 |
 |
Angry Chinese Blogger:
The news and views about China that the big media can't, or won't, tell you The is no single truth Menu: Home |
|
Entries By Country
   |
Beijing Detains Quake Critic
On paper, Article 4 is a pretty routine piece of legislation. It allows the government to take action against spies, saboteurs and revolutionaries, as well as those who would provide them succor and/or information. It's nothing special, indeed most countries have this kind of provision their statutes. However, what makes Article 4 so different from its foreign counterparts in not so much what it says but rather what it is used to do. Article 4 is used to silence those who embarrass the Chinese government.
It would appear that Article 4 has just claimed another victim.
Silencing the Critics
Zeng Hongling - a retired college lecturer at the Sichuan University of Science and Technology - was detained by Chinese security forces on 9 June 2008, under Article 4 of the State Security Law of the People's Republic of China.
Zeng had been staying with their father (A family friend in some account), after their own home was damaged in the Wenchuan earthquake, when security forces arrived at the home. Initially Zeng was told that they would have to report to Tuqiao police station so that they could register as being resident in the region. However, once at the police station Zeng was detained under the provisions of Articles 4.
The charges?
According an official account given to Zeng's family by security forces, Zeng was detained under Article 4: Clauses 1 and 3, of the State Security Law of the People's Republic of China.
The charges relate to a series of articles that Zeng posted on overseas Chinese language websites - under the pseudonym "ShanShan" - in which Zeng related their own person experiences of the Wenchuan earthquake and its aftermath.
Article 4: Clause 1?
Article 4: Clause 1, covers "subversion" and "incitement to subversion". It is typically used to detain those whom speak out against government policy or whom call for changes in government policy. In Zeng's case Clause 1 references criticism from Zeng of te official response to the Wenchuan earthquake, its aftermaths, and to claims that poor school construction which lead to the death of thousands of children was the result of state corruption and/or negligence. The charges are also thought to relate to Zeng's criticism of Mianyang state official Tan Li. Zeng offered stern criticism of Tan Li: accusing them of being a sycophant and of behaving inappropriately by posing smiling in photographs of earthquake damage.
Article 4: Clause 3?
Article 4: Clause 3 relates to charges of "gathering or distributing state secrets" and is typically used to detain those who gather or distribute information that embarrasses the government. In Zeng's case the charges specifically relate to the "provision of state secrets to an overseas source" and relates to the provision of information about the Wenchuan earthquake, and about government responses, which Zeng provided to website hosted outside of the Mainland (see below).
Although the content of Zeng's articles was to all intensive purposes public knowledge, it can officially be classified as a state secret under Article 8: Clauses 1-7, of the "Law of the People's Republic of China on Guarding State Secrets".
Under Article 8 a State Secret can include any information so classified by the State, even if such information is already in the public domain, even if it has no security value, and even if it was not previously classified as a secret up to that time. This was notably demonstrate in 1999, when ethnic Uighur Rebiya Kadeer was detained under Article 4: Clause 3, for translating articles that had previously been published in a local newspaper and attempting to mail them to their spouse in the US.
The Articles?
In all, Zeng published 3 articles on the internet. They were carried by "New Millennium News Web" and "Observe China Information Center" They were titled:
- "Why was there no forecast?"
- "Personal experiences of the earthquake"
- "The true face of the CCP government officials was entirely exposed through disaster relief - personal experiences of the earthquake"
Article 4, State Security Law of the People's Republic of China
"Act endangering State security" as referred to in this Law means any of the following acts endangering the State security of the People's Republic of China committed by institutions, organizations or individuals outside the territory of the People's Republic of China, or, by other persons under the instigation or financial support of the afore-mentioned institutions, organizations or individuals, or, by organizations or individuals within the territory in collusion with institutions, organizations or individuals outside the territory:
(1) plotting to subvert the government, dismember the State or overthrow the socialist system;
(2) joining an espionage organization or accepting a mission assigned by an espionage organization or by its agent;
(3) stealing, secretly gathering, buying, or unlawfully providing State secrets;
(4) instigating, luring or bribing a State functionary to turn traitor; or
(5) committing any other act of sabotage endangering State security.
State Security Law of the People's Republic of China
Article 8, Law of the People's Republic of China on Guarding State Secrets
(1) secrets concerning major policy decisions on state affairs;
(2) secrets in the building of national defense and in the activities of the armed forces;
(3) secrets in diplomatic activities and in activities related to foreign countries as well as secrets to be maintained as commitments to foreign countries;
(4) secrets in national economic and social development;
(5) secrets concerning science and technology;
(6) secrets concerning activities for safeguarding state security and the investigation of criminal offenses; and
(7) other matters that are classified as state secrets by the state secret-guarding department.
Neither have I read Zeng's article, nor I ever believe CCP.
I have my blogs posting some suspicions of predicting/forcasting the
earthquakes too.
But I don't dare to write all what I wanted to say.
So, are you just here to plug your blog?
Where did you get those information?could you tell me?
I use multiple sources, but Chengdu police released information about the
charges against Zeng to their family almost 2 weeks ago.
Zeng is the victim of an arbitrary decision, not Article 4. China is not
governed by the rule of law and if Article 4 were repealed tomorrow it
would mean nothing. Miloservic exercises reasonable caution. Why would
your blog be so special to be above the "law", ACB? Surely you know
better.
Xinhua Free Press:
Glad you have confidence that hosting your blog abroad provides protection
for those in China. I don't share your confidence. As far as I am aware,
it simply means you won't be shut down abroad.
Possible, but I agree with Miloservic that it's wise to err on the side of
caution.
Big question is what do you mean by "caution"
There is dissents in Beijing.But how to make a dicision?It is the same with
the other country——Vote.The More,the winner,Like the American President
selection.I understand the government.even if the decision have been
made,there is still many people have dissent.Because the basic number is
too big.It is really a hard job to be the government of such a big country.
ACB, it depends how much trust in and knowledge of technology you have. I
never assume my phone conversations, e-mails, or online activities are
absolutely anonymous. To believe so, or encourage others to believe so, is
rather naive. You shouldn't encourage participants on your site to
disregard their cautions. Even you track IP addresses, but do you know who
is tracking you?
Xinhua Free Press
Terrible to think that someone can embarrass a senior official through a
silly internet posting. That's simply backwards. If a senior official is
embarrassed, that official probably had something to be embarrassed about
and Zeng is a hero, not a criminal, for having the courage to point it out.
The embarrassment to China is by having an ass-backwards system of
information manipulation. Information, even controversial information, is
good.
"Terrible to think that someone can embarrass a senior official through a
silly internet posting"
BUt,
it is to western people.not to us.
you may think it is too ostentative,but I don't think so.
If let you to take the place of him,what can you do?
You are just writing here while maybe drinking cool beer,
but what about them.Have you ever been to Sichuan after the earthquack.
Have you have any experience of sad and sarrow.
When you see so many your own children dead,don't you feel painful in your
heart?
I believe He is really sad not acting.
2lovelycake:
Dear ACB, but I think you don't really care about the people who is still
suffering from the disaster,or you will not write a article like this.
You will pay more attention to the human lives.
I'm glad to come to Sichuan to teach. Best wishes to them.
On the contrary, I care a great deal. I care about the children who died in
poorly built schools, about the parents that they left behind, and about
those whom the government prevents from getting the truth out. This is
precisely why I write articles such as this.
But does it work? Why not sent what you write to BBC or CNN,why not write
things like this in a blog? If you really care about them,you won't just
write something,but without realize them. Don't be a giant in words,but a
weak man in action.
Beijing fears bloggers, else why detain them?
huh，I beg your mercy about my poor English.
I am a frequent reader of your blog, and having subscribed it quite a
while.
But to me, your text always have many "big words", I always can't be
sure that really understand your post very exactly, so most times I "don't
dare" to leave a comment.
That's what you say,not what I said.
I wanna tell you that sometimes you are wrong or too think only on your own
side.It's doesn't matter if you don't care.I'd rather all the visitors
could read my comments .They will know there is still some other voices.
Sorry,if you hate me.But I don't hate you.I respect you as a friend or I
don't know.
wishes.
"That's what you say,not what I said"