Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court Criminal Judgment in the Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, and Zhang Honghai Subversion Trial (CECC Full Translation)

The following translation of the judgment in the Xu Wei et. al. subversion of state power trial was prepared by CECC staff based on a January 1, 2004, version obtained from the Boxun Web site. The original Chinese version of the judgment can be viewed by clicking "more" below.

Additional background on this case is available here.

Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court Criminal Judgment

(2001) No. 1 Intermediate Criminal Preliminary Document Number 2045

Prosecutorial Agency Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate No. 1 Branch

Defendant Xu Wei (pen name Xu Luping, Zhou Han), Male, 28 years old (born August 12, 1974), place of birth Yantai city, Shandong province, Han ethnicity, masters degree level of education, prior to arrest was a reporter and editor with the Consumer Daily. Resident of Number 32, Xiaoyun Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing Municipality (household registration (hukou) address: B22 Fuwai Street, Xicheng District, Beijing Municipality); detained on March 13, 2001 on suspicion of committing the crime of subversion of state power, arrested on April 20 of the same year; currently detained at the Beijing Municipality State Security Bureau Detention Center.

Defense attorney Zhu Jiuhu of the Mo Shaoping Law Firm.

Defendant Yang Zili (pen name Yang Zi), Male, 31 years old (born December 10, 1971), place of birth Handan city, Hebei province, Hui ethnicity, masters degree level of education, unemployed. Resident of Number 604, Building 5, North Area, Xibali Villa, Haidian District, Beijing Municipality (hukou address: Number 55, Xueyuan South Road, Haidian District, Beijing Municipality); detained on March 13, 2001 on suspicion of committing the crime of subversion of state power, arrested on April 20 of the same year; currently detained at the Beijing Municipality State Security Bureau Detention Center.

Defense attorney Xu Wanlin of the Beijing Municipal Changan Law Firm.

Defense attorney Li Heping of the Beijing Municipal Gaobo Longhua Law Firm.

Defendant Jin Haike (pen name Jian Wa), Male, 27 years old (born May 26, 1976), place of birth Yanling county, Henan province, Han ethnicity, university level of education, unemployed. Resident of Number 1, Courtyard A2, Lishui Bridge, Chaoyang District, Beijing Municipality; detained on March 13, 2001 on suspicion of committing the crime of subversion of state power, arrested on April 20 of the same year; currently detained at the Beijing Municipality State Security Bureau Detention Center.

Defense attorney Liu Dongbin of the Mo Shaoping Law Firm.

Defendant Zhang Honghai (pen name Jiang Mingzu), Male, 29 years old (born November 1, 1973), place of birth Jinyun county, Zhejiang province, Han ethnicity, junior college level of education, unemployed. Resident of Number 2, Sihou East Road, Wuyun Town, Jinyun County, Zhejiang province; detained on March 13, 2001 on suspicion of committing the crime of subversion of state power, arrested on April 20 of the same year; currently detained at the Beijing Municipality State Security Bureau Detention Center.

Defense attorney Zhang Sizhi of the Beijing Municipal Wu Yuan Zhao Yan Law Firm.

Defense attorney Yan Ruyu of the Beijing Municipal Wu Yuan Zhao Yan Law Firm.

The Bejing Municipal People's Procuratorate No. 1 Branch charged in its Beijing Procuratorate No. 1 Branch Criminal Prosecution Document (2001) Number 222 Indictment that defendants Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, and Zhang Honghai committed the crime of subversion of state power, and initiated a public prosecution with this court on September 10, 2001.

This court constituted a collegial panel in accordance with the law, and tried this case in open court. The Bejing Municipal People's Procuratorate No. 1 Branch appointed procurator Li Leilin and acting procurator Zhang Xiaoyu to appear court, in support of the prosecution. Defendant Xu Wei and his defense attorney Zhu Jiuhu, defendant Yang Zili and his defense attorneys Xu Wanlin and Li Heping, defendant Jin Haike and his defense attorney Liu Dongbin, and defendant Zhang Honghai and his defense attorneys Zhang Sizhi and Yan Ruyu appeared in court to participate in the prosecution. Trial proceedings have now concluded.

The Bejing Municipal People's Procuratorate No. 1 Branch charged:

Defendants Xu Wei, Jin Haike, Zhang Honghai colluded with third parties, and in early May 2000, secretly established the "New Youth Study Group" organization, formulated organizational bylaws, with the purpose of "actively exploring paths of social transformation." That same year on August 19, the defendant Yang Zili and others joined the organization, and this organization carried out a division of labor, with Xu Wei as general secretary, and Fan Erjun and Zhang Honghai as secretaries.

Beginning in August 2000, defendants Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, Zhang Honghai and others secretly met several times, bringing up changing China's current regime, bringing about transformation of society, reestablishing a kind of liberalized social system, advocating the establishment of branches throughout the country, using the Internet to distribute essays, arranging to set up Web sites and publications, expanding the scope and influence of the organization, providing for the use of codes and other tactics, and during this time distributing on the Internet essays such as "Be a New Citizen, Reshape China," "What to Do?," and other essays which posited that "The democracy currently implemented in China is fake democracy," and "bring an end to the gerontocracy, establish a youthful China," in a vain attempt to overthrow the Chinese Communist Party leadership and the socialist system, and subvert the people's democratic dictatorship.

The Bejing Municipal People's Procuratorate No. 1 Branch transferred physical evidence, documentary evidence, witness depositions, forensic authentication conclusions, investigative agency explanations, the defendants' statements, and other relevant evidence relating to the charges that the four defendants committed a crime, believes that the actions of defendants Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, and Zhang Honghai violate the provisions of Article 105(1) of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, constituting the crime of subversion of state power, and submit to this court that punishment be imposed in accordance with the law.

Defendant Xu Wei argued during the court session: the prosecutorial agency's charge lacks evidence, and his actions did not have overthrowing China's current regime or establishing a liberalized social system as their purpose.

Xu Wei's defense attorney's opinion is: there is insufficient evidence for the prosecutorial agency's charge that defendant Xu Wei committed the crime of subversion of state power, there has been an incorrect application of the law, and Xu Wei's actions do not constitute the crime of subversion of state power.

Defendant Yang Zili argued during the court session: his liberalist views are academic views, and did not have overthrowing the socialist system or the Communist Party leadership, or subversion of state power, as their purpose.

Yang Zili's defense attorney's opinion is: the New Youth Study Group's aim to "actively explore paths of societal transformation" is not necessarily linked to overthrowing the people's democratic dictatorship or the socialist system, and there is insufficient evidence for the prosecutorial agency's charge that defendant Yang Zili's actions constituted the crime of subversion of state power.

Defendant Jin Haike argued during the court session: his actions did not have subversion of state power as their purpose.

Jin Haike's defense attorney's opinion is: Jin Haike and the others' establishment of the "New Youth Study Group" did not constitute a crime, there are no facts or evidence proving that Jin Haike committed any subversive acts, and the prosecutorial agency's charge is unfounded.

Defendant Zhang Honghai argued during the court session: his actions did not have subversion of state power as their purpose.

Zhang Honghai's defense attorney's opinion is: Zhang Honghai's acts do not constitute a crime, and the prosecutorial agency's charge lacks evidence.

The proceedings revealed:

In early May 2000, defendants Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, and Zhang Honghai colluded with Zhang Chanhua and Fan Erjun (who are being handled in a separate case) to secretly and illegally establish the "New Youth Study Group" organization, and formulated organizational bylaws, aimed at "actively exploring paths of social transformation." That same year on August 19, the defendant Yang Zili and others joined the organization, and this organization carried out a division of labor, with Xu Wei as general secretary, and Fan Erjun and Zhang Honghai as secretaries.

Since August 2000 defendants Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, Zhang Honghai, and others secretly convened several times at Beijing University, Renmin University, and other places, bringing up changing China's current regime, bringing about transformation of society, reestablishing a kind of liberalized social system, advocating the establishment of branches throughout the country, using the Internet to distribute essays, arranging to set up Web sites and publications, expanding the scope and influence of the organization, providing for the use of codes and other tactics. During this time, the aforementioned defendants and others distributed on the Internet essays such as "Be a New Citizen, Reshape China," "What to Do?," and other essays which posited that "The democracy currently implemented in China is fake democracy," and "bring an end to the gerontocracy, establish a youthful China." They vainly attempted to overthrow the Chinese Communist Party leadership and the socialist system, and subvert the people's democratic dictatorship.

After committing these offenses defendants Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, and Zhang Honghai were tracked down and brought to justice.

The aforementioned facts are verified by the following evidence presented, and examined and confronted, in court, and this court affirms:

1. The deposition of witness Fan Erjun proves: Jin Haike and Zhang Honghai proposed establishing the New Youth Study Group, and subsequently jointly discussed the organization's aims and bylaws, carrying out the ceremonies to establish the organization. Jin Haike proposed having Xu Wei assuming the office of secretary general, and that he and Zhang Honghai act as secretaries. Some of the speech of the study group's members contradicted the Constitution, Zhang Honghai completely repudiated the Communist Party, and during meetings his speech contained the idea of overthrowing the Communist Party. Yang Zili believed that the economy should be based on a system of private ownership, and politically rejected the Communist Party's one party rule. Jin Haike said that the current government is a totalitarian government, and that citizens lack democratic consciousness. Xu Wei and he endorsed the use of violent methods and using  uprisings among rural citizens to change China. In conclusion, the study group members had two types of views, and they all wanted to use different methods to overthrow the Chinese Communist Party leadership and change the path of today's China.  Jin Haike proposed the study group should establish a Web site, and asked everyone to distribute essays on the Web site, carry out exchanges online, and carry out propagandizing the members' views and ideology, and the study group¡¯s aims, to the outside, with Xu Wei responsible, and Yang Zili providing technical support. In October 2000, Jin Haike proposed to them that they could distribute their essays and hold discussions on Yang Zili's private Web site "Yangzi's Ideology Garden."

2. The deposition of witness Huang Haixia proves: Xu Wei was responsible for the work of designing a study group Web site, and Yang Zili was responsible for the Web site's techinical issues, and Yang Zili said that, before the study group's Web site was set up, they could first post essays on his Web site.  Xu Wei was the general secretary, and Xu's view was to use the problems of rural citizens that were in most urgent need of solving to arm average citizens' ideology, and use such things as law and economics to aid average citizens, allowing the study group to win people's hearts. Xu Wei was inclined to using violent methods, especially the use of uprisings among rural citizens to change China. The study group's bylaws called for setting up branches in Tianjin and Xi'an, for the introduction and development of new members, with the goal of changing the current social and political system and the economic system, changing the Communist Party's power under a one party regime, establishing a new form of democratic system, destabilizing the Communist Party's leadership position, and shaking people's trust in the Communist Party.

3. The deposition of witness Li Yuzhou proves: Yang Zili clearly indicated carrying out a multi-party system, and overthrowing the Chinese Communist Party. Zhang Honghai and Jin Haike proposed establishing branches, and were more active.  On this front, Jin Haike did relatively more. The work of applying to set up the study group Web site was the responsibility of Yang Zili, and before the study group Web site was functional, they first used a Web site Yang Zili established as a propaganda outlet for the study group. The study group asked every member to write essays and give them to Jin Haike, and Jin Haike was responsible for the editing work of "The Collected Works of the Study Truth Exchange," and for giving the collected essays to Yang Zili for posting on the Internet.  During meetings, members had proposed using aliases, etc.

4.  The Beijing Municipal State Security Bureau investigated and obtained a copy of the "New Youth Study Group Oath" signed and fingerprinted by Xu Wei, Zhang Honghai, Jin Haike, and Yang Zili, proving that Xu Wei, Zhang Honghai, Jin Haike, and Yang Zili had joined the New Youth Study Group.

5. A scrap of paper obtained from Yang Zili's place of residence, pieced together to form a copy of the New Youth Study Group's Oath, proved what a portion of the oath's content was.

6. The forensic authentication conclusions of the Beijing Municipal State Security Bureau proved: the "New Youth Study Group Oath" was written by Xu Wei.

7. Evidentiary materials and inquiry results of the Chuanglianwan Net International Information Technological (Beijing) Company Limited proves: on August 22, 2000, Yang Zili used the name Beijing Weiheng Taihe Technology Development Company Limited to apply to register as a member of the Chuanglianwan Net International Information Technological (Beijing) Company Limited client server system, and submitted the application and successfully registered the domain name (qingnian.org) in his individual capacity.

8. The print out of the "New Youth Study Group Bylaws" obtained from Xu Wei¡¯s place of residence proves: the primary content of the bylaws included the membership, organization, rules and regulations, meetings, fees, supplementary articles, etc., and provided the group would be called the New Youth Study Group, with a headquarters in Beijing and branches in other areas, and with the aim of exploring "transforming the path of China and the world."

9. A print out of the "Web site strategy plan" obtained from Xu Wei's place of residence, and the "Web site strategy plan," "untitled record of topics discussed," and other documentary evidence obtained from Zhang Honghai's residence proves: the Web site was the New Youth Study Group's propaganda domain and front organization. The topics discussed primarily included struggle strategies and long-term plans to become the ruling party.

10. The letter given by Xu Wei to Zhang Yanhua proves that Xu Wei's goal was to transform discontent with the current situation into a move to search for and open up an outlet, and in the quest for a path, ultimately producing a set of political theories, principles, and operating plans, and using activities to expand their ranks.

11. The "Declaration of the Establishment of the New Youth Study Group" printed from a floppy disc obtained from Zhang Honghai¡¯s place of residence proves: the New Youth Study Group was not satisfied with the current political regime, and incited the youthful masses to take action.

12. The "Bylaws of the New Youth Study Group (Draft)" printed from a floppy disc obtained from Zhang Honghai's place of residence proves: the "Bylaws" content included the name, aims (liberate the self, transform society), guiding principles, conditions for joining, organizational structure, membership rules and regulations, sources of dues, etc.

13. A copy of the "China New Citizen Reader" essay manuscript and the contents of a copy of a journal obtained from Jin Haike's place of residence proves that Jin Haike was not satisfied with current society, politics, and democracy.

14. The forensic authentication conclusions of the Beijing Municipal State Security Bureau verified: the handwriting in the journals signed by Jin Haike, yellow volume page 145, green volume pages 31 and 49 is that of Jin Haike. "China New Citizen Reader" manuscript was written by Jin Haike.

15. A letter of correspondence between Jin Haike and Li Dangshi in Xi'an obtained from Jin Haike's place of residence proves: Jin Haike contacted Li Dangshi regarding joining the New Youth Study Group.

16. The relevant "Yangzi's Essays," "Yang Zili's Address Book," "Collected Works of the Study Truth Exchange," and other documentary evidence from Yangzi's Web site decoded from the computer hard drive obtained from Yang Zili's placed of residence proves that the aforementioned essays had the purpose of overthrowing the political system.

17. Copies of the first, fourth, and fifth editions of the "Collected Works of the Study Truth Exchange" obtained from Xu Wei's and Jin Haike's places of residence prove: Jin Haike's "Become a New Citizen, Reshape China," Yang Zili's "Choose Liberalism," Yu Wei (Jin Haike's pen name) "What to Do?," and other essays published in the "Collected Works of the Study Truth Exchange" had content including bringing about social transformation, advocating the reestablishment of a liberalized social system, attacking the current system, and repudiating the Chinese Communist Party leadership.

18. Photographs of the computer mainframe, hard drive, chips, and modem, and photographs of a computer hard drive containing the contents of Yang Zili's personal Web site, and photographs of essays posted on Yang Zili's personal home page obtained from Yang Zili's place of residence, photographs of the "Collected Works of the Study Truth Exchange" obtained from places of residence of some members of the "New Youth Study Group," photographs of Jin Haike's journal obtained from Jin Haike's residence, and other physical evidence proved the existence of the aforementioned relevant evidence.

19. The Beijing Municipal State Security Bureau working explanation proves: through investigative information, the process of separately taking into custody each defendant.

20. Hukou proves and verifies: each of the defendants' identity.

With respect to the argument of Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, and Zhang Honghai that their actions did not have the goal of subverting state power, and the defense opinion of each of the attorneys that there is insufficient evidence for the charged crime, these are inconsistent with what the proceedings revealed. The physical evidence, documentary evidence, witness depositions, and other evidence at hand, presented, and examined and confronted, through the proceedings and affirmed by the court verify that defendants Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, and Zhang Honghai and others carried out the illegal establishment of an organization, brought up changing China's current regime, used the Internet to distribute the relevant essays about achieving social transformation, advocating reestablishing a liberal social system, attacking the current system, repudiating the Chinese Communist Party leadership, and other behavior, and the aforementioned facts and evidence amply reflect they had the subjective intent and objective behavior of vainly attempting to overthrow the Chinese Communist Party leadership and the socialist system, and subverting the people's democratic dictatorship; therefore, the four defendants' arguments and the opinions of their defense attorneys are all unfounded.

This court believes that the defendants Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, and Zhang Honghai defied China's laws and illegally established an organization, and plotted to carry out subversion of state power and the overthrow of the socialist system, and their actions constitute the crime of subversion of state power, and should be punished in accordance with law. The factual nature of the charge by the Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate No. 1 Branch that the defendants Xu Wei, Yang Zili, Jin Haike, and Zhang Honghai committed the crime of subversion of state power is clear, and the evidence is irrefutable, and the charged crime is established. The arguments of the four defendants that they are not guilty and the defense opinions of their defense attorneys all lack factual and legal bases, and this court neither accepts nor adopts them.  In accordance with the provisions of Articles 105(1), 56(1), 25(1), 26(1) and (4), and 64 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, this court rules as follows:

1. Defendant Xu Wei committed the crime of subversion of state power, and is sentenced to 10 years imprisonment and 2 years deprivation of political rights.

(The sentence to be calculated from the date this judgment is executed. Where custody occurs before the execution of the judgment, one day in custody to be set off against one day of the sentence, which is to say from March 13, 2001 and expiring on March 12, 2011.)

2. Defendant Jin Haike committed the crime of subversion of state power, and is sentenced to 10 years imprisonment and 2 years deprivation of political rights.

(The sentence to be calculated from the date this judgment is executed. Where custody occurs before the execution of the judgment, one day in custody to be set off against one day of the sentence, which is to say from March 13, 2001 and expiring on March 12, 2011.)

3. Defendant Yang Zili committed the crime of subversion of state power, and is sentenced to eight years imprisonment and two years deprivation of political rights.

(The sentence to be calculated from the date this judgment is executed. Where custody occurs before the execution of the judgment, one day in custody to be set off against one day of the sentence, which is to say from March 13, 2001 and expiring on March 12, 2009.)

4. Defendant Zhang Honghai committed the crime of subversion of state power, and is sentenced to eight years imprisonment and two years deprivation of political rights.

(The sentence to be calculated from the date this judgment is executed. Where custody occurs before the execution of the judgment, one day in custody to be set off against one day of the sentence, which is to say from March 13, 2001 and expiring on March 12, 2009.)

5. Evidence seized in this case shall be confiscated (list attached).

If [a defendant] does not accept this judgment, [they] may within 10 days of the second day after receiving this judgment bring an appeal through this court or directly to the Beijing High People's Court. Any written appeal shall include one original and four copies of the appeals brief.

Presiding Judge Bai Jun
Judge Gu Lianchun
Acting Judge Lai Qi

May 28, 2003

[Seal of the Beijing Municipal Number 1 Intermediate People's Court]

Court Clerks Li Qinghua, Cao Zheng

List of confiscated items

1. 4 floppy discs
2. 2 laptops
3. 47 pages of manuscripts
4. 4 paper fragments
5. 1 chip
6. 1 computer mainframe (including 1 hard drive)
7. 3 computer hard drives
8. 1 modem
9. various essays
10. 1 computer system


徐伟、杨子立、靳海科、张宏海案件的判决书
(博讯2004年1月31日)
北京市第一中级人民法院 刑事判决书yyy

(2001)一中刑初字第2045

公诉机关北京市人民检察院第一分院。

被告人徐伟(笔名徐鲁平,周汉),男,28岁,(1974年8月12日出生),出生地山东省烟台市,汉族,硕士研究生文化,捕前系《消费日报》社记 者、编辑。住北京市朝阳区霄云路32号宿舍(户籍所在地:北京市西城区阜外大街乙22号);因涉嫌犯颠覆国家政权罪,于2001年3月13日被羁押,同年 4月 20日被逮捕;现羁押在北京市国家安全局看守所。

辩护人朱久虎,莫少平律师事务所律师。

被告人杨子立(笔名羊子),男,31岁(1971年12月10日出生),出生地河北省邯郸市,回族,硕士研究生文化,无业,住北京海淀区西八里庄北 里5号楼 604号(户籍所在地:北京市海淀区学院南路55号);因涉嫌犯颠覆国家政权罪,于2001年3月13日被羁押,同年4月20日被逮捕;现羁押在北京市国 家安全局看守所。

辩护人许万琳,北京市长安律师事务所律师。

辩护人李和平,北京市高博隆华律师事务律师。

被告人靳海科(笔名剑瓦),男,27岁(1976年5月26日出生),出生地河南省鄢陵县,汉族,大学文化,无业,住北京市朝阳区立水桥甲2号院内 1号;因涉嫌犯颠覆国家政权罪,于2001年3月13日被羁押,同年4月20日被逮捕;现羁押在北京市国家安全局看守所。

辩护人刘东滨,莫少平律师事务所律师。

被告人张宏海(笔名江鸣族),男,29岁(1973年11月1日出生),出生地浙江省缙云县,汉族,大学专科文化,无业,住浙江省缙云县五云镇寺后 东路2 号;因涉嫌犯有颠覆国家政权罪,于2001年3月13日被羁押,同年4月20日被逮捕;现羁押在北京市国家安全局看守所。

辩护人张思之,北京市吴栾赵阎律师事务的律师。

辩护人阎如玉,北京市吴栾赵阎律师事务的律师。

北京市人民检察院第一分院以京检一分刑诉字(2001)第222号起诉书,指控被告人徐伟、杨子立、靳海科、张宏海犯有颠覆国家政权罪,于2001年9月10日向本院提起公诉。

本院依法组成合议庭,公开开庭审理了本案。北京市人民检察院第一分院指派检察员李磊森、代理检察员张晓宇出庭支持公诉。被告人徐伟及其辩护人朱久 虎、被告人杨子立及其辩护人许万琳、李和平,被告人靳海科及其辩护人刘东滨、被告人张宏海及其辩护人张思之、阎如玉到庭参加诉讼。现已审理终结。

北京市人民检察院第一分院指控:

被告人徐伟、靳海科、张宏海伙同他人,于2000年5月初,秘密非法成立了“新青年学会”组织,制定了组织章程,宗旨为“积极探索社会改造之道”。同年8月19日,被告人杨子立等人加入该组织,该组织进行了分工,徐伟为总干事,范二军、张宏海为干事。

被告人徐伟,杨子立、靳海科、张宏海等人自2000年8月以来,多次秘密聚会,提出改变中国现政权,实现社会的变革,重新建立一种自由化的社会制度,主张 在全国设立分会,通过互联网发表文章,筹备创办互联网站和刊物,扩大组织规模和影响,规定了使用暗语等策略,并在此期间在互联网上发表《做新公民,重塑中 国》、《怎么办》等文章,提出“中国当前实施的民主是假民主”,“结束老人政治,建立青年中国”,妄图推翻中国共产党的领导和社会主义制度,颠覆人民民主 专政的政权。

北京市人民检察院第一分院向本院移送了指控四被告人犯罪物证、书证、证人证言、技术鉴定结论、侦查机关工作说明,被告人供述等有关证据,认为被告人 徐伟、杨子立、靳海科、张宏海的行为触犯了《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第一款之规定,已构成颠覆国家政权罪,提请本院依法惩处。

被告人徐伟在法庭审理中辩称:公诉机关的指控缺乏证据,其行为没有推翻中国现政权,建立自由化社会制度的目的。

徐伟辩护人的辩护意见是:公诉机关指控被告人徐伟犯颠覆国家政权罪证据不足,适用法律错误,徐伟的行为不构成颠覆国家政权罪。

被告人杨子立在法庭审理中辩称:其自由主义的观点是学术观点,没有推翻社会主义制度、共产党领导,颠覆国家政权的目的。

杨子立辩护人的辩护意见是:新青年学会“积极探索社会改造之道”的宗旨与推翻人民民主专政的政权和社会主义制度无必然联系,公诉机关指控杨子立的行为构成颠覆国家政权罪的证据不足。

被告人靳海科在法庭审理中辩称:其行为没有颠覆国家政权的目的。靳海科辩护人的辩护意见是:靳海科等人成立“新青年学会”不构成犯罪,没有事实和证据证明靳海科实施了颠覆国家政权的行为,公诉机关的指控不能成立。

被告人张宏海在法庭审理中辩护称:其行为没有颠覆国家政权的目的。

张宏海辩护人的辩护意见是:被告人张宏海的行为不构成犯罪,公诉机关的指控缺乏证据。

经审理查明:

被告人徐伟、靳海科、张宏海伙同张彦华、范二军(均另案处理)于2000年5月初,秘密非法成立了“新青年学会”组织,制定了组织章程,宗旨为“积 极探索社会改造之道”。同年8月19日,被告人杨子立等人加入该组织,该组织进行了分工,徐伟为总干事,范二军、张宏海为干事。

被告人徐伟、杨子立、靳海科、张宏海等人自2000年8月以来,在北京大学、中国人民大学等地多次秘密聚会,提出改变中国的现政权,实现社会的变 革,重新建立一种自由化的社会制度。主张在全国设立分会,通过互联网发表文章,筹备创办互联网站和刊物,扩大组织规模和影响,并规定了使用暗语等策略。在 此期间,上述被告人等在互联网上发表了《做新公民,重塑中国》、《怎么办》等文章,提出“中国当前实施的民主是假民主”,“结束老人政治,建立青年中 国”。妄图推翻中国共产党的领导和社会主义制度,颠覆人民民主专政的政权。

被告人徐伟、杨子立、靳海科、张宏海作案后被查获归案。

上述事实,有下列经庭审举证、质证的证据证实,本院予以确认:

1.证人范二军证言证明:靳海科、张宏海提出成立新青年学会,后共同讨论了组织宗旨、章程,举行仪式成立组织。靳海科提出由徐伟担任总干事,他和张宏海为 干事。该学会成员的一些言论是与宪法相抵触的,张宏海全盘否定共产党,在聚会时言论中有推翻共产党的意思。杨子立认为在经济上应该搞私有制,在政治上否定 共产党的一党执政。靳海科说现在的政府是集权政府,国民缺少民主意识。徐伟和他赞成用暴力的方式,通过农民起义来改造中国。归纳起来,学会成员有两种观 点,都是要用不同的形式推翻中国共产党的领导,改变现在中国的道路。靳海科提出学会应建立一个网站,要求大家在网站上发表文章,进行网上交流,并将会员的 观点、思想及学会宗旨进行对外宣传,由徐伟负责,杨子立提供技术支持。2000年10月,靳海科向他提出可在杨子立的个人网站“羊子的思想家园”上发表文 章进行讨论。

2.证人黄海霞证言证明:徐伟负责学会网站的设计工作,杨子立负责网站的技术问题,杨子立说在学会的网站成立之前,可以把文章先放在他的网站上。徐伟是总 干事,徐的观点是用农民最急需解决的问题来武装老百姓的思想,用法律、经济等援助老百姓,让学会获得民心,徐伟趋向于用暴力方式,尤其是通过农民起义来改 造社会。学会章程中规定要在天津、西安成立分会,要介绍、发展新成员,目的就是要改变现行的社会政治体制和经济体制,改变共产党一党执政的政权,建立新型 的民主体制,动摇共产党领导的地位,动摇共产党的威信。

3.证人李宇宙证言证明:杨子立明确表示实行多党制,推翻中国共产党。张宏海、靳海科提议要建立分会,且比较积极,靳海科这方面的事比较多。学会网站的申 请工作由杨子立负责,在学会网站运行前,先以杨子立创办的网站做为学会的宣传性的窗口。学会要求每个会员都要写文章交给靳海科,靳海科负责《学实交流文 集》的编辑工作,再将收集到的文章交杨子立上网刊登。在集会时,会员曾提出使用化名等。

4. 北京市国家安全局侦查获取的有徐伟、张宏海、靳海科、杨子立等人签名及指纹的“新青年学会誓词”证明:徐伟、靳海科、张宏海、杨子立等人加入了新青年学会。

5. 从杨子立住处查获的碎纸片拼接而成的新青年学会入会誓词复印件证明了誓词的部分内容。

6. 北京市国家安全局技术鉴定结论证明:“新青年学会入会誓词”是徐伟所写。

7.创联万网国际信息技术(北京)有限公司证明材料、查询结果证实:2000年8月22日,杨子立以北京伟恒泰和科技发展有限公司的名义在创联万网国际信 息技术(北京)有限公司客户服务系统申请注册了会员身份,并以其个人身份提交申请并注册成功域名(qingnian.org青年)。

8. 从徐伟住处查获的“对新青年学会章程的修改打印件”证明:该章程的主要内容包括会员、组织、纪律、会议、经费、附则等,并规定该会定名为新青年学会,总部设于北京,分会分设各地,以探索“改造中国及世界之道”为宗旨。

9. 从徐伟住处查获的“网站策划方案”打印件及从张宏海住处查获的“网站策划方案”、“无标题议题记录”等书证证明:网站是新青年学会的宣传阵地及外围组织;讨论议题主要包括斗争策略及成为执政党的近远期规划。

10. 徐伟给张彦华的信件证明了徐伟的目的是要将对现实的不满变为寻找和开拓出路的行动,探索出一条道路,最终拿出一套政治上的理论、纲领和行动方略,通过搞活动扩大队伍。

11. 从张宏海住处查获的软盘中打印出的“新青年学会成立宣言”证明:新青年学会对现政权不满,并煽动广大青年要有所行动。

12. 从张宏海住处查获的软盘中打印出的“新青年学会章程(草案)”证明:“章程”内容包括名称、宗旨(解放自己,改造社会)、纲领、入会条件、组织机构、会员纪律、会费来源等。

13. 从靳海科住处查获的“中国新公民读本”文章手稿复印件及日记中内容复印件,证明了靳海科对现实社会政治、民主的不满。

14. 北京市国家安全局技术鉴定结论证实:署名靳海科日记本,黄色本第145页,绿色本第31、49页上的字迹是靳海科所写;《中国新公民读本》序手稿是靳海科所写。

15. 从靳海科住处查获的西安李党帅与其联系的信件证明:靳海科联络李党帅加入新青年学会的情况。

16. 从杨子立住处查获电脑硬盘中破译调取的羊子网站的有关“羊子的文章”、“杨子立通讯录”、“学实交流文集”等书证证明了上述文章具有推翻现政治体制的目的。

17.从徐伟、靳海科住处查获的《学实交流文集》第一、四、五辑的复印件证明:《学实交流文集》登载的靳海科《做新公民,重塑中国》、杨子立《选择 自由主义》、于魏(靳海科笔名)《怎么办?》等文章有实现社会变革、主张重建自由化的社会制度、抨击现行制度、否定中国共产党领导的内容。

18.从杨子立住处查获的电脑主机、硬盘、芯片及调制解调器的照片、存有杨子立个人网页内容的电脑硬盘照片、杨子立个人主页中登载的文章照片,从 “新青年学会” 部分会员住处查获的《学实交流文集》的照片,从靳海科住处查获的靳海科的日记照片等物证、书证证明了上述相关证据的存在。

19. 北京市国家安全局工作说明证明:经侦查获悉,各被告人分别抓获的经过。

20. 户籍证明证实:各被告人身份情况。

对于徐伟、杨子立、靳海科、张宏海关于其行为没有颠覆国家政权的的目的的辩解以及各辩护人关于指控犯罪证据不足的辩护意见,与经庭审查明的事实不符。现有 经庭审举证、质证并经法庭确认的物证、书证、证人证言等证据证实,被告人徐伟、杨子立、靳海科、张宏海等人实施了非法成立组织,提出改变中国现政权,通过 互联网发表有关实现社会变革,主张重建自由化的社会制度、抨击现行制度、否定中国共产党领导的文章等行为,上述事实和证据,充分体现其妄图推翻中国共产党 的领导和社会主义制度,颠覆人民民主专政政权的主观故意及客观行为,故四被告人的辩解及其辩护人的辩护意见均不能成立。

本院认为,被告人徐伟、杨子立、靳海科、张宏海无视国家法律,非法成立组织,策划、实施颠覆国家政权、推翻社会主义制度,其行为已构成颠覆国家政权罪,均 应依法惩处。北京市人民检察院第一分院指控被告人徐伟、杨子立、靳海科、张宏海犯颠覆国家政权罪的事实清楚,证据确凿,指控的罪名成立。四被告人的无罪辩 解及其辩护人的辩护意见,均缺乏事实及法律依据,本院不予采信和采纳。据此,依照《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百零五条第一款、第五十六条第一款、第二十五 条第一款、第二十六条第一款、第四款、第六十四条之规定,判决如下:

一、 被告人徐伟犯颠覆国家政权罪,判处有期徒刑十年,剥夺政治权利二年。

(刑期自判决执行之日起计算。判决执行以前先行羁押的,羁押一日折抵刑期一日,即自2001年3月13日起至2011年3月12日止)。

二、 被告人靳海科犯颠覆国家政权罪,判处有期徒刑十年,剥夺政治权利二年。

(刑期自判决执行之日起计算。判决执行以前先行羁押的,羁押一日折抵刑期一日,即自2001年3月13日起至2011年3月12日止)。

三、 被告人杨子立犯颠覆国家政权罪,判处有期徒刑八年,剥夺政治权利二年。

(刑期自判决执行之日起计算。判决执行以前先行羁押的,羁押一日折抵刑期一日,即自2001年3月13日起至2009年3月12日止)。

四、被告人张宏海犯颠覆国家政权罪,判处有期徒刑八年,剥夺政治权利二年。

(刑期自判决执行之日起计算。判决执行以前先行羁押的,羁押一日折抵刑期一日,即自2001年3月13日起至2009年3月12日止)。

五、在案扣押之证物予以没收(清单附后)。

如不服本判决,可在接到本判决收的第二日起十日内,通过本院或者直接向北京高级人民法院提出上诉。书面上诉的,应当提交上诉状正本一份,副本四份。

审判长 柏军

审判员 贾连春

代理审判员 赖 琪

二00三年五月二十八日

(北京市第一中级人民法院公章)

书记员 李庆华 曹铮

没收证物清单

1、 软盘 4张

2、 笔记本 2本

3、 手稿 47页
4、 纸张碎片 4张
5、 芯片 1 张
6、 电脑主机(含硬盘1块) 1台
7、 电脑硬盘 3块
8、 modem 1个
9、 文章 若干
10、电脑 1套
(Modified on 2004/1/31) (博讯 boxun.com)