Wei
Jingsheng Foundation News and Article Release Issue: A624-W386
魏京生基金会新闻与文章发布号： A624-W386
Release
Date: April 16, 2011
发布日：2011年4月16日
Topic:
The Ai Weiwei Incident Reveals the Evolution of the Chinese Legal System -- Wei
Jingsheng
标题：从艾未未事件看中国法制的演变 -- 魏京生
Original
Language Version: Chinese (Chinese version at the end)
此号以中文为准（英文在前，中文在后）
Note:
Please use "Simplified Chinese (GB2312)" encoding to view the Chinese
parts of this release. If this
mail does not display properly in your email program, please send your request
for special delivery to us or visit:
http://www.weijingsheng.org/report/report2011/report2011-04/WeiJS110416AiWWdetentionA624-W386.htm which
contains identical information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The
Ai Weiwei Incident Reveals the Evolution of the Chinese Legal System
--
Wei Jingsheng
On
April 3rd, right before the Chinese Memorial Day, the Chinese Communist
authority secretly detained the well-known artist Ai Weiwei. His family did not receive any
notification, and there was no news for his friends who were looking for
him. Only when the Xinhua News
Agency of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) released the news that Ai Weiwei
was under investigation due to suspicion of economic crimes, did people know
that indeed he was detained by the CCP.
Friends
cannot help but to angrily say: is this not the return of the Cultural
Revolution? What is the difference
from the lawless Mao Zedong era?
In essence, this indeed has no difference to the lawlessness of the Mao
era and Hitler era. The CCP
government has people disappeared quietly, depriving personal freedom without
legal procedures. This is the
lawlessness. This is Mao and
Hitler.
However,
to be different from the naked brainwashing classes of the Mao era, the illegal
detention nowadays has used certain legal loopholes. Starting from what was used against the common Chinese, it
developed into a full-scale dictatorship including illegal measures against its
own officials. That is it developed
from the so-called "residence under surveillance" used against common
people to the "double designation" used against CCP officials.
Let
me tell you a little story. In the
spring of 1994, the CCP was facing sanctions from the USA. At that time the Clinton administration
was preparing to ease the sanctions by delinking trade and human rights, which
encountered strong resistance in the US Congress. The opinions of the Chinese dissidents became the key bargaining
chip. The voice of the opposition
in China played an important role.
Thus,
the Jiang Zemin clique sent police to detain me for negotiations. They even initiated a few conditions to
improve human rights and the rule of law in exchange for me not to speak
against the delinking of trade and human rights. I did not agree.
Eventually, the compromise reached
was that, in exchange for releasing dissidents and also opening freedom
of expression and trade unions, I would keep silent on the issue of human
rights and trade.
This
agreement encountered great resistance even within the Communist
leadership. The faction against
Jiang Zemin did not plan to implement this agreement, in an effort to undermine
this delinking of trade and human rights.
Thus, they seized me again, with a certificate of summons for
interrogation. More than two days
later, I protested the continuously served summons for interrogation.
I
said: "First, in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Law, a summons for
interrogation is just to talk to me.
You have violated the law by interrogating me for days of more than 24
hours. Second, the continued
interrogations should not be more than 3 times and today is the last day. If you cannot bring a paper meets legal
procedures to arrest or detain me, then I am sorry that I must leave."
They
knew I would do as I said, and as well were concerned of the impact of the
international society, so they assured me: Do not worry, we will go get the
right document from the Procuratorate now and give it to you tomorrow. The following day, I asked: "Is
the paper here yet? If not, I am
ready to go home." The old
policeman said with hesitation: "Yes, it is here and you cannot go home
yet." When he handed over
that piece of paper, I laughed. It
was a certificate of "residence under surveillance". So I said: "Look, without
evidence, you cannot even get a detention warrant from the
Procuratorate." He replied:
"This 'residence under surveillance' by the Public Security Bureau also
works".
I
said that it is illegal detention that I will be looking for lawyers to file
against you, and I have to leave.
We had a quarrel. Then the
police who made the negotiations with me requested to talk to me alone. We drove away from the guesthouse
supposedly belonging to the fake antique company in Tong Country. These people told me that the situation
within the CCP was very complicated.
The anti-Jiang faction wanted trouble. If Jiang Zemin did not carry out the already reached
agreement, or if there were unexpected things from my side, it would cause the
breakdown of the agreement. They
told me that outside, the implementation of the agreement was still in effect,
and the people I asked to release were released as well. People like Wang Dan were still very
active that the authorities had not arrested them despite pressure. So they hoped that I would give some
face to Jiang Zemin, to be patient and to continuously maintain the
implementation of the agreement, and so on.
I
weighed the pros and cons, and decided to use my own freedom in exchange for the
freedom of people outside, so I accepted their "residence under
surveillance" while maintaining my rights of suing them for illegal
detention. After that, Bill
Clinton successfully delinked trade and human rights. Eighteen months later, the Chinese Communists took me to
court. It turned out that even the
court would not recognize that that 18 months detention was legal. Thus, it created a new case and broke
the law that had been defined in the Criminal Procedure Law requiring the
approvals of the court and Procuratorate to deprive people's freedom. Since then, depriving people's personal
freedom in the name of "residence under surveillance" became
"legal," and further expanded into "double designation"
used to against CCP's own officials.
The
legal reform that started in 1980 once gave great hope to the Chinese. However, from the "Severely
Crackdown" period of Deng Xiaoping, to the illegal detention and
"double designation", the lawless Mao era has returned after a big
circle. Why is this so? Do not even the CCP officials need the
protection of the law? This
question touches on a fundamental issue, that is the essence of authoritarian
politics is against the human nature.
As
early as three decades ago, Deng Xiaoping sensitively found out that the legal
system protecting human rights did not fit the need of authoritarian
politics. While intellectuals were
foolishly cheering that finally democracy and the rule of law would be
realized, Deng Xiaoping began to undermine the authority of the law by starting
"severely crackdown" for criminal offenses, one step at a time, until
it became routine to deprive people's personal freedom arbitrarily.
Once
the authority could arbitrarily deprive people's freedom, all the other parts
of constitutions and laws became a law serving the authoritarian regime
only. If they let you have, then
you shall have; otherwise, you do not.
This is the fundamental difference between the laws of an authoritarian
regime and the laws of a democracy.
To say that the authoritarians do not have law are only angry words from
the people. What people do not
have are their rights according to the law. In democratic law and the traditional Chinese law, one could
only deprive personal freedom according to the law which is clear defined. Even a crown prince was subject to
criminal punishment the same as the common people. Even when the emperor handed out punishment, it must also be
according to the law. In
comparison, authoritarian law is the law of the slave owners, whoever the master
is, whoever has the power to do anything he wants.
The
reason that nowadays there are so many people petitioning in China is because
that the Chinese people are accustomed to the law of equality, instead of the
law of slave owners from the West.
Thus there is this fundamental difference in the understanding. While the common people think that they
are legal and reasonable, the CCP officials tend to scoff at them. However, these officials need to be
reminded of the Cultural Revolution.
When they are "double designated", the common people will be
laughing at them as well.
To
hear Mr. Wei Jingsheng's commentary, please visit:
http://www.weijingsheng.org/RFA/RFA2011/WeiJS110408AiWWdetention.mp3
(Written
and recorded on April 8, 2011.
Broadcasted by Radio Free Asia.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This
is a message from WeiJingSheng.org
The
Wei Jingsheng Foundation and the Overseas Chinese Democracy Coalition are
dedicated to the promotion of human rights and democratization in China. We appreciate your assistance and help
in any means. We pledge solidarity
to all who struggle for human rights and democratic governance on this
planet.
You
are welcome to use or distribute this release. However, please credit with this foundation and its website
at: www.weijingsheng.org
Although
we are unable to afford to pay royalty fees at this time, we are seeking your
contribution as well. You may send
your articles, comments and opinions to: HCP@weijingsheng.org. Please remember, only in text files,
not in attachments.
For
website issues and suggestions, you may contact our professional staff and web
master at: webmaster@Weijingsheng.org
To
find out more about us, please also visit our websites at: www.WeiJingSheng.org
and www.ChinaLaborUnion.org for news and information for Overseas Chinese
Democracy Coalition and human rights and democracy movement as whole,
especially our Chinese Labor Union Base.
You
may contact Ciping Huang at: HCP@Weijingsheng.org or
By
phone Wei Jingsheng Foundation office at: 1-202-270-6980
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation's postal address is:
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation, P. O. Box 15449, Washington, DC 20003, USA
You
are receiving this message because you had previous shown your interest in
learning more about Mr. Wei Jingsheng and the Chinese Democratic Movement. To be removed from the list, simply
reply this message and use "unsubscribe" as the Subject. Please allow us a few days to process
your request.
*****************************************************************
中文版
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation News and Article Release Issue: A624-W386
魏京生基金会新闻与文章发布号： A624-W386
Release
Date: April 16, 2011
发布日：2011年4月16日
Topic:
The Ai Weiwei Incident Reveals the Evolution of the Chinese Legal System -- Wei
Jingsheng
标题：从艾未未事件看中国法制的演变 -- 魏京生
Original
Language Version: Chinese (Chinese version at the end)
此号以中文为准（英文在前，中文在后）
如有中文乱码问题，请与我们联系或访问:
http://www.weijingsheng.org/report/report2011/report2011-04/WeiJS110416AiWWdetentionA624-W386.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
从艾未未事件看中国法制的演变
-- 魏京生
四月三号，清明节前，中共当局秘密拘捕了著名艺术家艾未未。他的家人没有得到任何通知，朋友们四处打听也没有任何消息。直到中共的新华社发布消息，说艾未未因为经济犯罪嫌疑正在接受调查，大家才知道确实是被中共抓起来了。
朋友们不禁要愤愤然地说；这不是文化大革命来了么；这和毛泽东时代的无法无天有什么区别？从实质上讲，和毛泽东、希特勒时代的无法无天确实没有本质上的区别。政府可以悄悄地让人失踪，不需要合法的手续就剥夺了人身自由。这就是无法无天。这就是毛泽东、希特勒。
但是和毛泽东时代的赤裸裸的学习班不同，现在的非法拘禁采取了钻法律空子的形式，而且从针对老百姓迅速发展到了包括针对中共官员的全面专政。这就是从对老百姓的所谓“监视居住”发展到针对中共官员的“双规”。
我给大家讲个小故事。1994年的春天，中共面临着美国的严厉制裁。当时的克林顿政府正准备减轻这个制裁，搞了个“贸易和人权脱钩的计划”，在国会里遇到了很大的阻力。这时候，中国异议人士的看法就成为关键性的筹码。克林顿政府的计划是否可以通过，江泽民的计划是否能够过关，中国反对派的声音起着左右局势的作用。
于是，江泽民集团就派警察把我扣押起来进行了谈判，并且主动提出了改善人权和法制的若干条件，以换取我不反对人权与贸易脱钩。我没有同意，最后折衷成为在人权与贸易问题上不发言，换取中共释放被捕的异议人士，并且开放言论自由和工会自由。
这个协议在中共内部遭遇到了很大的阻力。反对江泽民的派别不打算执行这个协议，力图破坏人权和贸易脱钩。于是，他们再度把我扣押，使用的是传讯证。两天之后，我对连续出示的传讯证提出了抗议。
我说：“第一，按照刑事诉讼法，传讯只是找我谈话。你们连续多日谈话24小时已经是违法了。第二，连续传讯不能超过三次，今天是最后一天了。明天中午你们如果不能拿来合法的手续逮捕或者拘留我。我就对不起了，非走不可。”
他们知道我是个说得出来就做得出来的人，也考虑到国际社会的影响，就安抚我说：放心吧，现在就去检察院拿手续，明天一定给你个交待。第二天我问：手续拿来了吗？没有我就准备回家了。老警察犹犹豫豫地说：拿来了，你暂时还回不了家。我说给我看看。拿来一看我就笑了，这是一张监视居住证。我说：怎么样，没有证据检察院不给你拘留证吧。他说：我们公安局的监视居住证也管用。
我说这是非法拘禁，我要找律师告你们，现在我就得走。于是就吵闹起来。这时候和我谈判的那一派警察要求单独和我谈话，我们开车离开了关押我的通县假古董公司招待所。他们告诉我：现在的党内形势非常复杂。反江泽民的派别希望把事情搞砸。如果江泽民不执行达成的协议，或者我这儿出什么意外，都会使达成的协议破裂。现在外边仍然在执行达成的协议，我要求释放的人已经释放，王丹等人十分活跃当局也顶着压力没有抓人。他们希望我也给老江留个面子，少安毋躁，继续维护协议能执行下去，等等。
我权衡了利弊后，决定以自己一人的自由换取外边大家的行动自由，接受了他们的监视居住。但是声明保留控告他们非法拘禁的权利。之后，克林顿的贸易和人权脱钩成功了。十八个月后，中共就把我送上了法庭。法庭居然也不承认这十八个月是合法拘禁。这样就创造了一个案例，打破了刑事诉讼法所规定的剥夺公民的自由必须要有法院和检察院的批准。从那以后，以监视居住名义剥夺公民人身自由，就成了合法的方式，并进而扩大成为对付官员的“双规”。
从1980年开始的法制改革，曾给了人民极大的希望。但是从邓小平的严打开始，到非法拘禁和双规，绕了一大圈又走回到了毛泽东时代的无法无天。为什么会这样呢？连共产党官员们也不需要法律的保护吗？这就触及到了一个根本的问题。这就是专制政治的本质违背人的本性，是一种非人性的政治。
早在三十年前，邓小平就敏感地发现了保障人权的法制不符合专制政治的需要。就在傻乎乎的知识分子们欢呼民主与法制终于可以实现的时候，邓小平就从严厉打击刑事犯罪开始，破坏法律的权威性，从而一步步走到了可以任意剥夺公民的人身自由。
一旦人身自由可以任意剥夺，其它的宪法和法律就都成了给你你就有，不给就没有的专制法律。这是专制法律和民主法律的根本区别。说专制没有法律是人们的激愤之言，他们没有的是依法应享有的权利。民主的法律和中国传统的法律，只能依法剥夺人身自由。王子犯法与庶民同罪，就是皇帝降罪也要说出个道道来。相比较，专制的法律是奴隶主的法律，谁当主子谁掌权，就是谁说了算。
中国之所以有那么多上访的人，是因为中国人习惯于人人平等的法律，不习惯从西方传来的奴隶主的法律。理解上就有了根本的区别。当老百姓以为自己合理合法的时候，官员们往往会嗤之以鼻。但官员们就没有想一想文革是怎么回事。当那些被双规的时候，老百姓也在偷着乐呢。
聆听魏京生先生的相关录音，请访问：
http://www.weijingsheng.org/RFA/RFA2011/WeiJS110408AiWWdetention.mp3
（撰写并录音于2011年4月8日。自由亚洲电台播出。）
-----------------------------------------------------------------
魏京生基金会及中国民主运动海外联席会议以推动中国的人权与民主为己任。
我们欢迎任何形式的帮助与贡献。我们愿与世界上为人权与民主而奋斗的人们一起努力。
我们希望您能够帮助我们散发我们的资料。但请标明出处与我们的网址：www.weijingsheng.org
欢迎投稿（暂无稿费）或批评建议，请寄信箱： HCP@WEIJINGSHENG.ORG
魏京生基金会通讯地址：
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation, P. O. Box 15449, Washington, DC 20003, USA
电话： 1-202-270-6980
魏京生基金会网址：WWW.weijingsheng.org
中国民主运动海外联席会议及中国团结工会的网址为：www.ChinaLaborUnion.org
阁下之所以收到本信，是因为阁下以前曾表示有兴趣了解魏京生先生和中国民主运动。
倘若阁下希望不再收到类似信息，请回复本信并用 unsubscribe 作为主题(Subject)。