Church Members in Shandong Detained for Leading Youth Summer Bible Camp

China Aid Association
(Dacheng Village, Yutai County- December 19, 2007) 42 year old Bible teacher, Cheng Zhen-an, was
arrested at his home on August 10, 2007, on charges of “disrupting public order
under the guise of religion.” Mr. Cheng, along with other Bible teachers, were conducting
a summer youth Bible training camp with more than 30 students when police
arrived and disrupted the activities.
According to an official Yutai County government report ,
the detainees “conducted Bible studies, sang songs,  (and) played games €¦On the afternoon of the 9th,
people from Domestic Security Defense Brigade, Qinghe Police Station and Yutai
County Bureau of Religious Affairs tried to stop them, (on) the ground(s) that
the applicant disrupted the public order under the guise of religion.”
Mr. Cheng and five others were detained in front of the
children and taken to Yutai County Police Station. Mr. Cheng received 10 days
detention and a 1300RMB fine. Two leaders were detained for 5 days and fined
650RMB, while two students were fined 500RMB without detention. All six leaders
were arrested without detention or release certificates, a serious violation of
Chinese Constitutional law.  In addition,
police officials confiscated all Bibles within the residence without presenting
required paperwork.
Among those that were detained are:
Cheng Zhen-an (42 years old)
Du Xuefeng (39 years of old)
Qiu Yueying (40 years old)                           
Gao Fengqin (40 years old)
A direct challenge to the
ruling has been submitted by Mr. Cheng, who has sought legal defense in the
matter, as Chinese Constitutional law has clearly been violated.
Instead of being able to
participate in this two-day summer camp, the children were forced to witness
the detention of their leaders who have now been deemed “illegal clergymen.” Government
officials have labeled Mr. Cheng’s house as an “unregistered religious site”,
and have deemed the activities of a youth summer Bible camp as “disruptive to
the public peace”. A far cry from China’s Constitutional outlines for
religious freedom.
China Aid Association urges
the international community to take notice of these injustices and religious
persecutions that take place on a daily basis in China, and to pray for the devoted
believers who are persecuted for living out their faith.
We also encouraged those
concerned to take action by letting those involved know that you care.
To reach those parties involved, please contact:
Cheng Zhen-an  13371245183
Du Xuefeng       13355148090
Qiu Yueying       13355154527
Fu Yuanbin – 13905472688   (Director of Yutai County
Public Security Bureau)     
Wang Sheng- 13905472688   (Director of Yutai County
Police Station)
Decision on Administrative
Reconsideration of Yutai County People’s Government
(2007)
Yu Zheng Fu Jue Zi No. 04
December 3, 2007
Applicant: Cheng Zhen’an.
He is a male person of Han nationality born in November 1966.  He is a peasant residing at 149, Dacheng Village,
Qinghe Township,
Yutai County.
Qiu Yueying:Qiu Yueying is a female person of Han
nationality born in May 1969.  She is a
peasant residing at Rennan Village, Laozhai
Township, Yutai County.
Du Xuefeng: He is a male person of Han nationality born in May
1968.  He is a peasant residing at Rennan Village,
Laozhai Township,
Yutai County.
Respondent: Yutai
County Public Security
Bureau
Legal representative: Fu Yuanbin.  Position: director of the bureau
Main points of the case: the applicant refuses to
accept the specific administrative conduct of the respondent in issuing No.
417, No. 418 and No. 419 of Decisions of Public Security Administrative Penalty.  The applicant still applied for
administrative reconsideration at this agency on October 8, 2007.
The applicant claims as follows: the respondent’s
conduct of providing the administrative penalty originates from an erroneous
interpretation of the law of the state, which results in a legal error.  Therefore, the respondent made the illegal administrative
penalty and it should be made invalid and canceled.  The reasons for this are: 1: The conduct of
the applicant is legal and is a normal religious activity.  The conduct of the respondent of rendering an
administrative penalty is not based on facts. (1) The applicant’s conduct
complies with the basic principle of the religious policies of our
country.  Holding a religious activity at
one’s own residence according to the religious custom does not need approval.  The respondent’s claim that the applicant’s
religious activity is an “illegal gathering” is wrong and is also a violation
of the basic policy of the state’s religious policy. (2) The applicant’s
conduct is a religious activity protected by the constitution of our country.  It is stipulated in Article 36 of the Constitution
that citizens have freedom of religious belief.
The Sunday School Summer Camp held by the applicant and other Christians
on August 10, 2007 is a normal religious activity and is protected by the
constitution of our country.  The
administrative penalty made by the respondent on the applicant’s lawful conduct
is obviously a violation of the law and is also an infringement of the freedom
of religious belief protected by the constitution of our country.  2. The conduct of the respondent of rendering
the administrative penalty on the applicant not only has no basis in the substantial
law, it also violates the relevant legal procedure.  (1) The
respondent did not give the applicant right to make a statement or an argument.
(2) The respondent did not give the applicant a copy of the decision statement
on the administrative penalty. (3) In issuing the administrative fine, the
respondent did not use the financial receipts for fine and confiscation designed
and printed by the relevant legal departments.
Instead, they gave the applicant ordinary receipts 10 days after issuing
the fine and it was done only after repeated requests by the applicant.  Given the above reasons, the conduct of the
respondent of rendering the administrative penalty is a violation of the
Chinese Constitution, the law that has the highest legal validity in China.  It is also an illegal specific administrative
conduct.  The applicant therefore
requests that Yutai
County government confirm
according to law that this administrative penalty is illegal and order the
respondent to return the illegally confiscated books and the illegally charged
fine.
The evidence submitted by the applicant is:
1. Three
copies of the decision statement of the public security administrative penalty;
2. Three copies of receipt of the fine received by Agricultural Bank of China
on behalf of the respondent; 3. Three copies of living expenses at the
detention center of the public security bureau; 4. Receipts for payment from
Christian church for the years of 2000 and 2001 at the county’s Office for
Ethnic Religious Affairs.
The respondent claims: From August 8, 2007 through August 9, 2007, the
applicant and other people organized and gathered many young people (some of
them minors) at the residence of the primary applicant located at Dacheng Village, Qinghe Township of Yutai County
and conducted religious training sessions on these people.  The residence of the primary applicant is not
a legally registered religious site and the applicant and other people involved
are illegal clergymen.  According to
Articles 12, 20, 43 of “Regulations on Religious Affairs” and Articles 7, 20,
21, 22 and Clause 2 of Article 25 of “Regulations on Religious Affairs of
Shandong Province,” the conduct of the applicant is disrupting public order
under the guise of religion.  Pursuant to
Item 22 of Article 27 of Law of Administrative Penalty of Public Security of
People’s Republic of China, the decision of public security administrative
penalty was made.  This penalty decision
is supported by clear facts and solid evidence.
Its procedure is legal and it is based on correct applicable laws. The
respondent requests that the decision be sustained.
The evidence submitted by the respondent consists of:
1) Registration form for trial;
2) Three copies of decision statement of the public
security administrative penalty;
3) Three copies of notification record of the public
security administrative penalty;
4) Three copies of administrative penalty approval
form;
5) Three
copies of execution notification (acknowledgement of receipt) from the public
security detention center;
6) Certificate from Yutai County
Bureau of Ethnic Religious Affairs;
7) Six copies of inquiry record.
The legal evidence submitted consists of:
1) Article 27 of Law of Administrative Penalty of
Public Security of People’s Republic of China;
2) Articles 6, 12, 13, 15, 20, 43, 45 of “Regulations
of Religious Affairs”
3) Articles 7, 20, 21, 22, 25 and 33 of “Regulations
on Religious Affairs of Shandong
Province.”
It is found through investigation that: on August 7,
2007, the applicant Cheng Zhen’an, two other applicants and other people made
phone calls and planned to hold a religious training class in his residence on
August 8 through August 10.  In the
afternoon, the applicant Du Xuefeng led over a dozen of young people from his
own village and neighboring villages and arrived at the residence of Cheng
Zhen’an on tricycles.  The residence is
located in Dacheng Village of Qinghe Township.
In the meantime, the applicant Qiu Yueying led eight young people from
her own village and arrived at the residence of Cheng Zhen’an.  Cheng Zhen’an also told about a dozen of
young people from his own village to come to his residence.  There were a total of over 30 people in the
residence.  Some of these young people
are as young as 13 to 14 years of age and other are as old as 17 to 18 years of
age.  A few of them are 20.  Most of them are middle school and elementary
school students.
On the 8th and 9th of the month,
these people received religious training in his residence.  They conducted Bible studies, sang songs,
played games and the training lasted two days.
On the afternoon of the 9th, people from Domestic Security Defense
Brigade, Qinghe Police Station and Yutai County Bureau of Religious Affairs
tried to stop them.  On the ground that
the applicant disrupted the public order under the guise of religion, the
respondent summoned the applicant to appear at Qinghe Police Station where the
respondent made some inquiries and told the applicants they have rights to
state their reasons and argue and that they have the right for a hearing and
that an administrative penalty was being planned.  The applicants were also informed of the
facts, reasons and legal basis for the decision.
It is also
found that in 2000 and 2001 €¦  Religious clergymen must file at agencies in
charge of religious affairs before they can engage in religious
activities.  For those people posing as
religious clergymen in religious activities, agencies in charge of religious
affairs shall order them to stop their activities.  If there is illegally obtained income, the
fund shall be confiscated.  Those who
violate public security regulations shall be penalized according to public
security regulations.  Cheng Zhen’an’s
residence at Dacheng Village in Qinghe
Township is an illegal
and unregistered site for religious activities and the applicants are also
illegal religious clergymen who are not legally certified and who have not
filed at relevant agencies.  The
religious activity involving over 30 youngsters organized in the residence of
the primary applicant on August 8 and August 9 of 2007 is a violation of the
stipulations in “Regulations for Religious Affairs” and “Regulations for
Religious Affairs of Shandong Province.”  The respondent determines that the conduct
disrupted the public order under the guise of religion.  The facts are clear and the evidence is
solid.  The specific administrative
conduct made pursuant to Item 2 of Article 27 of “Law of Administrative Penalty
of Public Security of People’s Republic of China” is a correct application of
the law and its procedure is legal.
Pursuant to Item 1, Clause 1, Article 28 of “Law of Administrative
Reconsideration of the People’s Republic of China,” this institution has made
the following decision: sustain the No. 417, No. 418 and No. 419 of “Decision
on Public Security Administrative Penalty” coded Yu Gong Jue Zi (2007) by the
Public Security Bureau of Yutai County.
Should the applicants not accept this decision, they may
submit an administrative litigation at Yutai County People’s Court within 15
days of receiving this decision on reconsideration.