After the original Zhuiqiu officer's sentence, he filed a complaint against the Provincial and Municipal Council Network for violations of rights, which was in the hands of the courts.

My name is Xu Wei Guo, formerly Deputy Director-General of the Ma Village Division of the City of Giochu, Henan Province, in May 2013 in criminal detention by the Ma Village People ' s Procuratorate, in the same case, as well as Wang Jiangang, Chief of the Planning and Cadastral Mapping Unit of the Department, and Wang Chunsheng, village inhabitants of Lower Ma Village. On 24 June 2014, the Ma Village District Court of sentenced me to 10 years ' imprisonment for corruption and 5 years ' imprisonment for Zhang Jianqiang and Wang Chunsheng.

The three of us have appealed to the City Intermediate People ' s Court of Caiju. *

On 7 January 2015, the Court of Justice of the Court of Major Jurisdiction heard our appeal. At the court hearing, we three appellants and counsel were both engaged in the defence of innocence.

On 9 January 2015,* the CACJT Disciplinary Inspection Committee (hereinafter “the Municipal Disciplinary Commission”) the official website covered the second trial of our case* under the title “Court warning education activities in the Ma Village”. On 15 January 2015, the report was also published on the official website of the Central Communist Party (CPP) District Disciplinary Inspection Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Provincial Disciplinary Commission) on the subject of the trial alert education activities of the Municipal District District Disciplinary Commission of the Moo-Chang.

On 4 March 2015, the Court of Justice of Jorjun delivered its decision rejecting the appeal and upholding the original judgement. *

The three of us have been complaining for the duration of our sentences. I was also transferred from Henan prison to Zhejiang prison to serve my sentence for the complaint. The complaint has increased my suffering, but has no effect.

Our case is a very clear injustice, and I wonder why it has come to that.

After 10 September 2022* prison sentence was completed, * New Year 2023 * Occasionally * See * * Report on the Provincial and Municipal Board website * *, * * Surprisingly. *

In court, we three accused and defence counsel have both entered a plea of not guilty. But the report* says that* “ the accused deeply repents for his disciplinary offences”* this is not * * the distortion of facts and slander*! The report also uses the phrase “never good end of the game with the party Quest” to define our case as sexual. *

The courts are also subject to the Disciplinary Commission. In the absence of a conviction by the Court of Major Jurisdiction, the provincial and municipal disciplinary commissions have objectively put pressure on the court leadership and the judges who run the case, by falsifying, distorting and conclusive reports. Now that the Disciplinary Commission has reported that we “do not end well”, how dare the judges of the Intermediate Court let us end well! This report is likely to affect the outcome of our case and interfere with the administration of justice. *

When I discovered the report, I immediately sent it to the provincial and municipal Disciplinary Commission through the 12388 online reporting platform, the 12388 hotline, and mail to the provincial and municipal Disciplinary Commissions, and to the provincial and municipal Disciplinary Commissions ' letter-and-reception windows, without any effect.

In a state of emergency, I have filed civil proceedings with the People ' s Court*, together with Zhang Jianqiang and Wang Chun-sheng, for false reporting of violations of the right to honour on the website of the Provincial and Municipal Council.

On 3 April 2023, we submitted the case file online to the People's Court of the Free City District (hereinafter referred to as the “Liberation Court”) at the seat of the Municipal Regulatory Council. The next day, the judge of the Liberation Court called and asked us to go to the court and open the case. On 6 April, the three of us presented the case file at the Libertad Court Litigation Service. The Court acted as a micro-judge to receive the material but did not issue a receipt form.

Since then, we have asked the judges in office on several occasions about the progress made, who have said that the case has been reported to President Fan, who is awaiting instructions from him. That's the month that passed, and we didn't wait for any response.

On 10 May 2023, the day of reception of the letter of President Fan Chau, who finally met with him, said to me: “ I will report again that the report was not in order, since the party department is outside the jurisdiction of the Court, and we can look for a regulation at that point*”.

The words of Dean Fan are obviously pretentious and mocking me. I have therefore submitted a complaint to the relevant prosecutor ' s office, the courts, the Political and Judicial Commission, the Board of the Ombudsman, and even to the Provincial Council ' s Inspectorate. During this period, my letter of complaint to the National Office was sent back to the Liberation Court, on 17 May, the Office of the Court of Appeal informed me of the issuance of a " Request for Admission ". The Book of Information states: “To the point of your letter, We decided to accept it. As stipulated in the Letter of Enquiry Work Regulations, 13 July 2023 (Note: no more than 60 days after admission) will be closed and written in response to you. During this period, you raised the same matter of the letter of inquiry on the same facts and grounds, which were inadmissible to this organ and to the higher administrative authorities. I hereby inform you. ”

On 14 July, President Fan interviewed the three of us, briefly asking about the situation, and then informed us that the matter of the visit was extended for one month.

President Fan again interviewed us on 24 July, asking me to delete the video of the “one call a day” on the Web platform that President Fan had opened and threatening to call the police if he was not to be deleted. I asked him to open a case or to rule on it, President Fan said* our case is not a civil matter and the court will not open a case. But the Court will not find it inadmissible, because if it does, * we will appeal.* *

In a state of emergency, we have to hope that after the expiration of the letter-call, the Liberation Court will give a written response as promised in Receivable Notice . *

The liberation court did not reply after the expiry of the deadline. *

August 14, I again addressed the National Bureau of Mission. After the letter was sent to the Liberation District Court, the Court posted a reply to the reply column. The following are the following: With regard to the complaint of the Xu Wei Guo Guo City Disciplinary Inspection Commission, the CCP Henan Department of Disciplinary Inspection Commission, the matter of the non-opening of the case in our house, the letter-calling court was sent to the court on 14 July 2023, when our party secretary and the president personally interviewed the visitors, Zhu Wei Guang, Zhang Jianqiang and Wang Chun-sheng, to answer questions about their reflection, to make clear that they did not have a civil case to receive, and to express satisfaction with the interview and to remove the relevant non-resolve video from the platform after the interview. Search

In response to the comments,* I am somewhat * laughing: President Fan did say that the case was not a civil case, but at that time* I expressly rejected and rejected the President's statement and requested him to make a written decision and written replies to the letter, which were inadmissible under the law. If we're satisfied, how can we continue to report to our superiors? The liberation court is not a deer, to deceive the superiors.

I have since responded to the National Bureau of Visits on more than a dozen occasions. On each occasion, the Emancipation District Court responded by the reply of 14 August. I did not make my next complaint until I had read my comments on each occasion.

On 16 January 2024, the three members of the Visheng State were accompanied by lawyers Liu Taijin of the Totei law firm in Beijing to the Liberation Court Court Court Court of Justice, where they submitted to the Court the request of attorney to represent the three persons in civil cases, which was refused by the micro-judge. Counsel has sent the representation to the post office for the post office as a micro-judge. Counsel also went to the People ' s Procuratorate of the liberated areas and to the Municipal Intermediate People ' s Court of Giacho, asking them to monitor the non-inclusion of the liberated areas courts.

On the same day, I again (twenty-second time already) complained to the National Board of Letters and Visits, requesting the Office of the Inspector-General. Requesting written responses from the Liberation District Court on their correspondence in accordance with their commitments; (c) Call for the Emancipation District Court to open a case or to make a finding of inadmissibility in accordance with the law. After the submission of the request, the page is followed by a post stating that “the matter of the letter you have submitted is accepted or is in the process of being processed, and please do not raise the same matter within the prescribed time limit (usually 60 days). "of the letter.

We have a system of registration of cases. Article 9 of the Supreme People ' s Court ' s Regulation on Certain Issues in Registering People ' s Courts clearly states that: If a complaint, private complaint is inadmissible or no case is filed by the People ' s Court, it shall issue a written decision or decision, with reasons.

Article 126 of the Civil Procedure Code provides that: People ' s Courts shall guarantee the right of the person to sue in accordance with the law. An action in accordance with article 122 of this Act must be admissible. If the conditions for prosecution are met, the case shall be filed within seven days and the person concerned shall be notified; Where the conditions for prosecution are not met, the decision should be rendered within seven days and inadmissible; The plaintiff may appeal against the decision. *

President Fan first stated that “the party department is not within the jurisdiction of the courts” and later said that our claims “are not within the jurisdiction of civil cases”. The reasons are inconsistent and the purpose is only one: “no case”.

Not only does the President not file a case, but he has not decided to dismiss it, and has blocked the way for the legal appeals! *

Justice is the last line of defence for social justice. President Fan has blocked our path to justice, to justice in society, to the rule of law in its entirety.

In his address, the leader of the Supreme People's Court said: * “No case is opened, not just a legal issue, but also a question of conduct, a political issue”. *

President Fan has not filed a case and has not ruled inadmissible, which is * what * question and ? *

On 22 January, 2024,* I complained to the 12368 hotline of the Supreme People ' s Court about the non-inclusion of the Liberation Court, the judge who answered the call asked for details and said that he would be advised to report the situation. Yet another month has passed without any progress.

On 22 February, I again filed a complaint with the 12368 hotline of the Supreme People ' s Court regarding the non-registration of the liberation court.

This time, will it work?

Scan my public number 2D above, follow my case and feel the temperature of national justice with me.

Please forward, give some compliments and take a look to make this grievance known to a wider audience. *