得被告人的手机、优盘、SD卡、读卡器等物品的情况。

10. 上海市公安局浦东分局远程勘验笔录、电子数据提取固定清单，证实公安机关就张展“twitter”(推特)、“YouTube”(油管)的内容进行取证固定并与查明的客观事实不符的情况。

11. 上海弘连网络科技有限公司计算机司法鉴定所司法鉴定意见书，证实通过技术手段从被告人张展的手机中提取到相关微信朋友圈记录、聊天记录、部分便签记录、“twitter”(推特)上发布的部分推文记录，“YouTube”(油管)上发布的视频、“大纪元”、“自由亚洲电台”“twitter”(推特)账户发布的推文情况及部分视频、文章的观看数、评论数、转发数、标注喜欢数等情况。

12. 相关行政处罚决定书，证实被告人的劣迹情况。

13. 武汉市公安局出具的抓获经过，证实本案的案发及被告人的到案情况。

14. 上海市公安局浦东分局出具的人口信息，证实被告人的身份情况。

关于本案的管辖权，经查，被告人张展户籍地及居住地均在上海市浦东新区，根据《刑事诉讼法》关于地域管辖的规定，我院对本案依法享有管辖权。

关于本案事实，经查，在案的武汉市普通市民、基层社区工 作人员、保安人员、殡葬工作者就武汉市在防控疫情期间的武汉市具体社会情况、防疫措施、物资发放等事实做了详细的证言， 同时张展文章视频所记录内容的部分当事人也在证言中说明了事实的真实情况。上述证人均是武汉市防控新型冠状病毒感疫情过程的亲历者、张展文章视频记述情况的参与者，相关证言內容也相互印证，能够还原出武汉市防疫过程的客观情况，相关证据取证程序合法，内容客观且能相互印证，应当可以采信。故根据现查明的事实可以证实张展通过微信、“twitter”(推特)、“YouTube”(油管)等网络媒介发布的相关文章、视频及接受采访内容均与武汉市实际防控疫情的客观实际情况不符。

本院认为，被告人张展在武汉市防控新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情的关键期间，以亲历者的身份多次通过微信、“twitter”(推特)、“YouTube”(油管)等网络媒介以文字、视频等方式肆意编造、发布内容为歪曲武汉市防控新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情情况的记录性、评论性文章及信息并以此接受境外媒体“自由亚洲电台”、“大纪元”的采访，导致相关虚假信息在境内外信息网络、 报刊媒体上大量散布，并实际引发大量网民观看、评论、转发， 混淆视听，造成公共秩序严重混乱，其行为已构成寻衅滋事罪。 公诉机关指控的事实清楚，证据确实充分，罪名成立，量刑建议适当。本院为维护社会管理秩序，根据被告人张展犯罪的事实、性质、情节和对于社会的危害程度及劣迹情况，依照《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百九十三条第一款第(四)项、第六十四条， 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》第五条第二款的规定， 判决如下：

一、被告人张展犯寻衅滋事罪，判处有期徒刑四年。

(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2020年5月14日起至2024年5月13日止。)

二、扣押在案的作案工具依法予以没收。

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第一中级人民法院提出上诉。书面上诉的， 合当提交上诉状正本一份，副本二份。

审判长         马超杰
审判员         王美玲
审判员         陈玮

二0二0年十二月二十八日


书记员         余晓民 

Source: https://chinachangechinese.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/%E5%BC%A0%E5%B1%95%E5%88%A4%E5%86%B3%E4%B9%A6.pdf

Disappearing Government Records Show Police Ordering People, Companies to Stop Using Foreign VPNs

China's state sponsored media has long made it clear that foreign VPNs are not legal. For example, the Global Times wrote in 2012:

Residents in China have found logging into their Facebook and Twitter accounts increasingly difficult in recent days, after several popular VPN (virtual private network) companies have alleged that China's Great Firewall (GFW) has been upgraded. However, officials and experts in China's Internet industry have said that it is illegal for foreign companies to operate a VPN business in China.

Three overseas VPN service providers, Astrill, Witopia and StrongVPN apologized Thursday that their service to residents in the Chinese mainland has been blocked due to a recent upgrade of the GFW. Astrill claimed that most VPN protocols have been blocked,  and that many foreign companies have been influenced.

Fang Binxing, designer of the GFW, told the Global Times Thursday he did not know of any upgrade to the firewall.

"As far as I know, companies running a VPN business in China must register with the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. I haven't heard that any foreign companies have registered," Fang said.

Unregistered VPN service providers are not protected by Chinese laws, and any company running a VPN business should realize they have a responsibility to register, he said.

An employee from the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, surnamed Li, also confirmed that only Chinese companies and Sino-foreign joint ventures can apply to establish a VPN business.

See: "Foreign-run VPNs illegal in China: govt," December 12, 2012, https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/750158.shtml

Over the past several years there has also been a growing body of case law in China addressing the (il)legality of VPNs that are not provided by telecommunications carriers licensed  to operate in China. Courts have always been clear that providing unlicensed VPN services to others could violate a number of PRC criminal laws. For example, in State v. Liu Bingyang (刘冰洋刑事判决书, (2017)豫1329刑初556号), Liu was found to have violated Articles 285(3) of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China," by "providing programs and tools for the intrusion into and illegal control of computer information services" when he "used a website of his own construction XX to distribute information about Shadowsocks software and download links to users making payments to defendant Lin Bingyang through third party platforms." The court stated that "Shadowsocks" software and services which the defendant illegally sold could circumvent the monitoring of China's Internet firewall, and illegally access foreign websites, receive and view illegal videos, and receive and listen to illegal broadcasts." See: https://blog.feichangdao.com/2018/03/prc-court-unauthorized-great-firewall.html

It has also been quite common to see courts cite a defendant's use of "wall-climbing" software as evidence of their guilt in relation to other offenses, usually involving posting or accessing content the court deemed to be illegal. For example: 

• State v. Tian Weiguo (田卫国刑事判决书, (2016)新4003刑初5号): "Tian Weiguo used wall-climbing software to register on the foreign website 'Google,' and reposted false information with the content 'Xinjiang Shache Uighurs have been massacred.'" See: https://blog.feichangdao.com/2017/03/court-cites-gfw-circumvention-software.html
  
• State v. Jiang Kun (姜坤刑事判决书, (2019)黑2701刑初71号) "The indictment of the People's Procuratorate of Jiagedaqi charged defendant Jiang Kun with using wall-climbing software to browse the foreign website Twitter. . . . From 2014 to the present, Jiang Kun used computers and mobile phones to distribute, vilify, and attack Party and State leaders on his foreign Twitter account. There were a total of 1,434 posts with harmful information which harmed the nation's image, seriously jeopardized the nation's interests, and caused a negative impact internationally." See: https://blog.feichangdao.com/2020/05/court-jails-man-for-8-months-for-tweets.html
  
• State v. Duan Zheng (段铮刑事判决书, (2017)京01刑初69号): "In November 2016, he used wall-climbing software on his mobile phone to access a foreign video website called "theYNC." On that website he watched seven violent terrorist videos." See: https://blog.feichangdao.com/2017/09/man-jailed-seven-months-for-saving-isis.html

A question remained, however: Is it illegal to simply use a foreign VPN to access ostensibly legal content on foreign websites?

That question was answered in the affirmative this year in a series of articles by Wang Yuyang (王宇扬) posted on Tencent's Wexin:

• "Is Individual Use of VPNs for "Wall-Climbing" Illegal?"  个人使用vpn"翻墙"是否违法？ , May 2, 2020.
• "A Normative Interpretation of the Concepts of 'International Access Channel' and 'Access to the Networks” - Further Discussion on the Erroneous Application of Law on Administrative Punishments for 'Wall-Climbing'," “国际出入口信道”、“接入网络”概念的规范解释——再论“翻墙”行政处罚系适用法律错误 , August 7, 2020.
  
• "'Wall-Climbing' Postscript (1) - Addendum - Some Thoughts After Three Months of Studying Issues Involving the Administrative Punishments Law"  “翻墙”文后记（一）补遗——历时三个月的行政法问题研习感言 ,  August 13, 2020.
  
• "'Wall-Climbing' Postscript (2) - The Colorful Mysteries of Administrative Punishments,"  “翻墙”文后记（二）——行政处罚的神秘主义色彩, June 21, 2020.
•  "'Wall-Climbing' Postscript (3) -  A 'Guide' to the Framework of the 'No Penalty for Defense' System," “翻墙”文后记（三）——“申辩不加罚”制度的架空“指南”, July 22, 2020.
• "'Wall-Climbing' Postscript (4) - A Guide for Applying for Administrative Reconsideration for Those Punished for Wall-Climbing (With Sample Application),  “翻墙”文后记（四）——针对翻墙处罚的行政复议申请指南（附申请书样例）, July 29, 2020. 
  
• Regarding the Phased Nature of Searcing for 'Wall Climbing' Punishment Cases - 50 Cases of Punishment and 1 Civil Case, 关于“翻墙”处罚的阶段性案例检索——处罚50例、诉讼案件1例, August 4, 2020, 
  
• "It Is an Undisputed Fact that Wall-Climbing is Illegal, In August Alone, Zhejiang Province had 18 administrative penalties for 'Individual Wall-Climbing' (With 60 Cases Over the Whole Year) 「翻墙违法是无可争议的事实」浙江省仅8月份“个人翻墙”行政处罚达18起（全年60例）, September 4, 2020.
  
• "The Entryway to the Zhejiang Government Services Website's 'Open Information on Administrative Punishments Outcomes' Has Been Shut Temporarily," 浙江政务服务网“行政处罚结果信息公开”系统入口遭临时屏蔽（文末附既往材料备份链接）, October 30, 2020.

Wang documented dozens of examples of police apprehending and punishing inviduals solely for using VPNs. In each of the cases there was no claim either that the individuals posted anything illegal, or that the information they were accessing was illegal. In some cases the VPNs were being used to play games.

Below are full translations of three entries taken from the Zhejiang Government Services website's "Open Information on Administrative Punishments Outcomes":

Majin Police Precinct, Public Security Bureau of Kaihua
Administrative Punishment Decision
Kai Public (Ma) Administrative Punishment Decision [2019] No. 2019150842

Date Administrative Punishment Issued: September 27, 2019

Main Illegal Facts: From June 2019 to September 2019, Yao Zenglei used VPN software to illegally access international networks while playing the game “Ace Fishing: Wild Catch” on her mobile phone. There was no profit involved. Yao Zenglei’s behavior constituted unauthorized use of non-statutory channels for international networking

Category and Basis of Administrative Punishment: In accordance with the provisions of Articles 6 and 14 of the "Interim Provisions on the Administration of International Networking of Computer Information Networks" it was decided to give Yao Zenglei a warning as an administrative punishment.

Method of Execution and Time Limit of Administrative Punishment: Reprimanded on the Spot.

Chengguan Police Precinct, Public Security Bureau of Changshan, Zhejiang
Administrative Punishment Decision
Chang Public (Chengguan) Administrative Punishment Decision [2020] No. 005601

Date Administrative Punishment Issued: September 14, 2020

Main Illegal Facts: From 2014, 2015 to September 6, 2020, Zhang Liping downloaded wall-climbing software on her personal mobile phone and utilized the software to log onto the overseas "Twitter," "Facebook," "youTube," "instagram," etc. to browse various kinds of information. There was no financial gain. She was apprehended by our bureau on September 14, 2020. Zhang Liping's actions constitute unauthorized use of non-statutory networking channels.

Category and Basis of Administrative Punishment: In accordance with the provisions of Articles 6 and 14 of the "Interim Provisions on the Administration of International Networking of Computer Information Networks" it was decided to give Zhang Liping a warning as an administrative punishment.

Method of Execution and Time Limit of Administrative Punishment: Reprimanded on the Spot.

Jiefang Police Precinct, Dinghai District, Public Security Bureau of Zhoushan, Zhejiang
Administrative Punishment Decision
Zhou Ding Public (Jie) Administrative Punishment Decision [2020] No. 016921

Date Administrative Punishment Issued: October 24, 2020

Main Illegal Facts: From the first half of 2019 through October 2020, Zhang Tao searched and downloaded the wall-climbing software "LANTERN" using Baidu, and repeatedly used the "LANTERN" wall-climbing software to illegally browse the Wikipedia website for information. On October 24, 2020, Zhang Tao was apprehended by the public security agency in Room X, Unit X, Building X, Mingzhuyuan, Huannan Street, Dinghai District.

Category and Basis of Administrative Punishment: This Precinct believes that Zhang Tao illegally used mobile phone wall-climbing software to access international networks in order to inquire about relevant information. His action constitutes: Unauthorized establishment and use of non-statutory channels for international networking, and shall be subject to administrative punishment according to the law. In accordance with the provisions of Articles 6 and 14 of the "Interim Provisions on the Administration of International Networking of Computer Information Networks" and based on the circumstances of this case, it was decided to give Zhang Tao a warning as an administrative punishment, and he was ordered on the spot to stop making illegal connections to the international network.

Method of Execution and Time Limit of Administrative Punishment: Reprimanded on the Spot.

 

Police have also ordered companies to stop using foreign VPNs, again citing Articles 6 and 14 of the "Interim Provisions on the Administration of International Networking of Computer Information Networks." The screenshots below show that police ordered several companies to stop using Astrill and other VPNs and issued the companies official reprimands. There was no indication that the companies was using their VPNs to access foreign websites (as opposed to say, using them for video conferencing or exchanging files).

 

Articles 6 and 14 of the "Interim Provisions on the Administration of International Networking of Computer Information Networks" provide:

Article 6. To carry out international networking of computer information, the output and input channels provided by the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications in its public telecommunication network shall be used. No units or individuals shall establish or use other channels for international networking on their own accord.
Article 14. Those that violate stipulations in articles 6, 8 and 10 shall be ordered by public security departments to stop networking, with a warning issued to them. They may also be fined an amount up to 15,000 yuan. If they have earned any illegal income, said income shall be confiscated.

The police's application of Articles 6 and 14 has been explicitly endorsed by courts in China in both civil and administrative punishment cases. For example:

Panxing Ximin v. Google LLC (潘⾏紫旻与⾕歌有限责任公司⽹络侵权责任纠纷⼀审民事判决书, （2018)皖0291民初4662号): Wherein the court held that any evidence gathered by the plaintiff using ExpressVPN should be excluded by the court because its collection violated Article 6 of the Interim Provisions of the People's Republic of China on the Management of International networking of Computer Information:

关于原告潘行紫旻提交光盘中的屏幕快照、视频。根据《中华人民共和国计算机信息网络国际联网管理暂行规定》第六条规定，“计算机信息网络直接进行国家联网，必须使用邮电部国家公用电信网提供的国际出入口信息。任何单位和个人不得自行建立或者使用其他信道进行国际联网”。而本案中原告潘行紫旻提交的屏幕快照、视频显示，其是在中国使用ExpressVPN访问了被告谷歌有限责任公司经营的Gmail邮箱，并进行了相关邮件内容的查阅，违反了前述行政法规的规定，本院依法不予采信。

Lai Liangping v. Public Security Bureau of Shanghang (赖亮平行政判决书,（2019）闽0803行初36号): 

With respect to the question of plaintiff Lai Liangping’s claim that defendant Shanghang County Public Security Bureau issuing the Hang Public (Lufeng) Administrative Punishment Decision [2019] No. 00031 administrative punishment decision on June 28, 2019, ordering him to cease networking and giving him a warning was once again imposing administrative punishment on him, and constitutes double jeopardy. An investigation showed that the Hang Public (Lufeng) Administrative Punishment Decision [2019] No. 00031 administrative punishment decision issued by defendant Shanghang County Public Security Bureau was with respect to Lai Liangping’s violation of the provisions of Articles 6(2) and 14 of the "Interim Provisions on the Administration of International Networking of Computer Information Networks of the People's Republic of China" and was an administrative punishment of ceasing networking and a warning for the unlawful action of “climbing the wall” to access foreign websites. The laws and regulations upon which it was based were not the same as the distinct administrative actions that are the subject of the lawsuit, and was a separate distinct administrative action, and therefore does not constitute double jeopardy. The plaintiff’s claim is not consistent with the facts, and is not supported in accordance with the law.

See: https://blog.feichangdao.com/2020/08/lai-liangping-v-shanghang-public.html

Readers wishing to conduct their own research regarding the aforementioned cases should note the following:

Restricted Access to Court Judgments: The texts for the court cases cited in this post were retreived from the Supreme People's Court's China Judgments Online database (裁判文书网, https://wenshu.court.gov.cn) . However, beginning on September 1, 2020, anyone wishing to use the  China Judgments Online database must first register using a mobile phone number. For this reason I have not included any links to cases in that database, because they will not work for many readers.

Disappearing Administrative Punishment Decisions: In November 2020, the Zhejiang Government Services website's "Open Information on Administrative Punishments Outcomes" (http://www.zjzwfw.gov.cn/zjzw/punish/frontpunish/showadmins.do) removed cases relating to "Illegal Use of Non-Statutory Networking Channels." The first screenshot below shows that in September 2020 a search for the term "信道" ("Channels") returned 111 search results, and the first page of results was all cases involving "Illegal Use of Non-Statutory Networking Channels" (擅自建立、使用非法定信道进行国际联网). The second screenshot shows that by November 2020, however, the same search only returned 12 results, none of which related to cases involving "Illegal Use of Non-Statutory Networking Channels." For this reason I have not included any links to cases in that database, because they currently resolve to a 404 page.

This screenshot appeared in "It is an Undisputed Fact that Wall-Climbing is Illegal, In August Alone, Zhejiang Province had 18 Administrative Penalties for 'Individual Wall-Climbing' (With 60 Cases Over the Whole Year)," Wang Yuyang, September 4, 2020,.

This screenshot was taken by the author on November 7, 2020

China's Police Jailing People Who Call Them "Dogs" Online

Article 2(1)(7) of the "Public Security Administrative Punishment Law of the People's Republic of China," provides that public security bureaus of the people's government at the level of county and above are responsible for public security administrative punishments within their administrative districts relating to disturbing public order, harming public security, infringements of personal and property rights, and harming public administration where there is social harm that does not rise to the level requiring criminal sanctions. 

Article 26 of the "Public Security Administrative Punishment Law of the People's Republic of China," provides that "other provocative acts" (其他寻衅滋事行为 - also translated as "picking quarrels and provoking troubles" and "disturbing the peace") may be punished by detention of between 5 and 10 days or a fine of no more than 500 yuan. Where the circumstances are severe, a punishment of between 10 and 15 days detention and a fine of no more than 1,000 yuan may be imposed.

Article 42(2) of the "Public Security Administrative Punishment Law of the People's Republic of China," provides that insult or fabrication of facts to defame a third party may be punished by detention of five days or less or a fine of no more than 500 yuan. Where the circumstances are severe, a punishment of between 5 and 10 days detention and a fine of no more than 500 yuan may be imposed.

Insult refers to words and actions that harm the reputation or personal dignity of a third party. Defamation refers to distorting and spreading falsehoods which harm the reputation or personal dignity of a third party.

Below are four examples from China's state sponsored media of people who were subjected to administrative detention for referring to police as "dogs" on social media platforms.

Lei Doe's Administrative Punishment

At about 2:00 pm on November 2, 2018, the police officer on duty at the Chengbei Police Station of the Public Security Bureau of Poyang received a call saying someone posted on the Internet that "Poyang traffic police bite and bark like mad dogs." The Chengbei Police Station identified the Internet user as Lei (female, 33 years old, from Poyang). Upon questioning, Lei confessed and was sentenced to administrative detention by the Poyang police.

Source: Netease - "A Woman in Poyang, Shangrao Vented her Anger online and was Detained for Insulting Traffic Policeman," [上饶鄱阳一女子网上泄愤，辱骂交警被拘留] November 6, 2018, https://dy.163.com/article/DVV36IBL0517V8NK.html

Zheng Doe's Administrative Punishment

On June 26, 2019, the Traffic Police Detachment of the Public Security Bureau of Guangfeng found in WeChat Moments that someone had taken a video of traffic police officer on duty, accompanied by voice and text insulting the officers on duty such as "Lots of wild dogs." After learning of the situation, the Traffic Police Detachment reported the situation to the police station in the jurisdiction. After an investigation, Zheng Doe was taken into custody. Under questioning Zheng Doe confessed to the fact that he had posted material insulting the police. On June 27, Zheng Doe was sentenced to administrative detention by the Public Security Bureau of Guangfeng for seven days on suspicion of disturbing the peace.

Source: Shangrao Evening News, "Guangfeng Man Detained for 7 days for WeChat Moments Video of Insulting Police" [广丰一男子在朋友圈发辱警言论视频被拘留7日] July 2, 2019, http://paper.srxww.com/srwb/page/34/2019-07-02/A03/74611562026953355.pdf

Xia Weifeng's Administrative Punishment

At 9:00 am on August 15, 2019, Xia Weifeng was fined 20 yuan and admonished by traffic police for driving without wearing a seat belt and not displaying a student driver sticker. On the morning of August 19, Xia sent his own photos of traffic police officers on duty accompanied by the insulting text "Do these dogs have reason to bite people every day" to WeChat Moments. This was forwarded by Internet users which aroused the attention of the Public Security Bureau of Shenqiu. The "Rights Defense Office" of the Bureau and the Traffic Police Department initiated investigation. On the afternoon of the same day, Xia was taken into custody and transferred to the Xiguan Police Station for investigation and was punished by the public security agency with 14 days of administrative detention for disturbing the peace.

Source: Sohu, "A Man in Shen Qiu Scolded the Police on WeChat Moments and was Administratively Detained 14 Days!" [沈丘一男子在微信朋友圈骂警察 被行政拘留14日！] https://www.sohu.com/a/335203992_120066352

Xi Doe's Administrative Punishment

On November 15, 2019, Xi Doe was ticketed by a traffic police officer for parking her car illegally. After seeing the ticket, she posted "They aren't police officers, they're police dogs" and other text insulting the police in WeChat Moments. Screenshots of her Moments were reposted in large numbers, attracting widespread attention from society, and creating a pernicious influence. Xi Doe was taken into custody following an investigation by the Shengli West Road Police Station, and was punished by the public security agency with 10 days of administrative detention and a 500 yuan fine.

Source: The Paper, "A Woman in Hengshui Insulted a Traffic in her WeChat Friends Circle Over a Parking Ticket, and Then . . . ," [衡水一女子因违章停车被“贴条”朋友圈辱骂交警，结果······] November 19, 2019, https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_4999904