网络联署呼吁书:支持陈平福 反对文字狱

网络联署呼吁书:支持陈平福 反对文字狱

签名链接: (谷歌文档)

或发电邮至 freechenpingfu@gmail.com

2012年9月19日星期三

(视频)街头艺术家”煽动颠覆国家政权“

(编者:一个具有强大震撼力的视频由一个推文使它传播的更广泛,陈平福就是这样的一位街头艺术家..)



原视频 (youtube)


张健(评论):陈平福案是违宪执法的悲剧

几天前,9月4日,我在博客中国上看到甘雨医生的一文——《起诉书全文陈平福因网文面临牢狱之灾!》。原本打算当天下午撰写一文进行法学和政治学意义上的分 析。然而,由于自己先前对此并不是非常了解,加之紧看到一文说法而已(还有一个原因,就是当天在博客中国撰写的几篇文章,篇篇都遭到了管理员的“打击”, 即发表不久后被删除。)。于是,自己取消分析该事件。

  5日,在博客中国上看到鲁山老泉转载陈平福当事人自己的《我是这样走上“犯罪”道路的》,于此,对此问题有了更进一步的了解。同时,当天在微博上见到众多自由民主追求者纷纷报道陈平福事件的内容。

  6日晚,又在网易上看到推荐的《陈平福涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权案开庭》。虽然,这个以新闻消息报道的“证实”内容没有什么实质意义的消息,但是,从最近这众多的材料上,自己基本可以总结比最初看到《起诉书全文陈平福因网文面临牢狱之灾!》一文后更详细的认识了。

  坦率地说,看过这些之后,个人非常感慨,出于法学精神,也出于我们追求综合民主或现代民主的世界观、政治观和价值观,自己不得不说,就整个起诉陈平福一事来说,都是在“违宪”法学思想指导下进行的审判。具体地说,我们大概可以从以下几个方面来认识“违宪”法学观。

   首先,该审判违反了《中华人民共和国宪法》。我们都知道,目前官方以所谓的“2007年7月至2012年3月,陈平福在网易、搜狐、新浪等多家网站,用 博客或微博发表、转载了《向埃及人民学习,我们不想再忍受花言巧语的愚弄》、《不当奴化教育的帮凶》、《中国特色——领导创造思想》、《抗拒民主和法制, 全民族都是输家》、《我在自己的祖国被自己的仆人欺负》等34篇文章”来裁定陈平福犯有“通过互联网攻击党和政府,诋毁、诬蔑国家政权与社会主义制度,其行为触犯了《刑法》相关规定,应以煽动颠覆国家政权罪追究其刑事责任”。

  我们都知道,《中华人民共和国宪法》在第二章“公民的基本权利和义务”中明确有以下条款:

  第三十三条 凡具有中华人民共和国国籍的人都是中华人民共和国公民。
  
  中华人民共和国公民在法律面前一律平等。
  
  国家尊重和保障人权。
  
  第三十五条 中华人民共和国公民有言论、出版、集会、结社、游行、示威的自由。
  
  第四十一条 中华人民共和国公民对于任何国家机关和国家工作人员,有提出批评和建议的权利;对于任何国家机关和国家工作人员的违法失职行为,有向有关国家机关提出申诉、控告或者检举的权利,但是不得捏造或者歪曲事实进行诬告陷害。
  
  对于公民的申诉、控告或者检举,有关国家机关必须查清事实,负责处理。任何人不得压制和打击报复。
  
   我们亦知道,陈平福生活在中国大陆地区,即我们大陆绝大多数说的“中华人民共和国”或简称“中国”的地方,这样一来,他就是《宪法》第33条的“是中华 人民共和国公民”。既然他是这个地方的“公民”,那么他就理应有这里宪法赋予的公民基本权利,即宪法第35条、第41条的内容。

  毫无疑问,陈平福此次获罪的原因是一个公民行驶公民对“国家机关和国家工作人员,有提出批评和建议的权利”,而这个权利又属于宪法第35条的“中华人民共和国公民有言论的自由”权利。

  因此,对陈平福的起诉,本身就违反了宪法的精神,是对宪法的不尊重,对宪法明确公布的“公民的基本权利和义务”的蔑视,甚至是践踏。

   其次,此次说陈平福的行为是“通过互联网攻击党和政府,诋毁、诬蔑国家政权与社会主义制度,其行为触犯了《刑法》相关规定,应以煽动颠覆国家政权罪追究 其刑事责任”。我们法学人都知道,根据法理学的基本原则,上位法拥有最高权威,下位法服从上位法,当“下位法”违背“上位法”精神,制定的“下位法”无效。在此,我们也知道,《中华人民共和国宪法》属于法理学上说的“上位法”,是根本法,是制定一切法律的主旨和原则;而《中华人民共和国刑法》,它属于法 理学上的“下位法”,是部门法,是根据“上位法”的《宪法》来制定的。因此,我们现在根据“上位法拥有最高权威,下位法服从上位法”基本原则,就不难发 现,此次所使用的“中华人民共和国刑法”部分中的“危害国家安全罪”对陈平福进行起诉的法律准则和内容,其本身就因为陈平福拥有《宪法》“公民的基本权利 和义务”部分的保护,即我们说的甘肃省兰州市中级法院所根据的中华人民共和国刑法内容审判陈平福,其本质是违反了宪法,或者说,甘肃省兰州市中级法院没有尊重宪法。

   第三,陈平福有言论自由,但是他的这些文章是否构成“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”呢?这里显然存在法律上找不到依据的内容。我们知道,裁决陈平福犯有“煽动颠 覆国家政权罪”,就应该有犯罪事实,即陈平福的这些言论是否起到了作用?他的这些文章内容又是否“颠覆国家政权罪”的结果呢?按照《刑法》上的“无行为则 无罪行”、“无结果则无罪”和“罪行法定”原则,我们在此根本就找不到陈平福有“颠覆国家政权罪”的行为,更不存在“颠覆国家政权罪”的结果。既然没有行 为,又没有结果,那么,官方根据什么来裁决“危害结果”来审判陈平福呢?

   第四,陈平福的文章内容本身应该值得分析。我们都知道,此次官方以“2007年7月至2012年3月,陈平福在网易、搜狐、新浪等多家网站,用博客或微 博发表、转载《向埃及人民学习,我们不想再忍受花言巧语的愚弄》、《不当奴化教育的帮凶》、《中国特色——领导创造思想》、《抗拒民主和法制,全民族都是 输家》、《我在自己的祖国被自己的仆人欺负》等34篇文章”为由起诉陈平福,却不对文章内容的来源和本质进行分析,然后直接裁定陈平福犯有“颠覆国家政权 罪”。我们根据目前官方和媒体所说的,陈平福是“据陈平福公开发表的多篇博文所述,他原是皋兰县一家国企学校的数学教师。2005年,他遭遇了一连串的生 活打击。先是企业倒闭导致失业,继而又生了一场大病,负债累累,孩子又要上大学,生活难以为继。不得已,他来到省城兰州,靠拉小提琴卖艺为生,却多次遭遇 当地政府救助站的‘驱逐和羞辱’”。换言之,陈平福所有自己撰写的文章,都是来自于自己对现实生活的切身体会,是来源于悲惨的命运。因此,我们就可以这么 说,陈平福的创作,实际上和文学作品、时政评论、新闻消息等内容是一样的,都是来自于生活。这样,我们就可以推演出一系列很滑稽,甚至很荒唐的结论:目前 大陆所有的言论都是犯有“颠覆国家政权罪”,无论是中共央视,还是省市媒体,还是一般平民,他们对现实生活的赞美或批评,都是与陈平福的创作来源对象一样,即来自对现实社会的“感知”——不管是好的感知,还是坏的感知。既然都是人们对现实生活的感知,那为什么陈平福的言论就是“颠覆国家政权罪”?而中国 大陆央视、省视、地视,乃至各报纸、杂志等等,这些所有报道、刊出对生活感知的文章,其内容却不认为是“颠覆国家政权罪”?因而,我们可以说,如果陈平福 发表对现实生活的感言文章犯有“颠覆国家政权罪”,那我们所有人都应该是这样的,根本就没有彼此区别。

   综合地说,此次对陈平福因对生活感受发表了一些文章而起诉他犯有“颠覆国家政权罪”,无论从何种角度分析,我们都会裁断一个事实上存在的问题:甘肃省兰 州市中级法院、检察院、公安等司法系统的工作人员,他们对中国大陆的宪法、部门法实在太缺乏真知了解,仅是以应付差事去解决问题。当这样一群法盲执行宪法 及其相关法律时,我们所看到的,就必定是社会的悲剧和群众的悲剧.

  公开“违宪”,就应该执行“违宪”审查制度,即对司法人员及其相关人员进行调查,以匡正宪法在国民心中的至高地位!

2012年9月16日星期日

Human Rights in China Bulletin on Chen Pingfu


Online Protest Grows as Former Teacher Awaits Verdict on “Inciting Subversion of State Power”

2012-09-13
On the September 4, Chen Pingfu (陈平福), a former math and science teacher, was tried in a court in Lanzhou, Gansu Province for “inciting subversion of state power.” The court did not issue a verdict.
In 2005, Chen started playing violin on the street in Lanzhou on weekends to repay debts he had incurred for heart surgery. He was repeatedly harassed by local authorities in Lanzhou and began blogging about his ordeals and the cruelty of city officials. In August 2012, the Lanzhou procuratorate charged him with “inciting subversion of state power,” basing its indictment on 34 articles posted on his blogs.
After Chen’s trial, his story spread on the Internet and, on September 9, Sun Yat-sen University professor and documentary filmmaker Ai Xiaoming (艾晓明) initiated a signature campaign to protest his prosecution. As of September 13, 2012, 323 people have signed, including well-known scholars, writers, and rights defenders inside China and abroad.
There is no indication when the court will rule. It was reported that on September 13, the police officers who have been monitoring Chen left. Chen has been under residential surveillance since June 27, 2012.
Below is an English translation of the indictment by Human Rights in China. For additional background information on Chen, we are including an essay below, written by Yaxue Cao, based on Chen’s blog posts listed in the indictment.

A Portrait of a “Subverter”

by Yaxue Cao
On Tuesday, September 4, a 55-year-old man was on trial for “inciting subversion of state power” in Lanzhou, the capital city of northwestern province of Gansu, China, and the evidence cited in the indictment (see below for translation) consists of a long list of blog posts and nothing else. So it is a case of the crime of self-expression. The sentence hasn’t been announced, and at the end of the trial, the court announced that he would continue to be “residing under surveillance” (监视居住) until the sentence comes.
His name is Chen Pingfu (陈平福). He was 20 years old when China, under Deng Xiaoping’s leadership, reinstituted national college examination. He excelled in the exams, and entered Northwest Normal University in Lanzhou majoring in mathematics. Upon graduating he was assigned a teaching job at the vocational school of Victory Machinery Factory of Capital Steel (首钢胜利机械厂) in Gaolan (皋兰) on outskirts of Lanzhou. There he taught math for more than two decades.
In May 2005, he suffered a heart attack and was sent to a hospital. His employer, a Mao-era state-owned enterprise on the brink of bankruptcy, was unable to help him with funds needed for surgery, nor could he afford it himself.  He had to leave the hospital. His father gathered his younger siblings, pleading help from them for their older brother. They pulled together more than 50,000 yuan [about $6,000 at the time] and Chen Pingfu underwent a successful heart bypass surgery.
He was anxious to pay the debt, losing sleep sometimes, not because his siblings were pressuring him, but because none of them were well-off. One of his younger sisters, a cleaning woman in a small town making 150 a month yuan [about $20], gave him what was likely her life’s savings: 10,000 yuan[about $1,212].
With few means to make money, Chen Pingfu decided to play violin on the street. On Saturdays and Sundays he traveled 30 miles from Gaolan to downtown Lanzhou to do that. It wasn’t easy for an educated Chinese man with a keen sense of “face.” On his first trip, he chose a site but paced for an hour before taking out his violin and spreading a sheet on the floor that read: “Employee of Victory Machinery Factory, deeply in debt due to heart surgery, have to perform on street for alms.”
He played the famous Butterfly Lovers’ Violin Concerto (the musical retelling of the Chinese classical tale of Liang Shanbo and Zhu Yingtai, the so-called Chinese Romeo and Juliet) and Robert Shumann’s “Träumerei,” among other pieces. To those who thought he was a fraud, he gave his employer’s phone number for verification. But mostly he met with compassion, encouragement, and generosity. Once, a five-year-old girl pulled her mother to a stop, listened, and handed him a 1 yuan [about $0.15] bill with both hands. Another time, a man stopped and listened, then disappeared into a hotel but sent a porter with 50 yuan [about $6]. Other musicians gave him tips on how to play better. Along the way, he improved his playing.
It went well, so well that Sohu.com, a major Internet service provider in China, interviewed him about his “success” and the positive social aspects of his story. It is from this interview, now available on Youtube, and the articles listed in his indictment that I learned his story.
In 2009, as his factory prepared for bankruptcy and he had no job to go to, he played violin on street in the afternoons. For one reason or the other, he didn’t talk about the dark side of his street experience in the interview. On the street he was scolded and threatened by liuguan (流管, migrant population administration) and jiuzhu zhan (救助站, relief station) workers who came not to lend him a hand but to get rid of him. They told him, “The government forbids performing on street for money!” They pressed him onto the ground to subdue him. An officer from the relief station shouted at him, “I’ll send you to your death if you dare be a nuisance! Who do you think you are? Making you die is nothing for us! Go with us if you dare, and see how we will tidy you up!” (Quoted from his blog post “Fight against Brutality and Pursue Civilization.”)
One time, a group of men from the Relief Station seized him and threw him into a truck with metal bars. In the heat of the summer, after struggling with the thugs, his heart beat faster and his chest tightened. He begged his captors to let him out, but they laughed at him, and one of them told him he was out of his mind.
On the street, he also witnessed other cruelties. A woman’s basket of peaches was snatched away from her by a chengguan (城管, urban management) officer; a middle-aged shoeshine man was chased away.
As he played violin on street, he also set up several blogs, pouring out his anger, his frustration, and his thoughts on the ills in Chinese society. Not surprisingly, he was summoned and warned by the authorities.
As 2011 began, Chen Pingfu found a teaching job in the southwestern province of Yunnan. Still in Chinese New Year holiday season, he took a flight, for the first time in his life, to Yunnan, some 1,500 miles away. He had had enough trouble playing violin on the street and writing blogs. His plan was to give up both blogging and playing violin on street to teach children math and science and music. After all, he said, he needed to live first. Three days after he arrived in Yunnan, his former employer called, asking where he was. Soon after, the school’s principal, an old friend of his, received a call from police department in Gansu Province. The local police summoned the principal and interrogated him about Chen’s activities and their relationship. The principal pressed Chen about what he had done, and he didn’t want to be ruined for “hiding away a criminal.” Chen said again and again that he was not a criminal. The Yunnan police asked the principal to fire Chen and send him away within 24 hours.
He was back in Gansu Province in less than a week at his new job. This, despite repeated promises he has made to “relevant organ” that he would not write any more blog posts once he started working. Back in Lanzhou, he called the “relevant organ” to protest, and the person on the other end of the line burst out laughing.
In his blog posts, he told his stories, the humiliation and brutalities he had been subjected to. He reflected on the fundamental ills of the system, the lack of rule of law, and the abuses of power around him. He cheered the democratic revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia. He expressed deep gratitude toward the ordinary Chinese who had helped him in one way or the other.  He voiced his intense disgust for an education centered on tooling children according to the Party’s design. He hoped China would transition peacefully into a democratic country where traditional Chinese culture can be restored and a constitutional political system established, and where he can make a living and play violin freely without being persecuted by the authorities. Chen was determined to continue to speak out. He said in one of his blog posts: “As long as they don’t have an explanation or justification for me, I will continue to tell my story, expose the inhuman crimes perpetrated by the so-called people’s servants, and condemn this lying system.” (Quote from “I May Be Beaten to Death by Thugs, but I Will Not Be Cowed to Death.”)  
On June 27, 2012, he was charged with “inciting subversion of state power” for his blog posts and subjected to residential surveillance. He would have been jailed if not for his coronary heart disease.
“At the hardest time of my life when I had to give up treatment and go home to wait for my death…when I needed relief the most, there was no government to be seen. But when I was deeply in debt, and jobless, and had no choice but to play violin on the street to help myself, the Relief Station of Lanzhou’s municipal government came with a barred jail truck,” Chen Pingfu wrote in one post. (Quoted from “Weasels Serve Chickens.”)
In another, he wrote, “Looking back at my life thus far, I found that I had lived meaninglessly for all these years without doing one worthwhile and meaningful thing. I cannot swallow the humiliation in silence; I have kept thinking and reading to break the cultural dictatorship so that my mind can go to a farther and wider world.” (Quoted from “I Cannot Bear the Humiliation in Silence.”)
But instead of a farther and wider world, he has found himself in jail—in China.
(Yaxue Cao is a writer and translator based in Washington, D.C. She blogs about human rights conditions and the rule of law in China at Seeing Red in China.)

Lanzhou Municipal People’s Procuratorate of Gansu Province

Indictment

 [2012] No.120
Defendant Chen Pingfu; male; Han nationality; born March 1, 1957; identification number 622725195703011415; undergraduate education; registration residence:  Apt 101, 301 Xinxing Road, Shidong Township, Gaolan County; residing at Apt 3B-202, Building 2, Fengning Deshang Residential Complex, 284 Zhaolin Road, Anning District, Lanzhou.  On June 27, 2012, Chen was put under residential surveillance on suspicion of inciting subversion of state power as determined by the Gaolan County Public Security Bureau.
The Gaolan County Public Security Bureau has concluded its investigation of this case. The Gaolan County People’s Procuratorate submitted his case to the Lanzhou Municipal People’s Procuratorate for examination and review for indictment. The examination conducted according to law has found that:
Between July 2007 and March 2012, the defendant Chen Pingfu registered blogs or microblogs under the name “Chen Pingfu” on NetEase, Baidu, Sohu, Mtime.com, Sina, Tianya, and other websites where he published or reposted 34 articles including “This Is a Fight for the Spiritual Destiny between Good and Evil” (这是一场心灵归宿的正邪大战), “Weasels Serve Chickens” (黄鼠狼为鸡服务) “Fight against Brutality, Pursue Civilization” (对抗野蛮,追求文明), “Robbery or Law Enforcement?” (抢劫?执法?) “How the Rule of Law Can Be Used Only to Bind Ordinary People” (依法治国岂能只顾捆绑普通百姓) “An Unyielding Soul Will Never Be Conquered” (不屈的灵魂永远无法被征服!) “Learn from Egyptians—We Will Not be Fooled by Sweet Lies Anymore” (向埃及人民学习,我们不想再忍受花言巧语的愚弄) “I Cannot Bear the Humiliation in Silence” (我无法默默地忍受屈辱), “Prop Up Socialism , Suffer Hard Times, Dance in Shackles” (社会主义挺着,艰难的日子忍着,戴着镣铐的舞跳着), “Do Not Be Accomplices of Education That Enslaves” (不当奴化教育的帮凶), “The Bugle Call to Overturn the Dictators Has Sounded” (推翻独裁者的号角已经吹响), “Withdraw All Political Parties from Schools” (一切党派退出学校), “A Ghost under the Dictator’s Knife: To Wang Lijun” (专制刀下的鬼— 送给王立军) “Don’t Trick Me, the Whole World Knows” (不要忽悠我,地球人都知道), “Wake Up, Living People!” (活着的人,醒来吧!), “Wherever Great Leaders Appear, the People Are Bound to Suffer” (伟大领袖出现在哪里,那里的人民必定遭殃!) “Use Bright Lights to Illuminate Reality, Use Beautiful Violin Music to Move Society” (用明亮的灯光照亮现实,用迷人的琴声感动社会), “Attempting  to Stop the Tide of Democracy Is to Resist the Will of God” (企图阻挡民主潮流,就是抗拒上帝的旨意), “At the Heart of an Authoritarian System Is Official Power, at the Heart of a Democratic System Is Civil Rights” (专制制度以官权为中心,民主制度以民权为中心) “Chinese Characteristics: Leaders Create Thinking” (中国特色—领导创造思想), “Government Bans Making a Living Illicitly, Tunisians Overthrew Ali” (政府不许非法谋生,突尼西亚人将阿里赶下台), “Truth Has Power, True Words Have Energy” (真理具有力量,真话具有能量), “The Whole Nation Will Be at a Loss If Democracy and Rule of Law Are Resisted” (抗拒民主和法制,全民族都是输家), “A Nightmare: Traveled from the Northwest to the Southwest over 10 Days to Find Work But Was Forced to Return” (十天内从大西北到大西南打工挣钱,又被迫返回原地,一场噩梦), “Humanity’s Quest for Freedom and Dignity Is Reaching a Consensus” (人类对自由与尊严的追求正在达成共识), “I Protest with Anger the Authorities’ Infringement  of My Right to Make a Living” (愤怒抗议有关部门剥夺我打工挣钱谋生的权利!), “I Am Left Helpless, I Can Only Continue to Pursue the Path of No Return to Freedom and Dignity” (我被逼无奈,只好接着走这追求自由和尊严的不归之路), “I Want Freedom, Dignity, and to Live a Normal Life” (要自由、要尊严,我要像正常人一样生活), “This Tiger of Power Is Frightening Indeed” (真的好可怕啊,权力这个老虎), “I Was Bullied by Civil Servants in My Own Homeland” (我在自己的祖国被自己的仆人欺负), “A Nation That Imprisons Thoughts Is Hopeless” (被禁锢思想的国家是没有希望的), “There Is Such a Political System” (有这样的一个政治制度), and “The Greatest Enemy of Our Times” (我们这个年代最大的敌人). In these articles he expressed such inflammatory views as that Marxism, Leninism, Mao Zedong Thoughts, Deng Xiaoping Theory, Three Represents, and Scientific Development have no benefit for the society and the people; that the Communist Party rule knows only to push ordinary people around and not let them make a living; that the current system is not democratic enough, and that democracy and constitutionalism should be implemented.
The aforementioned facts of crime are proven by documentary evidence, material evidence, and the defendant’s statements.
The procuatorate believes that the defendant Chen Pingfu disregarded state laws and spread speech attacking the Communist Party and the government to unspecified Internet users, defaming and slandering state power and the socialist system.  His actions have violated the stipulations of Article 105(2) of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China. The facts of the crime are clear, the evidence is reliable and sufficient, and he should be found criminally responsible for the crime of inciting subversion of state power. This procuratorate is initiating prosecution proceedings against the defendant on the basis of the provisions of Article 141 of the Criminal Procedural Law of the People’s Republic of China, and asks for a judgment in accordance with the law.
Addressed to:
Gansu Lanzhou Municipal Intermediate People’s Court
Deputy Prosecutor: Wang Hailong (王海龙)
August 2, 2012
(The original Chinese indictment is available on Citizens’ Square.)
Link (Human Rights in China)

2012年9月12日星期三

时代周刊 《TIME》China: Laid-off Teacher Faces Inciting Subversion Charges for Online Posts


China: Laid-off Teacher Faces Inciting Subversion Charges for Online Posts



With his thin frame, shabby suit and graying hair, Chen Pingfu, who played his violin for handouts on the streets of northwestern Chinese city of Lanzhou, hardly seemed to be a threat to anyone. But after he wrote a series of online essays criticizing the country’s ruling Communist Party, the 55-year-old laid-off teacher was accused of “inciting subversion of state power”—a criminal charge generally reserved for China’s most prominent dissidents.

Such cases are generally handled quietly in China, with little mention in the domestic press and online discussion closely censored, despite whatever attention and criticism they may receive from foreign governments and human rights activists abroad. A prime example is literary critic Liu Xiaobo, who was sentenced to an 11-year prison term for inciting subversion in 2009. He is little known or discussed at home, but was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2010. Chen is the complete opposite. Largely unknown outside China, he has gained a surprising level of online support in China since he went on trial Sept. 4.

On Chinese blogs and Twitter-like services such as Sina Weibo, many people describe Chen as an exemplar of free speech who wrote about the injustices he faced in Chinese society. “I think they identify themselves with him because he is an ordinary person,” says Wang Songlian, a Hong Kong-based researcher for the ngo Chinese Human Rights Defenders. “He doesn’t have connections, he’s not rich, he’s not going forward in life. A lot of netizens feel the same.” Some commenters expressed concern over the effect his case might have on online discourse, which despite censorship has seen significant room for discussion of sensitive topics in recent years. “If this is a crime, then how many people who are active on Weibo should be convicted?” wrote Xing Jianmin, a lawyer from Hebei province. “How is it that the jails aren’t exploding?”

(MORE: Gulag Reform: Will China Stop Sending Its Dissidents to Labor Camps?)

Caixin, an aggressive Beijing-based business magazine, ran a story on its website that was later removed. When Hong Kong-based Phoenix Media re-posted the Caixin story on its website, it quickly gathered more than 120,000 comments, largely from mainlanders in support of Chen. “For a lot of people this case involves different layers of injustice that generate considerable empathy and make people angry,” says Joshua Rosenzweig, an independent human rights researcher based in Hong Kong. “This is not somebody who is a veteran political dissident. Those sort of people may not generate that kind of empathy. People feel they should know better, that they are just causing trouble. This guy, he’s got a grievance with the system and there seems to be a good reason. People see why he might question whether the one-party system has been good for China.”

Amid China’s boom, Chen serves as a stark reminder that for all the fortunes made and hundreds of millions lifted out of poverty, others have been left behind. Born in 1957, Chen was one of the first generation of students to take the national college entrance examination after it was reintroduced following the chaos of the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution, when universities were largely shuttered. He attended the Northwest Normal University from 1978-82, and took a job at the Shengli Machinery Factory in 1984. The factory originally made armaments as part of Mao Zedong’s “Third Front,” when industrial production was developed in the Chinese interior, far from the threat of potential foreign invasion. During the Cold War demand was strong, and despite its remote location business was good for the factory. Chen, who taught various subjects for workers’ evening classes, married and had a son. In the 1990s China began to streamline its military, and the factory struggled to transition to useful commercial products, like farm equipment.

Chen had his own struggles, too. He underwent heart surgery in 2005, and had to pay the $6,000 expense out of pocket. At the same time his son was planning to attend college, adding to his debt woes. So Chen began playing his violin on the streets of Lanzhou to earn extra money in his spare time. Three years later, the factory went bankrupt, forcing him to busk full-time. The ill treatment he received from local police, employees of a local rescue shelter, and urban management officers known as chengguan drove him to start writing online in 2007. “During my days of playing violin on the street, I was constantly insulted and abused by people from the government. They didn’t help me at all,” he told TIME in a phone interview from Lanzhou, where he remains under house arrest pending the outcome of his trial. “It was only the general public that gave me the help. That made me decide to write articles online.”

(MORE: Chinese Dissidents’ Stories of Abuse in Detention Emerge)

Chen says he wrote 300 to 400 articles over the next five years. Prosecutors in Lanzhou identified 34 in particular as evidence of the charge of inciting subversion. The titles include “I Can’t Bear Humiliation in Silence,” “The Call to Overthrow the Dictators Has Sounded” and “I Want Freedom, Respect and to Live Like a Normal Person.” They all bear the distinct voice of an educated man who once held a respected position in society enraged by the abuse he endures as an outcast hustling for a living on the streets. “Yesterday I saw a gang of fierce, imposing chengguan who drove away a middle-aged shoeshine man,” he wrote in a 2010 essay called “A Weasel Serves the Chickens. “That shoeshine man wasn’t doing anything to inconvenience pedestrians, so why did they drive him off? If it weren’t for family difficulties or a lack of money, who would subserviently shine shoes like that?”

Chen places much of the blame for the injustices he faced on authoritarian system, and by endorsing the Arab Spring last year he made himself a target for the crackdown that followed in China. In an essay from February 2011 titled “Study the Egyptians, We Don’t Want to Be Fooled Again,” he wrote, “I’m convinced that if we didn’t have the (Communist) Party’s leadership, this society would finally be harmonious and peaceful.” At that time Chen says he found a new job teaching in southern Yunnan province, but police blocked him from taking it due to his writing, which only increased his desperation. “They accuse me of attacking the social system,” he told TIME. “Indeed, I am attacking the system. It’s too brutal. The general public is very kind, but the government is inhumane. I’m not insulted by their accusations because I’m innocent. I only spoke the truth.”

His defense attorney, Lanzhou-based He Huixin, argued that Chen’s criticism of the government and the Communist Party don’t equal an attack on the state. He noted the same reasoning was put forward in 1933 on behalf of Chen Duxiu, a co-founder of the Chinese Communist Party, who was accused of threatening the state by Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist government. The argument didn’t work, and Chen Duxiu was convicted, but a public outcry spared him a harsh sentence. Nearly a century later, it’s unlikely the argument will work for Chen Pingfu, either, but he too can hope the concerns of China’s online masses will save him a long prison term.

—with reporting by Chengcheng Jiang / Beijing
MORE: Murder, Lies, Abuse Of Power and Other Crimes Of the Chinese Century



Read more: http://world.time.com/2012/09/11/teacher-violinist-enemy-of-the-state-web-posts-spur-free-speech-debate-in-china/#ixzz26Dz4NrM8

2012年9月11日星期二

网络联署呼吁书:支持陈平福 反对文字狱(签名更新)


(编注:甘肃 兰州 陈平福 因言被罪,《网络联署呼吁书:支持陈平福 反对文字狱》正在广泛传播,签名每日更新:签名更新链接-谷歌文档

网络联署呼吁书:支持陈平福 反对文字狱

网络消息:甘肃省兰州市中级法院于9月4日开庭审理了陈平福涉嫌“煽动颠覆国家政权”案。被起诉人陈平福,失业教师。陈平福在网易、搜狐、新浪等多家网站上发表和转载过若干博文,如《向埃及人民学习,我们不想再忍受花言巧语的愚弄》、《不当奴化教育的帮凶》、《中国特色领导创造思想》、《愤怒抗议有关部门剥夺我打工挣钱谋生的权利!》等等。起诉书认为,陈平福通过互联网攻击党和政府,诋毁、诬蔑国家政权与社会主义制度,其行为触犯了《刑法》相关规定,应以“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”追究其刑事责任。

甘肃荣庆律师事务所何辉新律师当庭为陈平福做无罪辩护。何辉新律师认为,首先,中国《宪法》第35条规定公民“ 有言论、出版、集会、结社、游行、示威的自由”。陈平福在互联网发表文章,有的是根据自己的遭遇撰写的,有的是转载的;其目的不过是为了表达“对现状不满,发泄心中的不快”。文中没有“造谣、诽谤”的内容,他是在履行《宪法》赋予一个公民对政府的监督权。这如何能被认为是“煽动颠覆国家政权、推翻社会主义制度”?其次,政府不等于国家,公民批评政府工作人员、乃至批评政府,不等于要颠覆国家政权。

我们支持何辉新律师所做的陈平福无罪辩护词,我们还认为,兰州检察院针对一个普通公民行使表达权的行为予以恶意起诉,令人震惊,骇人听闻。这是一起典型的以言治罪的案例,它对全社会发出了恐怖信号:新的一轮文化大革命、新的一轮文字狱将拿普通公民开刀了。这件事发生在中共十八大召开前夕,尤其具有不平凡的意义。这是公然挑战宪法赋予公民的神圣权利,也是挑战即将上任的新一届中共领导团队:十八大之后,每一位中国公民的言论自由权将会遭遇何种处境?

回顾历史,在当代中国,发生过难以计数的以言治罪悲剧。继反胡风运动之后,1957年的反右派运动,以言治罪达到前所未有的程度,给整个国家和人民带来深重的灾难。1966年毛泽东发动文化大革命,同样是从以言治罪开始。在今天的互联网时代,在新媒体和信息技术得到广泛应用的中国社会,如果发表和转载网文即涉嫌犯罪,这在全世界呈现了一个什么样的大国形象?又将开启一个规模何其广大的政治迫害时代!

尽管主流媒体对这场审判没有报道,尽管陈平福只是一个名不见经传的小人物;但是,在今天的网络时代,人们追求思想自由的意志势不可挡,翻越防火墙的能力也空前高涨。陈平福的名字和思想在网络上迅速传布,以至于有网民发出“我们都是陈平福”的呼喊。兰州检察院对陈平福的起诉书,激起诸多网民的愤怒、抗议和嘲讽。这场审判被认为“代表目前我国司法水平的全面堕落,公诉书狗屁不通”,“再有了判决,中国司法史的最差案件记录就产生了。“”公诉人满口‘打江山坐江山’的封建思想,却硬要将一个苦于生计、街头卖艺又屡屡被城管和救助站侮辱和收容,一心追求能有尊严自由地活下去,渴望这个国家变好且坚信她会变好的患有心脏病的55岁的白发老人,以颠煽罪送入牢房。”“陈平福的命很贱,你就是杀掉他,也不过等于是按死了一只蚂蚁,但这并不能增添兰州的光荣,恰恰相反。”“其实网民是抓不完的。你可以随时按死一只蚂蚁,但你能按死所有的蚂蚁吗?”

姑且不论,陈平福的所谓“有罪”言论,还都是在国内的网站上发表的,这些网站深受中共宣传部控制。他们对言论进行严格筛选,反复过滤。由此幸存下来的陈平福网文,居然还能成为“涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权罪”的证据;那么,被这些网站屏蔽、删除的文章、微博,其作者岂非人人当诛!陈平福有罪,那么允许他发表文章、开设博客的网站该当何罪?那些网站的负责人,是不是协同犯罪,甚至是罪魁祸首?如此推论,根本应该追究允许互联网进入中国的那些政府部门,如果没有互联网,陈平福又何从获取信息并发表和转发他人言论?!

如果说,上述推论是荒唐的;那么,开审网民陈平福就是一场司法闹剧,目的是震慑、打压那些关注现实并提出批评的意见人士。但是,就在此时此刻,互联网上,海量的信息在流动;无数网民以博文、微博的形式揭露现实危机,表达反腐诉求,谴责贪官污吏,揭露思想专制,呼唤民主宪政……这一切,不仅是行使着中华人民共和国宪法所保障的公民权利,而且是践行中国政府庄严签署的《世界人权宣言》。在这个具有普世价值的文本上记载着:

第十九条
人人有权享有主张和发表意见的自由;此项权利包括持有主张而不受干涉的自由;和通过任何媒介和不论国界寻求、接受和传递消息和思想的自由。

第二十七条
(一)人人有权自由参加社会的文化生活,享受艺术,并分享科学进步及其产生的福利。

我们必须行动起来,保卫陈平福,反对以言治罪。因为,保卫陈平福就是保卫我们每一位公民的权利,保卫此时此刻正在电脑前点击键盘、移动鼠标的每一位网民的权利,保卫人们自由交流的权利,保卫人们自由获取以及发表信息的权利。

今天在中国,人们的言论空间比较起反右和文革的黑暗时代已经有了极大的拓展,这是如林昭、遇罗克等无数坚持自由思想者用鲜血和生命换来的。但是,审判陈平福,就是扭转历史车轮,退向那个并不遥远的黑暗时代。更何况,在陈平福之前,已经有了多项恶劣的先例:谭作人调查川震豆腐渣工程和遇难学生名单被追究网文,因“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”被判处五年监禁。“福建三网民”为遇难女性发帖鸣冤,被判诽谤罪获刑;王荔蕻因声援三网民被判“寻衅滋事”罪入狱。方竹笋、任建宇因为若干微博言论甚至是在他人漫画上加评论被劳教。近日来还有朱承志因拍摄李旺阳被自杀照片被以“涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权”批捕……

如果我们今天不站出来保卫陈平福的言论表达权,那我们对自由民主的追求,对现实问题的揭露以及对公共事务的批评意见,同样会被歪曲和妖魔化;以至于“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”会像非典一样流行开来,成为权势集团打击报复的手段,成为对批评者实施政治迫害的工具;文革时代肆意将不同意见者打成反革命的悲剧势必重演。这是对整个社会肌体的致命打击,是对公共良知的戕害;在这样的人权灾难面前,我们绝不能沉默。

我们呼吁,所有希望中国走向民主、开放和文化多元性的人们,所有希望我们的下一代不再生活在思想专制中的人们,所有关注中国民主转型的学者、思想家、人权卫士、网络公民,大家都来参与网络联署,在“支持陈平福,反对文字狱”的呼吁书上签上你的名字。

签名表链接

通过电邮签名请送至: freechenpingfu@gmail.com

请关注: 艾晓明工作室博客(4)关于 《网络联署呼吁书:支持陈平福 反对文字狱》专栏

《自由亚洲-粤语》陈平福被“以言入罪”多人抱不平


2012-09-10

甘肃兰州教师陈平福因网上发表政治文章被控“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”,目前正等候判决,数十名海内外人士联署呼吁,支持陈平褔,反对文字狱。(海蓝报道)

甘肃兰州失业教师陈平褔因网上政治文章被控“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”,网民呼吁联署支持陈平褔反对文字狱,截至周六,三十多名海内外维权人士、学者签名支持,包括胡佳、王茘蕻、艾晓明及严正学等。联署内容指,兰州检察院针对一个普通公民行使表达权的行为予以起诉,令人震惊。这是一宗典型以言治罪的案例,它对全社会发出恐怖信号。这件事发生在十八大召开前,公然挑战宪法赋予公民的权利。

联署的北京异见人士胡佳指,他不清楚有多少人参与,这代表联署人士现时的统一意旨,尤其今天是教师节,陈平褔也是教师,独立思考的教师是国家的财富,他怎么可以在兰州被指控煽动颠覆国家政权罪,陷入司法打压,这是不公平。

他说:我本人在第一批签名里,我跟严正学曾被判处这个刑法,我们知道这个煽动颠覆国家政权罪,它不是国法是党法,是维护党权的一种私刑,这种东西降临在老师头上的话,我们觉得不公平。

就联署,陈平褔表示,有朋友致电告诉他这个联署活动,这是好事情,但他没有上网,不清楚具体情况。另外,他又指,他是失业教师,但他不想继续任教,因为教育控制思想严重,尤其政治课程。他说:尤其这个教育,我觉得这个政治课,对人的思想控制确实太严重,很多年青人不关心时事政治,那些东西都是官方对人的思想及精神控制,所以很多年青人没有动静。

陈平褔的案件于上周二兰州中院开庭,但至今仍未宣判。他自去年2月起被监视居住。

兰州巿中院起诉书指,2007年至12年3月,被告陈平褔先后在网易、百度、搜狐等网站发表,转载30多篇文章说,马列主义、毛泽东思想、邓小平理论等和人民没任何好处,共产党执政只知道欺压百姓,应该实行民主宪政等煽动性观点。本院认为他无视国法,在互联网上针对不特定网民,散布攻击党和政府言论等,应当以煽动颠覆国家政权罪追究刑责。

原文链接(自由亚洲-粤语)

2012年9月10日星期一

顾志坚:当务之急,我们要各显神通营救陈平福

中国的问题归根到底是缺乏民主自由,一日无民主自由,一日无稳定。现在所谓维稳,就是公权力动用武力镇压手无寸铁的民众。甘肃陈平福,国企改制,中年失业,身患重病,卖艺为生。一介书生,受苦难熬,上网发帖,说几句牢骚话,却竟也被以颠覆国家政权罪起诉。

在强大的国家政权面前,岂独陈平福是弱者?中国之大,陈平福不知几千几百万。刘少奇,彭德怀,哪一个不是彭德怀?请君入瓮这个词,很多飞扬跋扈的公门中人忘记了,重庆的王立军,唐建华,一个个打黑英雄,黑打时气焰熏天,倒台时,尿滚屁流,无处遁迹,即使逃亡美国领事馆,也只能乖乖束手待擒。我可以负责任的说,所有的中国人都可能是陈平福。所以,有人高喊:保护陈平福的平安幸福,就是保护十四亿中国人的平安幸福。

陈平福的辩护律师写的辩护词铿锵有力:政府不等于国家,执政党不等于国家政权。以言论批评、甚至抨击、反对执政党、政府的行为不构成煽动颠覆国家政权罪。在大多数上猫眼的人眼中,这是常识,可是,在渔民教育从小抓起的中国,何辉新律师在法庭上的发言犹如惊天雷劈,在所谓新中国的司法史上绝无仅有,可是,正如何律师所言,在七十九年之前的旧中国,79年前,章士钊为陈独秀危害民国案辩护词中就说,“以言论反对,或攻击政府,无论何国,均不为罪”,七十九年过去了,中国到底是进步了还是倒退了?每一个有良知的中国人,心中都会有明确的答案。

网络喧嚣,到底能不能解救陈平福?正如方竹笋先生因为讥笑薄熙来,王立军被判劳教,大家也曾经十分不服气,可是,方竹笋恢复自由,却是在薄熙来倒台之后。甘肃省委书记王三运,省长刘伟平调任甘肃,紧跟党中央,政治路线不错,也没有政敌,时光如白驹过隙,很快就可以安稳告老还乡,萧规曹随,难不成陈平福就没有出头之日?陈平福如果被判刑,老迈病体,也许一年半载不到,就死于狱中了。

方今之际,我认为网络的锣鼓要敲,把让陈平福回家的声音放大,同时,我觉得网友们应该各显神通。比如王三运书记的山东单县老乡们,可以写信或者打电话,刘伟平省长的亲戚也可以给他捎话,甘肃当地网友也可以给在外地做官的大人物写求救信,当然,作为江苏人,我们也可以向江苏籍的大人物陈情:陈平福无罪,放陈平福回家。如果我们的努力获得体制内还有点良心的高官的认同,他只需要一个电话,甘肃当局也许就悄悄的放人了。在中国这个人治社会,我们呼唤法治,却不能忘记人治社会的本质:官大一级压死人,利用体制来营救陈平福。

如果一切的努力都失败了,对应网民的不屈不挠,是社会整体的冷漠,我只有恳请甘肃当局领导认清形势,释放陈平福,其实就是给你自己解套。天下的民怨如同开水,如果再不降温,被开水烫死的何止明朝末年福王朱常洵?对于陈平福案,我想表明一个底线:对于言论自由受到国家宪法保护的陈平福先生,法院如果判他有罪服刑,我们坚决不答应,我们坚持认为陈平福无罪,我们所能让步的底线是:缓刑,立即释放,等陈先生出狱后,再进行申诉。如果你们逆天而行,最后一根稻草可是你们自己添加的,骆驼被压垮了,你们可什么都没有了。

江苏 苏州 顾志坚 13815201367 QQ 1848104960

原文链接(新公民论坛)

《美国之音》中国网络联署抗议兰州当局制造文字狱



海彦 09.09.2012

几十位中国海内外学者、律师、民主和维权等各界人士星期天在网上发起网络联署,抗议甘肃省兰州市以涉嫌“煽动颠覆国家政权”起诉在网上发表博文的兰州市失业教师陈平福。

呼吁书警告说,兰州当局9月4日对陈平福的审判是一起典型的以言治罪的案例,对全社会发出了恐怖信号,目的是震慑、打压那些关注现实并提出批评的意见人士。

呼吁书敦促各界人士声援陈平福言论自由的权力,谴责开审网民陈平福的司法闹剧,保卫每一位网民的权利,保卫自由交流的权利,保卫自由获取以及发表信息的权利。

原文链接(美国之音)

Chinese Voices for Justice: Chen Pingfu’s Inciting to Subvert State Power by His Blogposts?

Posted on September 9, 2012

On September 4, 2012, a laid-off math teacher, a blogger, and a street violinist, CHEN Pingfu was accused of inciting to subvert state power at the Lanzhou Intermediate People’s Court in Gansu Province, China. The accusation was mainly based on blog posts Chen wrote on a few Chinese blog communities, such as Sina, netease, sohu, etc. The following is the English translation of the Accusation by Gansu Lanzhou People’s Procuratorate
The accused Chen Pingfu, male, han nationality, born on March 1st 1957, ID number XXXX, hukou registration: XXX, resident address: XXX. On June 27, 2012, suspected of inciting to subvert state power, Chen was put under police surveillance.

The investigation by the public security bureau has been finished now, and the People’s Procuratorate took the case to our court for accusation. We found the following facts according to law:

Between July 2007 and March 2012, the accused Chen Pingfu registered blogs or microblogs under the name of Chen Pingfu’ s blog on Netease, Baidu, Sohu, Sina and other websites. He worte, and reposted blogs titled: “This is a fight of determining our mind between right and evil” , “Weasels serve chickens”, “To fight against brutality, to pursue civilization”, “Robbery? Law Enforcement?”, “Rule of law shall not only bind common people”, “An unyielding soul will never be conquered”, “To learn from Egyptian people, we will not be fooled by sweetened lying words”, “I cannot bear the humiliation in silence”, “Socialism stands, hard time suffers, dances in shackles”, “Do not be the supporters of brainwashed education”, “The bells rings for overturning the dictators”, “All parties shall retreat from schools”, “A ghost under the dictator’s knife to Wang Lijun”, “No fluffing, the whole world knows it”, “People alive, wake up”, “Where the Great Leader appears, where people suffer”, “The bright light shines the reality, beautiful violin moves society”, “Attempt to stop democratic tide is to stop God’s will”, “Authoritarian system makes authority power the centre, democratic system makes people’s right the centre”, “Chinese characteristics: Leaders make thoughts”, “Government does not allow making a living illegally, Tunisians overthrew Ali”, “Truth has its power, true words has its energy”, “To resist democracy and rule of law, the whole nation will lose”, “Ten days from North West to South West, had to return, a nightmare”, “The human being’s pursuit for freedom and dignity has been reaching a consensus”, “ I oppose with anger against the authorities’ abridging my right to make a living”, “I want freedom, I want dignity, I want to live a normal live a normal life”, “Indeed scary, the tiger of power”, “I was bullied by civil servants in my motherland”, “A nation with thoughts bounded is hopeless”, “There is such a political system”, “The biggest enemy in our era”, etc. He posted about 34 articles, expressing that Marxism Leninism, Mao Zedong thoughts, Deng Xiaoping Theory, and Three Representatives and Scientific Development have no benefit for people. The rule by the Communist Party is only repressing ordinary people, cut their way to make a living, the current system is non-democratic, and democracy and constitutionalism shall be adopted and other inflammatory opinions.

The evidence to prove the above criminal action including written evidence, material evidence, and the defendant’s statement etc has all been affirmed.

Our Procuatorate decides, the defendant Chen Pingfu neglected the Chinese law, spread words attacking the Communist Party the ruling government to indefinite Internet users. His action defames and slanders state authority and socialist system and violated Article 105, item 2.2 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China. The criminal fact is clear, the evidence is accurate and sufficient, the accused should be imposed with criminal penalty for inciting to subvert state power. In accordance with Article 141 of the Criminal Procedural Law of the People’s Republic of China, our Procuratorate brings up this lawsuit and ask for judgement according to law.

Address to Gansu Lanzhou City Intermediate People’s Court

Deputy Prosecutor: XXX

August 2, 2012

The trial of Chen Pingfu was on September 4th in Lanzhou city. After the trial, netizens have been spreading their support for Chen Pingfu, and voicing their opinion against “words crime”, despite the ceonsorship on the Internet. On Sina Weibo, many people are expressing their anger as well as worries. Some think that if we do not voice our opinion to support Chen Pingfu, or protest and struggle, the tragedy falls upon Chen Pingfu will sooner or later falls upon many others and us.

The following is an interview of Chen Pingfu in Chinese, where he talked about his experience of being a street violinist.



link (原文链接)《Chinese Voices for Justice》

2012年9月9日星期日

何辉新律师:关于陈平福“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”的辩护词


来源:维权网

作者:甘肃荣庆律师事务所 何辉新律师

兰州市中级人民法院刑事审判第一庭,尊敬的法庭:
尊敬的合议庭诸位:

我受本案被告人陈平福之委托和甘肃荣庆律师事务所之指派,担任涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权罪的被告人陈平福的辩护人。我们将忠实履行《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》(以下简称《刑诉法》)第三十五条规定的辩护人的职责,依法维护陈平福的合法权益。接受委托后,我查阅、复制(拍照)了检察院移送法院的证据材料,刚刚又参与了法庭调查和庭审质证活动,使我们进一步了解了本案的事实情况。在尊重事实和证据的基础上,本人将以一名执业律师的法律良知和操守提出如下辩护意见:

(辩护人特别声明:以下辩护意见只是根据本案事实,提出法律上的评价,不涉及政治上的评价,不代表辩护律师的政治主张。辩护律师的发言,无任何危害国家安全之目的、动机、故意,辩护律师在法庭上的发言,依法享有司法豁免权)

辩护人认为:甘肃省兰州市人民检察院(以下简称“公诉机关”)兰检公诉一诉[2012]120号《起诉书》(以下简称《起诉书》),指控被告人陈平福犯有煽动颠覆国家政权罪完全不能成立。辩护人完全不能同意对陈平福的罪名指控,该指控缺乏犯罪的构成要件,陈平福是无罪的,应该立即解除强制措施,宣告无罪。

79年前,章士钊为陈独秀危害民国案辩护词中说,“以言论反对,或攻击政府,无论何国,均不为罪”。如果说以言论攻击机关和人物就是危及国家安全,“于逻辑无取,即于法理不当”。“政府不等于国家,民国的主权在民,复辟国体才是叛国,才是危害。否则,不论对于政府或政府中何人何党,有何抨击,都是正常的,只有半开化的国家才会以此"临之于刑"。”79年过去了,这个辩护词也可以用在陈平福身上。

今天,79年后的辩护人认为:政府不等于国家,执政党不等于国家政权。以言论批评、甚至抨击、反对执政党、政府的行为不构成煽动颠覆国家政权罪。

本案没有任何证据能证明陈平福有试图煽动颠覆国家政权、推翻社会主义制度的行为。指控一个有严重的心脏病患者,一个年龄55岁,白发苍苍看起来近60岁的,恢复第一届高考的大学本科生,一个下岗失业的文弱书生,试图以言论来颠覆一个拥有几百万军队和警察,拥有尖端科技、武器的世界强国的国家政权,显然是匪夷所思的。

第一部分【理论常识辩】

第一、国家政权决不会通过言论煽动,进而被颠覆;陈平福涉嫌的煽动颠覆国家政权罪罪名本身是值得商榷的。

国家政权,从母语来看,有国家和政权两个并列词构成。
1、【国家】 国家是什么?自国家出现后,便逐渐产生了关于国家的理论和学说。古今中外各个时期许多政治家、思想家都直接或间接地对国家问题作过论述,而且国家理论始终处于发展之中。我们的国家有五千多年的历史,期间历经多次改朝换代,江山易主,外国人都把我们所处的这个时空、地域称为“中国”,英文名叫“china”。辩护人认为,国家是由一定领域(领土、领空、领海)、人民、主权组成。通过言论,如何煽动颠覆?这是不可能完成的“任务”。

2、【政权】政权是什么?政权在政府、政治和外交领域是指一个国家的政体的统治体制,政权是统治一个国家的权力。这个统治权是由国家机构代为行使,国家政权机构包括国家机关组织本身及担任国家机关的政务官员和事务官员。这个统治权,在中国封建皇朝,权力属于皇帝,所以称之为家天下。所谓"普天之下,莫非皇土,率土之滨,莫非皇臣。"在中国民国时期,统治权属于中国国民党,所以称为“党国”。在当下,根据《宪法》,这个统治权力属于人民,所以我们的国家全称为“中华人民共和国”。

3、【国家政权】基于以上,国家和政权是分开的,合并起来,国家政权就是由一定领域(领土、领空、领海)、人民、军队、国家机构、主权组成的混合物。因此说要通过言论煽动颠覆国家政权这个混合物,无异是痴人做梦,绝无可能。

国家政权从政府、政治和外交领域是指一个国家的权力归属和行使。根据当下中国《宪法》之规定,中国是人民民主专政的国家,国家政权机构代表人民行使政治权力,国家政权机构本身只是受托人,而不是他们本身就产生、拥有的这个政治权力。中华人民共和国的四部宪法把公民权利和义务一章放在国家机构之前,就是这个道理,这叫宪法制定过程中的逻辑自我证成。国家政权属于人民,人民是国家政权的所有者。人民建立起来行使公共智能的机构,只是公民权力的受托者。其关系犹如委托人和律师的关系。委托人,可以解聘委托律师。人民也可以随时更换国家机构和执政者,这就是通过选票的方式。按照宪法之规定和外交部对外所称,中国是民主国家,国家机构都是选举产生。

孙中山先生恒言,天下为公,唯德与能。就辩护人浅陋的所学所知:无论中国共产党的任何领袖,俱无共产党永久执拿政权之表示。宪法中说:“中国各族人民将继续在中国共产党领导下......中国共产党领导的多党合作和政治协商制度将长期存在和发展。”如何发展,我们不得而知。

因此,无论是意图煽动颠覆人民对国家的主权,还是煽动颠覆国家机构,唯一的路径就是违背人民的意愿,使用暴力征服人民,从而变成家天下或者其他形式的独裁,将人民从主权者的地位变成被统治者。而通过发表一些所谓的“诋毁、污蔑”等言论,通过言论的方式煽动颠覆国家政权,这是绝不可能的。

4、【颠覆】"颠覆"即倾覆,掀翻,亦即采用强制性的手段如武力或暴力之类强行改变某施力对象时空位置之做法。这些都需要物理力量的,用文字是无法完成倾覆,掀翻的。“颠覆”后来引申为“灭亡”。煽动,指丛恿、鼓动人做坏事。面对拥有数百万军队的国家政权,文字是无法完成倾覆,掀翻,乃至灭亡的。这是显而易见的真理。

5、【结论】因此,不仅理论上无法颠覆国家政权,而且行为上也不能颠覆,更不能从言论上煽动颠覆国家政权。陈平福一介书生,被指控煽动颠覆国家政权罪,以一人对13亿人,以一介书生对抗数百万雄兵的核国家政权,显然是天方夜谭。公诉人可以说,本罪是行为犯,不论结果,那么,《宪法》35条规定的公民有言论自由的规定,情何以堪!这个问题,辩护人在后面会专门论述。

以上是辩护人对煽动颠覆国家政权罪罪名之观点。

第二、中国《宪法》赋予了人民监督权和言论自由权

辩护人认为,以下真理不证自明——人人生而平等,公民在法律面前一律平等。人在这个世上,一些权利是不可转让的,其中包括生存权、自由和追求幸福。为了保障这些权利,人民才组建国家政权(包括政府机构),治人者的正当权利,来自被治者的同意。人民建立国家政权,来行使公共智能,同时人民为了防止国家政权堕落为反人民的暴政,人民有监督、制约、选择、罢免国家机关的各级官员的权利。首先,人民通过宪法规定,让一些国家机构来监督另一些国家机构。其次,人民保留了用选票更换国家执政者的权利。再则,人民个体保留了诸多权利,如言论自由权,生存权,追求幸福权等,这是人民未让渡给政府的权利,用来防止政府蒙骗民众,用以表达自由意志等等。

故,我国宪法在35条规定“ 中华人民共和国公民有言论、出版、集会、结社、游行、示威的自由”,在41条规定“中华人民共和国公民对于任何国家机关和国家工作人员,有提出批评和建议的权利;对于任何国家机关和国家工作人员的违法失职行为,有向有关国家机关提出申诉、控告或者检举的权利,但是不得捏造或者歪曲事实进行诬告陷害。”

中华人民共和国政府于1998年10月5日在联合国总部签署了《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》,并多次宣布将实施该《公约》,虽然全国人民代表大会没有批准该《公约》,原因复杂。但是至少说明国务院这个国家机构是认同该国际公约的。该《公约》是联合国在《世界人权宣言》的基础上通过的一项公约。在该公约第十九条规定“一、人人有权持有主张,不受干涉;二、人人有自由发表意见的权利;此项权利包括寻求、接受和传递各种消息和思想的自由,而不论国界,也不论口头的、书写的、印刷的、采取艺术形式的、或通过他所选择的任何其他媒介。 "
第三、社会主义制度内涵是一种发展中的内涵。本质上是一种经济制度。

1、社会主义制度是不断变动中的制度,从中华人民共和国中央人民政府成立以来,社会主义制度的概念一直在变化发展。

我国54宪法中的所有制,除公有制外,还有资本家所有制。我国的75宪法规定社会主义经济制度是生产资料全民所有和集体所有。国家实行计划经济。82宪法规定了社会主义经济基础是公有制,消灭人剥削人的制度。2004年的宪法修正案,提出以公有制为主体,多种所有制并存。

从宪法对社会主义经济制度定义的变迁就可以清晰地看出,社会主义制度是一个不断变化的过程,昨天坚持认为是真理的社会主义定义,随着历史的发展就会被超越,否定。胡锦涛主席提出的“科学发展观”就是对社会主义制度的进一步理论深化。我们曾经以社会主义计划经济为神圣不可侵犯,私有经济曾经被认为是资本主义的尾巴,如今,实施社会主义市场经济,全国遍地是私营企业。以后,还会进一步发展创新。

2、社会主义制度内涵不包括中国共产党领导,社会主义制度是一种经济制度。
宪法序言中提到:中华人民共和国成立以后,我国社会逐步实现了由新民主主义到社会主义的过渡。生产资料私有制的社会主义改造已经完成,人剥削人的制度已经消灭,社会主义制度已经确立。这说明,社会主义制度只是一种经济制度,不包括政治。

宪法的坚持四项基本原则,其中就包括了坚持中国共产党的领导和坚持社会主义制度,这就很明确说明,社会主义制度和坚持中国共产党的领导是两件不同的事情。不能将社会主义制度与中国共产党等同。反对中国共产党的领导,并不是反对社会主义制度,反对社会主义制度,并不是反对中国共产党的领导。

辩护人认为:以上这些原则是基本的现代政治常识,也是基本的政治伦理,也是中国《宪法》逻辑上的自我证成。我对陈平福案的辩护意见,将在这样的常识下展开。

第二部分【事实辩】

第一、陈平福在互联网发表文章,目的不是为了煽动颠覆国家政权、推翻社会主义制度。

1、和谐社会不应该搞文字狱。中国历代暴主实施暴政,大兴文字狱,黑暗时期,士或议政,辄遭窜杀。或被捉拿,株连族人,身陷囹圄,饱受酷刑,尝尽辛酸,如此,国无良士,内忧外患,豺狼虎豹,觊觎华族,烽烟四起,外敌入侵,同胞受难,民族蒙羞。这种惨痛的经历,殷鉴不远。“秦人不暇自哀而后人哀之,后人哀之而不鉴之,亦使后人而复哀后人也”。

外交部说中国是法治国家。宪法规定了“依法治国”,我们身处文明国家,法治国家,绝不能出现“因言获罪”,若出现这样的恶例,将是抹黑国家的人权形象。那样,国家领导人出访他国,在公共场合,会被诘问,会贻人口实,会给一些宣传部门口中的“反华势力”以话柄,拿该等案例说事,使国家领导人难堪。等等。

陈平福的言论绝不会颠覆国家政权,更不会推翻社会主义制度。陈平福发表文章目的是为了泄愤,是表达“对现状不满,发泄心中的不快”。关于这一点,有2011年3月11日,兰州市公安局国宝支队警员、兰州市公安局皋兰县县局国保支队警员询问笔录为证:

问:你发表的这些文章都是什么内容?
答:我发表的这些文章的内容一部分是我个人的想法,一部分是 我个人的经历。我的想法和个人经历都是要自由,要尊严,要人权。

问:你发表这些文章的目的是什么?
答:我发表文章目的就是表示对现状不满,发泄心中的不快。

问:你把你的这些文章为什么要在互联网发表?
答:因为我没有地方表达,无法表示我的不满。

问:你对什么不满?
答:我是对社会现状的不满,不是对某个人不满。

2、国家政权是指人民对国家政权机构的控制,陈平福并无颠覆人民对国家机构的控制的主观目的。

如前所论及,国家和政权这样的概念是分开的,即使国家作为修饰词,修饰政权,即试图颠覆的对象是中华人民共和国的国家政权,即中华人民共和国的国家机构。从所有陈平福的文章来看,陈平福明确表明不是要颠覆国家政权,陈平福从来没有试图颠覆上述国家机构,无论是全国人大,中华人民共和国主席,中华人民共和国中央军事委员会,地方各级人大和政府、民族自治地方的自治机关、人民法院和人民检察院。因此,陈平福没有这个主观意图,并没有摧毁国家机构,重建新的国家机构之目的。

3、党不是国家政权,政府只是国家政权的一部分,起诉书指控陈平福“散布攻击党和政府的言论”,法律上不是煽动颠覆国家政权、社会主义制度。

无论在宪法还是全国人大的网站上,中国共产党不是国家政权。攻击一个政党,哪怕是执政党,也并不能推出就是反对政权。起诉书指控的理由,正好是邓小平、江泽民、胡锦涛所批评的党政不分思想。辩护人想问一句,到底是公诉机关对,还是邓小平、江泽民、胡锦涛错了?如果执政党和政府就是国家政权,那么,请问设立国家机构又是为什么?如果中共中央总书记就是国家元首,那又何必要国家主席呢。 起诉书认为陈平福“向不特定的网民散布攻击党和政府的言论”,就构成了煽动颠覆国家政权罪,辩护人必须明确指出的是:这种反对共产党就是反对国家政权的理论,就是党政一体的理论,恰恰是中国共产党领导人和国家领导人自己都要反对的。公诉机关无权就该罪名作出扩大解释。公诉机关无权行使国家的立法解释权和司法解释权。

4、批评、抨击执政党和政府,并不是颠覆国家政权,更不是推翻社会主义制度。
根据陈平福文章及言论,其是批评政府工作人员的做派,他反对专制。事实上,中国共产党专制了没有?宪法讲的是共产党领导的多党合作,公诉人认为中国共产党没有“专制”,陈平福反对的就是一个虚假的现象,有什么社会危害性?又如何能煽动颠覆国家政权?

(邓小平说过:如果中国有朝一日变了颜色,变成一个超级大国,也在世界上称霸,到处欺负人家,侵略人家,剥削人家,那么,世界人民就应当给中国戴上一顶霸权主义的帽子,就应当揭露它,反对它,并且同中国人民一道,打倒它。按照小平同志说的,陈平福也没错)。

请合议庭注意,中华人民共和国的一切权力属于人民,由全国人民代表大会行使。陈平福反对的是执政党和政府的执政行为,其针对的是党派的行为。我们不论其反对的是否是正确,但可以肯定其反对的不是国家政权机关本身。从逻辑上说,陈平福的言论和煽动颠覆国家政权、推翻社会主义制度无关。

5、反对专制、实行民主等言论,陈平福不是发明人。中国共产党的领袖、新华社社论多次提出,应该是不存在有任何煽动颠覆国家政权的目的。犯罪的本质是侵犯法益,因此,以犯罪行为是否对法益造成侵害即是否对客体造成侵害为根本判定标准,陈平福的言论并没有侵犯煽动颠覆国家政权罪的法益,即对该该罪名的客体国家政权、推翻社会主义制度造成侵害。因为公诉人至今没有举出一份有力的证据。

根据罪刑法定原则,起诉书指控陈平福煽动颠覆国家政权、推翻社会主义制度不成立,陈平福无此主观目的,客观上也没有侵害该罪名之法益,按照犯罪构成,陈平福的行为不构成犯罪。

第二、陈平福的言论绝不会颠覆国家政权,更不会推翻社会主义制度,是在行使宪法规定的言论自由权和监督权。应正确区分言论自由与犯罪的界限

近世文明国家,莫不争言论自由。而所谓自由,大都指公的方面而言。与私而言,甲行使自由当以不侵乙之自由为限,若涉及诋毁、造谣、诽谤,公民可依民法通则、侵权责任法,刑法之公民的人身权利篇章追究对方民事责任和刑事责任。对于公权力和公权力机关,则不然.一个党派和政府,在一个国家执政和为人民服务,一任天下之公开评荐。所谓千秋功过,任评说。中国共产党的领袖毛泽东有诗云:“惜秦皇汉武,略输文采;唐宗宋祖,稍逊风骚。一代天骄,成吉思汗,只识弯弓射大雕。” 就是在点评人物和历史。

起诉书指控陈平福的文章,可以分为几类,一类是阐述自己对民主、自由的追求;一类是描述自己经历,渴望生存下去,发泄对现实不满之文章;第三类是对时事之评论,对事实之看法;其核心思想是,追求自由、民主、法治、宪政。

(一)陈平福撰写的文章,属于言论自由的范畴

辩护人认为:陈平福撰写文章表达的只是一种比较尖刻、激烈的批评而已,应属于言论自由的范畴,是公民依据《中华人民共和国宪法》35条和41条享有的政治权利和自由,是依据联合国《世界人权宣言》享有的民主权利 。联合国《世界人权宣言》第十九条规定:“人人有权享有主张和发表意见的自由,此项权利包括有主张而不受干涉的自由,和通过任何媒介和不论国界寻求、接受和传递信息和思想的自由”。中国的外交部长说中国的人权状况被美国好五倍,由此说明,我们国家宪法是非常注重人权的,非常注重言论自由的,不应搞那些早已扔进历史垃圾堆里的“因言获罪”的行径。

陈平福作为一个中国公民,对执政的中国共产党和有关制度持有个人的观点和看法是无可厚非的,即便陈平福所发表的针对中国共产党及政府的批评性言论被证明是错误的,也仍然属于公民的言论自由范畴,是在行使《宪法》所赋予的言论自由权。

(二)陈平福撰写的文章并没有对国家安全构成“现实而紧迫的威胁”,不应认定为犯罪。

目前,中国法律并没有规定哪些言论不能说,是危害国家安全的。在国际上得到公认的《有关国家安全、表达及获取信息的自由的约翰内斯堡原则》第六条规定:“只有当一个政府可以证明以下事实存在,言论才可能以危害国家安全受到惩罚:1、该言论是有意煽动即刻的暴力行动;2、该言论有可能会引起这样的暴力行为;3、在该言论与暴力的可能性或出现之间有着直接而且即刻的联系。”这一原则概括为“现实而紧迫的威胁”原则,即只有当言论对国家安全构成“现实而紧迫”的威胁时,才能构成犯罪。本案,陈平福撰写的文章并没有任何煽动即刻的暴力行为的言词,客观上也不可能引起这样的暴力行为,对于国家安全显然不构成现实而紧迫的威胁,故不应被认定为犯罪。

(三)陈平福撰写的文章没有“造谣、诽谤”的内容

1、“造谣”的词典释义是:“为了达到某种目的而捏造消息,迷惑群众” ,“诽谤”的词典释义是:“无中生有,说人坏话,毁人名誉;诬蔑”(分别见《现代汉语词典》1983年1月第2版第1443页,第315页);简言之, “无中生有、虚构事实”是“造谣”、“诽谤”二词共同要义;换句话说,“造谣”、“诽谤”涉及的是事实判断、事实真伪的问题,但公诉方并没有证据证明,陈平福文章阐述的事实是虚构的;《起诉书》所指控的陈平福“表达了马列主义、毛泽东思想、邓小平理论、三个代表和科学发展观对社会和人民没有任何好处;共产党执政只知道欺压百姓,不让百姓谋生;现行制度不够民主,应该实行民主宪政等煽动性的观点”。仅仅是公诉机关的观点,这是一个“价值判断”问题,而不是“事实判断”问题。因为,陈平福所写的文章中从来没有那样的字眼,是公诉机关强加给陈平福的。辩护人认为,起诉书混淆了“价值判断”和“事实判断”。

2、法律并没有规定有个罪名叫“诋毁、污蔑国家政权罪”,起诉书任意扩大解释,认定陈平福诋毁、污蔑国家政权与社会主义制度,进而认为陈平福触犯了《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第二款之规定,《起诉书》用“诋毁、污蔑”词汇来指控被告人是没有任何法律依据的;“诋毁、污蔑”与“造谣”和“诽谤”并非同一概念,它们之间具有完全不同的内涵和外延。国家的立法权在于全国人大及其常委会,公诉机关绝对没有立法这个权力。

3、即使陈平福发表的文章中有对中国共产党、政府及工作人员有不敬的言论或者说诽谤性的言论,也不必然构成犯罪,现行刑法并没有规定“诽谤党和政府罪”,更没有“诽谤政府工作人员罪”。

第三、陈平福撰写、发表文章,从本质上讲,是在捍卫人权,捍卫公民的生存权和自由。至于转载他人的文章,公诉机关也用来指控,这完全是莫名其妙的。

《宪法》规定,国家尊重和保障人权。什么是人权?联合国人权高专办的解释道:从我们出生那时起,政府即须帮助我们实现某些事物,因为我们是人。我们对政府的这些期望和要求就是人权,无论男人、女人、还是儿童,人皆有之。中国认为,生存权和发展权是首要的人权,也是享有其他人权的基础;没有生存权和发展权,其他一切人权均无从谈起。

陈平福被指控的33篇文章中,除去转载别人的文章,就是在不断重复他要生存。在一个疾病缠身,没有其它技能,文弱的读书人来说,他唯一的生存技能是拉小提琴,或者教书。他在兰州街头拉小提琴,在街头卖艺,靠技能生存,何错之有?!辩护人不否认城市管理的必要性,可是城管的野蛮执法,社会评价极为低下,举世皆知,他们以自己的行为自证了的。陈平福遭到城管野蛮的塞进囚车里,被抛弃在荒野。他一个公民,一个纳税人,凭啥接受这种野蛮的行径。他一个读书人,一个从事教书育人职业几十年的公民,如何忍受这种羞辱!政府机关的工作人员,法律何曾授权他们如此野蛮执法?!他当然愤懑,他的委屈无法向公权力机关诉说,他只能写成文章,从心理学上的角度,他是在泄解压力!他的遭遇,谁去安慰了?他憋屈,他当然必须说出来,说出来,自然会好受些。他在本辩护人的办公室对我说:“我觉得一个人活着,一辈子都不敢说真话,我觉得活着窝囊!”他就是想说他认为的真话。中国共产党的领袖毛泽东曾经说:“让人说话,天不会塌下来”。不让他说话,不让他打字,难道把他嘴堵上,把他手绑住吗?

陈平福去云南打工,养活自己,却被兰州皋兰县的国宝跨省捉拿,遣送回家。他一个55岁的知识分子,一个有独立人格的读书人,一个清流,一个被买断工龄,一个没有收入的老人,让他如何活下去?难道让他去乞讨?难道靠别人施舍?难道逼他像网络上广为流产的一个老人那样,故意抢劫,然后坐牢,活下去?!生命是如此的可贵!活着是多么的美好!不让他教书养活自己,他怎么活?——谁能告诉他!谁能告诉我!

第三部分【结辩】

岂有文章倾社稷,从来奸佞覆乾坤,千古伤心文字狱,罗织何曾铭法治。

人们不该忘记,文革在它最初策划于密室的时候,就是从构筑文字狱开始的。历史学家吴晗的一部《海瑞罢官》,就是点燃文革罪恶之火的导火线。那种从字里行间断章取义、牵强附会、任意上纲、罗织罪名的卑劣手法,杀了多少国士!捕风,捉影,抱残,守缺四式连环的招式,中国人并不陌生,想来,何其愤怒!!文革早已被否定,今年在两会出席记者招待会上,中国政府行政首长温家宝先生还在忧虑和担心“文革”有重演之势。

我们的国家绝不能再搞文革那一套。坚决要防止文革复辟!我们要阻击这种苗头!“文革”斩断了中华民族的传统文化根脉,对我华族文明摧残之甚,中外罕见,古今独步!毁人不倦,谁与争锋!那些史料所呈现的残酷,让人肝胆欲裂,悲愤万分。痛恨极了!从此以后,国士近乎绝迹,人人恐惧,噤若寒蝉,唯唯诺诺,但求自保。

多年以来,我们以生命亲友为借口,以生计饭碗为托词,以洁身自好为由头,卑微甚至卑怯地回避着暴力。官员的贪腐行为加重了整个社会的不公,吞噬着普世皆准的正义,深化了民族内心的势利与黑暗。我们的怯懦忍看,不敢挺身而出的谴责,就是一种对邪恶的默许甚至纵容。凡此种种图景,“文革”功不可没!

“金粉东南十王州,万重恩怨属名流。牢盆狎客操全算,团扇才人踞上游。避席畏闻文字狱,著书都为稻粱谋。田横五百人安在?难道归来尽列侯? ”难道,我华族,都需要这样的蝇营狗苟之辈!

好在我华族文化内在气质和自生力量,每到历史的关头,总会有人站出来,捍卫民族尊严,恢复民族元气。

人类追求文明是相通的,人们的生活方式,在一定的自然条件,地理环境下是大同的。所以,法律,犹如自然科学一样,是有规律的,是适合不同政体的。法律最能体现民主、自由的精髓。宪法规定“依法治国”,陈平福追求民主、自由有何不可?中国共产党和政府从来就没有拒绝过民主和自由,拒绝一党“独裁”,这种历史文献比比皆是。陈平福认为国家应该实行民主宪政,起诉书竟然认为是“煽动性观点”,辩护人极为震惊!宪政是一个动态的过程,中国早就有了宪法,有了宪法,就会逐渐实行宪政,有了宪政才有法治,从政治伦理和逻辑上讲,陈平福何错之有?遑论犯罪!

辩护人认为:国家、社会必须走向理性包容,多元和解才是正途。必须找回我们的传统文化中的善良、正直、诚实、勤奋的核心价值,必须找到民族内心的归属感,民众的族群自豪感。国家在国际人权领域必须彰显出高贵的国家气质,在世界上广受尊敬。这样的一个国家,一定是一个民主、自由、实现宪政的国家,人人脸上洋溢着幸福的笑容,多么美好!陈平福位卑未敢忘忧国,深怀感恩之心,对待周遭的一切,他深爱着自己的祖国和人民,忧国忧民,忠于自己的内心信仰,认同自由、民主、宪政,是公民的典范。

尊敬的合议庭诸位法官:

“法无明文不为罪”,在法治国家,从来都是司法控制警察。至今为止,我国的立法机关和最高人民检察院、最高人民法院(以下简称两高),都没有对“造谣诽谤或其他方式煽动颠覆国家政权”做出明确的界定;故此罪与公民的言论自由如何作出严谨的、科学的区分,至今没有令人信服的标准,比如说,在何种情况下,发表何种言论就构成犯罪;因此导致在司法界对此罪的认定,带有很强的主观性、随意性和模糊性,导致公民在发表言论时,无法对自己的言论是否构成犯罪有一个“合理预期”,这实质上是违反法治精神的。

基于以上论述,本案公诉人征引《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第二款之规定,湛然无据,请审判长依刑法精神,谕知无罪,以保全读书种子,尊重言论自由,恪守宪法之精神,省释无辜之讼累。今陈老而多病,谅无他逞,自应悯其拳拳之心,径行省释。实为公德两便。

谨辩!

呈送
甘肃省兰州市中级人民法院

陈平福辩护人:甘肃荣庆律师事务所 何辉新律师

于2012年9月4日当庭提交

起诉书全文 —— 陈平福因网文面临牢狱之灾!

甘肃省兰州市人民检察院

起诉书

兰检公诉一诉[2012]120号

被告人陈平福,男,汉族,出生于1957年3月1日,身份证号码:622725195703011415,大学文化程度,户籍所在地:皋兰县石洞镇新兴路301号101,住兰州市安宁区枣林路284号丰宁德尚小区2号楼3B-202室。2012年6月27日因涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权罪,经皋兰县公安局决定对其监视居住。

本案经皋兰县公安局侦查终结,由皋兰县人民检察院报送本院审查起诉。经依法审查查明:

2007年7月至2012年3月,被告人陈平福先后在网易、百度、搜狐、时光网、新浪、天涯等网站注册名为陈平福的博客或微博,发表、转载了标题为《这是一场心灵归宿的正邪大战》、《黄鼠狼为鸡服务》、《对抗野蛮,追求文明》、《抢劫?执法?》、《依法治国岂能只顾捆绑普通百姓》、《不屈的灵魂永远无法被征服!》、《向埃及人民学习,我们不想再忍受花言巧语的愚弄》、《我无法默默地忍受屈辱》、《社会主义挺着,艰难的日子忍着,戴着镣铐的舞跳着》、《不当奴化教育的帮凶》、《推翻独裁者的号角已经吹响》、《一切党派退出学校》、《专制刀下的鬼--送给王立军》、《不要忽悠我,地球人都知道》、《活着的人,醒来吧!》、《伟大领袖出现在哪里,那里的人民必定遭殃!》、《用明亮的灯光照亮现实,用迷人的琴声感动社会》、《企图阻挡民主潮流,就是抗拒上帝的旨意》、《专制制度以官权为中心,民主制度以民权为中心》、《中国特色--领导创造思想》、《政府不许非法谋生,突尼西亚人将阿里赶下台》、《真理具有力量,真话具有能量》、《抗拒民主和法制,全民族都是输家》、《十天内从大西北到大西南打工挣钱,又被迫返回原地,一场噩梦》、《人类对自由与尊严的追求正在达成共识》、《愤怒抗议有关部门剥夺我打工挣钱谋生的权利!》、《我被逼无奈,只好接着走这追求自由和尊严的不归之路》、《要自由、要尊严,我要像正常人一样生活》、《真的好可怕啊,权力这个老虎》、《我在自己的祖国被自己的仆人欺负》、《被禁锢思想的国家是没有希望的》、《有这样的一个政治制度》、《我们这个年代最大的敌人》等三十四篇文章,表达了马列主义、毛泽东思想、邓小平理论、三个代表和科学发展观对社会和人民没有任何好处。共产党执政只知道欺压百姓,不让百姓谋生;现行制度不够民主,应该实行民主宪政等煽动性的观点。

认定上述犯罪事实有:书证、物证、被告人供述等证据予以证实。

本院认为,被告人陈平福无视国法,在互联网上针对不特定的网民散布攻击党和政府的言论,诋毁、诬蔑国家政权与社会主义制度,其行为触犯了《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第二款之规定,犯罪事实清楚,证据确实、充分,应当以煽动颠覆国家政权罪追究其刑事责任。依照《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》第一百四十一条之规定,特提起诉讼,请依法判处。

此致

甘肃省兰州市中级人民法院

代理检察员:王海龙

二零一二年八月二日

附:证据目录及主要证据复印件。

--------------------------------------------

罪证:网文标题及链接:

http://chenpingfu1.i.sohu.com/blog/view/235325145.htm

原文链接(一五一十部落)