China Aid Association
from the beginning. Previous stories can be viewed at the following links: https://chinaaid.org/2013/05/defense-lawyers-argument-in-li-wenxi.html,
https://chinaaid.org/2013/06/verdict-regarding-enyu-bookstores-case.html,
https://chinaaid.org/2013/08/critical-evidence-in-pending-enyu.html,
and https://chinaaid.org/2013/08/free-li-wenxi-and-ren-lacheng-video.html.
ChinaAid reported on Aug. 23 that key evidence in the EnyuBookstore religious case had appeared on the shelves of a second hand bookstore
in Taiyuan, where the appeal case is to take place, before a verdict was
reached. This disregard for the law demonstrates that the relevant government
agencies’ claim to be “handling the case in accordance with law” is a facade.
Instead, the agencies’ real purpose is to attack religious freedom.
submitted an administrative lawsuit at the Taiyuan Court regarding the sale of
evidence by Taiyuan police for a case still in trial. The court told Xia that
the lawsuit would need to be sent to the administrative court for review and
approval, a process which would take up to seven days.
again. At first, the employee in the reception area refused to accept the
lawsuit materials, reasoning that Xia didn’t name any charges in the suit. Xia
told the employee that it was up to the court to determine the charges against
them and the he went to the court only to sue. The employee told Xia that all
those who bring a lawsuit to the procuratorate must name the crime they believe
to have been committed as well as the result they seek. “If you really want me
to say what crime, I’d like to say it’s a crime that carries a capital
punishment,” Xia said in response. The employee asked Xia in surprise if he wanted
to give the Public Security Bureau a death penalty. “The death penalty only
goes to the police officers who seized and then sold the books,” Xia said. At
this point, the employee called for the section chief to speak with Xia.
Branch should prosecute the charges against the court. Xia replied that he didn’t
know and told the chief to ask the Xiaodian District Branch. The chief told Xia
that he had insufficient evidence and that the court would not accept the
charges. “As a lawyer, my responsibility is to sue and I have given you some
evidence. If you don’t think the evidence is sufficient, you can send out
people to investigate—this is the responsibility of the procuratorate,” Xia
responded. The chief asked Xia if he thought the court should investigate every
lawsuit. Xia replied affirmatively, adding that the person who accuses someone
of a crime is responsible for false accusations and that the procuratorate is
responsible for any delays in the case if the court doesn’t immediately accept
the case. After this exchange, the section chief accepted the lawsuit.
judicial independence and take this administrative lawsuit seriously. We also
hope the court of appeals will be able to correct the sentencing handed down by
the lower-level court and give a just and fair verdict to Brothers Ren Lacheng
and Li Wenxi.