Chen Daojun (陈道军) who has been imprisoned since May 9 earlier this year at the Jintang Public Security Bureau detention center, Chengdu, Sichuan province, was convicted by the People’s Intermediate court in Chengdu today the 21st November 2008 at 11.00 am to 3 years of imprisonment and 3 years of deprivation of political rights. The judge altered the charge from “Inciting splittism” to “Inciting to subvert State power” upon verdict. Chen Daojun is a Chengdu-based journalist, freelance writer and human rights defender, who was first detained and then on June 13 arrested after publishing a number of articles on the issues of Tibetan autonomy, China’s need for reform, and the background on anti-western sentiment in China.

Zhu Jiuhu (朱久虎), Chen Daojun’s lawyer, argued during the trial that the specific charges brought against Chen Daojun, based on the three articles were legally unjustifiable.

The first article, Oppression of Authorities Forced People to Rebel (Guanbiminfan- Xiang Yingyongkangzheng de Zangzurenmin Zhijing官逼民反——向英勇抗争的藏族人民致敬) [1st article link to English Translation] discusses and states Chen’s support for the Dalai Lama’s call for meaningful autonomy in Tibet, and that the March uprising were as a result of failure to provide that autonomy. Lawyer Zhu cited Dalai Lama’s Open Appeal for Global Chinese (Shisishi Dalai Lama dui quanqiu Huaren de Huyu), which Dalai Lama made clear that he was seeking real autonomy instead of separation. The prosecutor says that by supporting the Dalai Lama, Chen is inciting splittism. However, this is based on the Dalai Lama advocating for independence. Since Chen has made a call for autonomy, not independence, he cannot be accused of splittism, nor inciting to subvert state power.

The prosecutor used another two articles What can be done after the 17th Congress？(Shiqida Hou Zenmeba十七大后怎么办) [2nd article link to English Translation] and Background of Chinese people who are against the West (Fan Xifang Huaren de Beijing反西方华人的背景) [3rd article link to English Translation] to say that Chen slandered and libelled against the Communist Party.

Lawyer Zhu made the argument that the Communist Party is an association, even though a special association, nonetheless still an association—thus do not have the right of a person’s right to reputation. Further a citizen’s criticism of an association is a civil dispute, not a criminal offense and should be settled according to civil law procedures.

The article “After the 17th Congress” discussed what should be done after the upcoming party conference. Here Chen called for development of democratic reform as a method to monitor and reduce the widespread corruption within the Communist party. This call has previously been made by Deng Xiaoping (before and during his time in power) amongst others, and he cannot be convicted for simply reiterating what party leadership has already called for, and can thus not be accused of inciting splittism nor subversion based on that article. In fact, Deng’s word on the subject of party corruption and abuse, and remedies for it, went far beyond what Chen stated in his article.

The last article Background of Chinese people who are against the West stated that the anti-western sentiment that blossomed during 2008 in China was a result of an ignorant youth, who used the occasion as an outlet of expression as they do not dare protest against their own repressive government, and also stated that to protest against a foreign government which allows freedom of speech, on behalf of their own government which does not allow freedom of speech, is cowardly. The article does not in any way incite, call for, or propose splittism or subversion, and its content breaks no law.

We strongly believe that the conviction of Chen Daojun is politically motivated, and a blatant violation of article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which China is a signatory. Presiding judge was Wang Ming (汪明), prosecutor was Liu Dong (刘东).

An appeal to the United Nations Special Representative to the Secretary General on the situation on Human Rights Defenders has been submitted.