May 13, 2006

Day 81: Others who share Hao’s plight

Filed under: Nina's blog — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 6:55 pm

On May 13th Hao’s sister Nina Wu wrote a post titled We are not the only family who are suffering:

Yesterday, I was saying to my friend how lucky I was that even though my brother is in trouble, I have so many friends who care and who support me. Last night, I climbed into bed, exhausted, but could not sleep because I kept thinking about my brother. I logged onto Jin Yan’s blog and saw that even though Hu Jia has been released, Jin Yan is still concerned about other unlucky families, and was wondering whether there are volunteer organizations that help those vulnerable families who are missing loved ones. We are not the only family in pain—who can help Yuan Weijing? Can we give such families more moral support?

Jin Yan has experienced pain, and our family is still in pain, I can understand the other families who are in hopeless situations.

Who remembers Chen Guangcheng http://guoyushan.blog.sohu.com/2938747.html Guo yushan?

May 7, I was on the train returning to Beijing, when suddenly I received a call from Yuan Weijing’s sister-in-law. She wanted to know the situation with our friends in Beijing who were trying to help Guangcheng. She really had to struggle to find time to call me.

Another time, she called me in a spare moment. She was under a lot of pressure: Guangcheng had disappeared and nobody knew what was going to happen; at home there was only her, Guangcheng’s old mother, and an infant not yet one month old; with this combination of elderly plus the baby, there were still about 20-odd people around where they lived guarding them. You can see what kind of an enemy the local government thinks Chen Guangcheng is.

Guangcheng’s mother is old but she can still walk around by herself. However, when she strolls around the village, nobody dares to talk to her. The old lady misses her son, and her health has deteriorated. The sister-in-law has to take of the elderly and the infant, so she is totally exhausted.

Receiving her phone call on the train, I felt their stress and fear, and I did not know how to console her. I asked her whether she knew that Times magazine made a list of 100 peoples of 2006 and that Guangcheng was listed as a “hero and leader”; she said that she knew, and said that Shandong television had reported on that list, of the 5 Chinese people who were chosen (Wen Jiabao, Ang Lee, Huang Guangyu, Ma Jun, Chen Guangcheng) they mentioned 4, only Chen Guangcheng was left out.

May 11, 2006

Day 79: Still no answers

Filed under: Nina's blog — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 6:41 pm

On May 11th Hao’s sister Nina Wu wrote on her blog:

On the afternoon of May 10, our lawyer received a phone call from the city PSB (actually the National Security Unit.) The main thrust of the call was that our “Application to retain a lawyer to offer legal assistance to Hao Wu” was invalid. The family members need to fill out the form themselves. I don’t know whether the content of our application did not meet requirements, or the formatting was nonstandard. If we had filled it out in person, we would have written the same things. Nothing would change. Why didn’t they mention the issue of the forms when they met the lawyer on April 21, and bring it up only now? Counting the days, they received our application ten days ago. If the lawyer didn’t call them many times, how long were they planning to delay before giving us a reply? Actually, I wrote my cell phone number on each document, so they have no excuse for not contacting the suspect’s relatives. Also, I cannot just drop in at the National Security Unit office. Only they can choose the place. All I can do now is set a time and place to complete the forms through our lawyer.

The approval of hiring a lawyer has already taken half a month without any results. When can we see my brother? They are clearly delaying. In fact, they don’t have any evidence that incriminates my brother. What methods or institutions can monitor the National Security Unit to keep it from prosecuting a falsified case?

May 10 is my husband’s birthday, but I completely forgot it. This is the first time I’ve forgotten in the ten years I’ve known him. In the early hours of May 11, as we finished our phone conversation, he told me that the day before was his birthday, and that even he forgot it. It was our daughter who reminded him. I know that my husband said that to keep me from feeling guilty. It’s true. What’s happened in Beijing has completely occupied my thoughts, making my temporarily incapable of being a responsible wife, mother, and daughter. Thank you to my husband and relatives for their understanding and support. In the future I will repay you twofold for the responsibilities I’ve forgotten over this period of time.

May 9, 2006

Day 77: Comprehending “the power of this network”

Filed under: Nina's blog — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 2:21 pm

On May 9th Hao’s sister Nina Wu encountered problems accessing her MSN Spaces blog. Chinese bloggers believe it has to do with the fact that MSN has switched its login system to an interface that it blocked in China (more on that later). Meanwhile, Nina writers: What else is happening?:

I am a citizen who is insensitive toward politics. Today I could not access my blog as I normally do, and I rushed to the newspaper to see if there is anything wrong. The Regulation on Enlisted Company in Stock Market was endorsed today and the market is on a rise, which is certainly none of my business. I further take a close review of the headlines: Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing attends the Six Party Talk on the Iraninan Nuclear Issue; and Vatician City issued a statement concerning the appointment of two bishops in China, in which the spokesman of China’s Foreign Ministry express the regret of Chinese government. And are these the reasons that lead to problem of bad connection to my email and blog?

After returning to Shanghai, I’ve also sent some emails to Hao’s friends in middle school, with no feedback received. I just hope that Hao’s incident won’t bewilder and puzzle people involved. Some of the netizens’ replies really comfort us, and I traced back to their blogs to read some related posts. Some blogs by the so-called “80s” generation make me realize that our new generation has not been overcome and occupied by mere material desire. Despite my joy I also worry about them. You won’t know the existence of the underlying rules of the game until you get in trouble with it. Then you will comprehend the power of this network. It’s valuable to live as thinking person, but you should learn to protect yourself before you are able to change the rules of the game. If people like Hao disappear one after another, the prospect of our lives will be with much less bright and many more families will experience pain.

I wish that all families can be joyful and every one can walk in the sunshine!

P.S. If you have sent an email to me and not yet received any reply, I maybe haven’t received it, or your mail is just on the winding road of delivery.

May 6, 2006

Day 74: Family holiday, missing Hao

Filed under: Nina's blog — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 2:38 pm

On May 6th Hao’s sister Nina Wu wrote the following entry on her Chinese blog, titled My Parents Spent The May First Holidays With Us:

Within the ten hours or so between the afternoon of April 30th and the morning of May 1st, we had an urgent consultation with my parents, we bought the airplane tickets, they traveled and we picked them up. Then we traveled by car. Our original intention was to take my parents away from the sorrow, but they continued to look troubled and without the enthusiasm that they had during previous trips. Only when they saw the lively granddaughter by them did their expressions turned from ‘dark to bright.’

We visited the famous scenic sites at Tiantai Mountain. My mother insisted on not going to Guoqing Temple, the original site of the Tiantai branch of Chinese Buddhism. Her explanation was that her many wishes for my younger brother have never materialized, so she was too broken-hearted to go anymore … Although I am not a Buddhist, I am aware that it was important to be honest and not disprect Buddha. So we gave up the plan to visit the ancient temple. I followed my mother from behind and silently watched her raised her hand to wipe away the tears on her face …

My mother fell ill during the trip and so we decided to cut the trip short. As we left, we made a visit to the ancient home of the Jigong Buddha for a final prayer for my parents’ wishes. In her sick state, my mother lit three joss sticks just like us, and bowed in all four directions. On the way back, we had a tacit understanding not to mention my younger brother. Previous to that, we also had a tacit understanding not to ask each other about our wishes.

We passed through Hangzhou and took a rest next to West Lake. Under the dark blue sky of the night, we finally opened our hearts and told my parents about this affair. We told them about the selfless help from our friends and we told them about the efforts from so many parties … My parent’s misgivings were gradually removed. When told about the friends’ appraisal of my younger brother, my mother did not look so sad anymore and my father did not sigh anymore, as they know the character of their son. I knew then that making my parents come to Shanghai had not been a wasted effort. This was the first step in the ten thousand mile march, and there is still a lot that I need to tell them, including about my blog …

After getting back to Shanghai, I found emails from my friends waiting for me. I learned that the outside world did not forget Hao, that there are still people thinking about him and that there are still people working hard
on his behalf. I was very gratified.

So here, I will express sincere thanks to all those friends on behalf of my parents and the whole family!

Some friends were worried that the Internet comments may cause me to be saddened. Actually, I have become more open-minded after the experiences over all these years. It would be unusual for a society to have only one voice about an affair. http://ethanzuckerman.com/haowu did not ban Jessica Copeland’s speech and I have no need to be troubled by the different kinds of voices on my blog. If the commentators carefully read all the
information, he/she would know that Hao was not a believer in any kind of religion. Actually, no matter whether is is Buddhism, Christianity, Catholicism or Islam, the core principles ought to be about being good. I have Buddhist and Christian friends. When they heard that Hao was missing, they prayed and they burned joss sticks for his early safe return. Love has no borders, and being good is not divided by belief or sect.

May 3, 2006

Day 69: Nina reflects on her brother’s loss of freedom

Filed under: Nina's blog — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 8:15 am

On May 1st Hao’s sister Nina wrote a blog post, The Bridge of Communication:

Deng Xiaoping had opened the gates of the country through his tour of and talks in the South, but people overseas still know little of China. I remember on my first trip to the United States in 1997, I’d met some kindly and approachable elderly people while strolling on La Jolla Beach. After barely 3 sentences, they started asking me questions on whether I had enough to eat in China; then, when a boatful of Chinese stowaways was found in Los Angeles Harbour, Americans tended to start debating with me the reasons why the Chinese sought to go to America by any means possible. No matter how I tried explaining to them, they found it impossible to imagine that “the good life” also existed in China. At that time, television channels broadcasted documentaries about Shanghai, the majority of whose scenes focused on squatter settlements and by-passed Pudong and the newly-emerging cityscapes. Quite possibly the standard impression Americans had of Shanghainese at that time was this: bleary-eyed in the morning; noisily unloading their nightpots; bicycles weaving in and out of narrow passageways; the very majestic “Lover’s Wall” of The Bund at night. As for Chinese politics, mostly what the television channels broadcasted were biographies of Chinese leaders and the Tiananmen Square incident. Repeatedly broadcasted were those few scenes and the interviews with student leaders; rare was any reflections from other perspectives. At the time, I had argued with little brother, feeling that the knowledge the outside world had of China was one-sided and lacking, but I did not know how to rectify this lack.

It’s hard to say that the news reported by CCTV is completely objective and comprehensive. Even “Oriental Horizon”, which has quite an influence within the mainland, only goes so far and no further in regards to the reporting of certain events. The style of this program is similar to that staple American interview program, “60 Minutes”, but content-wise often isn’t as in-depth as the latter. As China’s official window to the outside world – CCTV9, in terms of content, production quality and other points of evaluation, also has difficulties holding the long-term interest of the overseas audience. In order to have those from overseas understand the true China, there needs to be objective, diversified pathways of information.

The rise of the Internet indubitably provided a more flexible, choice-driven conduit for information communication, and also let Haozi find an effective way for understanding and exchange within and outside of the Great Wall. After little brother returned home to China, other than making plans for using the camera lens to record the changes happening in China, he also picked up his pen and wrote on his blog one story after another of what was happening around him. The sharpness of his perception made even this educated-and-having-worked-in-China-for-years older sister acknowledge her inferiority: his style was witty and lively, every story coming to vivid life, completely without sanctimony or the suspicion of artifice, seducing the reader into returning again and again; the stories he told involved the lives of the Chinese, the various aspects of society – to visit his blog is like seeing the world on the other side of the wall through a small hole in the wall. As for whether he was objective or fair, his readers knew the score; he synthesized various reasonings to analyze an event, a problem, seeking a moderate stance, free from bias, and not to mention that he welcome various debate on his blog. That, I think, is the main reason his weblog was heartily welcomed by everybody. Aside from that, having studied, worked, and lived in the States for many years, he could easily compose in English; this is the most important reason Haozi’s blog was able to gain international attention amidst the numerous Chinese blogs, even though one can find bloggers in China who are even better at telling Chinese tales.

Upon reading this, every reader must be saying, “Old wife Wang, bragging about the melons she’s selling”. Yes, I am proud of my little brother. But every since Haozi got into trouble, I’ve been reading my little brother’s weblog again and again, thinking to find the reason behind his fall to his current disgraced state. In the weblog, he didn’t express any political bias, nor used any anti-Party, anti-government turns of phrase, nor had any unreasonable rants. If readers have the inclination, they could visit Haozi’s blog, Beijing or Bust, or spaces.msn.com to help me analyze a little exactly what mistake Haozi made that caused him to lose an individual’s most precious possession – his freedom?

Also: on the last day of April, which is last night, around 8 o’clock, I received a phone call from Officer Liu of the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau, notifying me that they’d received on Thursday (yesterday was Sunday April 30th, , right? Don’t know why there’s a three-day gap in between?) the application “Requesting the Hiring of an Attorney to Provide Legal Aid to Wu Hao” I’d sent by Express Mail on Tueday. which is currently being transferred to the services department (the National Security Team?). Actually, in the two days since I sent out the Express Mail, the attorney had already notified by phone relevant personnel at the National Security Team of the sent application– and the National Security Team hasn’t yet delegated someone to pick it up? According to the letters regulation, the Letters and Complaints Bureau will monitor to make sure the relevant department gives a response within 15 days. It’s the head supervisory organ - could our anticipation be any higher? Especially considering that the voice of Officer Liu on the phone - full of Beijing patois - was kindly and approachable, his attitude impeccable. It’s only a tiny little program; having arrived at now, we’ve already exhausted a lot of time, but without seeing the sign signaling this program’s end. Perhaps, after this so-called program has completely run its course, we’ll long be white-haired.

A person’s freedom possibly appears very insignificant in the face of “national secrets”. But how much time does a person have?

Day 67: Actions taken for Hao

Filed under: Nina's blog — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 8:08 am

On April 29th Hao’s sister Nina posted the following in English on her blog:

Who/where we, Hao’s family members and friends, have contacted in the last couple of months:

1. China

1) Family’s efforts

Letters addressed to Leadership in China

* Chief of Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau, Ma Zhen Chuan by me

* Secretary of Beijing Municipal Committee of Politics and Law, Qiang Wei, by me

* President Hu Jin Tao separately by our father and me

* Premier Wen Jia Bao by our father

* Secretary of National Public Security, Zhou Yong Kang, by our father

China government departments we have contacted

* 3 inquiries to Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau Chaoyang District Branch Foreign Police Station;

* 1 visit to Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau Chaoyang District Branch;

* 3 visits to Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau (including once being barred outside the entrance of the PSB work building)

* 2 visits to Ministry of Public Security (one terminating outside the gates of the MPS on Changan Street, one terminating at Dongtanzi Hutong)

* 1 complaint reception at Beijing Municipal Government;

* 1 letter to Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau Disciplinary Inspection Commitee

* 1 visit to Beijing Municipal People’s Procuratorate;

2) Lawyers’ efforts

* Have written to Supervisory Office of Beijing Public Security Bureau, requesting that the relevant departments be charged with rapidly correcting their inappropriate behavior, safeguarding the lawyer’s execution of professional duties according to law, and safeguarding the procedural rights of the accused.

* Have reported to Beijing People’s Procuratorate regarding the illegal process by which the Beijing Public Security Bureau National Security Team handled Hao’s case;

* Have gone to Beijing Public Security Bureau Petition Office to exchange opinions with the police, and clarified the “ misunderstandings “ ;

* Have helped Hao’s family to submit an application to procure lawyers to the public security bureau.

2. United Nation

* Petitions Team, Office of the United Nations, High Commissioner for Human Rights have been asked to inquire into my brother’s case.

* “Form to Submit a Communication on a Victim of an Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance” has been submitted to Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances.

* Ulrich Garms from UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Special Procedures Branch has sent an email to Hao’s family,and the questionnaire has been submitted to United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention;

3. US

* A letter addressed to President Bush appeals to his talking to President Hu for the reason that Hao is being detained and when China’s government intends to release or prosecute him;

* Haozi’s friends in the United States have spontaneously written letters to American congressmen, demanding that they pay attention the matter of Haozi’s unreasonable arrest.

Hao’s other friends are working on other methods I may have not know in details…….

…….. There are more and more……

April 29, 2006

Day 64: Impact of Hao’s detention on his parents

Filed under: Nina's blog — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 3:38 pm

On April 26, Hao’s sister Nina wrote the following entry, “Can’t say to happy birthday to our father“:

After my parents have known Hao’s incident, they phone me everyday to discuss what we can do. When I tell them that I’ve tried every possible means but my efforts are in vain, all they can do is sigh. My mother asks every time: “This is a country built on law. How can it be?” Our parents have experienced the all kinds of events in their life and political pressure. After the adoption of opening up policy in China, the life of average citizens are better off, so is the legal system and political environment. Hao’s situation is like a huge blow to them, which tells them the reality is not so perfect as they’ve imagined. I know that every evening, our parents discuss it until midnight. They want to write letter to Minister of Public Security, President Hu and Premier Wen. Although I know all these efforts are useless, but I still provide them mail address, telling my father how to deliver the letter. My mother has been crying a lot recently. She wants to ask them:”My son is a good boy, why did you abduct him? You too are parents yourself, how could you do such thing with your own basic human
conscience?” They want to go to Beijing to make an appeal. I stop them because I fear that they can not stand such a physical and mental torture.

Last night when I spoke to parents, I suddenly realized that it’s April 26th, our father’s birthday. I hastily say happy birthday to father. Every year my brother and I would prepare carefully for my parent’s birthday. If we were not at home, we would send gift to them as a surprise, or ask other member of the family to hold a birthday party for them. This year, we have neither time nor mood to prepare a gift and it seems that my father’s birthday will be spent in gloom. Since the voice mail of my brother is still available, I left a message to him and some police officers in charge of this case, to inform them of my parents’ determination to go to Beijing
for appeal, to hope that my brother can get an opportunity to have a phone call to say happy birthday to his father. I also send short message to his mobile phone, which he will never receive.

Apparently the police can’t find any evidence of criminal charges against my brother, so why are they still putting him behind bars? When did they turn detaining into supervision and why didn’t they notify the
family? We and our lawyer can’t pay a visit to him and my brother lost his freedom innocently. Who can be responsible for what we have spent on time, energy and mind? We can not allow them to operate everything
behind the curtain. With the help of our lawyer, Wu Luanyan, we have already sent an application letter to the Beijing Bureau of Public Security, to request hiring a lawyer for Hao Wu. The UN human rights office also has feedback. I believe that everything is going in the right direction.

NOTE: Many thanks to our volunteer translation team of 5 people who wish to remain anonymous. They have been working hard to translate Nina’s blog posts almost daily.

April 28, 2006

Day 62: Police give lawyers the runaround

Filed under: Nina's blog — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 9:22 pm

On April 24th, Hao’s sister Nina wrote on her blog a post titled “The Lawyers Received The Response From The National Security Team:”

On the afternoon of April 21, pursuant to a telephone notice from the Beijing Public Security Bureau (National Security Team), my appointed lawyer went to the reception office of the municipal bureau. Three police officers met with the lawyer, and only identified themselves as municipal bureau workers who are representing the municipality to explain and respond to the lawyer even as they took notes for this meeting. One of them held up the letter from the appointed lawyer to the National Security Team and said: the three questions raised by the appointed lawyer (namely, detention beyond the legal time limit; failure to notify the family and the appointed lawyer about the nature of the case; failure to arrange for the principal to meet with a laywer within 48 hours) were actually misunderstandings, because:

First, the enforced procedure to limit the personal freedom of Hao Wu has changed from detention to supervised residence;

Second, this case involves the leaking of secrets and therefore it was not necessary to inform the family about the reason of the case, the suspected crime and the relevant government units involved in the case;

Third, whether the lawyer can be permitted to intervene requires the principal and his family to apply to the relevant government units for permission. To this date, Hao Wu himself and his family have not applied to
the public security bureau to procure a lawyer.

With respect to these statements, the lawyer expressed the following opinions at the time: the reason for the “misunderstandings” were not due to the family or the lawyer. Besides, the family has already applied to
procure a lawyer.

1. On February 22, Hao Wu was taken away. Afterwards, the family was not formally and precisely notified about when he was detained or when that was turned into supervised residence;

2. On March 20, the family of Hao Wu was simply notified at the municipal office that he had been “detained.” They were not informed about whether the case incolved “leaking secrets” and they were not told about the
relevant government unit or the place of detention. Therefore, it was normal for the family to procure a lawyer and for the law office to accept the appointment. Under these circumstances, the lawer will treat this according to normal procedures. Furthermore, the family of Hao Wu informed the receiving personnel at the municipal reception office on March 29 that they have procured a lawyer, and the personnel did not inform them at the
time that the case involved the “leaking of secrets”;

3. The lawyer’s office sent a letter on March 21 to ask the municipal bureau for a response from the relevant government unit as well as to meet with the principal. The Chaoyang District bureau replied on April 7 that there was no such case and they had not detained Hao Wu. The family found out from the Jianwai station that the National Security Team was in charge of the case. On April 12, the lawyer’s office wrote to the National Security Team. This delayed the procedure, but it should not be attributed to misunderstanding by the family and the lawyer or because they had acted incorrectly with respect to the procedure. The lawyer acted in accordance with the legal procedure, so the public security unit should solemnly follow the criminal procedure while respecting and protecting the basic rights of the principal. At the same time, the relevant government unit should have a clear channel for informing the principal’s family about how to exercise their rights, to guarantee that the principal’s family can turn in the application and to understand the nature of the case so as to avoid
“misunderstandings.”

Given the requirement for the family to file a written application, the lawyer asked the municipal bureau to provide a concrete method by which the principal’s family can submit a request for a lawyer and for the lawyer to arrange for an interview. The other party said that they will report the situation to their superiors and respond as quickly as possible. A police officer named Zhang left down a telephone number for contact.

The family asked the lawyers for advice, and their opinions were:

1. The case of Hao Wu probably involves issues connected to other people and therefore cannot be resolved immediately. The evidence that the police has on hand is insufficient to persuade the procuratorate to approve an arrest. The maximum time of criminal detention is only 30 days, so he has been switched to supervised residence. As for the “leaking of secrets,” this is just a way of concealment.

2. According to the “Law of Criminal Prosecution,” even after the family submits an application to procure a lawyer to the public security bureau, it is still possible to have a response of “not approved.” Nevertheless, we
still have to go through this.

3. Based upon what we can do, the lawyers will fulfill their responsibility as lawyers and their position and principle of defending the legal rights of the principal will not change.

4. The procuratorate does not have the power to monitor whether the process by which the public security bureau handled this case is illegal.

We can only go through social opinon and other means to monitor.

If you have seen my previous blog posts, you will know that we have made all sorts of efforts and that the various reasons and excuses from the National Security Team are wan and feeble.

The relevant requirements in the “Law of Criminal Prosecution”:

Article 51: The People’s Court, the People’s Procuratorate and the Public Security Bureau may under the following circumstances place the suspected criminal or accused under bail or supervised residence:

(1) possibly sentenced to restraint, detention or otherwise given additional sentence:
(2) possibly sentenced to a term of imprisonment or more, but such that bail or supervised residence will not pose a threat to society.

The bail or supervised residence will be implemented by the public security organization.

Article 57: The suspected criminal or accused under supervised residence should follow the following regulations:

(1) Must not leave the place of residence without the approval of the supervising organization; those without a place of residence must not leave the designated place of residence without approval;
(2) Must not meet anyone without the approval of the supervising organization;
(3) Must appear when summoned for interrogation or trial;
(4) Must not interfere with any testimony by witnesses in any form;
(5) Must not destroy any evidence, or create false evidence, or collude to create false tesimony;

If the suspected criminal or accused under supervised residence should violate the aforementioned regulations in a serious manner, he/she will be arrested.

Article 58: The People’s Court, the People’s Procuratorate and the Public Security Bureau must not hold the suspected criminal or accused on bail for more than 12 months or in supervised residence for more than 6 months.

During the period of bail or supervised residence, the investigation, prosecution and trial of the case must not be interrupted. If there should be any inappropriate criminal liability or if the maximum limit of bail or superivised residence is exceeded, the order for bail or supervised residence should be rescinded in time. When the bail or supervised residence is removed, the organization in charge of the bail or supervised residence should be notified in a timely manner.

Article 64: When the public security bureau detains a person, an order for detention should be shown.

After the person is detained, with the exception that it may interfere with the investigation or it was impossible to complete the notificiations, the reason for the detention and the place of detention should be communicated
to the family of the detainee or his/her unit within 24 hours.

Article 74: The case for which suspected criminal or accused is detained cannot be closed during the period of investigative detention, prosecution, first trial and appeal trial. Instead, it must be continuously investigated
and evaluated, and the suspected criminal or accused may be given bail or supervised residence.

Article 96: From the day of the first interrogation or the day after forced restriction is imposed, the suspected criminal can procure a lawyer to provide legal advice and file appeals and complaints. After the suspected
criminal is arrested, the appointed lawyer can apply for bail on his behalf. In cases involving national secrets, when the suspected crimincal wants to hire a lawyer, it should be approved by the invesigating agency. The appointed lawyer has the right to learn about the suspected crimes of the suspected criminal from the investigating organizations and may meet with the detained suspected criminal and attmept to understand the case from the suspected criminal. When the lawyer meets with the detained suspected criminal, the investigating organization may be represented at the scene depending on the nature and requirements of the case. In a case which involves national secrets, when the lawyer meets with the detained suspected
criminal, it should be approved by the investigating organization.

Reporters Without Borders condemns “state abduction” of Hao

Filed under: News — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 8:36 am

The following was posted April 26th at the Reporters Without Borders website:

After two months without news, authorites accused of “kidnapping” blogger

Reporters Without Borders today said it considered Chinese blogger Hao Wu to be the victim of state abduction as more than two months have gone by since his arrest without his family getting any news about him. His lawyer has not been allowed to see him, but has been told his client is now in a state security “guesthouse”.

“This case shows the Chinese security services operate without any control by the courts,” Reporters Without Borders said. “Hao is the victim of an arbitrary system that interprets the law as it sees fit. We call on European and American diplomats to raised his case at their meetings with the Chinese authorities. We are curious know how they will justify the Public Security Bureau’s procedures.”

In a message posted on her blog (http://spaces.msn.com/wuhaofamily/blog/), Hao’s sister, Na Wu, said she had hired a lawyer who asked three questions during an interview with the Public Security Bureau on 21 April: why his client is being held longer than allowed by the law, why the authorities refuse to inform his client’s family, and why they refuse to let him see his client, which they should have done within the first 48 hours of his arrest.

The Public Security Bureau replied that these were just “misunderstandings.” Hao was no longer in detention, he was under “house arrest,” the bureau said. At the same time, the case was “classified,” which explained why no information had been given about the charges against Hao and where he was being held. Finally, neither Hao’s family or his lawyer had been allowed to see him because they had not formally requested it, the bureau added.

Na said she has never been directly notified about her brother’s arrest. The classified nature of the arrest is completely new and has never previously been mentioned by the bureau. The comments of Hao’s lawyer are also posted on her blog. He said Hao should have been placed under “house arrest” no more than 30 days after his arrest. Calling the case “classified” was just a pretext for not disclosing the charges against Hao, he added.

Na finished her latest message with the follow comments: “If you have already visited my blog and are already aware of the efforts we have undertaken since his arrest, you will understand how unconvincing the Public Security Bureau’s explanations and excuses are.” In a phone with Reporters Without Borders, she added: “The police have made it clear to me that they are aware of everything I have said and done.”

Hao has a blog called Beijing or Bust in which he writes under the pseudonym of Beijing Loafer. He is also the North-East Asia editor of the website Global Voices, to which he contributes under name of Tian Yi. He was arrested on 22 February while preparing a report on China’s underground protestant churches.

Global Voices has set up a Hao support site: http://ethanzuckerman.com/haowu

April 25, 2006

Day 61: Nina writes of injustice

Filed under: Nina's blog — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 10:48 am

On April 23rd, Day 61 of Hao’s detention, his sister Nina posted an entry to her blog titled Injustice:

There are too many injustices in life!

On Friday night, my husband and I went shopping at the supermarket. As our car was exiting from Century Street onto Yanggao Street, a jeep with a “Practicing” sticker passed us at high speed. Since there was only one lane, my husband was unable to avoid the car. When this car with the license plate “Hu D” overtook us, its rear wheel struck our front wheel. A young lady stepped out of the jeep, and at first said “Sorry.” When we started talking about responsibility for the accident, she insisted that two lanes were merging, and because her car was in the main lane, she had the right of way. Please! The exit was quite far from where the two lanes merged. By then our car had already driven on the main lane for a stretch. After the 110 police car and traffic cops arrived, they looked at the indentation on the front right wheel of our car and the marks on the back of hers, and assigned us full responsibility, according to both common sense and traffic laws (in the end, even the traffic cop said that we were wrongly accused.) That “Mushroom hair“ was suddenly inspired, and asked us to compensate her 200 yuan, saying, “The insurance company will cover it anyway,” and, “There’s time to pay now.” In the end, I could only tell her that I hoped she took the money with a clean conscience.

Friends! If a car is going to hit you from behind, and if you have a few seconds to think before yanking your car to the side, please analyze the situation: can you avoid a collision? If so, turn the wheel and avoid it. If not, please let the car hit you from behind. Whatever you do, don’t dodge and let the rear wheel of the other car strike your front wheel. Otherwise you won’t be able to explain that you were in the right.

Injustice in life isn’t only here. A friend yielded to an electric bicycle. After the car stopped, the bicycle started to slow down. Because it was for a bicycle, because the driver was a woman, and perhaps because she had an out-of-town accent, she was fined 1000 Yuan by a policeman. My husband and daughter once saw a person from Xinjiang, among seven others, stick his foot under a slowly turning taxi. Claiming it had been crushed, he forced the driver to hand over all his money. As soon as the taxi left, he started walking about unhindered…

Injustice in life happens in many places. A normal businessperson, simply because he isn’t willing to pay the tax collector’s “personal expenses” or offends “certain people” while doing business, might suffer a harsh auditing, and even enter prison due to unjust judgment on charges of “tax evasion.” An honest, ordinary person gets in a dispute with a neighbor. Because the other side is the little brother of the district party secretary, the ordinary man suffers harassment and beatings for a long time…

My brother was taken away by police without any legal procedure. He can’t see his family or lawyer. This is the unjust treatment of Haozi by the police. His family members have been unable to get information about him for a long time, and have not received an explanation from the police or government. They also endure torture from the words of the police. Is this the unjust treatment that a suspect’s relatives must endure? Our life is laid out before their eyes; must we endure the humiliation of being stripped naked? Must we endure the lasting effects of shadows on our psyches? Worried about unnecessarily troubling friends and relatives who do not yet know, and even influencing their lives, we hurriedly end our phone conversations. We also do not warmly welcome friends into our house or drop in on them, nor do we enthusiastically take part in all kinds of social events. Must we endure the hardship of leaving behind a normal social life? If these are the hardships that we must endure, we have the courage to endure them. I only hope that sun and moon can witness the great pains we have taken, and friends and relatives will one day understand our temporary rudeness and unreasonableness. I hope that someday lighthearted laughter and welcoming smiles can return to our household.

I hope that this society will have more conscience, justice, and respect for the law, making these injustices fewer and fewer.