Welcome to the Landing of Trump, where three Jilin visitors were brought to the prison: two were released and field is still being prosecuted

During the visit of President Trump to Beijing in May, Chinese leaders received him with official diplomatic courtesy; Several Jilin defenders have also raised their welcome banners and have been prosecuted for criminal offences. > On October 9, the case, which lasted for nearly five months, was released: Ping, Dong, Kew Hong, Tan, and Tano was charged with the same banner expression for the search for the disorder. (c) The Jilin Governor, the People ' s Court of the Ridge District. The contradiction between political expression and State power becomes particularly specific when a State welcomes foreign presidents in the living room, while bringing civil welcomees to the prison.

The banner is not complex. The participants, under the names of field, Kingdom Ping and Dong Kui-hong, welcomed the President of the United States to China, the Chinese and American peoples to China and called attention to human rights in China. The field then published the photographs and the text on social platforms, referring to the release of political prisoners, prisoners of conscience and the cessation of persecution of defenders. It is neither a threat against foreign heads of State nor a call for violence in public reports; However, in the disposition of the Beijing police and the Jilin local security authorities, the banner was included in the criminal case.

The original interview in May was and the three men displayed banners at Beijing Planet Park on 14 May; Follow-up reports on 9 October recorded three individuals taking photographs of their house in the mountains on the afternoon of 13 May. The two reports described the location and date of the shooting differently and could not be written as the only site that had been approved. However, the core of the case was consistent: the three men publicly expressed their welcome and human rights claims and were subsequently taken away by the police, eventually leaving the field alone to face prosecution.

How a photograph led out of the Three Places of Detention

was revealed by ZOJIN on the morning of October 9, on 14 May, on the bus between the field and the Kingdom equals, who were on their way to the National Board of Letters and Visits, stopped by police vehicles to identify themselves and taken to the Beijing City Public Security Bureau East Branch. Nagagyo police station was then taken to the law enforcement centre of the station for questioning that afternoon. The following morning, the Beijing police handed over the three men to the Jilin local security authorities. The three persons who had jointly expressed their claims were then sent to different cities and places of detention.

(a) Fields are held in criminal detention by the Governor of Jilin, the Jilin District Public Security Bureau and in the Longridge County Detention Centre; (a) Ping, Kingdom, is held in criminal detention by the Deok-hye City Public Security Bureau and in the Changchun City Detention Centre; Dong Kew Hong is in criminal detention by the Town Security Department of Dungeon and is in Yengei City Detention Centre. The police are all dealing with the alleged harassment. The same banner and the same expression, which eventually led to the detention of three local public security authorities, showed that it was not a simple incident in the streets of Beijing, but a coordinated and coordinated inter-provincial treatment.

On 12 June, the Kingdom received remand and left the detention facility; On 18 June, the Dhui-Chui City Public Prosecutor ' s Office refused to authorize the arrest of Dong Gue-hong, who was released on the same day. On the same day, the District Prosecutor ' s Office of Nagachi approved the arrest of the field. By October, OSI had learned that fieldwork had been indicted at the District Court of Nagajing. The absence of bail pending trial does not mean that the case is dropped, and the failure to arrest necessarily does not mean that the entire process is concluded; But the fact that the three men are of different judicial fate at least indicates that the same expression has not been dealt with in exactly the same criminal consequences.

Why would the Gillin police go to Shanghai to find evidence

The case did not stop on the three parties. In June, the Jilin Long Ridge County Public Security Police went to Shanghai to contact the rights defender Zhou Zhongqing and seize his cell phone. According to the Human Life Watch, the police issued a statement saying:https://www.epochtimes.com/gb/26/6/9/n14784740.htm"target" rel= "nopener noreferrer" data-linked-reference= "tru" data-reference-label= "detention decision and Zhou Chongqiao interview" , stating that in the course of the investigation of the field search for disorder, the property, documents could be used to prove guilt or innocence of the suspect. Yu Zhong Chong Chong, who claimed to have no knowledge of the field, was still under police investigation.

The police had the power to gather evidence in criminal cases under the law, but when the original act was a photo of the foreign president being welcomed, the need to detain another defender ' s mobile phone across the province became a real issue: what was the police looking for? Was it organized to commit specific offences or to comb the relationship between the expressors? If the focus of the survey is expanded from a banner to a social network of defenders, the cost of citizen participation in public discussions will be significantly raised.

Fields are not the first to be pursued by local authorities. According to Human Rights Watch, he had been sentenced twice and once to a prison sentence for visiting the country to defend his rights, and had served a cumulative prison sentence of eight years and six months. Old experience cannot automatically prove the new case to be guilty or substitute for an independent judgement of the banner. In particular, under the broad offence of “silentness”, how the judiciary relates specific expression to the conduct of public order disturbance provided for in the criminal law will directly determine whether the field is again deprived of its liberty.

Political exclusion zone between diplomatic and civil welcome

, 14 May, Trump and Xi visited and met at the Beijing Forum, where photographs of their peers were publicly released. For Beijing, this State diplomacy is part of the management of relations between China and the United States; For the three defenders, the same visit was an opportunity to appeal to the outside world for attention to human rights in China. The two are the same people who welcome each other, but the expression of power is different: the State can decide which images represent “Chinese-American friendship”, and if the “human rights” are written in the welcome banner, the public may encounter the police, the prison and the prosecutor's office.

This is a distinct feature of the political control of the Communist Party of China: displaying friendship and openness to the outside world does not mean allowing citizens to participate in political expression on their own. Welcome the fact that foreign presidents do not automatically constitute an offence; Nor is it violence to call for attention to human rights. By combining the two, criminal means are likely to be effectively punished not by “welcome” per se, but by the ability of citizens to bypass official propaganda and to define their own image of the State and diplomatic issues.

Now Ping and Dong Kew Hong have left the prison, and the field is still facing criminal proceedings before the District Court of Nagachi. The police hand over three persons from Beijing to Jilin, detain them in different cities, investigate rights defenders in Shanghai across the province, and have different decisions taken by the prosecution service against the three, a clear chain of law enforcement that is more telling than any political slogan: a welcome banner that does not show the content of violence, is sufficient to trigger a State machine across the region. If the Chinese Government is to show the world its confidence, it should first allow ordinary people to express their welcome, criticism and claims in their own language, rather than to pay for a photograph that loses its freedom.