State Prosecutions of Speech in the PRC
Vol. 1

Cases in Translation Illustrating the Application of National Security and Public Order Laws to Political and Religious Expression

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction and Acknowledgments 1

1.1. Why Compile a Casebook? 2

1.2. About the Title 4

1.3. Case Selection 6

1.4. Types of Documents 11

1.5. Casebook Organization 13

1.6. Casebook Appendices 14

1.7. Case Sources 15

1.8. Translation and Formatting Conventions 16

1.9. Translating PRC Legal Terminology 18

1.10. Acquiring, Using, and Sharing This Casebook 22

1.11. Chinese Language Texts 23

1.12. Feedback and Contributions 23

1.13. Acknowledgments 23

1.14. About the Translator 23

2. Prosecutorial Discretion 25

2.1. Zhang Jie – Inciting Subversion by Posting Slogans About June Fourth – 2001 26

Translator's Summary: The Procuratorate withdrew its indictment of Zhang for posting "I don't know whether my fellow classmates have forgotten the June Fourth massacre of 1989, but those who have not forgotten please sign here" on the campus of Beijing University.

2.2. Ai Weiwei – Tax Evasion – 2011 29

Translator's Summary: On April 3, 2011, Ai Weiwei was detained at the Beijing Airport and his assistant, Wen Tao, was grabbed off the street by four plain clothes officers. The same day, the Public Security Bureau of Beijing searched Ai's house. On April 6, tax and police authorities confiscated financial records of Beijing FaKe Cultural Development Co., Ltd., a company that employed Ai as a designer. Ai and Wen were released in June and were not charged.

2.3. Chen Pingfu – Inciting Subversion by Posting Online – 2012 31

Translator's Summary: The Procuratorate withdrew its indictment of Chen for publishing 34 articles online with titles such as "Those Intending to Stay the Tide of Democracy Are Opposing the Will of God" and "Official Power is at the Heart of Autocracy, Civil Rights are the Heart of Democracy."

2.4. Wang Yu – Cancellation of Certificate to Practice Law – 2020 34

Translator's Summary: Wang Yu was detained at the same time as other lawyers at the Fengrui Law Firm (see Chapter 6 Associations: The "7.09" Rights Defenders), but there is no indication Wang was criminally prosecuted. The government canceled Wang's certificate to practice law on the grounds that, after the government shut down the Fengrui Law Firm, she was not employed by another law firm.

3. Mens Rea 35

3.1. Yue Zhengzhong – Inciting Subversion by Mailing Letters – 2000 36

Translator's Summary: Yue mailed letters with "reactionary content" in the name of a coworker in order to frame him. The court found Yue not guilty of inciting subversion on the grounds that "he did not take the aforementioned actions with the intent to subvert state power or overthrow the socialist system."

3.2. Yang Honglin – Inciting Subversion by Posting Flyers – 2002 41

Translator's Summary: Yang wrote "reactionary language" on advertisement flyers along with the phone number of someone he believed had cheated him while gambling and posted them around town. The court found Yang not guilty of inciting subversion on the grounds that "his hoped-for outcome . . . was not to cause unspecified persons to contemplate or carry out subversion of state power."

3.3. Lü Yunxuan – Disturbing the Peace by Hanging Banners (Administrative) – 2019 46

Translator's Summary: The court found the police violated the law by jailing Lü because they had failed to meet their evidentiary burden to show that Lü disturbed the peace by hanging three banners over his pharmacy's door that read "Cherish All Under Heaven," "The People are Poor and the World is in Chaos," and "The Officials are Corrupt and the Land is Doomed." The court ordered the police to apologize to Lü and pay him compensation for the loss of his personal freedom.

3.4. Yuan Jianmeng – Defamation by a Journalist (Administrative) – 2020 53

Translator's Summary: The court found that police did not violate Yuan's rights when they subjected him to administrative detention for reposting an article to his personal social media accounts that police determined defamed a Communist Party cadre. Yuan argued that he "had no intent to infringe on the reputation of others and no knowledge that there were concocted false facts." The court held that as a journalist Yuan had a duty to verify the accusations in the article had been confirmed by a government agency.

3.5. Wang Doe – Disrupting Public Order by Posting About Xinjiang (Administrative) – 2020 63

Translator's Summary: Police subjected Wang Doe to five days administrative detention for posting "factually incorrect statements" in a QQ chat room. The court rescinded that punishment on the grounds that "the subjective purpose of the plaintiff's posting of the aforementioned statements was to persuade Internet users in the same chat group, not to disseminate rumors." Wang's stated intent was to post "patriotic and government-loving statements in the hope that during these extraordinary times Hubei people would understand and cooperate with the actions of the government."

4. Prior Restraints 70

4.1. Cai Zhuohua, Xiao Gaowen, Xiao Yunfei & Hu Jinyun – Unlicensed Publishing of Christian Literature – 2005 71

Translator's Summary: Notwithstanding the defendants' claim that their printing of books was not commercial in nature, the court found them guilty of illegally operating a business and disrupting market order on the grounds they used a printing press to print Christian literature that the Press and Publication Administration of Beijing authenticated as illegal publications.

4.2. Yang Maodong (Guo Feixiong) – Publishing Political Literature Without a Serial Number – 2007 80

Translator's Summary: The court found Yang guilty on the grounds that he "misappropriated a Periodical Serial Number." The court rejected the defense's arguments that a five year statute of limitations had expired and that "the judicial interpretations, administrative regulations, and departmental rules that are the basis for the charge that defendant Yang Maodong committed the crime of illegal operation of a business do not comply with the provisions of China's Constitution and laws regarding freedom of publication."

4.3. Shi Weihan, Tian Hongxia, Li Fengshan, Zhou Xin, Cheng Xiaojing, Lü Yuequan & Li Zong – Unlicensed Publishing of Christian Literature – 2009 91

Translator's Summary: The court found the defendants guilty of illegal operation of a business on the grounds that they printed The Bible and "other books of a religious nature" without the authorization of the press and publication agency. The court stated that "an intent to obtain illegal revenue is not a necessary prerequisite for the crime of illegal operation of a business. Rather, all book publishing and printing must be authorized by publishing agencies pursuant to a signed Book and Periodical Printing Commission and in accordance with strict registration procedures."

4.4. Shi Doe – Unlicensed Publishing of Islamic Literature – 2013 108

Translator's Summary: The court found Shi guilty of illegally engaging in unlicensed publication and distribution of publications on the grounds that he wrote "books and brochures about the Islamic religion and proselytizing Islam without obtaining the relevant publication operating license and without going through a formal publishing house."

5. Associations: The China Democracy Party 111

5.1. Xu Wenli – Subversion – 1998 112

Translator's Summary: The court found Xu guilty on the grounds that he attempted to establish the "China Democracy Party" and formulated the "Constitution of the China Democracy Party (Provisional)," which defined "The primary goal of the Chinese Democratic Party" as "end the one-party dictatorship and establish a third republic."

5.2. Wang Youcai – Subversion – 1998 115

Translator's Summary: The court found Wang guilty on the grounds he drafted and shared documents that "argued for such things as 'gaining political rights, revising the Constitution, eliminating one party rule' and 'establishing a constitutional democratic political system and establishing a system where political power is divided.'"

5.3. Lü Xinhua – Subversion – 2001 119

Translator's Summary: The court found Lü guilty on the grounds that "Under circumstances where this organization had yet to obtain authorization to be established from the relevant agency, defendant Lü Xinhua nevertheless actively participated in the 'China Democracy Party Hubei Preparatory Committee' organization."

5.4. Wang Jinbo – Inciting Subversion – 2001 124

Translator's Summary: The court found Wang guilty on the grounds that he mailed materials to 30 classmates and friends with statements such as "the Communist Party of China places itself entirely above the law, the people and other political parties and organizations, and has become a root cause of destabilization, which will unavoidably lead to social unrest and civil war, and lead to the break up of the country."

5.5. Hu Mingjun & Wang Sen – Subversion – 2002 130

Translator's Summary: The court found Hu and Wang guilty on the grounds they "contended with the government, and colluded with 'democracy movement' elements in Beijing and elsewhere to vilify and defame our country's government on foreign radio stations and websites."

5.6. Yao Fuxin & Xiao Yunliang – Subversion – 2003 139

Translator's Summary: The court found Yao and Xiao guilty on the grounds that they "organized, plotted, and engaged in activities in the name of the 'China Democracy Party Liaoning Party Committee.'"

5.7. He Depu – Inciting Subversion – 2003 144

Translator's Summary: The court found He guilty on the grounds that he published articles that were "found to be illegal publications for having content that is banned under Article 26 of the 'Regulations on the Administration of Publishing' and Article 17 of the 'Interim Rules on the Administration of Internet Publishing' as 'Opposing the basic principles confirmed in the Constitution,'" including "An Open Letter to President George Bush on His February Visit to China" which had content such as "the basic nature of the Communist Party is to be tyrannical and anti-democratic."

5.8. Yang Tongyan (Yang Tianshui) – Subversion – 2006 150

Translator's Summary: The court found Yang guilty on the grounds that he published articles on foreign websites that "attacked the leaders of the Communist Party of China and the socialist system" and "called the people's democratic dictatorship a 'tyrannical regime'" and "followed the program and regulations of the China Democracy Party."

6. Associations: The "7.09" Rights Defenders 157

6.1. Zhai Yanmin – Subversion by a Lawyer – 2016 158

Translator's Summary: The court found Zhai guilty. Zhai told prosecutors who questioned him in court that he met Hu Shigen as a member of the unregistered "Yahebo Covenant Church," and that he had no "anti-party and anti-government ideas" until Hu "brainwashed" him.

6.2. Gou Hongguo – Subversion – 2016 164

Translator's Summary: The court found Guo guilty, but gave him a suspended sentence. Guo told prosecutors who questioned him in court that Hu Shigen baptized him as a member of the unregistered "Yahebo Covenant Church," and that Hu "bewitched" him into believing in "ideas that subvert state power, such as transforming the State."

6.3. Hu Shigen – Subversion – 2016 168

Translator's Summary: The court found Hu guilty on the grounds that he "enlisted people to spread ideologies that subverted state power, and actively cultivated spokespeople and action forces for his subversive concept of 'color revolution,'" "cooperated with others to plan strategies, methods, and means of subverting state power," and "incited and directed others to sensationalize hot-button incidents."

6.4. Zhou Shifeng – Subversion by a Lawyer – 2016 172

Translator's Summary: In its commentary on Zhou's case a Supreme People's Court publication stated: "The public trial of the case in accordance with the law simultaneously issued a solemn declaration to the anti-China forces in the West: China's constitutional and legal bottom line must not be challenged, and the fundamental interests of the Chinese people must not be trampled on. Faced with a 'color revolution' and a 'push-the-wall movement' under the cloak of so-called 'democracy' and 'human rights,' the Chinese people are not paralyzed and will defend their system and regime with the strongest determination and the most powerful force. Any attempt to undermine China's harmony and stability, any scheme to subvert China's State regime or prevent China's peaceful rise is doomed to find no welcome in people's hearts, will be severely punished by the law, and will end in shameful failure!"

6.5. Xie Yang – Inciting Subversion by a Lawyer – 2017 175

Translator's Summary: The court found Xie guilty, but exempted him from punishment. Xie testified about his involvement in the Qing'an Incident, and that he "accepted interviews with media outlets from Hong Kong, the United States, and elsewhere to strengthen the concept of 'Qing'an Lawyers' being retaliated against by the government for acting in the Qing'an Incident."

6.6. Jiang Tianyong – Inciting Subversion by a Lawyer – 2017 180

Translator's Summary: The court found Jiang guilty on the grounds that he published articles and gave interviews to foreign media outlets that sensationalized hot-button cases to "smear the offices of the State regime and attack the system established by the Constitution." The court specifically cited the article "Move Forward with Love, Watch Over and Help One Another – 7.09 Family Members Are Watching What Happens to the Arrested Citizens of Weifang."

6.7. Wu Gan – Subversion – 2017 192

Translator's Summary: The court found Wu Gan guilty on the grounds that he "advocated the use of sensationalizing disorderly conduct online and offline and other methods to insult and belittle State agencies and their staffs, in order to attack, confront, and oppose the State regime." His conviction was based on the charge that he colluded with Zhou Shifeng, Zhai Yanmin, and others associated with the Fengrui Law Firm to "strengthen an ideology that subverted state power."

6.8. Wang Quanzhang – Subversion by a Lawyer – 2019 230

Translator's Summary: The court found Wang guilty. The court judgment could not be located, but the indictment charged that he "used his status as a lawyer to accept financial support provided by foreign organizations many times, established companies to engage in illegal activities, and provided materials abroad attacking China's rule of law and human rights. At the same time, he engaged in criminal activities subverting state power and overthrowing the socialist order by sensationalizing hot-button cases and incidents, illegally gathering in public venues to engage in disorderly conduct, and using public opinion to provoke people who do not know the truth to hate the government."

6.9. Yu Wensheng – Inciting Subversion by a Lawyer – 2020 233

Translator's Summary: The court found Yu, a lawyer who represented Wang Quanzhang (see p. 230), guilty on the grounds that he "published open letters on the Internet through 'Twitter' and 'Facebook' to attack the State regime and the socialist system. He distorted and fabricated facts about, and sensationalized, hot-button domestic incidents in the name of 'rights defense.' He accepted foreign funds and interviews many times, denied the leadership of the Communist Party of China, denigrated China's governmental and judicial agencies, defamed China's rule of law as being in retreat and human rights as deteriorating, intentionally provoked people who did not know the truth to hate China's current political system, and incited subversion of China's State regime and the overthrow of the socialist order."

6.10. Zhu Chengzhi – Disturbing the Peace (Criminal) – 2020 244

Translator's Summary: The court found Zhu guilty on the grounds that he "used foreign Internet platforms to disseminate a large amount of fake information relating to significant domestic events that severely harmed the image of the State and severely endangered the interests of the State, creating disturbances and misleading the public." The court specifically cited Zhu for using "Twitter and Facebook to maliciously sensationalize major domestic events" such as the Jiansanjiang Incident, "Qing'an Incident, and the Lei Yang Incident, all of which occurred at least two years prior to Zhu's arrest.

7. Associations: Falun Gong 248

7.1. Zhao Jindong – Using a Cult to Undermine Law Enforcement – 2001 249

Translator's Summary: Prosecutors charged Zhao with inciting subversion of state power on the grounds that he "illegally printed and disseminated Falun Gong cult propaganda material whose main contents were expressions of dissatisfaction with the central government's declaration that the Falun Gong organization was a cult." The court agreed Zhao's actions constituted an offense, but held he committed the crime of using a cult organization to undermine law enforcement, and exempted him from punishment because he "recognized his crime, submitted to the law, severed all ties with the Falun Gong cult, has been able to expose Falun Gong's fundamental cult nature in various ways, and has rendered meritorious service."

7.2. Geng Doe – Using a Cult to Undermine Law Enforcement – 2020 252

Translator's Summary: The court found Geng guilty on the grounds that she invited three other people to come to her home to "practice Falun Gong and share their knowledge of Falun Gong with one another." Geng said in her statement "I am innocent, I believe in freedom, and I will continue to practice Falun Gong."

8. Other Associations 256

8.1. Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, Zhang Honghai & the New Youth Study Group – Subversion – 2003 257

Translator's Summary: The court found Xu, Yang, Jin, and Zhang guilty on the grounds that they discussed changing China's current regime and published articles online about "achieving social transformation, advocating reestablishing a liberal social system, attacking the current system, and repudiating the Communist Party of China's leadership." The court cited statements such as "the democracy currently implemented in China is fake democracy," and "bring an end to the gerontocracy, establish a youthful China" as evidence of their intent.

8.2. Cai Lujun and the China Freedom & Democracy Alliance– Inciting Subversion – 2003 265

Translator's Summary: The court found Cai guilty on the grounds that he established the "China Freedom and Democracy Alliance" and downloaded, copied, and disseminated articles on the Internet that attacked the Party and the socialist system. The court also held, however, that while the Press and Publication Administration of Hebei had confirmed that some of the articles disseminated by Cai, including "The Truth of China's June Fourth" and "River Elegy" were illegal publications, there was "no evidence proving that their content was speech that uses manufacturing rumors, defamation, or other means to incite subversion of state power and the overthrow of the socialist system."

8.3. Guo Quan and the China New Democracy Party – Subversion – 2009 271

Translator's Summary: The court found Guo guilty on the grounds he illegally formed a political party, and used the Internet to plan a "One Week Stay at Home Revolution" which called for "all citizens to stay at home, do not collaborate with the dictators, do not act in the service of dictators, prepare seven days worth of food and water, and wait for the advent of a democratic China." The court said the foregoing constituted instigating "the overthrow of the socialist system under the guise of helping certain 'rights defense' groups."

8.4. Zhao Lianhai & Parents of Poisoned Infants – Disturbing the Peace (Criminal) – 2010 278

Translator's Summary: Zhao organized groups to advocate on behalf of high-profile victims of government malfeasance and misfeasance, including parents who infants were poisoned by tainted milk powder, and a woman who was raped while being held in detention. The court found Zhao guilty on the grounds that he "brought together many people in public venues, creating a disturbance and causing severe chaos in public order." The court rejected the defense's claim that his actions were "within the normal rights defense activities."

8.5. Xu Zhiyong and the New Citizens Movement – Gathering Crowds by a Lawyer – 2014 287

Translator's Summary: The court found Xu guilty on the grounds that he "exploited hot-button social issues of public concern" to repeatedly organize large gatherings in public venues. The "issues" included government policies that made it difficult for children of parents without a Beijing household registration to sit for entrance examinations for high school and college.

8.6. Qin Yongmin and China Human Rights Watch – Subversion – 2018 311

Translator's Summary: The court found Qin guilty on the grounds that he established the organization "China Human Rights Watch." Evidence cited of his guilt included the fact that he held weekly lectures in a QQ group, researching and discussing how to promote "peaceful transformation," and disseminated articles written by him promoting "peaceful transformation."

9. Political Speech 324

9.1. Huang Qi – Inciting Subversion – 2003 325

Translator's Summary: The court found Huang guilty on the grounds that he used his website to publish articles about such issues as "democracy movements," "June Fourth," and "Falun Gong." The court acquitted Huang on a separate charge of inciting separatism on the grounds that, while Huang's website had articles with contents that promoted ethnic separatism that were posted by him, those articles were not initially produced, edited, or disseminated by him, and there was no evidence that his goal was to incite separatism.

9.2. Wang Xiaoning – Inciting Subversion – 2003 331

Translator's Summary: The court found Wang guilty on the grounds that he published articles in which "he advocated his own democratic thoughts and attacked the current political and social systems." The court cited articles with titles such as "Regulation and Control of the Internet Cannot Violate the Constitution and Laws" and "Why Is the Communist Party of China Afraid of Western Democratic Politics?" and statements which the court said "advocated the establishment of a political party capable of replacing the Communist Party of China and the implementation of a 'multi-party system' and 'separation of the three powers.'"

9.3. Luo Yongzhong – Inciting Subversion – 2003 341

Translator's Summary: The court found Luo guilty on the grounds that he wrote and published a number of "reactionary articles," including "Can the Three Represents Give Us Victory Over SARS?" and "Tell Today's Youth the Truth About June Fourth" that attacked the socialist system and created a negative influence on society. Luo's sister acted as his defense counsel. The court said that it showed leniency in sentencing Luo to three years imprisonment on the grounds that Luo confessed to the crime.

9.4. Du Daobin – Inciting Subversion – 2004 345

Translator's Summary: The appeals court upheld the lower court's judgment finding Du guilty on the grounds that he distributed 26 articles on the Internet, including "Discussing Subversion of the Government is Legal," which contained "defamatory speech that incited subversion of state power on a massive scale, and encouraged others that "we must help our mainland China brothers to overthrow autocratic and dictatorial rule." The appeals court found the articles defamed China's State regime by characterizing it as "autocratic, violent, tyrannical, unjust, and corrupt," saying that it had "long ago lost the qualities of representative justice," and claiming that "the spirit of the Nazis has returned, it has taken hold in the State regime."

9.5. Zheng Yichun – Inciting Subversion – 2005 350

Translator's Summary: The court found Zheng guilty on the grounds that he communicated with, and accepted funds from, the Epoch Times website, and that he wrote and published 77 articles on the Internet that "had an adverse impact inside and outside of China" including "An Indictment of the Communist Party of China's Criminal Clique," which was made into a rock and roll song by the Pangu Band.

9.6. Zhang Lin – Inciting Subversion – 2005 355

Translator's Summary: The court found Zhang guilty on the grounds that he published articles on "Epoch Times" and "Boxun News Net," and gave an interview to the "Voice of Hope" radio program that opposed the basic principles set forth in the Constitution, threatened the State's unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity, spread rumors, disrupted social order, and harmed social stability.

9.7. Li Jianping – Inciting Subversion – 2006 359

Translator's Summary: The court found Li guilty on the grounds that he "abused the civil rights conferred upon him by the Constitution, and disseminated speech on the Internet that endangered state security" by publishing 18 articles on the "Epoch Times," "Boxun News Network," and other websites. Evidence cited to support Li's conviction included testimony from Shi Tao and evidence collected as part of his conviction (see p. 576).

9.8. Guo Qizhen – Inciting Subversion – 2007 365

Translator's Summary: The appeals court upheld the lower court's judgment finding Guo guilty on the grounds that he "distributed a large number of articles on the 'Democracy Forum' website, attacked and cursed the State government, and disseminated speech that damaged the State regime, the socialist system, and the judicial system." The lower court cited articles such as "Announcement Regarding Participating in Gao Zhisheng's Hunger Strike" and "Hunger Strike Diary." The appeals court explicitly rejected Guo's defense that "writing articles criticizing the Party, the government, or their leaders is an exercise of constitutional rights."

9.9. Zhang Jianhong – Inciting Subversion – 2007 370

Translator's Summary: The appeals court upheld the lower court's judgment finding Zhang guilty on the grounds that he "harbored grievances against the State regime and the socialist system because the 'Aegean Sea' website of which he was the editor-in-chief was shut down" and wrote and published over 110 articles on "Epoch Times," "Independent Chinese Pen," "Boxun" and other websites that "fabricated false facts about a 'June fourth massacre'" and maligned and denigrated China's State regime on a massive scale as "the absolute mortal enemy of all mankind." The appeals court noted that Zhang's "objective was neither to maintain and strengthen our country's State regime and socialist system, nor to submit proposals and criticisms directed at specific facts and incidents for the improvement and betterment of their works."

9.10. Hu Jia – Inciting Subversion – 2008 374

Translator's Summary: The court found Hu guilty on the grounds that he made statements such as: "Human rights disasters are erupting in China every day" and "The only things that can grow in the soil of an autocratic system are greed, corruption, and abuses of power. The so-called 'harmonious society' is fabricated out of thin air, and then big talk, empty talk, clichés, nonsense, and lies gets repeated tens of millions of times. All of this is poison. The ruling party uses poison to quench our thirst, and then drags the whole society down to its grave."

9.11. Lü Gengsong – Inciting Subversion – 2008 381

Translator's Summary: The appeals court upheld the lower court's judgment finding Lü guilty on the grounds that he publish articles on foreign websites that defamed China's State regime with statements such as "If one must find a 'one and only legal government,' then from a historical perspective and from the aspect of legally constituted authority, this 'one and only legal government' can only be the government of the Republic of China, and not the government of the People's Republic of China."

9.12. Liu Xiaobo – Inciting Subversion – 2009 386

Translator's Summary: The court found Liu guilty on the grounds that he published essays on the Internet that defamed, and incited others to overthrow, China's State regime and socialist system. The court specifically cited that Liu "colluded with others to draft an article with the title 'Charter 08' that advocated views of an inciting nature such as 'eliminate the monopoly of one party on the exercise of political power,' and 'create a Chinese federation under the framework of a democratic constitutional system of governance.'"

9.13. Jin Andi, Lü Jiaping & Yu Junyi – Inciting Subversion – 2011 395

Translator's Summary: The appeals court upheld the lower court's judgment finding Jin, Lü, and Yu guilty on the grounds that they published over 10 articles on "Boxun.com" and other websites which contained defamatory statements such as "The corruption situation cannot be curbed, and the current political structures, mechanisms, and systems are the crux of the ongoing worsening corruption situation."

9.14. Chen Xi – Inciting Subversion – 2011 406

Translator's Summary: The court found Chen guilty on the grounds that he used "network circumvention software" to publish articles on "Boxun," "China EWeekly," "Democracy Forum," "Rights Defense Net," and other foreign websites such as "'June Fourth' Changed Me and Changed China," and "A Response to the Activities of the United Nations 'World Human Rights Year,'" that "manufactured rumors and defamed the Communist Party of China, saying it is 'a criminal organization that ignores the law and willfully violates human rights.'"

9.15. Chen Wei – Inciting Subversion – 2011 410

Translator's Summary: The court found Chen guilty on the grounds that he published articles on "China Democracy," "China Human Rights," "China EWeekly" and other websites that included defamatory statements such as "The people have been deprived of their ideology and belief," and "The entire Communist Party of China utilizes violent mechanisms to control the people," and incitements such as "The funeral bells are ringing for one party dictatorship" and "This system must be changed."

10. Seditious Libel on Social Media 415

10.1. Cheng Huaishan – Defaming the Politburo (Administrative) – 2014 416

Translator's Summary: The court found that police did not violate Cheng's rights when they subjected him to administrative detention for a single QQ post that the police decided "flagrantly humiliated leaders of the Party and the State" including Xi Jinping and other members of the Politburo Standing Committee. The court acknowledged that Cheng's post did not explicitly name any State leader, but "nevertheless included content that was clearly insulting and defamatory, and its target was both specific and unique, and based on the timing of the post and the related content, it was entirely obvious who it was about."

10.2. Guo Jianhe – Defaming State Leaders (Administrative) – 2015 421

Translator's Summary: The court found that police did not violate Guo's rights when it subjected him to administrative detention for reposting statements to friends on WeChat that insulted State leaders. The court provided no examples of what Guo posted, and it did not address Guo's defense that his actions were an exercise of his right to freedom of speech granted under China's Constitution.

10.3. Yu Doe – Defaming Xi Jinping (Criminal) – 2017 424

Translator's Summary: The court found Yu guilty on the grounds that he made several posts in a WeChat group that "involved statements that defamed Comrade Chairman Xi Jinping." The court said it showed leniency in sentencing Yu to only six months imprisonment on the basis of his "candid confession."

10.4. Feng Zhouguan – Disturbing the Peace by Berating Xi Jinping (Administrative) – 2018 426

Translator's Summary: The court found that police did not violate Feng's rights by subjecting him to five days administrative detention for referring to Xi Jinping as "fat pig," "steamed bun," and "spendthrift" in WeChat posts. The court rejected Feng's claim that "If the country's leader or his appointed attorneys want to play at litigation with [Feng] then [the police] should maintain a neutral stance because the [police] are agents of the country's judiciary."

10.5. Luo Daiqing – Disturbing the Peace by Ridiculing the Image of the State (Administrative and Criminal) – 2019 436

Translator's Summary: The court found Luo guilty on the grounds that while studying at the University of Minnesota in the United States he posted 40 statements and inappropriate memes on Twitter that "ridiculed the image of State leaders." The court said it showed leniency in sentencing Luo to only six months imprisonment as he was "able to honestly confess to the crime and recognize his offense and show a relatively penitent attitude."

10.6. Jiang Yuchun – Disturbing the Peace with Fake and Harmful Information (Criminal) – 2019 440

Translator's Summary: The court found Jiang guilty on the grounds that he made 894 posts on WeChat with "fake and harmful political information such as 'Housing prices are about to collapse, the Communist Party of China's mouthpieces are frantically clamoring, three consecutive shows of force, this brutal madness is a road leading to destruction.'" The court said it showed leniency in sentencing Jiang to only 14 months imprisonment as he was "able to truthfully confess to his criminal actions."

10.7. Li Doe – Disturbing the Peace by Harming the Image of the State (Administrative and Criminal) – 2019 443

Translator's Summary: The court found Li guilty on the grounds that he used VPN software to publish 120 posts on Twitter that "harmed the image of the State and severely endangered the interests of the State." The judgment did not specify what the statements were. Li had already served 20 days administrative detention for the same offense, and the court said it showed lenience in sentencing him to one year imprisonment because he signed a confession.

10.8. Jiang Kun – Disturbing the Peace by Vilifying the Party (Criminal) – 2019 446

Translator's Summary: The court found Jiang guilty on the grounds that he made 1,434 posts on Twitter that "vilified and attacked the Party and the State." The court noted that Jiang "often watched videos and read articles by foreign anti-Chinese forces that attacked and vilified the institutions and policies of the Party and the State, and this caused him to develop hateful thoughts about the current social system." The court said it showed leniency in sentencing Jiang to only eight months imprisonment as he "admitted his crime and expressed remorse."

10.9. Lai Liangping – Disturbing the Peace by Posting Claims of Human Trafficking (Administrative) – 2019 450

Translator's Summary: The court found the police did not violate Lai's rights when they subjected him to administrative detention for posts on Twitter that insulted previous Party and State leaders and fabricated fake information such as "the staff of the Lufeng government in Shanghang were human traffickers." The court rejected Lai's defenses including that he had been subject to double jeopardy and that one of the posts used as evidence against him had been made 18 months prior. The judgment also noted that police had separately subjected Lai to administrative punishment on the grounds that he "used international access channels provided by non-state public telecommunication networks to carry out international networking, and 'climbed the wall' to access foreign websites."

10.10. Ma Huaying – Disturbing the Peace by Critiquing Party Leaders (Criminal) – 2019 461

Translator's Summary: The court found Ma guilty on the grounds that he posted "a large amount of adverse news that maliciously critiqued Party and State leaders, ethnic and religious policies, and domestic laws and regulations," and made "false critiques" on foreign websites. Ma had already been subjected to 15 days administrative detention by the police for the same offense. The court deducted those 15 days from his criminal sentence of 10 months.

10.11. Wang Xiquan – Disturbing the Peace with Insulting Posts Targeting Police (Criminal) – 2020 463

Translator's Summary: The court found Wang guilty on the grounds that he "made several insulting and inappropriate remarks" on a government WeChat post that "glamorized criminals, and smeared traffic police officers' just enforcement of the law."

10.12. Zhang Zhixiang – Disturbing the Peace by Vilifying the Communist Party of China (Administrative) – 2020 466

Translator's Summary: The court found that the police did not violate Zhang's rights by subjecting him to 10 days administrative detention for posting on WeChat "In a civilized society, tyrannical Communist bandits will not survive for long," and "In the modern civilized 21st century heaven will not tolerate the immortality of Communist bandits." The court rejected his defense that he was "referring to the current United States President and Republican Party leader Donald Trump's government," and not the Communist Party of China.

10.13. Yao Yongsheng – Disturbing the Peace by ReTweeting the US Embassy (Criminal) – 2020 472

Translator's Summary: The court found Yao guilty on the grounds that he "caused serious chaos in the network order and the public order of society" by reposting 29 tweets from the Twitter accounts of the "New York Times Chinese Network," "The American Embassy and Consulates in China," and "Radio Free Asia" to his own Twitter account.

10.14. Yang Tianqiao – Disturbing the Peace by Criticizing Mao Zedong (Administrative) – 2020 476

Translator's Summary: The court found police did not violate Yang's rights by subjecting him to 12 days administrative detention for a single WeChat post criticizing Mao Zedong and the Cultural Revolution. The court did not directly address Yang's argument that the punishment violated his "freedom of speech in accordance with the provisions of Article 35 of the 'Constitution of the People's Republic of China,'" and that he had "the right to publicly express any opinions about anyone."

11. Religious and Minority Issues 480

11.1. Ze Ge & Luorang Danzhen– Inciting Separatism by Sharing a Book by the Dalai Lama – 2000 481

Translator's Summary: The appeals court overturned Ze's conviction on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence to prove that he had the intent to incite separatism. The appeals court upheld Luorang's conviction for inciting separatism on the grounds that he excerpted speech that praised the Dalai Lama and propagated Tibetan independence and separatism and mimeographed copies that he then distributed to many people.

11.2. Ilham Tohti – Separatism by a Professor – 2014 485

Translator's Summary: According to a case summary published by the Supreme People's Court, the court found Tohti, a lecturer at the Central University for Nationalities, guilty on the grounds that "he used the 'Uyghur Online' website as a platform, and used his position as a university lecturer, to confuse, entice, and coerce some ethnic minority students to join the website, gradually forming a relatively stable organization. The organization was headed by Ilham Tohti, with clear internal divisions and relatively stable core members. They engaged in separatist activities over an extended period of time, which complies with the criminal law's provisions on criminal syndicates."

11.3. Pu Zhiqiang – Inciting Ethnic Hatred and Disturbing the Peace by a Lawyer– 2015 489

Translator's Summary: Based on the indictment and public reports, Pu was found guilty on the grounds he published eight Weibo posts that incited ethnic hatred and four that disturbed the peace. The texts of the relevant posts can be found on p. 727.

11.4. Tian Weiguo – Inciting Ethnic Hatred by Posting About Xinjiang – 2016 492

Translator's Summary: The court found Tian guilty on the grounds that he "used foreign websites to disseminate fake information with content that incited ethnic hatred, sowed discord between the ethnicities, and undermined ethnic unity." Cited examples of his posts included: "Xinjiang Shache Uyghurs have been massacred," and "The Shache massacre has been tweeted about for so long, the time has come for someone to call for the United Nations to send an investigation team."

11.5. Huang Shike – Providing Religious Instruction Online – 2017 495

Translator's Summary: The court rejected the prosecutor's charge that Huang committed the crime of gathering crowds to disrupt social order, and instead found Huang guilty of illegal use of information networks on the grounds that he "engaged in the religious activities of discussing and instructing about religious scriptures in a non-religious venue, thereby disrupting the normal religious administration order, which severely endangered society." The actions cited were using WeChat to discuss religious texts and teach others how to pray.

12. The 1989 Tiananmen Square Demonstrations 498

12.1. Zhu Ruixiang – Inciting Subversion by Sharing the Tiananmen Papers – 2001 499

Translator's Summary: The court found Zhu guilty on the grounds that he emailed content from "Big Reference" to 12 friends and shared 15 pages of excerpts from "The Tiananmen Papers" with one friend. The court accepted the police's determination that the former was "a hostile publication, and that an enemy organization uses this publication to do such things as attack the leadership of our Communist Party and socialist system, slander Party and State leaders, and conspire to carry out subversion of China's government," and the government's determination that the latter "severely interfered with the overall situation of China's reform and opening up, jeopardized social stability, and its content had serious political problems."

12.2. Zhang Peng – Endangering State Security by Calling to Commemorate June Fourth – 2009 503

Translator's Summary: A committee ordered Zhang to undergo 18 months of reeducation through labor for "making commemorative June Fourth culture shirts," publishing an article on Boxun.com with the statement "Commemorating June Fourth is a great thing, and if no one takes to the streets to commemorate then people will look down on the democratists," and posting statements on QQ chats such as "I advocate for a social movement, but I oppose violence."

12.3. Tan Zuoren – Inciting Subversion by Commemorating June Fourth – 2010 506

Translator's Summary: The court found Tan guilty on the grounds that he conspired with others to hold a blood drive to commemorate the "Tiananmen Incident," published an article on the Internet - "1989 - A Witness to the Last Beauty: An Eyewitness' Tiananmen Square Diary" - that "distorted, smeared, and denigrated the government's disposition of the 'Tiananmen Incident,'" and accepted interviews from foreign media regarding the "Great Wenchuan Earthquake" that "severely denigrated the image of the Party and the government."

12.4. Zhang Changhong – Disturbing the Peace with Big Character Posters (Criminal) – 2018 510

Translator's Summary: The court found Zhang guilty on the grounds that he posted big-character posters with false contents in public venues with statements such as "Do you know about the June Fourth Tiananmen Massacre." The court cited incidents going back as far as 2013, even though he had already twice been detained and subjected to 10 days administrative detention in 2016 as punishment for some of those incidents. Zhang appealed claiming his prior detentions were not considered in calculating his sentence. The appeals court found no error.

12.5. Dong Zehua & Yuan Shuai– Disturbing the Peace by Interviewing Foreigners (Criminal) – 2019 513

Translator's Summary: The court found Dong and Yuan guilty on the grounds that Dong "wore a T-shirt with sensitive markings on it and took photos in Tiananmen Square and posted the photos online" and Dong and Yuan "interviewed foreigners in Tiananmen Square and made inquiries into sensitive topics."

12.6. Jie Ruixue – Disturbing the Peace by Wearing a T-Shirt (Criminal) – 2019 516

Translator's Summary: The court found Jie guilty on the grounds that she "stood in an area crowded with tourists in the vicinity of the national flag pole in Tiananmen Square wearing a white t-shirt upon which was written 'Freedom of Speech, Vindicate June Fourth, Oppose Repeating the Tragedy.'" The court said that it showed leniency in sentencing Jie to six months imprisonment on the grounds that Jie "made a truthful confession of her crime."

13. The 2019 Hong Kong Demonstrations 519

13.1. Li Doe – Disturbing the Peace (Criminal) – 2020 520

Translator's Summary: The court found Li guilty on the grounds that he "made inappropriate statements in posts through WeChat Moments or in writings on paper hung on the office building of the People's Government of Tanxi that insulted Party and State leaders and supported 'Hong Kong Independence.'" The court sentenced Li to prison notwithstanding what it characterized as his "mild mental retardation" and "limited criminal capacity for the illegal actions."

13.2. Xue Doe – Disturbing the Peace (Criminal) – 2020 523

Translator's Summary: The court found Xu guilty on the grounds that he posted statements on Sina Weibo and Twitter such as "Hong Kong citizens probably need the freedom to replace the shameless chief executive," and "I hope that the true Hong Kong police will stand on the side of the Hong Kong people, and even if they cannot resist, that they will not become the accomplices of the dictator."

14. State Symbols 526

14.1. Qin Zhihui – Defamation and Disturbing the Peace (Criminal) – 2014 527

Translator's Summary: According to the Supreme People's Court, this was the first case to be published following the issuance of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Handling of Defamation Through Information Networks and Other Criminal Cases," and is a "model" case that serves as a "warning" to Internet users that they must "consciously regulate" their words.

14.2. Zhang Guanghong – Disrupting Public Order by Distorting the Image of Dead Soldiers (Administrative) – 2015 540

Translator's Summary: The court held the police did not violate Zhang's rights when they jailed him for seven days and confiscated his computer on the grounds that he "used his own Sina Weibo to spread rumors and posts about the 'Five Heroes of Wolf Tooth Mountain' and distorted the image of those revolutionary martyrs."

14.3. Xu Chang – Defaming a Martyred Firefighter – 2018 547

Translator's Summary: After Xu posted comments on Sina Weibo regarding a deceased firefighter, police detained her and subjected her to five days administrative detention for disturbing the peace. The public prosecutor then sought the opinion of the deceased firefighters' next of kin and was told they would not file a civil lawsuit against Xu. The public prosecutor then filed a "public interest lawsuit" against Xu for violating the "Protection of Heroes and Martyrs Law of the People's Republic of China." The court found Xu guilty and ordered her to publicly apologize in news media outlets.

14.4. Liu Renwen – Insulting the National Anthem and Disturbing the Peace (Administrative) – 2019 553

Translator's Summary: The court of appeals upheld police subjecting Liu to 10 days administrative detention for posting "distorted lyrics of the national anthem in multiple WeChat groups" in violation of the "National Anthem Law of the People's Republic of China" and 10 days administrative detention for disturbing the peace for the same act, for a total of 20 days.

14.5. Wei Yongliang – Disturbing the Peace by Ridiculing a Revolutionary Martyr (Administrative) – 2020 557

Translator's Summary: The court of appeals upheld police subjecting Wei to 10 days administrative detention for posting "inappropriate speech on the Internet that distorted historical facts and ridiculed the heroic image of the revolutionary martyr Wei Ripan." The court did not accept Wei's claim that the punishment was imposed almost a year after the statements were made, and the statute of limitations had expired.

15. Sharing Information 561

15.1. Huang Qunwei – Fabricating & Distributing Information About SARS – 2003 562

Translator's Summary: The court found Huang guilty on the grounds that he posted articles on the Internet "at a particular period of time when China's people were fighting the 'SARS' epidemic, severely disrupting social order" such as "Absolutely reliable news, Shanghai conceals a large number of SARS cases" and "China has entered an economic crisis due to SARS."

15.2. Zheng Enchong – Disclosing a Secret Xinhua News Report – 2003 566

Translator's Summary: The court found Zheng guilty on the grounds that he shared information with Human Rights in China that he had learned from a police officer that the public security agency was dealing with a "sudden mass incident" in Shanghai, as well as a Xinhua news article entitled "Forced Demolitions Lead to Clashes, Reporters Attacked While Conducting Interviews." The court said that "considerations such as whether or not the foreign organization received them, or whether or not there were any actual harmful consequences to the interests of the State do not influence the establishment of this offense."

15.3. Liu Fenggang, Xu Yonghai & Zhang Shengqi – Disclosing Information about a House Church Member's Prosecution – 2004 571

Translator's Summary: The court found Liu guilty on the grounds that he wrote three articles that were published abroad that constituted "intelligence," based on a "verification" produced at trial by the National Administration for the Protection of State Secrets. One of the articles deemed to be "intelligence" was a description of the detention, trial, torture, and punishment of a woman for being a member of an unlicensed Christian congregation (which she denied).

15.4. Shi Tao – Disclosing Government Orders to News Outlets – 2005 576

Translator's Summary: The court found Shi, a journalist, guilty on the grounds that he shared with foreign websites notes he took during an editorial meeting at which an editor at his newspaper summarized a document issued by the Party and the government regarding "stability work" in connection with land seizure protests, petitioning, Falun Gong, Hong Kong, liberalism, and the 15th anniversary of "June Fourth."

15.5. Sun Xiaodi & Sun Dunbai – Disclosing Information about a Mine – 2009 581

Translator's Summary: The Reeducation Through Labor Committee ordered Sun and his daughter to serve 2 years and 18 months, respectively, for sharing information about pollution coming from a mine associated with China's nuclear industry.

15.6. Gao Yu – Disclosing a Communist Party Document – 2015 584

Translator's Summary: The court found Gao guilty on the grounds that she shared with a news publisher in Hong Kong a copy of Party General Document (2013) No. 9, which discussed seven political "perils," including constitutionalism, civil society, historical nihilism, and universal values.

15.7. Tang Jingling, Yuan Chaoyang & Wang Qingying – Inciting Subversion by Sharing Political Books – 2016 593

Translator's Summary: The court found Tang, Yuan, and Wang guilty on the grounds that they "compiled, printed, and disseminated a series of 'Non-Cooperation Movement' books and other propaganda pamphlets" with titles such as "Breaking the Real Axis of Evil," "Organizing: A Guide for Grassroots Leaders," "Self Liberation: A Guide to Strategic Planning for Action to End a Dictatorship or Other Oppression," and "Strategic Nonviolent Conflict: Thinking about the Fundamentals."

15.8. Dr. Li Wenliang – Telling People About COVID in Wuhuan – 2020 622

Translator's Summary: A Wuhan police officer issued a formal reprimand to Dr. Li for the "illegal act" of publishing non-factual statements about 7 cases regarding SARS having been confirmed in Wuhan's South China Fruit and Seafood Market in a WeChat group.

15.9. Zhang Zhan – Disturbing the Peace by Reporting on COVID in Wuhan (Criminal) – 2020 624

Translator's Summary: The court found Zhang guilty on the grounds that she spread fake information about the circumstances of Wuhan's prevention and control of the Covid-19 outbreak on WeChat, Twitter, and YouTube, and accepted interviews from foreign media where she "maliciously sensationalized the new coronavirus pneumonia epidemic in Wuhan."

16. Accessing Information 629

16.1. Yuan Yulai – Purchasing Illegal Books – 2016 630

Translator's Summary: The court rejected Yuan's administrative lawsuit on the grounds that the government's confiscation of a package of 14 books from Yuan's home that he purchased online "had no actual impact on [his] legitimate rights and interests." The government had entered his home because he was suspected of purchasing and storing illegal publications. The books included "The 100 Bible Events That Influenced the World," "Night: A Memoir of a Nazi Concentration Camp," and "Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln."

16.2. Duan Zheng – Possessing Extremist Videos – 2017 632

Translator's Summary: The court found Duan guilty on the grounds that he saved seven terrorist videos on his cell phone and his Baidu cloud storage account. Duan was not accused of having any communication, affiliation, or involvement with any terrorist organization, and the court noted that there was no evidence that Duan distributed or shared the videos or showed them to anyone else, and rejected his defense that he downloaded the videos out of curiosity.

16.3. Liu Bingyang – Providing VPN Services – 2017 637

Translator's Summary: The court found Liu guilty on the grounds that he "provided programs for the intrusion and illegal control of computer information systems" when he shared information online about, and took payments for, the Shadowsocks software, which "could circumvent the monitoring of China's Internet firewall, and illegally access foreign websites, receive and view illegal videos, and receive and listen to illegal broadcasts."

16.4. Yao Zenglei – Illegally Accessing Foreign Games with a VPN – 2019 641

Translator's Summary: Police officers found Yao guilty on the grounds that she "used VPN software to illegally access international networks while playing the game 'Ace Fishing: Wild Catch.'"

16.5. Zhang Liping – Illegally Accessing Twitter with a VPN – 2020 642

Translator's Summary: Police officers found Zhang guilty on the grounds that she "downloaded wall-climbing software on her personal mobile phone and utilized the software to log onto the foreign Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, etc. to browse various kinds of information."

16.6. Zhang Tao – Illegally Accessing Wikipedia with a VPN – 2020 643

Translator's Summary: Police officers found Zhang guilty of using "wall-climbing software to illegally browse the Wikipedia website for information."

17. Civil Disputes and Private Prosecutions 644

17.1. Chen Jiangang v. Procuratorate Daily Publishing – Civil Defamation – 2014 645

Translator's Summary: The court found that the state sponsored media outlet People's Procuratorate Publishing did not defame lawyer Chen Jiangang when it falsely reported that Chen had requested his client –the well-known singer Wu Hongfei – have her criminal detention be converted to administrative detention.

17.2. Kong Qingdong v. Nanjing Radio & Television Group – Civil Defamation – 2015 650

Translator's Summary: The court found that the host of a state sponsored media program did not defame Beijing University professor Kong when he referred to Kong as "a beast" and said Kong's reputation was "based entirely upon cursing others." The court stated "In order to ensure that citizens and the media enjoy full freedom of speech when debating matters of public interest, one cannot simply believe that every mere expression of doubt or criticism must by its nature constitute an infringement of a public figure's right to reputation, unless at the time the speaker speaks there is clear malicious intent."

17.3. Huang Zhong & Hong Zhenkuai v. Guo Songmin – Civil Defamation – 2016 658

Translator's Summary: The court found Guo had not defamed Huang and Hong (an editor and writer at the magazine "Yanhuang Chunqiu") because his Sina Weibo post referring to a "gang of sons of bitches" was not clearly directed at Huang and Hong. The court accepted Guo's claim that his post was "a critique and refutation of historical nihilism" generally, notwithstanding the fact that Guo posted that in response to a Sina Weibo post that read "What is motivating the editors and writers at 'Yanhuang Chunqiu'? Couldn't dig up a turnip to eat during a time of war? Is it too polite to say these kinds of writers and authors are sons of bitches?"

17.4. The Supreme People's Court Position Paper on the "Five Heroes of Wolf Tooth Mountain" Cases – 2016 667

Translator's Summary: The court found Hong guilty of defaming soldiers who died during World War II in a lawsuit brought by two of the soldiers' sons in connection with a scholarly article he published which questioned the government's official version of their deaths. The Supreme People's Court praised the judgment on the grounds that Hong's article "failed to make a positive appraisal of the basic fact that during the battle the [soldiers] demonstrated courageous acts of heroic opposition to the enemy and a spirit of willingness to die for a just cause."

17.5. Chen Guangping – Private Prosecution for Criminal Defamation – 2020 675

Translator's Summary: Police officers brought a private prosecution against Chen claiming he defamed them in online posts accusing them of corruption. The appeals court upheld the lower court's rejection of his defense that his posts consisted of "criticism and online supervision through public opinion" and were based on evidence and facts, as well as its sentencing him to 30 months imprisonment for criminal defamation.

18. Appendix I: Selected Laws, Regulations & Judicial Interpretations 684

18.1. The Six Most Commonly Prosecuted Speech Offenses 685

18.2. The Constitution 689

18.3. Public Security Administrative Punishments Law 691

18.4. National Anthem Law 693

18.5. Protection of Heroes and Martyrs Law 694

18.6. Criminal Law 695

18.7. Regulations on the Administration of Publishing 703

18.8. Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court Regarding Certain Questions About the Specific Laws to be Used in Adjudicating Criminal Cases of Illegal Publications 706

18.9. Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court Regarding Certain Questions Concerning the Specific Laws to be Used in Adjudicating Cases of Foreign Theft or Spying to Obtain, or Providing Illegally, State Secrets or Intelligence 707

18.10. Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Handling of Defamation Through Information Networks and Other Criminal Cases 708

18.11. Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and People's Procuratorate on Issues Concerning the Application of Law for Criminal Cases of Disturbing the Peace 710

18.12. Interim Rules on the Administration of Internet Publishing 711

18.13. Interim Provisions on the Administration of International Networking of Computer Information Networks 713

19. Appendix II: Individuals Imprisoned for Posting on Twitter 714

19.1. Convictions for Defamation 714

Wang Beiyuan – Harming the Reputations of Party and State Leaders – 2019 714

19.2. Convictions for Defamation and Disturbing the Peace (Causing Severe Chaos in a Public Venue) 715

Wang Doe – Endangering State Interests and Defaming Mao Zedong – 2019 715

19.3. Convictions for Disturbing the Peace (Berating) 717

Cheng Doe – Denigrating the Image of the Party and the Government – 2019 717

Xu Doe – Denigrating Party and State Leaders and Police Groups – 2019 717

19.4. Convictions for Disturbing the Peace (Causing Severe Chaos in Public Order) 719

Dong Doe – Harming the Image of the State – 2018 719

Chen Guoji – Insulting State Leaders – 2019 719

Yang Zhaoxing – Reposting Fake Information About the Party from Foreign Media – 2019 720

19.5. Convictions for Disturbing the Peace (No Clause Specified) 721

Gao Zhenqiang – Attacking Party and Government Leaders – 2019 721

Ge Renqiang – Vilifying State Leaders – 2019 721

Wei Qi – Posting Anti-Party and Anti-Communist Content – 2019 722

20. Appendix III: Individuals Jailed for Insulting the Police 723

21. Appendix IV: Examples of Criminalized Speech 727

21.1. Yu Wensheng's Open Letter 727

21.2. Pu Zhiqiang's Sina Weibo Posts 729

Posts Accused of Disturbing the Peace 729

Posts Accused of Inciting Ethnic Hatred 730

22. Appendix V: Further Readings 732

22.1. Prosecutorial Discretion 733

Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598 (1985) 733

22.2. Mens Rea 735

State Trials, Trial of Lieut. Col. John Lilburne, 1649, Justice Jermin 735

Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246 (1952) 735

Hong Kong Special Administrative Region v. Tong Ying Kit (唐英傑) (2021) 736

22.3. Prior Restraints 739

Areopagitica: A Speech of Mr. John Milton for the Liberty of Unlicen'd Printing (1644) 739

William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1769 739

Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931) 739

Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. Conrad, 420 U.S. 546 (1975) 740

Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539 (1976) 741

Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 445 (1996) 741

Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 414 (1996), Justices Wu Geng, Su Junxiong, and Cheng Zhongmo dissenting in part. 742

A Study on the Issues of Ratifying and Implementing of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (2002) 743

22.4. Political Association 744

Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 445 (1996) 744

De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353 (1937) 744

Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949) 745

Yates v. United States, 354 U.S. 298 (1957) 746

22.5. Political Speech 748

Records of the Grand Historian, Zhou Ben Ji 748

State Trials, The Trial of John Tutchin, at the Guildhall of London, for Libel, Entitled "The Observator" (1704) 748

Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) 749

Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) 750

22.6. Seditious Libel 752

Han Shu, Wen Di Ji 752

The Reports of Sir Edward Coke, The Case De Libellis Famosis, or of Scandlous Libels (1605) 752

State Trials, Trial of the Seven Bishops for Publishing a Libel (1688) 753

New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) 754

23. Appendix VI: Translation Conventions 757

24. Appendix VII: Table of Cases by Offense 768