|
“六四”20周年，中国维权律师遭迫害 港台法界共同声明
马总统两年前说：“自由民主，两岸对话基础”
“六四”二十周年即将到来。两年前，马英九总统以“自由民主，两岸对话基础”为题投书媒体，称六四为中共政权以武力血腥镇压学生民主运动，并指出“中共的改革开放一直限缩在民生议题上，在民主改革步伐不但停滞不前，对于异己，对于新闻自由或其它自由人权的压抑更是未有丝亳放松”。马总统强调“自由民主必须是两岸的共同语言，因为能够真正促使两岸有效对话并建立互信的共同基础，只有自由与民主”。
两年后的今天，两岸交流如火如荼。但中共对自由人权的压抑与打击，真的改变了吗？马英九总统主导的两岸对话，真的以自由民主为基础吗？
中国维权律师今年五月纷纷“考核不合格”
律师身为在野法曹，在世界各国往往成为政治与司法改革的急先锋。中国也有极少数勇于维护人权的维权律师，却必须面对政府无情的打压：中国律师每年五月必须通过司法局的“年检”或“考核”，来年始具合法执业的资格，据悉中国政府今年对将近二十位维权律师以“年度考核不合格”为由，完全剥夺其执业的权利！有多家事务所已陆续接到来自司法行政部门和律师协会的指令和警告，有的事务所被要求立即解除与相关维权律师的聘用合同，有的事务所被要求以事务所名义对相关维权律师出具“年度考核不合格”的结论，以配合政法系统对维权律师的打压行动，其中理由竟有因代理群体性案件未按级汇报，或代理法轮功等政治敏感性案件，或对律师组织代表制、降低会费要求提出意见均受牵连。这样行政权堂皇干涉律师执业权利情况是在法治人权社会中的人民无法想像的。
如果连律师都因维护人权而遭吊销执业资格、丧失执业权利，其他律师如何敢于接办维权案件？普通老百姓如何敢于透过法律途径争取权益？这样的社会只充份显示人治色彩而毫无法治观念。
中国维权律师人身安全难保
更令人发指的是，近三个月以来，严重侵害维权律师人身安全的事件在中国不断发生：2009年2月4日，缓刑中的著名维权律师高智晟被警方从陕西老家带走后，至今下落不明；2月17日，北京忆通律师事务所遭停业整顿六个月的处罚，著名维权律师李劲松、李苏滨不能继续从事律师或代理工作；2月28日，为多起宗教信仰案件被告人辩护的黑龙江省律师韦良月被哈尔滨警方无端拘捕；2009年2月26日，参与推动北京律师协会直选的北京律师程海、唐吉田、张立辉和杨慧文，虽在初选中获得不少会员支持，但在3月4日的第二轮选举中被无理抽起，选举过程黑箱作业，当时有份提出直选倡议的北京律师温海波同样暂不能通过年检；4月10日，广西律师杨在新在代理失地农民案件中，遭到非法征地的政府背景多名暴徒残酷殴打；4月12日，北京律师程海在四川成都市执业过程中，遭到晋阳街的政府工作人员非法阻挠和野蛮殴打；4月16日，代理失地农民维权的广东律师刘尧被判处有期徒刑一年，缓期两年执行；2009年5月13日北京律师张凯、李春富在重庆市江津区执业过程中，20多名警察非法闯入委托人家中，对两位律师进行反铐、野蛮殴打，其中张凯律师被高高地铐在派出所铁笼中。警察非法强行检查案卷，拿走关键证据。
凡此足见“六四”以来二十年迄今，中共对民主人权的压抑未有丝毫放松；中国在民生议题上持续改革开放的同时，就连法治改革步伐上仍停滞不前，甚至倒退。
要求马总统实现承诺，将保障人权优先置于两岸交流议题
马总统上任迄今，两岸交流一日千里，但两岸对话的议题中，却只见经济合作，未见保障人权。如果马总统上任后对中国人权问题即噤若寒蝉，则不仅背弃了其选前“自由民主，两岸对话基础”的承诺，更形同背弃全体台湾人自由民主的信仰。若不能促成中国的民主化，两岸著眼于短暂经济利益的贸然交往，不啻于与虎谋皮；若中国政府持续打击异己、侵害人权，台湾政府却未置一词，则形同为虎作伥，更可能断送台湾多年累积的民主资产。
法律人出身的马总统，更应深切认知在野法曹对维护人权的关键角色，若连维权律师的执业权利及人身自由都遭中国政府任意打压剥夺，台湾人实在难以信任马总统与这样的中国政府继续紧密对话。因此，在“六四”20周年前夕，台湾法界特此郑重要求马英九总统在“六四”周年纪念前公开表态并承诺：
第一， 实现选前承诺，记取“六四”教训，以民主、人权、法治为两岸对话基础；
第二， 要求中国政府尊重并保障中国维权律师的基本执业权利及人身自由。
共同声援人：中华民国律师公会联合会 香港中国维权律师关注组
台北律师公会
民间司法改革基金会
西元2009年6月2日
20th Anniversary of June 4 Massacre,
Mainland Chinese Lawyers Persecuted
Joint Statement by Hong Kong and Taiwan Lawyers
2 June 2009
Ma Ying-Jeou, president of Taiwan, said two years ago: “Freedom and Democracy, the Basis for Cross-strait Dialogue.”
The 20th anniversary of the June 4 Massacre approaches. Two years ago, President Ma Ying-Jeou wrote a newspaper article entitled “Freedom and Democracy, the Basis for Cross-strait Dialogue”. He said the Chinese Communist regime initiated its bloody crackdown on the student pro-democracy movement by arms and he pointed out that “the opening-up reform of Communist China has been limited only to livelihood issues. While democratic reform has not only been halted, the suppression of dissidents, freedom of the press and other freedoms and human rights still haven’t been loosened.” President Ma emphasized that “freedom and democracy should be the common language for both sides across the strait because they are the only basis for building authentic and effective cross-strait dialogue and trust.”
Now, there are many cross-strait exchanges. However, has Communist China really changed its attitude towards the suppression and crackdown of freedom and human rights? Is the cross-strait dialogue led by President Ma really based on the issues of freedom and democracy?
Many Mainland Chinese Lawyers Fail the “Annual Assessment” in May
As the profession to monitor the legality of government actions, lawyers around the world are always the ones who push forward political and judicial reforms. There are extremely low numbers of human rights lawyers in mainland China who are brave enough to fight for human rights, but they often have to face the government’s crackdown. Mainland Chinese lawyers have to pass the so-called “annual assessment” by judicial authorities, so that they can continue to hold their qualifications for legal practice. According to reports, the Chinese government has stripped the rights to legal practice of some 20 lawyers by giving the excuse that they failed the “annual assessment.” Many law firms received instructions and warnings from the judicial authorities to dismiss some lawyers, while some were required to make a conclusion that the relevant lawyers failed their “annual assessment”. In this way, they had to do so to match the government’s crackdown on the lawyers. Reasons given for the lawyers’ failure in their “annual assessment” include, taking up mass incidents cases without reporting to the authorities, taking up Falun Gong cases and other politically sensitive cases, or demanding direct elections in the Lawyers Association to which they belong and demanding a decrease in membership fees. This way of trying to legitimize the crackdown on lawyers’ right to legal practice is simply unimaginable for people who live in societies which respect the rule of law and human rights.
If lawyers lose their legal practice licenses for defending human rights, how could other lawyers dare to take up human rights cases? How could ordinary people fight for their rights through legal channels? This shows that the society is ruled by man and there is nothing in China related to concepts of the rule of law.
Mainland Human Rights Lawyers’ Personal Safety is at Risk
Even more outrageous is that there have been continuing attacks and oppression against lawyers during the past three months: prominent Beijing human rights lawyer Gao Zhisheng, who is serving a suspended sentence, was taken away in his hometown in Shaanxi by the police on 4 February and he has been disappeared since then; on 17 February, Beijing Yitong Law Frim was ordered to close down for six months and prominent human rights lawyers Li Jinsong and Li Subin couldn’t continue their legal practice; on 28 February, Heilongjiang lawyer Wei Liangyue, who handled many Falun Gong cases, was unreasonably detained by the local public security officers; on 26 February, Beijing lawyers Cheng Hai, Tang Jitian, Zhang Lihui and Yang Huiwen, who took part in the campaign to demand direct elections in the Beijing Lawyers Association, received the support of many members in the preliminary election, but their candidacy was suddenly taken away during the second round of elections on 4 March. The election was carried out in a “black box” manner. Beijing lawyer Wen Haibo who also took part in the direction election campaign still couldn’t pass the annual assessment of his legal practice; on 10 April, Guangxi lawyer Yang Zaixin was brutally beaten up by unidentified thugs when he handled a farmland eviction case; on 12 April, Beijing lawyer Cheng Hai was interfered with and beaten up by local government officials when he handled a case in Chengdu, Sichuan province; on 16 April, Guangdong lawyer Liu Yao was sentenced to one year’s imprisonment, suspended for two years, for criminal damage when he handled a farmland eviction case; on 13 May, Beijing lawyers Zhang Kai and Li Chunfu were taken away and violently beaten up and interrogated by more than 20 local public security officers when they handled a case involving the death of a Falun Gong practitioner in a local re-education through labour camp. The public security officers illegally and forcibly took away all the documents and the significant evidence of the case.
From these cases, we can see that Communist China has never loosened its suppression of democracy and human rights since the June 4 Massacre 20 years ago. While the Chinese government continues to open up its reform on livelihood issues, the pace of judicial reform has been halted or even gone backwards.
Demand President Ma to Realize his Promise, Prioritize Human Rights as the Issue for Cross-strait Dialogue
Since President Ma took the presidential office, the exchanges across the strait have been increasing. However, we can only see economic cooperation in the issues covered in the dialogue, but not human rights protection. If President Ma became nervous about mentioning human rights issues in mainland China after taking the presidential office, he does not only turn away from his promise of “freedom and democracy, the basis for cross-strait dialogue” before the presidential election, but it also appears as if he has turned away from Taiwanese people’s belief in freedom and democracy. If we don’t strive for pushing for the democratization of mainland China and we only concentrate on economics and trade, it would seem that we are exploiting the benefits of the ordinary people with the Communist regime. If the Chinese government continues to suppress dissidents and violates human rights and the Taiwanese government doesn’t say anything about that, it would be as if we are working with the Communist regime and might even give away our assets of democracy which have been accumulated over the years.
As a former legal academic, President Ma should know very well the significant role lawyers and legal academics play in defending human rights in the society. If we continue to see the right of mainland Chinese human rights lawyers to legal practice and personal freedom being exploited, it would be very difficult for Taiwanese people to trust how President Ma could have a dialogue with such a Chinese government. Therefore, on the 20th anniversary of the June 4 Massacre, the Taiwanese legal sector strongly demands that President Ma should publicly state and promise that:
1. He will realize his promise before his election to the presidential office and use the lessons of the June 4 Massacre, democracy, human rights and the rule of law as the basis for the cross-strait dialogue;
2. He will demand the Chinese government to respect and protect the rights of mainland Chinese human rights lawyers to practice and to personal freedom.
Jointly endorsed by:
Taiwan Bar Association
Taipei Bar Association
Judicial Reform Foundation (Taiwan)
China Human Rights Lawyers Concern Group (Hong Kong)
|
