Click to visit ValueCalling.com
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ C h i n a N e w s D i g e s t +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
US Regional, No. US96-043
November 2, 1996
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| CND-US, normally 1 or 2 issues a week, is a supplement to CND-Global and |
| has basically no overlap with the CND-G news. CND-US provides in-depth |
| information concerning Chinese students/scholars in the United States. |
+-------------------------------ISSN 1024-9141-----------------------------+
Table of Contents # of Lines
============================================================================
1. News Brief (2 Items) ................................................. 25
2. Organizations Call on Petition Campaign for WANG Dan (2 items) ...... 181
3. International Symposium on U.S.-China Relations Held ................. 51
4. Information Exchange:
INS to Move to Direct Mail for Employment-Based I-485s .............. 115
5. Job Opportunities (7 Items) ......................................... 203
6. Wang Dan's Trial and the New "State Security" Era
-- Comprehensive News/Info Summary and Analysis on WANG Dan's Case .. 870
--- --- ---
News/Info on S.1394 Is Available at URL http://cnd.cnd.org/visa/simpson-bill/
Or at URL http://www.cnd.org/ (Look for Server Announcements on the top page)
============================================================================
CND is a free network news service run by volunteers. To subscribe to/unsub.
various CND Services and/or for more information, see trailer of the package.
CND-US is published by China News Digest International, Inc. All rights are
reserved. Redistribution is hereby permitted provided that it is not for
profit and with proper acknowledgment to CND.
============================================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. News Brief (2 Items) ................................................. 25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996 Thanksgiving Chamber Music Concert in Chicago Area, presented by
East Meets West Music Arts. Music Director: Dr. YANG Fengshi, Co-sponsor:
North Central College. Time: Sunday, November 24, 1996, at 4:00PM; Location:
Pfeiffer Hall on the campus of North Central College (310 E. Benton Ave.),
Naperville. The program promises to offer a celebration of Thanksgiving
and brotherhood through music: Chinese and American; traditional and modern;
vocal and instrumental. Tickets ($15 each) for the Thanksgiving Concert are
available by calling 630-357-6714 (From: chai@spss.com)
--- --- ---
Greater Houston Peking University Alumni Association Established
More than 200 people attended the inaugural meeting of the Peking University
Alumni Association in Greater Houston. The festive gathering was held in the
auditorium of the General Consulate in Houston in the evening of October 26,
1996. Alum from as far back as Class of 1939 to as fresh as Class of 1996
were united under one roof. Many old acquaintances were found, while many
new ones were established. Mr. WU Zurong, the Consul General, delivered the
first congratulatory speech. Representatives from other associations in
greater Houston, including KeDa Alumni Association, Chinese Professional
Society, Houston Chinese School, Chinese Scholar Association, Cultural
Society, Poetry Society, also made brief speeches. Journalists from Overseas
Chinese News, World Journal and US Southwest News attended the meeting as
well. There will be activities in the general Association level several
times a year. Activities in the various interest group level will be much
more frequent where members can meet at individual member's home. For more
information, please contact: Mr. NI (lideng@slb.com) or Mr. WANG
(713-995-0899). (From: Lei Zhou <lzhou@cs.rice.edu>)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Organizations Call on Petition Campaign for WANG Dan (2 items) ...... 181
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) American Scientist Organizations Join Petition for WANG Dan
(2) IFCSS Calls on Global Petition Campaigning for WANG Dan
____ ____ ____
(1) American Scientist Organizations Join Petition for WANG Dan
Forwarded by: hszhou1@io.org
_From: EMUNOZ <emunoz@AAAS.ORG>
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE HUMAN RIGHTS NETWORK
(AAASHRAN) 28 October 1996
CASE NUMBER: 9621.dan
SIGN ON FOR A CHINESE COLLEAGUE IN DISTRESS
The New York Academy of Sciences' (NYAS) Committee on Human Rights, the
Committee of Concerned Scientists, the Science and Human Rights Program of
the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and Human Rights
in China are co-sponsoring a petition, which we ask you to sign NOW, as the
situation of a jailed colleague has taken a grave turn. We plan to mail
this petition subscribed by a good number of concerned scientists to the
designated high-level authorities of the People's Republic of China on
Wednesday, October 30 (The information in the petition letter has been
updated, according to the web site of NYAS, but no update plan of mailing
the petition is available yet. For background information on Wang Dan,
please refer to CND-US96-042, 10/29/96. - CND-US)
To:
Jiang Zemin, President, People's Republic of China
Li Peng, Premier, People's Republic of China
I am distressed at reports that Wang Dan, a former student at Beijing
University, received an 11 year sentence the morning of October 30, 1996,
on a charge of " conspiring to subvert the government," based on his
accepting a scholarship to fund his correspondence course at our University
of California at Berkeley, his publishing articles abroad on human rights
issues, and his raising funds to help people suffering repression.
All his activities were peaceful and hardly intended to subvert your
Government. I therefore call upon you to drop the charges and set Wang Dan
free immediately and unconditionally. By doing so, you will enhance the
stature of the People's Republic of China in the eyes of the world.
PLEASE ENDORSE THIS PETITION, INDICATING YOUR AFFILIATION
AND HELP COMPOUND ITS EFFECTIVENESS BY ENCOURAGING COLLEAGUES TO SIGN ON AS
WELL. RETURN IT BY FAX AT 212.838.5226 OR EMAIL YOUR NAME, AND AFFILIATION
TO HUMANRIGHTS@NYAS.ORG.
____ ____ ____
(2) IFCSS Calls on Global Petition Campaign for WANG Dan
>From HQ@ifcss.org Fri Nov 1 09:38:18 1996
The Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS) is
outraged to learn that the verdict of the trial on Wang Dan came four
hours after it started on October 30, and Wang Dan was sentenced to eleven
years in prison. It is believed that Wang Dan would appeal against the
verdict to the Beijing Higher Court within ten days after he receives
official documents. To respond to government's trial and the verdict on
Wang Dan, a worldwide petition campaign has been prompted, to urge all
concerned overseas Chinese nationals, students and scholars, and their
organizations throughout the world, to send petition letters (attached),
via fax or regular/express mail, to Mr. Qiao Shi, National People's
Congress, and Mr. Xiao Yang, Minister of Justice, for overturning the
verdict made by the Beijing No. Interme-diate Court, against Wang Dan.
[Instruction]
1. Cut off the attached sample letter (or modified as one intends);
Your help to distribute to your local nets or friends are highly
encouraged and appreciated;
2. Sign your name and fill in the date;
3. Mail it to: Mr. Qiao Shi and Mr. Xiao Yang, and People's Daily;
by fax or regular/express mail (addresses and numbers provided);
4. Return a Siugnature message to hq@ifcss.org for sending out
collectively by the IFCSS Headquarters.
..........................cut line...............................
Mr. Qiao Shi, Chairman, Standing Committee,
the National People's Congress, P.R.C.
Mr. Xiao Yang, Minister, Ministry of Justice, P.R.C.
As a Chinese national, I am very concerned that Wang Dan, a former
Beijing University student, was sentenced to eleven years in prison in
a show trial lasting for only four hours. According to the official
indictment, the charges were mainly based on Wang Dan's writing articles
expressing his political views regarding China's development,
communicating with his colleagues for excha-nging political prospectives,
collecting funds to help dissidents for maintaining basic living standards,
who lost jobs under the government's orders, and participating in a
correspondence study program at U.C. Berkeley (Xinhua News Agency,
October 30). In my opinion, Wang Dan exercised all above activities
openly, peacefully and rationally without violence. The capital charge
against Wang Dan, for "conspiring to subvert the government", is ground-
less. I, hereby, appeal to the National People's Congress, to urge the
Ministry of Justice for reviewing the case, and over-turning the verdict
made by the Beijing No 1 Intermediate Court.
I am particularly distressed by the facts that Wang Dan was
secretly arrested on 21 May, 1995 after he signed a petition
with many other intellectuals calling for a reassessment of the
1989 movement, tolerance towards dissents and the release of
political prisoners without any due legal procedure. Wang Dan was
unlawfully held unknown even to his family for seventeen months
prior to the announcement of his formal arrest and charge. Wang
Dan's family was given only one day to find the lawyer for his
defense and less than two weeks to prepare the trial. The so-
called "open trial", which proved to be pure "show trial" lasting
for only four hours, was also strictly controlled with partici-
pants hand-picked by the authority, exclusive to the concerned
public and news media. These facts cast great doubts over the
fairness, authority and dignity of China's current justice system,
severely tarnish national image once again in front of internati-
onal society.
To our knowledge, the government's treatment of Wang Dan is in
severe violation of the Constitution of the People's Republic of
China, the Law of Criminal Procedure of the People's Republic of
China and the Article of the Universal Declaration of Human Right,
which China has endorsed and is obliged to uphold as a member of
the United Nations. The freedom of speech is a basic right guar-
anteed by China's Constitution. No one should be secretly detai-
ned for 17 months without any formal charge and no one should be
prosecuted for peaceful expression of their political views. Such
trials bring nothing but disappointment, dismay and resentment to
the government, tense the social conflicts and undoubtly over-
shadow the dynamic, constructive and real social stability in our
country.
Facing the dawn-light of the 21st century, Chinese nationality
is encountering an unprecedented and historical opportunity for
social, cultural, economical and political development in our
country. It is my belief that those developments should be achie-
ved in parallel to the promotion of universal respect for and ob-
servance of the fundamental freedom of speech and belief, and
basic human rights. The governing body bears undenied and histo-
rical responsibility to push forward the process toward the
change at this turning-point of the century. I firmly believe
that brutal human rights abuses, and repression of peacefully
expressed dissent opinions, the hallmark of feuderal system
against human nature, will not only bring embarrassment to billi-
ons of Chinese living both in China and overseas, but also under-
mine China's reputation in the world and damage China's national
interest as a whole.
Mr. Qiao Shi and Xiao Yang, I am, hereby again, calling on you
and urge you exercise your full power and duty on behalf of
the National People's Congress (NPC), and the Ministry of Justice,
to scrutize the trial on Wang Dan, and take immediate action to
safeguard the dignity of the Constitution of the People's Republic
of China, and protect the Constitution-guaranteed rights of indi-
vidual citizens by the rule of law.
Sincerely,
_________________ (Signed)
_________________ (date)
...........................cut line...............................
Please cut off and sign the sample letter, fax or/mail to
the following addresses:
XIAO Yang, Minister of Justice
Xiaguangli
Beijing, 100016, People's Republic of China
Telexes: 210070 FMPRC CN or 22478 MFERT CN
(Please forward to Xiao Yang Buzhang)
Faxes: + 8610 467 7351
QIAO Shi Weiyuanzhang, National People's Congress (NPC)
Changwu Weiyuanhui, Renmin Dahui Tang
Beijing, People's Republic of China
COPIES TO:
Beijing Ribao
34 Xibiaobei Hutong, Dongdan
Beijing, Peoples Republic of China
(Beijing Daily)
People's Daily,
Beijing, People's Republic of China
Further Information: HQ@IFCSS.ORG 202 347 0017 (Voice), 202 347 0018 (Fax)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. International Symposium on U.S.-China Relations Held ................. 51
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_From: zhaohui Hong <76162.1411@CompuServe.COM>
Abridged by CND-US
Initiated by Association of Chinese Professors of Social Sciences in the
United States (ACPSS), and sponsored by Chinese Economists Society (CES),
Association of Chinese Political Studies (ACPS), Chinese Historians in the
United States (CHUS), Chinese Academic Link (CAL), and Chinese Association
of Science and Technology (CAST), the International Symposium on U.S.-China
Relations was held at the University of Maryland, College Park, October
25-27, 1996.
With members topping 5,000, The six academic organizations shared some
basic characteristics have total some 5,000 members, most of whom came from
mainland China. This symposium, the first cooperation effort made by the
academic organizations in the United States, allowed them to invite many
well established scholars and experts in various fields discussing methods
and strategies to improve Sino-American relations.
The goal of the symposium was to examine the past, present, and the future
of U.S.-China relations from multidisciplinary perspectives, promote
exchange between different disciplines, and explore possible means and
policy alternatives to end the new deterioration of U.S.-China relations.
Over 120 professors and specialists attended the symposium. About eighty of
them sent in papers or abstracts and over seventy of them presented papers
at the conference. Ambassador James Lilley, Former U.S. Ambassador to China
and Director of Institute For Global Chinese Affairs at University of
Maryland, Mr. Douglas Paal, President of Asian-Pacific Policy Center and
Former Senior Director for Asian Affairs on the National Security Council,
Professor Zhihua Shen, Director of the Center for Oriental Studies, the
Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Dr. Angang Hu, Research Fellow of the
Chinese Academy of Science and Professor of Economics at Tshing Hua
University, and Dr. Zhaohui Hong, Chairman of the Symposium Organizing
Committee, Executive Vice President of ACPSS, and Associate Professor of
History at Savannah State University of Georgia, attended the opening
ceremony and delivered speeches. The opening ceremony was followed by a
welcome banquet at which Dr. Dennis Xu read a valuable letter from
President Bill Clinton who shared his view on current U.S.-China relations.
The Beijing Office of the Ford Foundation provided generous financial
support for the symposium.
The symposium held three joint sessions: "U.S.-China Relations: An
Overview," "Role of Taiwan and Japan in U.S.-China Relations," and
"Nationalism and U.S.-China Relations." The symposium also held a roundtable
meeting on "Role of Overseas Chinese Scholars in U.S.-China Relations."
Leaders from twenty Chinese academic organizations and communities discussed
detail plans that might lead U.S.-China relations to a healthy direction.
They tentatively agreed that to follow the model of this symposium, several
academic associations should organize the second conference on the United
States and Chinese Modernization in New York next June. In addition to joint
sessions and roundtable discussions, the symposium had nine panels covering
various topics.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Information Exchange:
INS to Move to Direct Mail for Employment-Based I-485s .............. 115
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: NAFSA Network (10/30/96); Forwarded by Bo Xiong
The following information comes from the AILA National office and may be of
interest to you and your faculty, staff and students. The notice
implementing direct filing of I-485 applications in employment-based cases
was published in the Federal Register of October 30, 1996 and is effective
NOVEMBER 29, 1996. Note that any case already filed with a local office
MAY be forwarded by the local office to the region, in the local office's
discretion. The I-485 MAY NOT be filed at the same time as the I-140,
though INS will propose regulations to make this possible.
Forwarded by William A. Stock, Esq., Immigration Law Group, Dechert Price
& Rhoads
Voice: 215.994.2324 Internet: wstock@dechert.com
AILA's summary follows:
DIRECT MAIL EMPLOYMENT-BASED I-485s
Some of you have called us/e-mailed us within the last day or two stating
that your local INS Office has informed you that your I-485 package has
been sent to one of the Texas Service Center for processing. AILA has very
recently learned that the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)
plans to publish a notice on direct mail for employment-based adjustment of
status applications sometime during the week of 10/28/96-11/01/96. The
effective date of the INS notice will be thirty days from the date of
publication, meaning some time in late November or early December. AILA
has been able to locate a draft of the Federal Register notice and the
following is an AILA summary of its key components.
Special Update: INS to Move to Direct Mail for Employment-Based I-485s
Overview
The draft notice states that the expansion of direct mail will include all
I-485 applications for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act
which are filed on the basis of an approved employment-based immigrant
petition, including those for eligible dependents of the principal visa
applicant.
The I-485 may be filed at a service center provided that it is being filed
on the basis of (1) Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; (2)
Form I-526, Immigrant Petition for Alien Entrepreneur; or (3) Form I-360
which classifies the beneficiary as a "Special Immigrant Religious
Worker." Concurrent filings of these petitions with the I-485s will not be
permitted. INS is contemplating a separate rulemaking that would permit
this.
Eligibility to apply for permanent residence is dependent on whether a
visa priority date is available, and service centers have been directed to
reject any I-485 submitted on behalf of an applicant to whom an immigrant
visa is not yet available on the date the application is received by the
service center.
Service centers may transfer I-485s to a local INS office if it is
determined that an interview is necessary.
Employment Authorization
An applicant for adjustment of status may apply concurrently for an
employment authorization document (EAD) by filing form I-765 with the I-
485. If the I-765 is not filed with the I-485, it may be filed at the
service center at a later time with a Form I-797C notice of action. A
request for employment authorization may also be filed at a local office,
provided that it has jurisdiction over the applicant's place of intended
employment and has the capability to produce a valid EAD. In the event
that the service center has transferred the I-485 to a local office for
interview or any other reason, the I-765 must be filed at that local
office. Form I-797C should be utilized as evidence of eligibility for EAD
applications filed at local offices.
Advance Parole
Similar rules apply for advance parole. An adjustment applicant may file
for advance parole using Form I-131 concurrently with an adjustment
application. Further, an applicant may file for advance parole at a
service center at a later time using the I-797C as evidence of eligibility
for advance parole. An applicant may elect to apply for advance parole at
the INS district office having jurisdiction over the place of qualifying
employment, by including the I-797C with the form I-131 application. As
is the case with employment authorization, in the event that an adjustment
of status application is transferred to a district office, the I-131 must
be filed locally,
Jurisdiction of the Texas Service Center
INS will be permitting I-140s, I-I29s, I-526s, and I-829s to be filed at
the Texas Service Center in instances where beneficiaries will be employed
in a state within the jurisdiction of that center. The Federal Register
notice requires INS to amend its filing instructions with 30 days of
publication of the Federal Register notice.
Effective Date and Transition
The effective date of the Federal Register notice is 30 days from the date
of publication. During the first sixty days following the effective date,
however, local INS offices that receive I-485s may continue to process
them. According to the draft notice, this decision "will be at the local
office's discretion, taking into account pertinent factors such as whether
the transition to direct mail will significantly delay EAD issuance and
whether accepting a case is appropriate in light of current workloads or
other relevant circumstances."
Moreover, until 90 days after the Federal Register notice is published, a
local INS office may forward any filed cases to the service centers, at no
cost to the applicant. It appears, though it is not totally clear, that
this would apply to cases filed before, on, or after the date of
publication of the Federal Register notice. AILA will seek clarification
of this in the next few weeks. Beginning 90 days after publication,
however, any application designated for direct mail submitted to a local
office will be returned to an applicant for submission to the appropriate
service center.
Howard W. Gordon Director of Information AILA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Job Opportunities (7 Items) ......................................... 203
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Multiple Information Technology Positions
(2) Faculty Position (Physics) in Fudan University
(3) Software Engineer (Multiple Openings)
(4) Postdoctoral Position on Chemistry
(5) General Manager - Singapore
(6) Jobs for Comm, Programmer, etc.
(7) Job Opportunities - Austin, TX, USA
____ ____ ____
(1) Multiple Information Technology Positions
From gzheng@kpmg.com Wed Oct 30 01:14:58 1996
Multiple Information Technology positions are available nationwide for: Staff
Technicians, Consultants, Senior Consultants, Managers, and Senior Managers
at KPMG Peat Marwick LLP.
Profile:
Successful candidates must have strong technical understanding, working
knowledge of and experience with mainframe and client/server languages and
tools, including (but not limited to) Powerbuilder, Windows, C++, Oracle,
Sybase, DB2, Informix, and/or Visual Basic. All candidates must possess strong
analytical capabilities, appropriate verbal and written communication skills, a
high degree of personal motivation and significant growth potential. Prior
consulting and/or government experience is beneficial.
KPMG is the Global Leader in Professional Services Firms and offers a positive
work climate. KPMG serves thousands of client organizations including some of
the most prestigious and complex companies in the world. KPMG offers
competitive compensation packages and many "family friendly" work options.
Contact: G. Zheng at (415) 813-8128 or
email: gzheng@KPMG.com
____ ____ ____
(2) Faculty Position (Physics) in Fudan University
From: Trint001@aol.com
Applicants are being sought for a faculty position in Semiconductor Group
of the Department of Physics of Fudan University. Applicants will be on the
associate or full professor level, depending on the qualification. The
applicant must have a Ph.D degree, and two years post-doctoral experience is
high expected. Applicants should submit a detailed curriculum vitea with a
list of publications, names of referees and a short statement describing
their research interest to: Prof. Chen Liangyao, Dept. of Physics, Fudan
University, Shanghai 200433, P. R. China (E-mail: lychen@fudan.ihep.ac.cn).
____ ____ ____
(3) Software Engineer (Multiple Openings)
From: "Synex Technologies." <synex@laraby.tiac.net>
Synex Technologies is a software development and consulting company based in
Massachusetts. Due to strong market demand, we are actively recruiting
software engineers (multiple openings) with 1+ years experience in product
development using the following tools:
Microsoft Visual C++/Visual Basic/SQL Server, Windows 95 and NT platform
(must be familiar with MFC/ODBC/ActiveX, WWW/Java knowledge helpful but not
required)
These are permanent positions.
(full visa sponsorship for qaulified international candidates)
If interested, please respond to
synex@tiac.net
(508) 640-0803 (fax)
____ ____ ____
(4) Postdoctoral Position on Chemistry
From: Weihong Tan <tan@chem.ufl.edu>
Applications are invited for a postdoctoral position at the Department of
Chemistry and the Brain Institute, University of Florida. The successful
applicant must have a strong background in any one of the following areas:
scanning probe microscopy, optics and spectroscopy or bioanalytical
chemistry. We are carrying out exciting researches in bioanalytical
chemistry and biophysics, mainly in the following areas: near-field
optics; optics and spectroscopy; scanning probe microscopy; single
molecule detection and application; biochemical sensors and probes; Brain
research and neuroscience. The successful applicant will be expected
to show both individual initiative and ability to work as a team member.
There are some excellent opportunities in our lab. Interested applicants
should make an initial contact with Prof. Tan through e-mail
(tan@chem.ufl.edu), or send Prof. Tan a CV with three reference letters.
Here is the address:
Prof. Weihong Tan
Department of Chemistry and The UF Brain Institute
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-7200
352-846-2410
E-mail: tan@chem.ufl.edu
____ ____ ____
(5) General Manager - Singapore
From: train@tkointl.com (Train Qun Luo)
Company Overview:
The company headquartered in Silicon Valley, USA designs and markets high-
quality color printing viable for anyone with a personal computer. Their
color servers integrate the hardware and software technologies that are
required to print color images at high speeds. By connecting plain paper
copiers to PC networks, the company has pioneered a new market for short-
run color printing.=20
With more than 46,000 units installed worldwide, the company=92s color
servers are used by leading corporations, advertising agencies, graphic
design studios, and print-for-pay businesses.
Job Duties:
This opportunity entails running a P & L business, identifying an office
site and appropriate legal/accounting assistance, as well as opening the
office and hiring employees.
Requirements:
- 5 - 10 yrs experience in a sales function in a high
technology(preferably computer) company
- Experience in small and large companies
- Fluency in English & Mandarin Chinese
- Motivated, self-started, independently
- Extensive Travel will be required
Compensation:
Total package >US$100K/year
Please send your resume to Mr. Train Luo by fax or email.
Train Qun Luo - Personnel Consultant
TKO Personnel Inc.
2001 Gateway Place, Suite 550W, San Jose, CA 95110
Tel: 1-408-451 5490 Fax: 1-408-453 9083
EMail: be950@scn.org train@tkointl.com
TKO's homepage: http://www.tkointl.com
Train's homepage: http://www.geocities.com/broadway/1688
____ ____ ____
(6) Jobs for Comm, Programmer, etc.
From: gao@zot.io.org (GAO)
GAO Research & Consulting Ltd. is the world's leading supplier of software
modem technology. GAO is now offering complete modem, fax, and telephony
software including V.34 modem in C and DSP assembly.
The company has R & D, programmer, and hardware positions available. Duties
include research and development of digital signal processing algorithms
and programming software in C and assembly for modem, fax, and telephony
applications.
Following qualifications are desired for R & D and programmer positions:
[1] Ph.D., M.Sc., or B.Sc. in communications
Work exprience in communications
Programming experiences in C or assembly
[2] B.Sc. in computer
Programming experiences in C or assembly
Following qualifications are desired for hardware positions:
B.Sc. in EE
Design experience with PCB and CAD tools
The company is growing fast and is looking for HIGHLY talented individuals
with forward thinking who are willing to grow with the company.
You are cordially invited to read our home page.
Please contact
Alan or Chase
GAO Research & Consulting Ltd. - DSP for Communications
55 Nugget Avenue, Unit 204
Scarborough, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M1S 3L1
Fax: (416) 292-2364
Tel: (416) 292-0038
Email: gao@io.org
WWW: http://www.io.org/~gao
[1] North American experiences are desirable, but not necessary.
[2] If you send us by email, please follow by fax or postal mail.
Please remember to send us your transcripts.
____ ____ ____
(7) Job Opportunities - Austin, TX, USA
From: "Golden Bridge International" <sales@goldenbridge.com>
Golden Bridge International Corp., Austin, TX has following job
opportunities:
We have a huge need for Object Oriented people for several projects. All
candidates must travel at least 50%. Their home-base would be Austin. The
needed skills are C++ and/or VC++ (preferably more than 1 year), OO
experience (at least 1 year)--the more years of experience the better! The
available positions include developers, designers, architects and
programmers. If you have formal OO methodology (i.e. Rumbaugh, Booch, OMT
etc.) that would be a great plus.
If Interested, please send your resume to:
info@goldenbridge.com or fax to (512) 834-7785
P.S.: H1, GC sponsorship available. This job offer is for globelwised
Candidates.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Wang Dan's Trial and the New "State Security" Era
-- Comprehensive News/Info Summary and Analysis on WANG Dan's Case .. 870
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_From: hrwatchnyc@igc.org 10/31/96
Forwarded by: ajn1@columbia.edu (Andy Nathan) 11/02/96
>From ajn1@columbia.edu Sat Nov 2 18:13:17 1996
Subject: China--Wang Dan's Trial and the New "State Security" Era
(29 Oct 96) With its decision to bring Chinese dissident Wang Dan to trial on
October 30 on the charge of "conspiracy to subvert the government," the most
serious charge in the Chinese criminal code, the Chinese government has
signaled its determination to deny freedom of speech and association to any
citizen daring publicly to raise fundamental criticisms of government policy.
The charge sends a message to China's dissidents that the courts will no
longer draw a distinction between political speech or writing on the one hand
and concrete action on the other: both levels of dissent are henceforth to be
indiscriminately treated as "endangering state security." It casts serious
doubt on the commitment of top Chinese officials to the vaunted reform of the
country's legal system. And it shows conclusively that Western mantras about
economic growth producing political liberalization notwithstanding, Chinese
leaders are growing increasingly intolerant of dissent. In addition, by
holding Wang Dan's trial just weeks before the visit to Beijing of U.S.
Secretary of State Warren Christopher and just weeks after visits of German
Foreign Minister Klaus Kinkel and Italian Foreign Minister Lamberto Dini,
Beijing has chosen to disregard international expressions of concern over its
human rights record.
Human Rights Watch/Asia calls on the Chinese government to release Wang
Dan and drop all charges against him. The government should also permit
international observers, from the diplomatic community, the press corps and
international legal and human rights organizations, to attend the trial in
Beijing Intermediate Court No.1.
If Wang Dan is found guilty as charged, the international community must
not stay silent:
-- China's chief trading partners, including the United States, the
European Union, Australia, Canada and Japan, should postpone plans for
any official trade missions to China where government ministers
accompany corporate representatives for the express purpose of signing
major business deals. There should be a moratorium on such
ministerial-led visits until major human rights improvements, including
the release of key political prisoners, take place.
-- Human rights in China should be a top agenda item in any high-level
bilateral meetings with senior Chinese officials, including President
Jiang Zemin, at the time of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)
summit in Manila, November 20-25. Officials from APEC countries should
publicly call for human rights improvements as an integral ingredient of
China's long-term economic and social development.
-- State visits, including proposed summits of Chinese leaders with the
presidents of Germany (November) and the U.S. (sometime in 1997), should
be used as leverage for achieving concrete human rights objectives and
should only take place if those objectives, including the release of key
prisoners, are achieved.
-- The countries in Africa, the Asia-Pacific region, Europe and the
Americas, including the U.S. that support progress on human rights and
that are represented on the U.N. Human Rights Commission, should begin
efforts now to ensure that a resolution on human rights in China and
Tibet is introduced and passed during the next session of the Commission
in Geneva in 1997.
Background to the Case
Wang Dan, then a history student at Beijing University, had been a
leader of the protests in Tiananmen Square in 1989 and was sentenced to four
years in prison as a result. After serving most of his term, he was paroled in
February 1993 but continued to speak out against what he saw as injustice and
lack of redress for the victims of the June 4 crackdown. He was detained
again in Beijing on May 21, 1995 for having coauthored and signed various
petitions to the government in the run-up to the sixth anniversary of that
crackdown. On May 24, police informed the family that Wang was under
investigation for "disturbing the social order" and, in a sign that he was in
for a long stay, that they could send him a parcel of clothes. For almost
seventeen months thereafter, Wang was held incommunicado by the authorities at
an unknown location. On October 10, Wang's mother, Wang Lingyun, was informed
that the prosecution indictment against him was now ready (a copy is attached)
and that she had twenty-four hours in which to find a lawyer to defend him
against the charge of conspiring to subvert the government, a crime punishable
by a minimum of ten years' imprisonment and by a maximum of death.
The alleged offenses in Wang Dan's case consist mainly of publishing
articles in the overseas press deemed objectionable by Beijing and of
receiving donations from abroad for the provision of humanitarian relief to
imprisoned and released dissidents. These are actions that in the past would
have attracted at most the charge of "counterrevolutionary propaganda and
incitement." In Wang Dan's case, they have been arbitrarily interpreted in
the indictment to constitute subversion and a fundamental "threat to state
security." These features of the prosecution indictment appear to reflect the
government's plans to replace the Criminal Law's statutes on
"counterrevolutionary crime" with the seemingly more neutral and
internationally acceptable statutes referring to "crimes of endangering state
security." These changes are reportedly to be introduced at the next plenary
session of the National People's Congress in March 1997.
The Wang Dan indictment in a sense constitutes a "transitional text" in
this legislative reform process. Far from signaling any greater official
tolerance of dissent in future, the impending legislative revisions will in
practice mean the reverse, with top dissidents being charged with more serious
crimes and receiving substantially heavier sentences than in the past.
In one sense, Wang Dan's imminent trial merely represent the latest
round in a pattern of governmental repression in China. Its significance,
however, goes beyond the silencing of an outspoken critical voice. The fact is
that China's urban dissident movement, after seven years of struggling to
survive and reassert some measure of influence in the country's political
affairs since June 1989, has in effect been comprehensively smashed. In a
series of political trials held since 1994, and similar to the one Wang Dan
now faces, the authorities have driven home the message that no degree of
overt political opposition, however peacefully expressed, will be tolerated.
Among the most prominent such cases:
-- On October 8, 1996, Liu Xiaobo, a renowned literary critic and former
professor of Chinese literature who helped negotiate the safe departure
of students from Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989, was summarily
arrested. Together with Wang Xizhe, a veteran dissident from southern
China, Liu had coathored an open letter to the Chinese and Taiwan
governments in late September calling for a peaceful solution to the
question of national reunification; asking that the Chinese Communist
Party finally deliver on pledges of free speech and party pluralism; and
pointing out that under China's constitution, President Jiang Zemin
should be impeached for having recently claimed that the People's
Liberation Army was under the "absolute leadership of the Party" rather
than the national legislature. He was arrested by police at his home in
Beijing, and the following day, he was sentenced by the Public Security
Bureau without benefit of a trial to three years' "reeducation through
labor." Fearing imminent arrest, Wang Xizhe, who had served almost
twelve years of a fourteen-year sentence imposed in 1981 for previous
dissident activity, went into hiding and subsequently escaped from
China, arriving in the U.S. on October 15.
-- In September 1996, the trial of Zhang Zongai took place. Zhang is a
former elected member of the Xi'an People's Congress who spent five
years in jail for denouncing the government's crackdown on the 1989
pro-democracy movement, on charges of "counterrevolutionary propaganda
and incitement," in part for having written letters seeking guidance
from the Taiwan news media on how to bring democracy to China and for
conducting an interview with Wang Dan prior to the latter's redetention.
The outcome of trial is as yet unknown.
-- In late September 1996, there was the reported trial and sentencing of
Guo Haifeng, a student leader of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protest
movement who served more than three and a half years in jail for his
activities at that time, to seven additional years' imprisonment on
charges of "hooliganism," apparently for assisting another dissident to
flee China. (Also in September 1996, Wang Hui, the wife of imprisoned
labor-rights activist Zhou Guoqiang, who is currently serving a
four-year term of "reeducation through labor" in a prison camp in
Heilongjiang Province, was secretly detained by Beijing police on
account of her persistent attempts to appeal against her husband's
incarceration, and has not been heard of since. During a previous
detention this summer, Wang Hui reportedly attempted to hang herself in
her cell but was cut down by prison guards and then given a severe
beating as punishment.)
-- On July 4, 1996, Liu Nianchun, human rights and labor activist, was
administratively sentenced to a three-year reeducation through labor
term, the three years to be served on top of the fifteen months he had
already been detained. Liu had disappeared into residential
surveillance on May 21, 1995, the same day that Wang Dan vanished.
-- In May 1996, the secret trial took place of Li Hai, a graduate student
who spent a year in prison after June 1989 and then co-sponsored the
1993 "Peace Charter," only to be rearrested in May 1995 for allegedly
"leaking state secrets," a charge apparently related to his human
rights' monitoring activities. Almost six months after the trial, Li's
family still had not been informed of the sentence.
-- In December 1995, Wei Jingsheng was sentenced to a further fourteen
years' imprisonment on the counterrevolutionary charge of "conspiracy to
subvert the government" for having dared, following his release in
September 1993 from an even longer previous sentence for dissident
activities, to continue publishing articles critical of the government
and calling for greater civil and political freedom in China.
-- In December 1994, Hu Shigen, Kang Yuchun and Liu Jingsheng, activists
who attempted to organize an unofficial labor union and create a
political party devoted to social-democratic goals, were sentenced to
prison terms of twenty, seventeen and fifteen years respectively on
various major charges of counterrevolution.
Meanwhile, hundreds of other known political dissidents, unofficial
religious activists and believers, independent labor-rights advocates and
ethnic-minority rights campaigners in Tibet, Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia who
have been rounded up by the security authorities and sentenced after unfair
trials over the past decade remain behind bars throughout China, increasingly
forgotten by the international community as trade and security interests
dominate relations with China. The true number of those currently imprisoned
in China for exercising their rights to freedom of speech and association far
exceeds those cases currently known to outside monitoring groups.
The State's Case Against Wang Dan
As noted above, Wang Dan was taken into custody by public security
officials in May 1995 and then disappeared for more than a year. On October
14, 1996, he was granted a one-hour meeting with his mother, his first contact
with the outside world since his detention, to discuss and prepare his defense
strategy. Wang was said to be in poor physical condition; he is believed to be
suffering from throat and prostate ailments although it is unclear whether he
has had any access to medical care during his detention. He is nevertheless
said to be "mentally prepared" to receive a heavy sentence at his trial, since
not only has he been charged with committing the most serious offense in
China's Criminal Law, but the procuracy has also branded him a "repeat
offender" and asked the court to sentence him with "extra severity." It thus
appears that lenient treatment has been ruled out in Wang's case, although
international pressure has sometimes been able to secure a lighter sentence.
According to details entered in the prosecution indictment, Wang was
held under "residential surveillance" (jianshi juzhu) from May 22, 1995, the
day following his initial detention, onwards. Under Chinese law, "residential
surveillance" is supposed to be a minor "coercive measure" whereby a suspect
is allowed freedom of movement under surveillance within a specified radius of
his or her home. In recent years, however, Chinese police have increasingly
applied the measure against dissidents and others as a means of circumventing
lawful time limits on criminal detention, turning it into a disguised form of
arrest. In the case of China's leading dissident and Nobel peace prize
candidate Wei Jingsheng, who was held incommunicado by police under so-called
residential surveillance for twenty months prior to his formal arrest and
sentencing in December 1995, the court compounded the illegality by refusing
to deduct this period from his new fourteen-year sentence on the grounds that
Wei had not been "detained" during that time. His sentence was thus
effectively increased to almost sixteen years. Presumably Wang Dan will
encounter the same treatment at his trial.
But this was merely the first in a series of procedural violations
committed by the police in both cases. According to the Criminal Procedure
Law, formal arrest (daibu), to be approved by the procuracy upon the police's
establishment of sufficient preliminary evidence of an offense, must follow
within ten days of a suspect's initial detention, or the person is to be
freed. In the former case, the suspect's family must be informed within
twenty-four hours of the decision to make an arrest. There then follows an
often lengthy period of "investigative custody," during which the police are
required to obtain sufficiently clear evidence of guilt to justify making a
request to the procuracy for a public prosecution to be initiated in court.
Further time is then legally required for the procuracy to examine and approve
the police's request and, eventually, to prepare the bill of indictment,
forward it to the court and present a copy to the defendant's family. In Wang
Dan's case, the prosecution indictment, dated October 7, 1996, notes that Wang
was not formally arrested until October 4, 1996, thus indicating that the
entire post-arrest criminal process had been telescoped into a mere three-day
period.
The core illegality lies in the authorities' claim that during the
actual period of investigative custody, Wang was not in police detention but
merely under residential surveillance when in practice it is clear that all
relevant phases of the criminal process were actually carried out and
completed during that period. But in addition, Wang's family were neither
informed that formal arrest had been carried out until more than a week after
the event, nor given a copy of the bill of indictment until Wang's mother
asserted her right to serve as one of his defenders in court, together with
the lawyer that she had managed to find within the police's arbitrarily
imposed time-limit of twenty-four hours.
Although more obvious in Wang's and Wei's cases than in most others,
such procedural violations are in fact the norm rather than the exception in
China's judicial system in the cases of leading dissidents or
"counterrevolutionaries." In view of the international plaudits reaped by the
Chinese government following revisions to the Criminal Procedure Law that were
passed by the National People's Congress earlier this year, the question
arises as to what grounds exist for believing that China's law enforcement
authorities will be prepared to abide by the more stringent standards of
judicial process scheduled to come into force in January 1997, when they have
shown such consistent disregard for the much less onerous standards that
currently apply.
Manufactured Quotations
In reviewing the detailed allegations raised against Wang Dan in the
prosecution indictment, one is reminded of what Bao Tong, the former chief
aide to ousted Premier Zhao Ziyang, is reported to have said upon reading the
indictment brought against him after June 1989: "It's not so much what they've
accused me of getting up to, it's that they really haven't accused me of doing
anything." ("Bu shi tamen zhikong wo gan shenmo, shi tamen mei zhikong wo zuo
shenmo." Bao was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment on the charge of
"leaking state secrets" for his alleged role in the 1989 pro-democracy
movement, released from jail in May 1996 and then immediately transferred to
the alternative custody of a high-security government facility in western
Beijing.)
The procuracy commences its case by citing Wang's authorship, after his
release from prison in February 1993, of some thirty articles that were
published in the Hong Kong, Taiwan and Western news media, and in which he
allegedly "incited turmoil" and "sought to create public opinion in support of
the overthrow of the state power and the socialist system." Only three of the
articles are cited by name, however, and only a few brief phrases and
sentences from those are actually quoted in the indictment in support of the
authorities' accusations. The procuracy apparently viewed these quotations as
being so conclusively damning that there would be no necessity for it to
burden the court with any more specific examples drawn from the remaining
twenty-seven or so offending articles mentioned in the indictment.
The first item of evidence produced is an article that appeared in Hong
Kong's Ming Bao in September 1994 titled "On the Urgency of Democratic Reform
in China." In that article, notes the indictment,
The defendant attacked the Four Basic Principles laid down in
China's Constitution as being "like a paper horse that falls at
the first touch." (The "Four Basic Principles" refer to Deng
Xiaoping's March 1979 injunction that China will forever adhere to
"the leadership of the Communist Party," "the dictatorship of the
proletariat," "the socialist path" and "the Four Modernizations."
In 1982, the Chinese government wrote these principles into the
preamble of the State Constitution.)
By the normally lurid and inventive standards of Chinese political
metaphor, this is a relatively timid formulation. Most Chinese dissidents
worth their salt would probably have deployed the ever-popular "praying mantis
who vainly obstructs the wheel of history" and would almost certainly have
opted for a "paper tiger" in preference to Wang's horse. But since the Chinese
authorities have no known plans to introduce laws prohibiting mixed metaphor,
the Beijing procuracy must have a different argument to pick with Wang.
Although not presented in the indictment, the actual context in which Wang
made his disparaging equine remark was as follows:
The [Communist Party's] ossified ideological tenets are like a
double-edged sword. They help it to maintain stability, but at the
same time resemble a piece of burning charcoal which it is unable
to cast from its hand. It was forced to make remarks about
democracy that no one believed, and was then thrown into passivity
and has since chosen to keep silent on the matter, keeping its
opponents well at a distance. The reason for this is that the Four
Basic Principles afford such a narrow space for debate that any
sincere and earnest discussion about democracy is liable to get
out of control. By the same token, if the Communist Party wished
to reason or argue things out with others, it would also find
itself in the wrong even before it began, since the Four Basic
Principles essentially preclude all discussion. The Four Basic
Principles are thus like a paper horse that falls at the first
touch. ("Lun Minzhu Gaige Zai Zhongguo de Poqiexing," Ming Bao,
September 5, 1994.)
At issue here, from the procuracy's point of view, is not so much Wang's
straightforward plea for the authorities to extend the limits of debate in
China beyond the narrow confines laid down in Deng's Four Basic Principles.
Rather, it is that since those principles are enshrined in the constitution,
any questioning of their authority is in practice viewed as tantamount to a
"violation" of the constitution. This is the unstated axiom permitting the
procuracy to characterize Wang's mere criticism of the principles as being
self-evidently contributory to the alleged "conspiracy to subvert the
government." For the procuracy to be accusing Wang of subversion on the basis
of a mild metaphorical comment published in a newspaper article amounts to an
eloquent endorsement of the truth and accuracy of his views on the restrictive
nature of the Four Basic Principles.
The second of Wang's statements cited by the procuracy reads:
In the mainland today, the authorities are imposing press
censorship upon the people and freedom of speech under the
Constitution has become an empty phrase.
The judicial authorities have no compunction here in citing a mere
verbal or written statement by the defendant as posing evidence of
"counterrevolutionary guilt." What is surprising is that they should be doing
so without embarrassment when the viewpoint at issue is one claiming that
freedom of expression is under restriction. The only possible grounds for
legally challenging that statement would be if it were somehow false. But by
citing the proposition itself as constituting evidence of guilt, the procuracy
only succeeds, once again, in demonstrating its validity.
The third "statement" cited in the prosecution indictment is, in point
of fact, a composite creation stitched together by the Beijing procuracy from
two separate comments that Wang made in different articles written more than
one year apart. According to the prosecution indictment,
[The defendant] slandered the Chinese Communist Party and the
People's Government as being "a lost and confused generation,
whose leaders rule over a lost and confused party that resolutely
refuses to surrender the slightest of its interests and would even
sacrifice the future of the country to ensure that its power is
not checked."
The first part of this pseudo-quotation is derived from Wang's September 1994
article, "On the Urgency of Democratic Reform in China." The original context,
which is again omitted from the prosecution indictment, contains some
surprises:
Again, we should be aware that the philosophy in which the
Communist Party actually believes long ago deviated from its own
nominal convictions. It believes in stark, much-needed pragmatism
more than it believes in Marxism-Leninism. For a long period, the
Communist Party leadership has acted quite sensibly. It regards
nothing as really indispensable apart from the safeguarding of its
ruling power. Who cares what color the cat is, so long as it
catches mice? ... So the Communist Party doesn't stubbornly
believe in dogmas quite as it appears to do. Rather, we should say
that it is a "lost and confused party" led by a "lost and
confused generation," including Deng Xiaoping. It is unsteadily
groping its way across the river by feeling for the stones
underfoot, and only God knows where it may finally end up.
As can be seen, Wang's description of the party leadership as
representing a "lost and confused generation" was made in the context of a
rather generous and sympathetic assessment of the party's recent record and
achievements. Undeterred by the conciliatory tone of these remarks, however,
the procuracy then proceeds to reassign Wang's "lost and confused generation"
to perform the subject role in a much more caustic and angry-sounding passage,
one that he wrote just a few months after his release from prison in February
1993. The original passage, which appeared in an article published in the
South China Morning Post on July 2 of that year, reads as follows:
Through the brutality of the June 4 incident, we can see that the
Chinese Communists resolutely refuse to surrender the slightest of
their interests. They would even sacrifice the future of the
country to ensure that their power is not checked.
After a quick and tidy excision of the unsettling reference to "June 4,"
and a judicious insertion of Wang's unflattering reference to the Chinese
leadership, the procuracy then constructs the quotation cited above, conveying
sentiments that are significantly more radical and confrontational in nature
than those Wang Dan actually voiced.
In a subsequent paragraph, the Beijing procuracy again upbraids Wang for
his commission of the following metaphorical misdemeanors:
From May 1994 through 1995, Defendant Wang Dan wrote articles
propagating the view that "the government is dragging the entire
country toward a final point of decision" and that "China today is
like a country sitting on top of a volcano, like the 'wind-filled
tower awaiting the coming storm.'"
The real focus of the government's disquiet appears to lie with Wang's
conviction that "the time has now come for us to put our words into concrete
action." But what specific "concrete action" did Wang actually have in mind,
or rather what did such action eventually consist of? According to the
procuracy, nothing less than the following:
To this end, Defendant Wang Dan proceeded to draft a petition
titled "A Proposal to Safeguard Basic Human Rights and Uphold
Social Justice," and then to collude [with other dissidents] to
concoct another petition titled "Draw the Lessons from the
Bloodshed Promote Democracy and the Legal System," for which more
than eighty signatures of support were obtained and which was
later published in newspapers in Hong Kong, Taiwan and elsewhere.
Thus, according to the Chinese government, the attempt by Chinese
citizens to safeguard, uphold or promote the goals of basic human rights,
social justice, democracy and the legal system, by means of writing articles
or petitions and by seeking to have these published even outside China's
borders, is a legally proscribed activity and one to be construed by the
courts as constituting a conspiracy to subvert the government.
Dangerous Liaisons
The remainder of the indictment comprises a vague and meandering litany
of Wang's various contacts with overseas-based Chinese pro-democracy
activists. First, he is said to have "colluded" with Wang Juntao, now living
in Boston, Massachusetts and running an organization called the China Research
Institute, and Hu Ping, former chairman of the Chinese Alliance for Democracy,
a worldwide Chinese dissident group based in the U.S. This "collusion"
consisted, according to the indictment, of his agreeing to serve on the board
of Wang Juntao's institute and of discussing tactics with Hu Ping to "set up
an oppositional force" in China. Both the Chinese Alliance for Democracy,
which publishes the magazine China Spring and is seen by the Chinese
authorities as a pro-Taiwan organization, and the China Research Institute,
which is seen as an association of anti-government Chinese expatriates, are
anathema to the Chinese government. But freedom of association is written into
the country's constitution, and therefore the procuracy has no technical
grounds for complaint.
Wang Dan is then accused of receiving financial assistance from two
U.S.-based organizations, the Greater Los Angeles Front for a Democratic China
and the Boston-based Fund for Democracy in China. But in fact, the Beijing
procuracy is only able to come up with two reasons for why Wang allegedly
obtained these unstated sums of money. First, it says that the funds formed
some unspecified part of a "self-study project" aimed at "allowing students
who were arrested or dismissed from college during the 1989 democratic
movement and other such movements" "to remain in China to persist in promoting
the country's democratization"; and second, it states that an again
unspecified sum was used to "provide financial assistance" to several
imprisoned and released Chinese dissidents.
Without further elaboration, the above "evidence" is bluntly
characterized by the procuracy as providing proof positive that Wang "colluded
with hostile overseas forces in order to carry out the criminal act of
conspiring to subvert the government" and that he "actively enlisted the
services of domestic reactionary forces as part of his organizational
preparations for conspiring to subvert the government."
Finally, there is the matter of Wang's "collusion" with Wei Jingsheng.
On this, the procuracy has the following to report:
In September 1993, Defendant Wang Dan began conspiring with Wei
Jingsheng to united the various illegal organizations within
China, and wrote letters to Han Yanmin [a Guangxi-based labor
activist also cited in Wei's court indictment] and others stating
that the democratic forces had to acquire a sizable collective
image before they would be truly qualified to speak out.
Again, the latter would seem to represent little more than a candid assessment
by Wang and Wei of the current stage of development of China's hard-pressed
democracy movement and hardly the stuff of a "subversive conspiracy." But
there was more:
[Said Wang:] We should keep in touch, strengthen communication
among ourselves, stay in touch by letter, and unite together in
mutual assistance; [and in order to prevent] the authorities from
striking us down one by one, we should act in unison, whether
advancing or retreating.
With this, the state rests its case, for in China, only one political
entity is permitted the right to organize, develop organic connections and
present a "sizable collective image" to the country's citizenry, and that is
the Communist Party of China.
Conclusions: A New Look for China's Laws on Dissent
Some broader analytical observations may now be made. Taken together,
these point to the conclusion that the Wang Dan indictment constitutes a
transitional text that sheds light on a subtle but highly significant exercise
now being carried out by the Chinese government in creating a new image for
the country's existing laws on dissent. The purpose of this "reimaging" is
apparently to cosmetically retool those laws while at the same time
reinforcing their repressive nature and impact. An indication of this
development came in early 1995 when an inquiry made to the Chinese government
by a Western human rights activist concerning the current status of several
political prisoners known to have been convicted on charges of
"counterrevolutionary incitement and propaganda" elicited the response that,
to the contrary, they had been convicted of "counterrevolutionary conspiracy
to subvert the government." A subsequent similar inquiry made by the same
activist to one provincial government in China then brought forth the more
revealing official observation that "crimes of counterrevolution...are now
referred to as the crime of subverting the government."
The first analytical point worth noting is that since the adoption of
the present Criminal Law in 1979, the Chinese courts' use of Article 92 in
criminal proceedings has been an extremely rare event. Out of an overall
prisoner database compiled by Human Rights Watch/Asia of more than 1,200
persons reported to have been convicted of counterrevolutionary offenses of
all types since 1979, only fourteen are known to have been convicted of
"conspiracy to subvert the government." Half of that number were senior
Communist Party officials (notably the "Gang of Four") who were brought to
trial after 1979 for involvement in the most violent excesses of the Cultural
Revolution, and the other seven were peaceful dissidents, three of whom were
sentenced as long ago as 1983. The remaining four were pro-democracy activists
Chen Ziming and Wang Juntao, sentenced to thirteen years' imprisonment in
1991; Liu Gang, sentenced to six years' imprisonment in 1991 (the court cited
obscure "mitigating circumstances" in Liu's case); and Wei Jingsheng,
sentenced to fourteen years' imprisonment in December 1995.
Viewed against the backdrop of the 1989 pro-democracy movement, a
tumultuous event in which millions of people participated nationwide and to
which the government responded by declaring martial law and killing hundreds
of unarmed demonstrators, the courts' eventual use of Article 92 against Chen,
Wang and Liu at least conformed, in a perverse general sense, to the relevant
criteria of China's statutes on counterrevolution. The 1989 movement, after
all, was characterized by the authorities as being a "counterrevolutionary
rebellion" perhaps the most heinous form of "conspiracy to subvert the
government."
The use of this charge against Wei Jingsheng and Wang Dan displays no
such conformity with the broad contours of "criminal justice with Chinese
characteristics" as practiced by the courts since 1979, and may therefore
portend something very different. In Wang's case, the additional charge of
"endangering state security" has been inserted into the prosecution
indictment and in an apparent first for China's court system, he has been
charged under both the counterrevolutionary statutes and the State Security
Law of the PRC, a highly repressive item of legislation passed by the NPC in
February 1993. This appears not to be accidental: according to press and
foreign diplomatic reports, China's leadership was so impressed with the
favorable international reaction that it received for its revisions of the
Criminal Procedure Law in March 1996 that it has decided to enact a
corresponding set of revisions to the country's Criminal Law early next year.
As noted above, foremost among these will probably be the long-awaited repeal
of the historic counterrevolution statutes (Articles 90 to 104) and their
replacement with systematic provisions for the punishment of "crimes
endangering state security" (weihai guojia anquan zui).
Many Western government officials have expressed the hope that these
revisions will serve to purge China's Criminal Law of its politically
discriminatory and repressive aspects, in particular the broad license
conferred on the courts under Article 102 ("crimes of counterrevolutionary
propaganda and incitement") to impose sentences of up to life imprisonment
upon those guilty only of making statements or writing articles critical of
the Communist Party and the government. For clear counsel on this point,
however, one need turn no further than to the "Detailed Rules for Implementing
the State Security Law of the PRC," promulgated by the State Council in July
1994, and specifically to an item cited by the Beijing procuracy earlier this
month in its bill of indictment against Wang Dan:
Article 8: The following activities are the "other sabotage
activities which endanger state security" referred to in Article 4
of the State Security Law:
[...] 2. Fabricating or distorting facts, publishing
or disseminating written or verbal speeches, or
producing or propagating audio and video products
which endanger state security.
This succinctly dispenses with the notion that the forthcoming shift
from laws on counterrevolution to ones covering threats to state security will
bring any enhanced freedom of expression for Chinese dissidents. One searches
in vain in the State Security Law and in the "Detailed Rules" for any
definition of what actually constitutes an act of "endangering state
security," encountering instead a maze of stipulations such as the following:
The "hostile institutions" referred to in the State Security Law
refer to institutions which are hostile to the PRC government and
socialist system characterized by the people's dictatorship, as
well as institutions which endanger state security. The Ministry
of Public Security shall identify the hostile institutions.
("Detailed Rules," Article 5)
Although empowered to identify the "hostile" institutions and
individuals in question, the authorities are nowhere required to inform
China's citizens of the outcome of their investigative labors, making
voluntary compliance with these and any future related laws problematic.
Likewise, the October 7 indictment expressly accuses Wang Dan of violating
this equally opaque legal injunction:
The "collusion" activities of endangering state security referred
to in Article 4 of the State Security Law refer to the following
activities carried out by institutions or individuals inside the
country:
(1) Plotting or carrying out activities for
endangering state security together with
organizations, institutions or individuals outside the
country. [...] ("Detailed Rules," Article 7)
The bottom line is that if the Chinese government had any intention of
abolishing the existing laws on counterrevolution in a way that would bring to
an end the persecution of peaceful political dissent in China, then it would
certainly not be bringing Wang Dan to trial at the present time or on the
specific charges contained in the prosecution indictment that appears below.
The trial thus may be a harbinger of things still to come in China. At least
where political dissidents are concerned, all the judicial signs thus far
point not to any impending liberalization or relaxation of controls on freedom
of expression but instead to intensified repression by the country's state
security forces.
APPENDIX I(a)
Bill of Indictment Against Wang Dan
Issued by the Sub-Procuratorate of Beijing Municipal Procuracy
October 7, 1996
(Text of indictment as issued in Chinese by Human Rights In China, October 16,
1996; present translation by Human Rights Watch/Asia)
Defendant: Wang Dan, male, twenty-seven years old, unemployed,
resident at No.32 Xinkai Lane, Xinjiekou Dong, West City District,
Beijing Municipality. In January 1991, [the defendant] was
convicted of the crime of counterrevolutionary propaganda and
incitement and sentenced to a fixed term of four years'
imprisonment, with one year's deprivation of political rights. On February 17,
1993, he was released on parole, and on February 16, 1994 the period of
deprivation of political rights was completed. On May 22, 1995, he was placed
under residential surveillance (jianshi juzhu), and on October 3, 1996 he was
formally arrested (daibu) for committing the crime of conspiring to subvert
the government. Currently held in custody.
The Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau, having completed its
investigation into the case of Wang Dan's conspiracy to
subvert the government, transferred the case to our Procuratorate
for review and prosecution; we have ascertained the
criminal facts of the case to be as follows:
After his release on parole in February 1993, Defendant Wang Dan wrote
more than thirty articles, including "On the Urgency of Democratic
Reform in China," "Post-Deng China and the Democratic Movement"
and "Supervise Power through Speech," which were published successively
in the Taiwan United Daily News and Hong Kong Ming Bao newspapers,
among others. In these articles, Defendant Wang Dan attacked the Four Basic
Principles laid down in China's Constitution as being "like a paper
horse that will fall at the first touch"; he falsely claimed that
"In the mainland today, the authorities are imposing a news blockade
against the people, and freedom of speech under the Constitution has
become an empty phrase"; and he slandered the Chinese Communist
Party and the People's Government as being "a lost and confused
generation, whose leaders rule over a lost and confused
party that resolutely refuses to surrender the slightest of its interests
and would even sacrifice the future of the country to ensure that its power
is not checked." By thus inciting turmoil, he sought to create public
opinion in support of the overthrow of the state power and the socialist
system.
>From September 1993 to March 1995, Defendant Wang Dan successively colluded
with Wang Juntao (released on bail for medical treatment following
his conviction and imprisonment on charges of conspiracy to subvert
the government) and Hu Ping, former chairman of the "Chinese
Alliance for Democracy," an overseas-based reactionary organization;
moreover, he accepted the post of board member on Wang
Juntao's "China Research Institute," an organization established in the United
States for purposes of conspiring to subvert the Chinese government. Defendant
Wang Dan discussed with Hu Ping the so-called tactics of struggle they
would use in scheming to "set up an oppositional force" in China.
Furthermore, Defendant Wang Dan accepted material support from the
U.S.-based Greater Los Angeles Front for a Democratic China, as
part of a "self-study project" aimed at allowing "students who were
arrested or dismissed from college during the 1989 democratic
movement and other such movements" "to remain in China to persist in promoting
the country's democratization." He recommended a series of former members of
illegal organizations within China to take part in the plan, and moreover
applied to Shen Tong, former member of an illegal organization and currently
chairman of the U.S.-based Fund for Democracy in China, for operating
expenses, and accepted financial assistance from abroad. Defendant Wang Dan
colluded with hostile overseas forces in order to carry out the criminal
act of conspiring to subvert the government.
>From May 1994 through 1995, Defendant Wang Dan wrote articles propagating the
view that "the government is dragging the entire country toward a final point
of decision" and that "China today is like a country sitting on top of a
volcano, like the wind-filled tower awaiting the coming storm'"; he also
clamored that "the time has now come for us to put our words into concrete
action." To this end, Defendant Wang Dan proceeded to draft a petition
titled "A Proposal to Safeguard Basic Human Rights and Uphold Social
Justice,"and then colluded with Bao Zunxin, Liu Xiaobo, Liu Nianchun
and others to concoct another petition titled "Draw Lessons from the
Bloodshed Promote Democracy and the Legal System," for which more
than eighty signatures of support were obtained and which was later
published in newspapers in Taiwan, Hong Kong and elsewhere. In September
1993, Defendant Wang Dan began conspiring with Wei Jingsheng to
unite the various illegal organizations within
China, and wrote letters to Han Yanmin (a labor rights
activist from Guangxi province who was also cited in the
government's prosecution indictment against Wei Jingsheng) and others
stating that the democratic forces had to acquire a sizeable collective image
(qunti xingxiang) before they would truly be qualified to speak out. "We
should keep in touch, strengthen communication among ourselves, stay in
touch by letter, and unite together in mutual assistance"; and in order to
prevent "the authorities from striking us down one by one, we should act in
unison, whether advancing or retreating." Furthermore, Defendant Wang Dan
set up a mutual-aid donations fund from which he provided financial
assistance to Kang Yuchun, Wang Guoqi, Liu Jingsheng and others.
Wang Dan actively enlisted the services of domestic reactionary forces as
part of his organizational preparations for conspiring to subvert the
government.
The accuracy of the above-mentioned facts is attested to by the material
evidence, documentary evidence, the witnesses and witness testimony, and the
forensic-scientific expert evaluations that have been placed on file. The facts
are clear and the evidence is reliable, sufficient and convincing. This
procuratorate holds that Defendant Wang Dan, despite having been paroled after
his conviction and imprisonment on charges of counterrevolution, failed to
repent and reform himself after his release from prison.. Moreover, he
proceeded to fabricate and distort facts; published and disseminated articles
and statements that endangered the security of the state; actively colluded
with overseas organizations and individuals, obtaining their support and
receiving financial assistance from them; incited turmoil; and carried out
a series of criminal acts which endangered the security of the state
and [represented] a conspiracy to subvert the government, thus posing a
major danger to society. The acts in question violated Articles 90, 92
and 63 [as received: the latter could be a transcription error for
"Article 62 (ed.)] of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China;
Article 4 (section 1, section 5) and Article 23 of the
[State] Security Law; and Article 7 and Article 8 (paragraph 2) of the
Implementing Regulations [of the State Security Law], constituting the crime
of conspiracy to subvert the government. [The defendant] is a repeat offender
and thus should be sentenced with extra severity. With a view to defending
the state power of the people's democratic dictatorship and the socialist
system, and in order to uphold the security of the state, this Procuratorate
hereby, in accordance with the stipulations of Article 100 of the Criminal
Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, presents this public
prosecution and requests that punishment be meted out in accordance with the
law.
Procurator Wang Zhonghua
Clerk of Court Wang Ting
October 7, 1996
APPENDIX I(b)
Applicable Legal Statutes
1) Criminal Law of the PRC
Article 90:
All acts of endangering the People's Republic of China committed
with the goal of overthrowing the political power of the dictatorship of
the proletariat and the socialist system are crimes of counterrevolution.
Article 92:
Whoever plots to subvert the government or dismember the state is to
be sentenced to life imprisonment or not less than ten years of fixed term
imprisonment. (Article 103 of the Criminal Law further stipulates:
"Whoever commits any of the crimes of counterrevolution mentioned above in
this Chapter, except those in Articles 98, 99 and 102, may be sentenced to
death when the harm to the state and the people is especially serious and
the circumstances especially odious." (A subsequent government decree
extended the death penalty to crimes committed under Article 99, which
refers to "the use of feudal superstition or superstitious sects and
secret societies to carry on counterrevolutionary activities."))
Article 62: (According to the transcript of the prosecution indictment on
which the translation given in Appendix I(a), above, is based, the
procuracy cited Articles 90, 92 and 63 of the Criminal Law against Wang
Dan. However, since Article 63 calls for lenience and mitigated punishment
to be extended to those who "voluntarily surrender," "whose crimes are
relatively minor" and who (even if their crimes are serious) "demonstrate
meritorious service," citation of this article appears to flatly
contradict the procuracy's insistence elsewhere in the indictment that
Wang is "a repeat offender and thus should be sentenced with extra
severity." It may well be possible that the original indictment in fact
calls for application of Article 62, and that a transcription error
occurred in the version of the indictment published overseas.
Article 100 of the Criminal Procedure Law, also cited in the indictment,
simply calls for the procuracy to initiate public prosecutions in cases
where the facts of the alleged crime have been adequately established.)
Counterrevolutionary elements who, at any time after their
punishment have been completely executed or they have received a pardon,
commit another crime of counterrevolution are all to be treated as
recidivists.
2) State Security Law of the PRC
Article 4:
Any organization and individual whose conduct harms the PRC's state
security must be dealt with by legal means.
Acts of harming the PRC's state security referred to in this law are
those carried out by organizations, groups and individuals outside the
territory, or instigated and financed by them but carried out by others;
as well as those carried out by organizations and individuals inside the
territory in collusion with organizations, groups and individuals outside
the territory:
1. Of plotting to subvert the government, dismember the state and
overthrow the socialist system;
2. Of taking part in an espionage organization or accepting a
mission assigned by an espionage organization or its agents;
3. Of stealing, secretly gathering, buying and illegally providing
state secrets for an enemy;
4. Of instigating, luring and bribing state personnel to rise in
rebellion; and
5. Of engaging in other sabotage activities against state security.
Article 23:
When an act of harming the PRC's national security carried out by
organizations, groups or individuals outside the territory or instigated
and financed by them but carried out by others, or carried out by
organizations and individuals inside the territory in collusion with
organizations, groups and individuals outside the territory, constitutes
a crime, it shall be investigated for its criminal responsibilities
according to the law. ("State Security Law of the People's Republic of
China," adopted by the National People's Congress Standing Committee on
February 22, 1993; translation from the British Broadcasting Corporation's
Summary of World Broadcasts, March 3, 1993.)
3) Detailed Rules for Implementing the State Security Law of the PRC
Article 7:
The "collusion" activities of endangering state security referred to
in Article 4 of the State Security Law refer to the following activities
carried out by institutions or individuals inside the country:
1. Plotting or carrying out activities for endangering state
security together with organizations, institutions or individuals
outside the country;
2. Accepting the financial support of organizations, institutions or
individuals outside the country, or doing so at their instigation,
to carry out activities which endanger state security; and
3. Establishing ties with organizations, institutions or individuals
outside the country, and obtaining their support and assistance for
carrying out activities which endanger state security.
Article 8:
The following activities are the "other sabotage activities which
endanger state security" referred to in Article 4 of the State Security
Law:
1. Organizing, plotting or carrying out terrorist activities which
endanger state security;
2. Fabricating or distorting facts, publishing or disseminating
written or verbal speeches, or producing or propagating audio and
video products which endanger state security;
3. Carrying out activities which endanger state security through
establishing social organizations or business institutions;
4. Using religion to carry out activities which endanger state
security;
5. Endangering state security through creating national disputes or
inciting national splittism; and
6. Activities of individuals outside the country who disregard
dissuasion and meet with personnel in the country who have
endangered state security or who are seriously suspected of
endangering state security. ("Detailed Rules for Implementing the
State Security Law of the People's Republic of China," promulgated
by the State Council on July 12, 1994; translated in Foreign
Broadcast Information Service (FBIS-CHI-94-135), July 12, 1994.)
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Executive Editors of This Issue: Hua ZHAO (Los Angeles), Bo XIONG|
| Coordinating Editor of This Issue: Bo XIONG (Chicago, IL) |
| CND Mailing Lists Maintainers: Bo XIONG, Weihe GUAN |
| CND Reader Technical Consultant: Liedong ZHENG (SG) |
| CND Manager: Bing WEN (CA) |
| Team members are in the U.S.A. unless indicated otherwise: |
| AU - Australia, CA - Canada, SG - Singapore, FI - Finland |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| China News Digest (CND) offers the following services: |
| (1) Global News (Every Other Day) (2) US Regional News |
| (3) Canada Regional News (4) Europe & Pacific Regional News |
| (5) HXWZ (Weekly Chinese Magazine) (6) InfoBase |
| CND back issues, database and related information are available via: |
| ftp://canada.cnd.org/pub/cnd/ [IP: 142.132.12.100] http://www.cnd.org |
| To subscribe or get information, mail requests to: CND-INFO@CND.ORG |
| To contribute news, e-mail: CND-EDITOR@CND.ORG |
| Postal Address: CND, P.O.Box 10111, Gaithersburg, MD 20898-0111, U.S.A. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+