You are here

Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang - Court Verdict

Intermediate People’s Court of Liaoyang Municipality, Liaoning Province


Criminal Verdict


(2003) Xing-Yi-Chu-Zi (Note 1) No.1


Public Prosecution Organ: Liaoyang Municipal People’s Procuratorate, Liaoning Province


Defendant: Yao Fuxin, male, born on 29 September 1950, of Han ethnicity, educated to lower-middle school level, a resident of Liaoyang City. Formerly a worker at the Liaoyang Municipal Steel Rolling Factory. Resides at Group 12 of the Ferroalloy Residential Zone, Baita District, Liaoyang City. He was taken into criminal detention on account of the present case on 17 March 2002, was formally arrested on 30 March of the same year, and is currently held in custody.


Defenders: Mo Shaoping and Xie Wei, both lawyers at the Mo Shaoping Law Centre in Beijing.

Defendant: Xiao Yunliang, male, born on 6 May 1946, of Han ethnicity, educated to lower-middle school level, a resident of Liaoyang City. Formerly a worker at the Liaoyang Municipal Ferroalloy Factory. Resides at Group 1 of the Shipailou Residential Zone, Baita District, Liaoyang City. He was taken into criminal detention on account of the present case on 20 March 2002, was formally arrested on 30 March of the same year, and is currently held in custody.


Defenders: Xiao Yunji and Zhang Bingbing, relative and friend [respectively] of Xiao Yunliang.


In its Indictment (Liao-Shi-Jian-Gong-Xing-Su) No. 103 (2002), the Liaoyang Municipal People’s Procuratorate charged the defendants Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang with committing the crime of subverting the political power of the state, and it submitted to this Court a public prosecution case against them. After reviewing and accepting the case, the Court formed a collegial panel in accordance with law, and on 4 January 2003 delivered copies of the Indictment to the defendants. On 15 January 2003, a public hearing was convened in accordance with law and the case was tried. The Liaoyang Municipal People’s Procuratorate of Liaoning Province sent Procurator Deng Hong and Assistant Procurator An Xi to appear in court in support of the public prosecution. Defendant Yao Fuxin and his defenders Mo Shaoping and Xie Wei, and also Defendant Xiao Yunliang and his defenders Xiao Yunji and Zhang Bingbing, appeared in court to participate in the proceedings. The case has now been heard and concluded.


The Liaoyang Municipal People’s Procuratorate charged that, from 1998 onwards, Defendants Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang actively took part in organizing and establishing the “Liaoning Provincial Branch of the China Democracy Party,” and moreover that they carried out illegal activities in the name of the “China Democracy Party".(Note 2) From the middle of February 2002 until 20 March, Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang created incidents, fabricated rumours to delude the masses, and on numerous occasions incited members of the public who were unaware of the true facts of the situation to force their way into the Liaoyang City Government Offices, the Municipal People’s Congress, and the offices of the police, procuracy and courts, thereby seriously disturbing the proper functioning of these state organs and seriously disrupting normal traffic order. Yao and Xiao also communicated on numerous occasions with extra-territorial hostile elements and organizations, in an attempt to obtain their support and assistance.


The public prosecution organ presented the following main items of documentary evidence: “Charter of the China Democracy Party”; a statement from the “Liaoning Provincial Branch of the China Democracy Party”; and explanations of the situation provided by the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of State Security, and the Beijing Public Security Bureau. The witnesses were: Wang Wenjiang, Wang Dechen, Yang Chunguang, Wei Zhenjie, Pang Qingxiang, Gu Baoshu, He Ruoxue, Wang Dawei, Guo Xiujing, Su Anhua, Li Chunmeng, Xu Fuchen, Zhou Xianfeng, Tong Yanfeng, and Tong Yanling. The public prosecution organ held that the activities of Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang should be dealt with as constituting the crime of subverting the political power of the state and be punished accordingly.


Defendant Yao Fuxin stated in his defence that since he had neither been a member of the China Democracy Party nor taken part in its activities, the charge of subverting the political power of the state could not stand. The principal arguments made by his defenders was that there was insufficient evidence to show that Yao Fuxin had taken part in the activities of the China Democracy Party; that the question of his involvement in the China Democracy Party had already been dealt with [by the authorities], and therefore there was no legal basis for proceeding further against him on this count; and that his actions had not been aimed at subverting the political power of the state.


Defendant Xiao Yunliang stated in his defence that since he had neither been a member of the China Democracy Party nor taken part in its activities, the charge of subverting the political power of the state could not stand. The principal argument made by his defenders was that the facts put forward as evidence by the public prosecution organ in charging Xiao Yunliang with the crime of subverting the political power of the state did not actually take place, and that therefore Xiao Yunliang did not engage or take part in any activities to subvert the political power of the state.


It has been ascertained in the course of investigation that during 1998, after Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang learned that Wang Wenjiang (already sentenced) was scheming to organize and set up a “Preparatory Committee for the China Democracy Party in the Three [NORTH-?]Eastern Provinces” with the aim of subverting the political power of the state and overthrowing the socialist system, they went together to Anshan to find Wang Wenjiang and they expressed to him their willingness to join the China Democracy Party. On 27 September that year, Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang took part in an illegal meeting at the Shengxiang Mansion in Anshan, where they colluded with others in scheming to establish a Liaoning Provincial Preparatory Committee of the China Democracy Party, for which Yao Fuxin was appointed to be the Liaoyang Coordinator. On 29 November the same year, Yao Fuxin, Wang Wenjiang and others secretly conspired at the home of Wang Zechen (already sentenced) to fix 5 December [1998] as being the date of the “First Liaoning Provincial Congress of the China Democracy Party,” at which they would found the “Liaoning Provincial Branch of the China Democracy Party” and ratify the “Charter of the China Democracy Party”; none of this came about, however, due of the timely intervention of the public security organs.


During the same period, Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang made contact with other people and exchanged information with them concerning the activities of the China Democracy Party; moreover, they frequently told people that they were [members of] the Democracy Party. In mid-1999, in an effort to expand the membership of the China Democracy Party, Xiao Yunliang gave to Pang Qingxiang (now exempted from prosecution) a copy of Issue No. 7 of [a publication titled] “Democratic Forum of the Opposition Party.” Yao Fuxin urged Pang Qingxiang to join the China Democracy Party, but Pang refused to do so. From January 2002 onwards, Yao Fuxin communicated with extra-territorial hostile organizations and elements, providing them with information on [his group’s] illegal activities and soliciting help and support from them. From mid-February 2002 until 20 March, Yao Fuxin, Xiao Yunliang and others created incidents on numerous occasions; spread rumours to delude the masses; incited members of the public who were unaware of the true facts of the situation to force their way into the Liaoyang City Government Offices, the Municipal People’s Congress, and the offices of the city’s police, procuracy and courts; and made inflammatory speeches outside the door of the Municipal Government Offices. Moreover, they paid no heed to the admonishments given to them by the public security organs and they refused to implement the latter’s order to disperse, so leading to a situation whereby the main roads in Liaoyang remained blocked for a long period of time. This seriously disturbed the proper functioning of the state organs and exerted a most pernicious influence.


The evidence serving to prove the above facts is as follows:


1. Documentary evidence: the Ministry of Public Security’s declaration that the China Democracy Party is a hostile organization.

2. Documentary evidence: the “Charter of the China Democracy Party,” which confirms that the China Democracy Party holds the political aim of putting an end to leadership by the Communist Party.

3. Documentary evidence: Anshan Intermediate People’s Court’s criminal verdicts No. 129 An-Xing-Chu-Zhi (1999), No. 130 An-Xing-Chu-Zhi (Note 3)(1999) and No. 29 An-Xing-Chu-Zhi (2000), which show that Wang Zechen, Wang Wenjiang and Kong Youchen were all found guilty of subverting the political power of the state on account of their active involvement in the “Liaoning Provincial Branch of the China Democracy Party” and other activities, and that they were sentenced to six years, four years and one year of imprisonment respectively.

4. Witnesses Wang Wenjiang, Wang Zechen, Zou Ping and others testified that Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang took part in the 27 September 1998 meeting held in Liu Jianping’s office at the Shengxiang Mansion in Anshan.

5. Witness Wei Zhenjie testified that at the 27 September 1998 meeting, Yao Fuxin was appointed to be the [China Democracy Pary’s] Liaoyang Coordinator.

6. Witness Pang Qingxiang testified that Yao Fuxin had tried to induct him as a new member of the Democracy Party, and he confirmed that Yao had asked Xiao to lend him a copy of Issue No. 7 of the “Democratic Forum of the Opposition Party.”

7. Witness Wei Zhenjie testified that Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang took part in the 27 September 1998 meeting, and that he and Yang Liang had subsequently, on approximately 7 October, gone to Liaoyang to inform Yao and Xiao that news of the meeting had leaked out and that therefore the two of them should henceforth behave carefully.

8. Witness Gu Baoshu testified that Yao Fuxin organized illegal activities in the name of the China Democracy Party.

9. The public security organ’s investigation records and also the list of items confiscated both show that a copy of Issue No. 7 of the “Democratic Forum of the Opposition Party” was among the items found at Pang Qingxiang’s home.

10. Yao Fuxin stated in court that he had supplied information about his illegal activities and their consequences to the [abovementioned] extra-territorial hostile organizations and hostile elements.

11. Witnesses Pang Qingxiang, Wang Dawei and others testified that Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang had organized and incited members of the public who were unaware of the true facts of the situation to force their way into the Liaoyang municipal government organs.


The aforementioned evidence was all presented at the court hearing and was examined and evaluated appropriately, and although the defendants and their defenders have raised dissenting opinions with regard to a portion of this evidence, they have not presented any corresponding evidence to prove their various viewpoints. The facts of this case are clear, the evidence is solid and ample, and it is sufficient to allow a determination to be made.


This Court finds that Defendants Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang, in disregard of the laws of the state, actively took part in, organized, and conspired to establish the “Liaoning Provincial Branch of the China Democracy Party,” an organization devoted to subverting the political power of the state and overthrowing the socialist system; and that, in disregard of frequent admonishments given to them by the public security organs, they persisted in scheming to organize and incite members of the public who were unaware of the true facts of the situation to force their way into government offices. Their activities constituted the crime of subverting the political power of the state. The charges levelled against the two defendants by the Liaoyang Municipal People’s Procuratorate are found to be justified, the evidence is solid and ample, and appropriate action must therefore be taken.


With regard to the defence argument put forward by Yao Fuxin and his defenders that he neither joined nor took part in the activities of the China Democracy Party, and that he did not hold the aim of subverting the political power of the state, our investigations have shown that Yao Fuxin was actively involved in organizing the [China] Democracy Party in Liaoning Province and that he took part in the Democracy Party’s activities; there are witness statements to this effect from Wang Wenjiang, Wang Zechen and others, and Yao himself has also said as much on numerous occasions. In addition, his defence argument that his actions were not carried out with the aim of subverting the political power of the state is contradicted by the facts as established by this Court in the course of its investigations, and is therefore rejected. With regard to the argument put forward by Yao Fuxin’s defenders that the question of his involvement in the China Democracy Party had already been dealt with [by the authorities], our investigations have shown that the public security organs merely summoned Yao Fuxin to receive education and suasion over the matter of his participation in the China Democracy Party, and that he was given no punishment by them at that time; but Yao continued as before to undertake activities in the name of the China Democracy Party, right up until the time when this case was uncovered. The Court therefore rejects this defence argument also.


In his defence statement, Xiao Yunliang argued that he had neither joined nor taken part in the activities of the China Democracy Party, and that he did not have the aim of subverting the political power of the state. The statements given by Witnesses Wang Wenjiang, Wang Zechen and others prove, however, that Xiao Yunliang did take part in the activities of the China Democracy Party, and the Court therefore rejects this argument. With regard to the argument put forward by his defenders that the [alleged] facts of his crime did not actually occur and that his behaviour did not constitute the crime of subverting the political power of the state: the defenders have not produced any corresponding evidence to prove these points, and so the Court rejects this defence argument also.


This Court’s Adjudication Committee has now discussed and reached its decision on the case, and in accordance with the stipulations of Article 105 (Para 1), Article 106, Article 25, Article 55 (Para 1) and Article 56 (Para 1) of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, we pronounce judgment as follows:


Defendant Yao Fuxin is found guilty of the crime of subverting the political power of the state and is hereby sentenced to serve a fixed term of seven years’ imprisonment, with subsequent deprivation of political rights for a period of three years. (The sentence is to be calculated from the date of execution of this judgment, with one day to be subtracted for each day already spent in custody prior to the judgment’s execution; that is, the sentence will run from 20 March 2002 until 19 March 2009.)


Defendant Xiao Yunliang is found guilty of the crime of subverting the political power of the state and is hereby sentenced to serve a fixed term of four years’ imprisonment, with subsequent deprivation of political rights for a period of two years. (The sentence is to be calculated from the date of execution of this judgment, with one day to be subtracted for each day already spent in custody prior to the judgment’s execution; that is, the sentence will run from 20 March 2002 until 19 March 2006.)


If the defendants disagree with this judgment then they may lodge an appeal, within a period of ten days starting from the day after they receive their copy of the judgment, either through this Court or directly with the Liaoning Provincial High People’s Court; one original copy and two photocopies of the written appeal should be provided.



Judge:Nian Tiepeng


Adjudicator:Di Haibo


Assistant Adjudicator:Song Xiaofeng


9 May 2003


Recorder:Li Xiaohui


(This copy has been compared with the original and contains no errors.)




Notes


(1) “Xing-Yi-Chu-Zi” is an internal court reference code.

(2) Quote markes added

(3) As above.


Translated by China Labour Bulletin 26 June 2003