吴弘达就刘晓波先生被重判致美国各界的公开信

尊敬的阁下,

中国资深民主活动人士、知名异议作家、我的故交刘晓波先生被北京政府判刑11年,消息传来,我深感悲痛,也极为愤慨。刘晓波先生被羁押一年之久后获此重刑,显示出中国国内政治态势的总体走向:尽管多年来有各种乐观的猜度,认为中国经济自由的增长和与西方贸易联系的紧密将导向政治自由化,但是共产党政权仍然严酷镇压一切形式的异议活动,并在近年来逐步加强了对各种表达自由的控制。

刘晓波先生遭到重判,准确显示出中共政权对异议声音已经达到了零容忍。刘晓波先生是一位学者,心地善良,言辞谦和,从来没有鼓动暴力推翻现政权。相反,他一直主张用和平、渐进的的方式实现中国的民主转型。刘晓波先生“煽动颠覆罪”的判罪依据仅仅是他撰写的政论文章,刘晓波被逮捕、被重判,是要向所有要求政治改革的中国人传达这样一个信息——中国政府不会容忍批评意见,不管这种批评多么温和。

尽管北京传来的消息让人沮丧,但现在还不是绝望的时候——现在我们要做的是立即行动起来。当局对刘晓波的判决透露出,执政党本身十分心虚。重判刘晓波意味着中共政权十分惧怕国内发生动荡。据估计,今年全国共发生了10万起示威抗议。选择在圣诞节这一天宣布判决结果,表明了他们害怕为此招致国际谴责。这使我们有理由相信,保持国际压力有可能迫使中共政权缩短刘晓波先生的刑期。为此,我呼吁美国政府中止原定明年2月份与中国举行的人权对话,以表达对中共当局重判刘晓波的抗议。我也敦促奥巴马总统公开谴责中国政府逮捕、重判刘晓波先生;敦促美国国务院发表措辞强烈的声明,就刘晓波一案对北京当局进行谴责。

中国以政治理由监禁刘晓波,是对国际人权准则的严重侵犯,表明中国政府公然漠视自己的宪法所规定的言论自由权。中共政权希望它的所作所为不会引起国际社会的注意。我们要打破中共的如意算盘。请和我一起敦促美国政府拿出最大的努力,促使中国释放刘晓波,确保在刘晓波先生最需要我们支持的时候,各方能及时施以援手。

此致,

吴弘达

执行主任

劳改基金会董事会全体董事联署支持

廖天琪
洛珠嘉日
杰夫·菲德勒
余茂春

海外民运团体推动刘晓波入围诺贝尔奖

图片来源: AP

香港民运人士手举刘晓波照片(资料照片)

“今后可能是风涌而起,在民间,在知识界、社会团体以及国际社会,民主自由是个浩浩荡荡的东西,现在更进一步启发了民众对民主的要求,民众更加明确了民主的发展进程。”

海外中国民主运动团体日前发出倡议,推动提名中国知名异议人士刘晓波角逐2010年诺贝尔和平奖。与此同时,对刘晓波所谓颠覆国家政权罪的评论高度集中在中国的“以言治罪”趋势,1957年的老右派告诫,千万不要重蹈历史覆辙。

*全美学自联倡议*

中国留美学生团体–全美中国学生学者自治联合会(学自联)12月30日发出倡议,呼吁立即推动提名刘晓波角逐2010年诺贝尔和平奖。倡议说,每年2月1日前,挪威的诺贝尔和平奖委员会都要在世界范围征集和平奖的候选人选,以便12月10号颁奖。现在距截止期已经很近,该组织紧急呼吁各界朋友参与推动刘晓波入围。

全美学自联说,他们推动提名刘晓波入围诺贝尔和平奖出于两个目的。第一,旨在促进全世界了解刘晓波以及《零八宪章》签署团体;第二, 促使国际社会关注中国的人权状况,支持中国的人权事业和民主运动。不过,学自联的倡议没有提供推动提名的运作细节。

*老右派:刘晓波入围名符其实*

蒋文扬是1957年反右运动中四川重庆地区的所谓右派,得知推动刘晓波角逐诺贝尔和平奖的倡议后,他对美国之音说:“我们不谈只是希望提名刘晓波角逐诺贝尔和平奖,我们只谈愿不愿意签名,愿不愿意支持这个事情。我愿意支持,愿意签名。刘晓波是以他的思想用笔把它写出来,所表达的内容完全符合任何一条法律。”

诺贝尔和平奖鼓励以和平方式为人类进步事业做出贡献的人。刘晓波没有主张暴力,而是和平表达思想。当年重庆的老右派蒋文扬说:“我觉得,刘晓波是一位和平使者,应该把他作为诺贝尔和平奖(被)提名人。”

*吴弘达:呼吁奥巴马采取行动*

美国的劳改基金会负责人吴弘达日前发表公开信,对刘晓波被中国当局判处11年“深感悲愤”。他说,刘晓波的言辞一贯温和,主张渐进实现民主,这项判决是以言论治罪,依据的只是一些政论文章。他敦促各界和他一起促成刘晓波的释放,也要求美国政府采取高层行动。

美国洛杉矶时报日前发表题为“中国视异议人士之理想为威胁”的社论,文章说,以信仰为由监禁刘晓波是错误的,因为他毕竟只是一个和平表达异议的人士,刘晓波宣扬的是变革,而不是推翻共产党,既然如此,何为颠覆?不过,社论说,自由和民主理念的确具有“颠覆性”,而且是“永远锁不住的”。

*“重蹈覆辙”与“今非昔比”*

重庆的老右派蒋文扬深受“因言获罪”之苦,面对新的“以言治罪”受害者,这位当年的右派分子2009年除夕表示,看到了历史有重蹈覆辙的危险。不过他说,今非昔比,当局以言治罪没有压住抗议声浪。

他说:“今后可能是风涌而起,在民间,在知识界、社会团体以及国际社会,民主自由是个浩浩荡荡的东西,现在更进一步启发了民众对民主的要求,民众更加明确了民主的发展进程。”

*中国内政*

与此同时,北京第一中级人民法院有关刘晓波颠覆国家政权罪判决书,其中包括刘晓波六篇文章的题目,以及判决书非正式外文译文和律师的一审辩护词全文正在流传。

中国官方表示,对刘晓波煽动颠覆国家政权罪的审判依据的是中国宪法,纯属中国内政,任何外国势力都不得干涉中国的司法主权。

关键词:学自联,诺贝尔和平奖,蒋文扬,吴弘达,右派,因言获罪

吉林大学教室黑版上出现声援刘晓波口号

(维权网义工瀚之报道)12月30日,本网义工从朋友处获悉,异议作家、《零八宪章》发起人之一的刘晓波博士被以“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”判处11年徒刑并剥夺政治权利两年后,各地抗议违法判决与声援刘晓波呼声不断。刘晓波大学本科的母校——吉林大学日前不仅留传出声援刘晓波的歌曲,今天又有人在教室的黑版上写出声援的口号。可见对刘晓波博士的违法判决已经引起社会强烈不满,各种抗议正在漫延。

布什总统文胆抨击奥巴马对刘晓波案软弱

曾经是美国总统布什讲词撰稿人的威廉麦古恩,30日撰文批评奥巴马总统对中国及世界各地争取民主自由人士的不幸遭遇采取不闻不问的态度,难免让人共同发出一个疑问:「美国总统去了哪?」

目前是《华尔街日报》专栏作家的麦古恩举出的例子,包括因为要求政治改革而被中国当局判入狱11年的刘晓波、因为抗议政府而遭到保安警察武力镇压的伊朗人民,以及饱受当局派出的恶棍流氓骚扰的古巴政治受刑人的家属。他们大多都会问,美国总统去了哪。

麦古恩说,以奥巴马上任一年来的表现,他用来对付这些独裁政权的“武器”,就是与这些领导人一起在白宫拍拍照,示示好。文章指出,奥巴马拒绝与达赖喇嘛会面,但却不忘与委内瑞拉的查韦斯握手,奥巴马这些举动,只会让世界其他领袖心中打量,「面对这种人,我们到底还可以予取予携到什么地步」?

麦古恩甚至将奥巴马与近代美国普遍被认为是最无能最软弱的福特总统相提并论。文章指出,1975年福特总统应邀出席美国劳联工会的年度宴会,劳联本来也有意邀请一年前从苏联流亡海外的诺贝尔文学奖得主索忍尼辛参加晚宴,但由于时任国务卿的基辛格反对,福特于是放弃与索忍尼辛见面。文章指出,功利主义者认为与索忍尼辛会面,将有损不久之后的美苏高峰会议,但福特这个举动,不但被国际社会普遍认为软弱无能,这个形象甚至已深深崁入世人脑海。

麦古恩最后指出,奥巴马上任一年来,刻意告诉世人他是有别于布什总统,这一点他成功了,但「希望他不会给予外界一个信息,他是美国另一个福特总统」。

蔡子强:历史将宣判他无罪

【明报专讯】刘晓波,过去二十年,因为坚持自己的信念,而四度当上国家的囚徒。青春,就是如此在铁窗之下被消磨掉。到了11 年之后,他刑满出狱,到时他已经会是一位65 岁的花甲老翁了。

我记得有位民运人士写过这样的一首狱中诗:

「我怕孤独,但连自己的影子也难得一见;

我怕黑暗,却只能在铁窗后面仰望蓝天;

我只靠梦生活,但梦中却永远只是飘着染血的鞭子;

而我全部的罪名,却只是对自由的渴望。」

无错,刘晓波的所有罪名,只不过是对一个自由、民主中国的渴望而已。

在上个礼拜判刑当天,刘晓波十分平静,没有呼天抢地,他只望着太太刘霞点头微笑,令人相信他对自己所作的一切,无怨无悔。

这令我想起两句说话。

曾经当过《人民日报》副总编辑,并以「皇甫平」为笔名撰写过一系列支持深化改革文章的内地新闻工作者,在追思《人民日报》以故副总编辑王若水时,提过两句后者说过,掷地有声的说话:

「宁做痛苦的清醒者,不做无忧的梦中人。」

中国人特别忌讳提起自己的阴暗面,所思考的,也不是如何改良自身,把阴暗面消除,而是竭力否认它们的存在,中共则更进一步,痛恨那些指出这些劣迹和阴影的批评者、异见人士,要把他们禁绝而后快。

《零八宪章》所提的十九项主张:修改宪法、分权制衡、立法民主、司法独立、公器公用、人权保障、公职选举、城乡平等、结社自由、集会自由、言论自由、宗教自由、公民教育、财产保护、财税改革、社会保障、环境保护、联邦共和、转型正义,都是十分温和,是公民最基本和正当的权利要求,提倡的只是以温和改良的方式推进社会进步,我看不到有任何颠覆国家的地方,看不到何罪之有。

独裁者将会慢慢发现,他们无法杜绝任何批评,因为即使你审查、甚至禁制了书刊,一切有正义感的作家,将有办法找到自己的表达方式。

都说,今天当入世、经济起飞、奥运、宇航等梦想,已经一一实现,中国已经「大国崛起」。中国人或会觉得,自己已经找到那个当年阿基米德所追寻,足以举起整个地球的支点。但我却想说,一个如此怯懦的国度,它将不会有足够的力量,去巍然耸立於天地之间,面对未来。

刘晓波如今是被判入狱了,但我坚信:

「历史将宣判他无罪。」

作者是中文大学政治与行政学系高级导师

崔卫平:“不放弃这样一个朋友”(续三)

就刘晓波被判11年重刑后,北京崔卫平教授在征得受访者同意后,把许多中国知名知识分子对刘晓波被判刑的看法在“推特网”公布出来。

本台特约记者沈愚继续发来第三篇报道:

昨天,她在博客上转发这些知识分子的表态时说,“我对大家说的,主要就是,不放弃这样一个朋友。”她还说,“我们不放弃。”

章立凡的看法:1.宪政民主是庄严的历史承诺,也是通过社会和解维系执政合法性的救赎通道。今年圣诞节,权力的傲慢与偏见再度堵死通道。2.历史上一再失信,当前经济、政治改革和法制建设全面倒退,社会冲突无解。3.丧失现实判断力,开历史倒车自杀。尽管我不热爱革命,但已确认脑残无救。

陈家琪(电话中)的看法:请让我们看看罪证及那部宪章和宣判书,在未看到这些东西之前我们无话可说。(此后)陈家琪来信:欺,是装不知道,瞒,是不说真话。也有在习惯性欺瞒中什么都不再明白的人。11月《艺术世界》,封面是戈尔巴乔夫与昂纳克的热烈拥抱,当时距离柏林墙倒塌不到一个月。戈尔巴乔夫在拥抱完昂纳克后说:“他表现的好像他什么都不再明白”。我们总还不至于如当年的昂纳克那么迟钝、愚蠢吧?

许纪霖:在中国,人民币都可以开手铐,言论颠覆国家政权也就不奇怪。为让海内外不明真相围观者擦亮眼睛,我郑重要求1、吸取当年批“571工程纪要”的好经验,将大毒草“08宪章”公诸于众,作为反面教材教育人民。2、刘晓波胆敢上诉,如公审四人帮,二审全程向全球直播,让广大群众认清他的面目。

刘青峰的看法:此时,我抄录佐拉的《我控诉》:「那份起诉书多么肤浅!一个人有可能因为它而被判有罪吗?如此恶劣着实令人震惊,我要求正直人士都要阅读它:当他们想到德雷福斯因为它而在魔鬼岛付出不相称的代价时,他们的心将因愤怒、反感而悸动。」

孙津的看法:晓波是个很聪慧敏感的人,做朋友尤其讲义气,但他似乎过于相信自认道德为善的良知的正确性。(孙津博士,北京师范大学政治学研究所所长、致公党北京市副主委,与刘晓波博士同门、同届、同窗)
卢跃刚的看法:我不是零八宪章的签署者,但是我同意其中的基本准则和愿景,我反对、厌恶以言获罪。我读了对刘晓波的起诉书和一审判决书,这让我想起了已经废除的“恶攻罪”和“反革命罪”。我不知道历史是倒退了,还是进步了?

李大同的看法:这是一次中世纪的审判。暴露出来的,恰恰是审判者内心的恐惧—— 对思想和表达的恐惧。

张闳的看法:“在这个国家,一个正直的人唯一合适的去处就是监狱!”这是列夫·托尔斯泰说的。现在的问题是:究竟谁更不自由?是正直的囚徒还是那些贼眉鼠眼的狱卒?在把晓波关进了有形的监狱的同时,他们也把自己关进了无形的精神监狱。依我看,真正苦闷和惶惶不安的是他们。

叶廷芳的看法:请共产党的主事者们回顾一下中外历史:当年迫害司马迁、孙膑,迫害伽利略、布鲁诺的那些人一个个都振振有词:为了江山社稷的稳固;为了上帝的安宁……但经过历史的沉淀,司马迁、伽利略等人的文字闪闪发光,而振振有词的那些人如今安在?--一个个被钉在历史的耻辱柱上!

崔卫平推特网址 http://twitter.com/CUIWEIPING

We Are Willing to Share Responsibility with Liu Xiaobo

We Are Willing to Share Responsibility with Liu Xiaobo
(December 10, 2009)

We, the Chinese citizens who have co-drafted or signed Charter 08 with, that Mr. Liu Xiaobo, have learnt that he is to face prosecution and be subjected to penalties, and so reaffirm our attitude once again:

1) We have always believed that China’s development and progress must be based on the conditions that the human rights are fully protected, and that the justice can be fully realized, and that the rule of law tends to be completed, and the system turns to democracy. Otherwise, the society will only continue to result in abnormal prosperity, and the social wealth gap will be widening, and serious injustice will bring about the social conflicts. On this point of view, we have upheld the same ideas and pursuits as Mr. Liu Xiaobo has;
2) We are ready to sign Charter 08 and agree with its concepts, which is based on our concerns on the nations current and future situations, and also the performance of our civic responsibilities in accordance with the rights affirmed by the Constitution, and which we have never considered to be contrary to any of the existing laws and regulations;
3) If Mr. Liu Xiaobo is to be prosecuted for those above, then each of us is an integral part of his case, and the indictment of Mr. Liu Xiaobo is to put each of us on trial; if Mr. Liu Xiaobo is convicted, it is equivalent to condemn everyone of us as being guilty. We have no choice but bear punishment with Liu Xiaobo.

The domestic cosigners of Charter 08 to share responsibilities with Liu Xiaobo (164)

Yu Haocheng, legal experts, Beijing
Zhang Sizhi, lawyer, Beijing
Mao Yushi, economist, Beijing
Du Guang, political scientist and professor, Beijing
Bao Tong, former member of Central Committee of CCP, Beijing
DING Zilin, Professor, Beijing
Jiang Peikun, professor, Beijing
Zhang Zuhua, constitutional scholar,, Beijing
Xu Youyu, scholar, Beijing
Chen Ziming, scholar, Beijing
Cui Weiping, professor, Beijing
Hao Jian, professor, Beijing
Gao Yu, reporter, Beijing
Yu Shicun, writers, Beijing
Zhang Boshu, political scientist, Beijing
Zhang Xianyang, scholar, Beijing
Zhou Duo, scholar, Beijing
Zhang Yaojie, scholar, Beijing
Li Datong, reportor, Beijing
Zhao Dagong, writer, Shenzhen
Mo Zhixu, freelance writer, Beijing
Wen Kejian, scholar, Hangzhou
Jiang Tanwen, writer, Shanghai
Ye Du, editor, Guangzhou
Liu Di, freelance writer, Beijing
Wang Xiaoshan, columnist, Beijing
Teng Biao, human rights activist, Beijing
Wang Yi, missionary, Chengdu
Ran Yunfei, writer, Chengdu
Zan Aizong, writer and special correspondent, Hangzhou
Yang Zili, scholar, Beijing
Wang Guangze, independent political commentator, Beijing
Wen Yunchao, Internet observer, Guangzhou
Ma Shaofang, businessman, Shenzhen
Tie Liu, writer, Beijing
Zhu Jianguo, writer, Shenzhen
Zhuang Daohe, lawyer, Hangzhou
Wu Baojian, lawyer, Hangzhou
Su Yuanzhen, professor, Hangzhou
Yang Guang, Independent scholar, Guilin, Guangxi
Ahdin, reporter, Beijing
Shu Yang, artist, Beijing
Wang Debang, freelance writer, Beijing
Zhang Facai, designer Nanning
Chen Shaohua, designer, Shenzhen
Li Haiwei, rights activist, Beijing
Liu Jingsheng, freelance, Beijing
Hei Feng, poet and writer, Suzhou
Zhu Xinxin, freelance writer, Shijiazhuang, Hebei
Hu Zhao, scholar, Beijing
LI Yongsheng, writer and journalist, Chengdu
Tang Jingling, lawyer, Guangzhou
Yuan Xinting, editor, Guangzhou
Xiong Yong, lawyer, Beijing
Lu Wen, writer, Jiangsu
Li Yuanlong, former reporter of party newspaper, Bijie, Guizhou
Liu Shihui, lawyer, Guangzhou
Wang Zhongxia, freelance, Beijing
Ba Zhongwei, freelance, Henan
Wang Wei, freeance, Laiwu, Shandong
Ni Ming, retired worker, Panjin, Liaoning
Liu Shasha rights activist, Beijing
Guo Qiang, petitioner, Chongqing
Zhang Tao, freelance, Shijiazhuang
Yan Ba, Port transportation, Shenzhen
He Huan, freelance, Zhejiang
Gu Chuan, human rights defender, Beijing
Chen Long, liberal artist, Hangzhou
Xu Bo, clerk, Dali, Yunnan
Liu Ling-er, human rights Defender, Wuhan
Tong Yao, jobless, Beijing
Lin Yulin, student, Wenzhou
Ma Yuchen, medical worker, Beijing
Tian Yongde, human rights defender, Beijing
Li Erping, teacher, Heilongjiang
Jia Chunxia, human rights defender, Tangshan
Lu Hengxian, human rights defender, Nanning, Guangxi
Lu Fangzhi, citizen, Wuhan
Qin Hanjie, citizen, Shanxi
Zhong Guiqing, citizen, Maoming, Guangdong
Li Yu, wildebeest club sponsor, Deyang, Sichuan
Zhu Yufu, former political prisoner, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province
Wei Shuishan, merchant, Hangzhou
Liu Xianbin, human rights defender, Suining, Sichuan
Zhang Baisheng, migrant worker, Wenzhou
Pu Fei, IT, Chengdu, Sichuan
Che Hongnian, freelance writer, Shandong
Cheng Hanzhong, clerk, Leshan, Sichuan
Dang Duansheng, freelance, Hefei
Yuan Xinting, editor, Guangzhou
Xiong Yong, lawyer, Beijing
Lu Wen, writer, Jiangsu
Li Yuanlong, former reporter of party newspaper, Bijie, Guizhou
Liu Shihui, lawyer, Guangzhou
Wang Zhongxia, freelance, Beijing
Ba Zhongwei, freelance, Henan
Wang Wei, freelance, Laiwu, Shandong
Ni Ming, retired worker, Panjin, Liaoning
Liu Shasha rights activist, Beijing
Guo Qiang, petitioner, Chongqing
Zhang Tao, freelance, Shijiazhuang
Yan Ba, Port transportation, Shenzhen
He Huan, freelance, Zhejiang
Gu Chuan, human rights defender, Beijing
Chen Long, liberal artist, Hangzhou
Xu Bo, clerk, Dali, Yunnan
Liu Ling-er, human rights Defender, Wuhan
Tong Yao, jobless, Beijing
Lin Yulin, student, Wenzhou
Ma Yuchen, medical worker, Beijing
Tian Yongde, human rights defender, Beijing
Li Erping, teacher, Heilongjiang
Jia Chunxia, human rights defender, Tangshan
Lu Hengxian, human rights defender, Nanning, Guangxi
Lu Fangzhi, citizen, Wuhan
Qin Hanjie, citizen, Shanxi
Zhong Guiqing, citizen, Maoming, Guangdong
Li Yu, wildebeest club sponsor, Deyang, Sichuan
Zhu Yufu, former political prisoner, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province
Wei Shuishan, merchant, Hangzhou
Liu Xianbin, human rights defender, Suining, Sichuan
Zhang Baisheng, migrant worker, Wenzhou
Pu Fei, IT, Chengdu, Sichuan
Che Hongnian, freelance writer, Shandong
Cheng Hanzhong, clerk, Leshan, Sichuan
Dang Duansheng, freelance, Hefei
&

向挑战文字狱的勇士致敬!——致中国狱中作家的新年问候

向挑战文字狱的勇士致敬!——致中国狱中作家的新年问候
(2009年12月31日)

即将过去的2009年是极为不寻常的一年,国际笔会独立中文笔会荣誉会长刘晓波博士于12月25日圣诞节被判重刑十一年,标志着21世纪中国文字狱最为黑暗一天的到来!
 
迄今为止,在独立中文笔会狱中作家委员会98位狱中作家的名单上,这一年被重判的还有异议作家郭泉(十年)和王荣清(六年)。
 
铁肩担道义,辣手著文章。自1989年“六四屠杀”后入狱,刘晓波已因参与民运和自由写作数次在监禁中共度过了6年。这一次,他仅因参与发起与起草《零八宪章》和六篇文章就遭北京当局重判十一年徒刑,开创了以“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”恶法判刑的最高纪录。
 
《零八宪章》是中国独立知识分子与民间力量相结合的产物,是一次伟大的觉醒,也是一次勇敢的行动!《零八宪章》最初签名者有300多名学者、记者、自由撰稿人和活动人士,目前参与联署者已超过一万人。在刘晓波被重判后,越来越多的签署者喊出了:“我们愿与刘晓波共同承担责任”!
 
刘晓波是我们时代中的一个知识分子英雄,是挑战中国当代文字狱恶法的勇士。我们在此向他问候和致敬!同时也向《零八宪章》的所有签名者、支持者问候和致敬!
 
在新年之际,我们问候本会其他四位系狱会员:师涛、杨天水、力虹、杜导斌,特别关切在狱中正身患重病的本会首届“狱中作家奖”获得者杨天水和美国国家民主基金会2008年民主奖获得者力虹。
 
同时,我们祝贺和问候本会救援名单上于今年获释的9位狱中作家和新闻工作者:拖乎提·吐尼雅孜、杨子立、张宏海、朱虞夫、贺彦杰、陶海东、严正学、张林、李智。
 
我们问候本会37位系狱荣誉会员:孔佑平、黄金秋、徐伟、靳海科、吴义龙、徐泽荣、何德普、秦永敏、哈达、郑贻春、阿卜杜勒加尼·梅梅特民、郭飞雄、郭起真、努尔莫哈提·亚辛、陈树庆、王小宁、齐崇怀、吕耿松、胡佳、陈道军、孙林、张玉辉、许万平、胡明君、黄琦、陆建华、阿布露莎(女)、郭泉、魏桢凌、王荣清、张起、袁显臣、谭作人、吴保全、张鹏、范燕琼(女)、海莱特·尼亚孜。
 
我们问候本会和国际笔会救援名单上的其他9位狱中作家和记者:王炳章、卢正奇、宁先华、袁湫雁(女)、罗勇泉、达瓦坚赞、卓玛嘉、班觉洛布、昆宗次巴、贡噶仓央。
 
我们问候所有至今仍然系狱的因言获罪者!你们是挑战当代文字狱的勇士,在这个黑暗的年代,在我们迎向的曙光的日子里,其中就有你们当初的晨曦微微。
 
独立中文笔会狱中作家委员会

Chinese Authorities Block Chinese Citizen Li Jianhong from Returning to China

Chinese Authorities Block Chinese Citizen Li Jianhong from Returning to China

As the Commission noted in its 2009 Annual Report, Chinese authorities continue arbitrarily to deny some Chinese citizens the right to return to their country in contravention of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In mid-October 2009, the Chinese government blocked freelance writer and activist Li Jianhong (a.k.a. Xiao Qiao) from returning to her home in Shanghai after a stint in Sweden as the “Guest Writer of Stockholm” with the International Cities of Refuge Network (ICORN). Chinese officials in Shenzhen twice refused Li entry into mainland China from Hong Kong. Hong Kong authorities would not permit Li to remain in Hong Kong, and thus she had no choice but to fly back to Sweden, where she is today.

Writer and activist Li Jianhong suspects that Chinese authorities blocked her from re-entering China in mid-October because she had signed Charter 08, a document calling for political reform and greater protection of human rights in China, and because she wrote several articles in connection with the 20th anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen protests this year, according to an article published in the South China Morning Post (SCMP) (subscription required) on October 23. The article quoted Li Jianhong as saying that “[i]n July, several police officers told my parents in Shanghai that I would probably not be allowed back to the motherland for my alleged persistent anti-Communist and anti-socialist stance.” Li told SCMP that mainland immigration officials explained to her “that they were simply following orders” when they refused to let her enter China.

By refusing Li, a Chinese citizen, entry into China, the Chinese government is acting in contravention of Article 13 (2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which provides: “Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.” In addition, Article 12(4) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which China has signed but not yet ratified, states: “No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.”

Background

In 2002, Li Jianhong co-founded an independent Web site, Enlightenment Forum (Qimeng Luntan), which subsequently was shut down in 2004, according to an October 15 statement issued by the Independent Chinese PEN Center (ICPC) (in Chinese, in English via China Free Press). Li then created the Free China Forum (Ziyou Zhongguo Luntan), which the PEN American Center (American PEN) reports also is blocked. According to American PEN, Li “has been subjected to intense police harassment since January 2005 for her critical writings published online and peaceful dissident activities.” Li has experienced repeated instances of home confinement, brief detentions outside her home, and interrogations. (Li’s account of her arbitrary detention and mistreatment at the hands of Shanghai public security officers (domestic security protection unit) during 2007 is available in an English translation here (via American PEN).) On one occasion in 2007, Shanghai police detained Li, a member of the ICPC, in order to prevent her from attending an ICPC dinner party in Beijing, at which she was to receive the Lin Zhao Memorial Award. When the Shanghai public security authorities finally granted Li permission to leave China for Sweden in 2008, they told her that once she left, she would not be permitted to return, according to an October 15 Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) report. On April 28, 2008, the day of her departure to Sweden, Li was “escorted” to Shanghai’s Pudong International Airport by two government vehicles.

Li in Stockholm as Guest Writer; Blocked From Returning Home to China

Li had been in Sweden since April 2008 serving as the Guest Writer of Stockholm city with the International Cities of Refuge Netwok (ICORN), according to an ICORN news report. Originally a year-long stint, according to a Radio Free Asia article, the Stockholm city government subsequently extended her invitation to remain in the city. Li sought to extend her Chinese passport which was due to expire in late October 2009, but the Chinese Embassy in Sweden rejected her application. Consequently, Li left Sweden ahead of schedule, and traveled to Hong Kong on October 10. Li attempted to enter mainland China twice from Hong Kong, first on October 15 (when some of her books were confiscated), and then again on October 17, and was blocked both times (see CHRD’s reports 1 (October 15), 2 (October 17), and ICPC’s October 15 statement). Hong Kong authorities would not permit Li to remain in Hong Kong, according to an October 18 Ming Pao article. ICORN’s report, posted on its Web site around October 23, stated that Li had returned to Stockholm, and with “the help of Stockholm’s City of Refuge coordinator,” Li was “permitted to enter the country despite the fact that her passport and her Swedish visa” expired the next day. Professor Perry Link, discussing Li Jianhong’s case in his October 21 post on the New York Review of Books Blog, wrote: “Chinese who are critical of their government have long grown accustomed to the regime’s use of the national border as a thought-test. You criticize us? All right, if you are inside the country, we might not let you out. If you are outside the country, we might not let you in.” Professor Link mentioned that a friend of his, a well-known Chinese dissident who is abroad on a year-long fellowship, decided to rush home to China after hearing what had happened to Li. His friend’s view was that “if he was going to be trapped, [he] would rather be trapped inside China than outside.”

The Chinese government has, for many years, refused to renew passports of Chinese citizens abroad whom it deems to be “troublemakers,” or otherwise barred them from returning to China, thereby forcing them into exile. (See Human Rights in China/Human Rights Watch 1995 report; Dui Hua Foundation’s August 2007 discussion of Yang Jianli and the right to return, and a May 13, 2009, New York Times article regarding 1989 student leader Zhou Yongjun’s case.) The Chinese government’s “use of the national border as a thought-test”to use Professor Link’s formulationappears to have taken on a new twist: Chinese citizens who currently reside in China, whom the Chinese government views as “troublemakers,” but nonetheless permit to travel abroad for fellowships, vacation, or other purposes, travel overseas at their own peril. Another Shanghai-based Chinese citizen, Feng Zhenghu, who has repeatedly been denied entry back into China following a trip to Tokyo this summer wrote in a September 2009 letter (via CHRD) to President Hu Jintao:

That I have been arbitrarily prohibited from returning to China and my home after traveling abroadthis is a threat to all Chinese citizens. My misfortune is something that every Chinese person could experience. In the past, others have experienced this misfortune, now it is my turn; if there is someone the leaders are dissatisfied with, then tomorrow that person will meet the same fate. Moreover, based on my experience of having tried seven times to return to China, I’ve realized this: the Chinese government’s unlawful measures in prohibiting its own country’s citizens from returning home not only harm Chinese citizens, but in the end, the Chinese government’s own dignity and reputation is also harmed.

For more information see Section IIFreedom of ResidenceLiberty of Movement in the CECC 2009 Annual Report.