• Fri
  • Dec 19, 2014
  • Updated: 4:30am

Beijing court convicts two more New Citizen activists

PUBLISHED : Thursday, 30 January, 2014, 3:30am
UPDATED : Thursday, 30 January, 2014, 5:07am

A Beijing court has found two more activists from the New Citizen movement guilty of disturbing public order and sentenced one of them to prison.

Hou Xin and Yuan Dong were convicted of gathering a crowd to disturb public order, the Haidian District People's Court said on its microblog. New Citizen founder Xu Zhiyong was sentenced to four years in prison on the same charge on Sunday.

Xu started the grass-roots movement to promote clean governance and fairness in education. His fledgling campaign became the target of a crackdown by authorities after it inspired people across the country to gather for dinner parties to discuss social issues and occasionally to unfurl banners in public places in small rallies.

Yuan and Hou were among four activists who unfurled banners and gave speeches in a busy western section of the capital in March, urging officials to disclose their assets.

Yuan was sentenced to 18 months in prison. The court said Hou's crime was deemed "relatively light" and it spared her from punishment.

Hou said by phone that police had privately asked her not to maintain her ties with the movement. She said the court did not allow her to read a closing statement in which she denied unfurling banners. She said she was simply there to take photos.

Yuan's lawyer, Chen Jiangang , said his client would definitely appeal against the judgment. "I believe they should not even sentence him to a day. They are China's conscience," he said.

The recent rulings were a message from President Xi Jinping and his government that they regard the development of civil society as a threat, said Joseph Cheng Yu-shek, a professor of politics at City University.

"In the eyes of the reformers and liberals in China, Xi Jinping is more or less following the Putin model, rather than the Gorbachev model," he said.

Associated Press, Reuters



For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

Down with the CCP
to secure for his/her client a judgment that is not only favorable but also enforceable. On the contrary, defense attorney is given the opportunity to challenge Plaintiff’s choice of forum or even the defendant may benefit and play possum from an unenforceable judgment.
Under pennoyer rules, a court which has no personal jurisdiction over defendant may not issue an in personal judgment. However, each of the U.S. 50 states had or adopted its own substantive commercial laws, called a “long-arm statute” which the local courts have jurisdiction over corporation or defendant yet under the due process clause of the constitution each state court can only exercise personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant or company if the defendant has had sufficient “minimum contacts” with the state to justify jurisdiction. For instance, a company or corporation from another state that sells products directly within another state is “purposefully availing” itself of the laws of the other state, which is sufficient contact to justify jurisdiction.
Procedural due process and even substantive due process in the United States are very complicate. If you have a complaint, you need to sue somebody, or you've been sued in U.S., then, you may need a lawyer to start proceedings or litigation defense on your behalf."
Jennie PC Chiang江佩珍 01/30/14 美國
Taiwan is small; if anything goes wrong it is easy to manage.
In Taiwan, you may go to courthouse and ring the courthouse bell to sue someone without going through any procedural laws which procedural due process or fairness may not be existed and parties whose rights are to be affected may not be heard, such as improper service of process, Taipei district court issued an arrest warrant to a movie or singer star who claimed she did not receive a notice/service that she has been sued by Taxi driver for dispute between her and Taxi driver. Procedural laws are legal rights created and defined by Substantive Law. U.S. Procedural Laws can be very complicated such as the same case may be governed by much different procedural and even substantive rules depending on which state is forum for the litigation. However, even extreme variations in state practice are curtailed by the uniform nationwide effect of the federal Constitution’s demand.
Usually, state venue rules require that a lawsuit be brought in the area where the defendants reside or the disputed events occurred. However, it would be more complicated if the defendant is a citizen of different state(s) or a citizen of other country and jurisdictional amount is in excess of $75,000.00. Then, the controversies or cases will be under Federal jurisdiction. Choice of favorable law influences on choice of forum. The competent lawyer who commences litigation on behalf of a client is to secure for
I usually do not discuss or comments on case without completely understanding the case. Media report Chinese so-called dissidents are based on, more or less, hearsay or only dissidents’ side of story since I have not read any Chinese judiciary comments about the case or exactly what ground for judgment issued.
A China with democracy or freedom must be reasonable regulations and prohibitions, by its constitution and legal systems, imposed in interests of community and the even distribution of a level of the education. The idea of so-called Chinese dissidents’ democracy or freedom will not be worked in China current society as the following reasons (this article, both Chinese and English versions, has been posted in my Facebook and my Blog):
"How to protect your personal or business legal rights in the United States!
We make a comparison with the other side of the world, U.S. Taiwan legal systems are immature and Childish or, with all due respect, monkey business, similar to some small European countries such as Spain. Taiwan Courts should not, in the guise of interpretation, enlarges the scope of a statute and include therein situations not provided nor intended by the Taiwan lawmakers or legislative bodies. Again democracy or human right must have good legal systems impose in interests of community as well as the level of the education. So, I would not recommend China adopt any legal or social system of Taiwan.



SCMP.com Account