Court Sentences Shaanxi Investor Feng Bingxian to Three Years Imprisonment

January 30, 2006

The Jingbian County People's Court in Yulin city, Shaanxi province, has sentenced private investor Feng Bingxian to three years imprisonment for "gathering a crowd to disturb public order," a crime under Article 291 (amended in December 2001) of the Criminal Law, according to a January 5 Radio Free Asia (RFA) report. The court identified Feng as the principal leader and organizer of a group of private investors whose oil fields the municipal governments of Yulin and Yanan seized in 2003. The court also sentenced private investors Feng Xiaoyuan (no relation to Feng Bingxian) and Wang Shijun, but released them on January 5 and suspended their sentences for three years because they showed remorse and cooperated in the investigation, according to a January 6 report in the South China Morning Post (subscription required). The 21st Century Business Herald and Boxun both noted that, at the conclusion of the proceedings, Feng Bingxian reserved his right to appeal.

The Jingbian County People's Court in Yulin city, Shaanxi province, has sentenced private investor Feng Bingxian to three years imprisonment for "gathering a crowd to disturb public order," a crime under Article 291 (amended in December 2001) of the Criminal Law, according to a January 5 Radio Free Asia (RFA) report. The court identified Feng as the principal leader and organizer of a group of private investors whose oil fields the municipal governments of Yulin and Yanan seized in 2003. The court also sentenced private investors Feng Xiaoyuan (no relation to Feng Bingxian) and Wang Shijun, but released them on January 5 and suspended their sentences for three years because they showed remorse and cooperated in the investigation, according to a January 6 report in the South China Morning Post (subscription required). The 21st Century Business Herald and Boxun both noted that, at the conclusion of the proceedings, Feng Bingxian reserved his right to appeal.

According to the RFA report, the court did not notify criminal defense lawyer Mo Shaoping about his client's sentencing. Reports also indicated that the court failed to inform Feng's family about his sentencing date, and that Feng's son was the only non-government representative allowed to attend the proceedings. Feng's son told RFA that the court judgment relied strongly on the local procuratorate's case, and that the procuratorate's evidence consisted almost entirely of notes from public security interrogations of individual private investors. An earlier RFA report (via Epoch Times) from Feng's December 26, 2005, trial proceedings also suggested that the court has restricted access by outsiders to various stages of Feng's criminal process. Feng pleaded not guilty at his December 26 trial and requested that both the court and head procurator Wang Minglang recuse themselves from the trial, because of potential bias and previous involvement in the dispute over the oil field seizures. In a detailed analysis of Feng's case, The Economic Observer reported that representatives of the court and procuratorate maintained that their involvement in the separate administrative lawsuit was "unrelated to this [criminal] case." They refused Feng's request for recusal and transfer to a jurisdiction outside Shaanxi province. Both RFA and Reuters noted that court personnel closed the December 26 proceedings to media representatives and about 100 private investors who wished to show their support for Feng.

Sources close to Feng's case, including his criminal defense lawyer and fellow private investors, have highlighted the questionable use of the Criminal Law to shut down enforcement of private property rights that are recognized under Chinese law and enshrined in the language of 2004 Amendments to the Chinese Constitution. Despite the guarantee under Article 13 of the Constitution that "the lawful private property of citizens is not to be violated," recent corruption scandals implicating China's top leadership have confirmed the continuing abuse of government authority in land deals. In late 2005, government response to citizen efforts to enforce their property rights led to the violent suppression of protests in the villages of Dongzhoukeng and Taishi, Guangdong province. Government officials have also detained numerous property rights activists, including Beijing legal expert Guo Feixiong and Fujian rights activist Huang Weizhong (whose case has received coverage from RFA), on the basis of similar accusations of "gathering people to disturb public order." Mo Shaoping's defense pleading (posted by Boxun) emphasized that in Feng's case, the procuratorate could prove neither a criminal intent to disturb public order nor "serious circumstances" deserving of criminal punishment under Article 291. In an Appeal to President Hu Jintao, Premier Wen Jiabao, and All Segments of Society Regarding Prosecution of Four Representatives Feng Bingxian Et Al. (posted by Boxun), fellow private investors highlighted that Feng had encouraged them to avoid violent and otherwise criminal behavior, and resort only to the law in enforcing their property rights.

Recent CECC reports reflect that rights activists who challenge the Chinese government's abuse of power continue to be charged with vaguely defined crimes. In December 2005, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture called on the Chinese government to "abolish imprecise and sweeping definitions of crimes that leave large discretion to law enforcement and prosecution authorities such as 'endangering national security,' 'disrupting social order,' 'subverting public order,' etc." For more information on the application of vague criminal and administrative provisions to detain Chinese citizens for political offenses, see the CECC's analysis on Political Crimes, in Section III(b) of the 2005 Annual Report. For more information on Feng's case, see the CECC's analyses of his detention in July 2005 and his indictment in October 2005.