Supreme People's Court Approves Fan Qihang Execution Despite Allegations of Torture

December 10, 2010

In late September 2010, Chinese authorities executed alleged Chongqing criminal syndicate boss Fan Qihang, despite publicly released videos reportedly supporting Fan's claims that he had suffered torture for more than six months. In late July, Zhu Mingyong, Fan's criminal defense lawyer, released the secret video recordings of his client, in which Fan recounts the numerous forms of torture he claimed to have suffered while in police detention and shows related wounds. The high-profile execution comes only months after six Chinese agencies issued regulations to make confessions obtained through torture inadmissible in court. In addition, in August 2010, a group of Chinese lawyers and activists released open letters calling on the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Supreme People's Court (SPC) to investigate the case and the "common phenomenon" of torture in Chongqing municipality's high-profile anti-crime campaign. The SPC's decision to execute Fan―despite the evidence and advocacy―raises continued doubts over the court's willingness to investigate allegations of torture fully and to implement the new guidelines that aimed to prohibit evidence obtained through torture.

Chongqing Executes Alleged Criminal Syndicate Boss Fan Qihang

According to media reports, on September 26, 2010, Chongqing authorities executed alleged criminal syndicate boss Fan Qihang, after the Supreme People's Court (SPC) approved Fan's death penalty sentence as part of the SPC verification and approval process mandated under Article 48 of the Criminal Law (Chongqing Daily News Group, reprinted via Xinhua, 26 September 10; Xinhua, 26 September 10). In February 2010, Chongqing authorities sentenced Fan to death for "organizing, leading and participating in triads," murder, and other charges (Chinese Human Rights Defenders, 3 August 10; Xinhua, 10 February 10). In August 2010, however, Fan's criminal defense attorney Zhu Mingyong publicly released a video detailing how authorities "subjected [Fan] to many forms of torture on [an] almost daily basis for six months," according to a July 30 South China Morning Post article (subscription required). The SPC review did not acknowledge the torture claims, and failed to uphold legal provisions in the new evidence regulations that would have allowed Zhu to attend the review (see Art. 38 of the "Rules Concerning Questions About Examining and Judging Evidence in Death Penalty Cases"). According to a September 26 Zhengyi Net article, the SPC reportedly approved the death penalty, claiming "the facts were clear, the evidence reliable and adequate, the conviction accurate, the sentence appropriate, and the proceedings legal." The SPC review approved the capital sentence, despite new procedural guidelines issued by China's top judicial and law enforcement bodies in June 2010. The guidelines purportedly intended to exclude confessions obtained through torture from trial and grant special scrutiny for the review of evidence in death penalty cases. (For more information on the guidelines, see the "Rules Concerning Questions About Exclusion of Illegal Evidence in Handling Criminal Cases" and the "Rules Concerning Questions About Examining and Judging Evidence in Death Penalty Cases.")

Case Background: Alleged Criminal Syndicate Boss Fan Qihang

Over the course of the year, the case against Fan Qihang has emerged as one of the highest profile cases in Chongqing municipality's ongoing "anti-crime" campaign, which has reportedly led to more than 3,100 arrests as of late September 2010 (Chongqing Daily, 22 September 10). On June 26, 2009, public security officers with the Jiangbei branch of the Chongqing Public Security Bureau detained Fan in the large-scale crackdown, according to an August 3, 2010, CHRD statement and a December 25, 2009, Sanlian Lifeweek Magazine article (reprinted in the New People's Network Web Site). Although Fan's family retained Zhu to represent Fan, authorities did not permit the criminal defense lawyer to meet with Fan until November 2009, according to an August 6, 2010, Amnesty International article and the December 25, 2009, Sanlian Lifeweek Magazine article. Between November 24, 2009, and December 2, 2009, Sanlian Lifeweek Magazine reports that Zhu met with Fan on five occasions, all of which occurred with a police presence. Fan allegedly confessed to the murder and other crimes while in detention, but later denied any involvement. On January 6, 2010, Fan retracted his earlier confession stating that he did not learn of the murder until after his arrest, according to a January 6 China Youth Daily article. On February 10, 2010, the Chongqing Municipal No. 1 People's Court sentenced Fan Qihang to death for "running a gang, murder, illegal dealing in and transportation of guns and ammunition, drug trafficking, operation of illegal businesses, bribery, operation of a casino, and tolerating others' drug taking," according to a September 26 Xinhua article. On May 31, 2010, the Chongqing Municipal Higher People’s Court upheld Fan's sentence, according to a May 31 Zhengyi Net article (in Chinese).

Fan Qihang Case Leads to Criticism of Chongqing Crackdown

On July 27, criminal defense lawyer Zhu Mingyong, Fan's defense counsel, publicly released secret recordings showing Fan discussing torture he endured for up to six months, according to a July 30, 2010, South China Morning Post article (subscription required). (Fan Qihang's video testimony is available online here.) On August 23, 2010, a group of Chinese lawyers and activists released open letters calling on the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate to investigate the use of torture and other illicit methods in the sweeping crackdown on organized crime in Chongqing, according to an August 22, 2010, Agence France-Presse article and August 23, 2010, Chinese Human Rights Defenders translations of the letters. In the letter the Supreme People's Court (available in English on the Chinese Human Rights Defenders Web site here; in Chinese on the Web site of Teng Biao here) the lawyers share their concerns over alleged procedural abuses and torture accusations: "[A]vailable evidence makes one come to the conclusion that the legal and political authorities of Chongqing are producing a large quantity of wrongful convictions in the name of 'striking hard against organized crime,' and are suspected of using torture indiscriminately, harming innocent persons, and trampling on the rules of procedure." The letter specifically points out Fan Qihang's firsthand accounts found in the publicly released materials by Fan's criminal defense lawyer Zhu.

  • "For instance they shackled my hands behind my back and hung me by my wrists from an iron window grille, so that my toes just barely touched the ground, and they never took me off. The longest they did that was for five [consecutive] days before they took me off."
  • "Then they kept me standing for a week; the longest period, I remember, was for over 10 days. For over 10 days I was not able to sleep for one minute, not even one second. During that time I fainted and fell unconscious several times, when they saw me fainted, they splashed me with cold water to bring me back to my senses."
  • "Whenever I collapsed, they pulled me up again, made me stand again, and beat and kicked me….Living was worse than dying; and I actually tried to commit suicide because I could no longer endure this torment. Twice I bashed my head against the wall, leaving two big scars on my head. While I was hung up and they wouldn’t take me off, but instead splashed me with cold water to wake me up, I bit through the tip of my tongue. After that, it took two days before they took me to a clinic to treat the wound."

In addition to these specific accounts, the letter also raises the issue of police threats to bury other Chongqing defendants alive if they did not confess to roles in the organized crime crackdown, as well as other alleged abuses committed by authorities. In the letter's conclusion, the lawyers and activists call on the Supreme People's Court to protect against torture, which "violates the dignity of [China's] laws," and to hold those found responsible for torture, if any, legally accountable.

Prospects for the New Guidelines on Excluding Evidence Obtained Through Torture

The SPC's decision to execute Fan―despite lawyers' advocacy and the video―raises doubts over the court's willingness to investigate allegations of torture fully and to implement the June guidelines that aimed to prohibit evidence obtained through torture. In a September 2, 2010, South China Morning Post article (subscription required; reprinted on the US-Asia Law Institute Web site here),Professor Jerome Cohen and Professor Eva Pils discuss the hopes of Chinese lawyers and reformers who seek greater consistency between Chinese laws and implementation. Cohen and Pils write, "If the SPC should reverse Fan’s conviction for murder and other offenses on the ground that it was based on evidence obtained through torture and send the case back for a fairer trial, this would be landmark progress in the administration of justice in China. If, on the other hand, it dispatches Fan to his death by allowing the conviction to stand, this will signal the continuation of business as usual." In its September 8, 2010, report to the Committee Against Torture (CAT), CHRD raises specific concerns over the new regulations. The report, for example, points out that Article 6 of the "Rules Concerning Questions About the Exclusion of Illegal Evidence in Handling Criminal Cases" places an undue burden of proof on torture victims to produce evidence that "may be difficult or impossible for a torture victim to ascertain or understand at the time they were tortured or afterwards."

For more information on the rights of criminal suspects and the issue of torture, see Section II―Criminal Justice in the CECC 2010 Annual Report.