To: The Honorable Chief of Court:
Having attended and observed the open trial of Wang Liping on August 15 regarding her use of organization of an evil religion to break the law and on the basis of her three charges, I would like to present my thoughts for your reference when you are considering her final sentencing. Due to my limited knowledge of the law, please be tolerant of any shortcomings there may be.
- About going to Beijing to appeal: according to related regulations of the law in our country, going to Beijing to appeal is a legitimate right granted to the public by the law, and there is no need to apply in advance to any department or person in order to do this. Therefore, there is no such basis on which to claim that Wang Liping's going to Beijing to appeal for Falun Gong is illegal. Article 10 of the "Regulations for Appealing" states that appeal issues should be submitted to the relevant administrative units or immediate upper level administrative unit that has the authority given by law to make decisions on how to handle appeals. Therefore, the government should carry out this law to prevent infringement of this legitimate public right, no matter what other regulations the government has enacted. This is also the major responsibility of the Court of the People, because everyone should be treated equally in the eyes of the law. If a person can be convicted whenever he or she goes to Beijing to appeal, then the situation of an ordinary citizen is no better than that of a criminal who still has the right to appeal to a higher court.
- About conviction of illegal assembly: about the assembly, Article 2 in "Regulations of the People's Republic of China for Assembly and Marching" states that the assembly referred to here is the event of gathering a group of people in open public places to present their opinions and wishes. The meeting of Wang Liping and several Falun Gong practitioners at her home to share their cultivation experiences was not at all involved with going outside in an open public space to present their ideas and wishes. Therefore, this charge does not meet the criterion of this law for assembly.
- On the charge of collective signatures: Article 41 in the Constitution states that the citizens of the People's Republic of China have the right to comment on and make suggestions to any department or officer of the government. Article 8 in "Regulations for Appealing" states that the person who wishes to appeal can bring up their own issues to relevant departments of the government. This shall pertain to that administrative unit and staff's infringement upon one's own legal rights. Yet, it became impossible to get issues resolved through this channel because Falun Gong practitioners were arrested when they went to the departments that were supposed to received viewpoints for appeals. In order to help the central government understand the real story of Falun Gong and withdraw measures that do not meet the Constitution, Wang Liping used the way of signature collection to reveal the true story of Falun Gong to the leaders of the Ministry of State Affairs and the Party Central Committee. What she has done is in no way illegal, including the content and motive of collecting signatures.
Articles 36, 37 and 38 in the Constitution state that a citizen has the freedom of belief, freedom of one's own body and one's own dignity, and the reputation of a citizen will not be infringed upon. Wang Liping and other signees all benefited from practicing Falun Gong. Their sole intent was to tell the real story of Falun Gong to the central government with their own cultivation experiences. They had every right to say some words for Falun Gong, because only genuine practitioners can understand the enlightenment and experiences of Buddha Law cultivation. Her very last intention was to explain the truth of Falun Gong to the central government as well as to the public that Falun Gong is the great law of the universe, it is the cultivation of Buddha Law, and it is not an evil religion, and she wished to let the central government make the decision after reinvestigation. Therefore, what she has done is not illegal no matter which aspect is considered.
These are just some of my thoughts as an observer that I would like to present to you, the Honorable Chief of Court and Judges, for your reference.
An Observer
September, 2000
