A photo turned into “incitement to division”: Wang Jing, Shao Feng, and the chain of responsibility for Tibetan public security behind Zhang Yi’s detention

On September 11, lawyers finally saw Zhang Yi, a Wuhan citizen detained for more than two months in Lhasa City Guard. The latest public information shows that Zhang Yi was not released, and the case is still in the investigation phase. The Lhasa City Public Security Bureau’s “Arrest Notice” in family materials has nailed on paper the state organs implementing compulsory measures: Zhang Yi was executed on suspicion of “incitement to the separation of the country.” The case, which was previously publicly, was extremely eye-catching – on July 1, 2026, Zhang Yi was taken away by the police during the Lhasa Temple, and related human rights and organization families that the incident was related to his showing the photographs of the Dalai Lama to Tibetan believers.

From a photo to a national security crime: it’s not ordinary law enforcement, but the criminalization of political security machinery for freedom of expression.

Zhang Yi is an activist of the 89th generation of Wuhan. Public information shows that he has been involved in civil society activities for a long time. After entering Tibet, he was taken away by the police in the Temple of Israel, and the case has since escalated from on-site control to criminal detention and formal arrest. Amnesty International has taken emergency action on the Zhang Yi case, pointing out that the authorities did not publicly explain the specific facts of the so-called "incitement to a separatist state" and believed that its detention was related to the peaceful exercise of rights.

The arrest notice provided by the family of the Lassa Municipal Public Security Bureau shows that Zhang Yi has entered the formal arrest procedure. This document cleared the boundaries of responsibility: the case is not a temporary scrutiny of the landscape civilian police, but a national security criminal prosecution continuously promoted by the Lassa public security organs. As long as the authorities can not take out the concrete crimes that go beyond the peaceful display of photos, expression of ideas, the long term imprisonment of Zhang Yi for "incitement to the crime of separation of the state" is a serious violation of the rights of thought, religion and freedom of expression using the crimes of national security.

The 11th September lawyer meeting brought the latest situation. The Defense Network in X released the news that Zhang Yi's current overall condition is still fine, with a slight back pain; but before in the detention phase there had been a severe high ground reaction and fainting, and then the blood pressure was found to rise. The news said that he had previously argued because of anti-high ground reaction drugs and low blood pressure medication deficiency, and now replaced the drug after blood pressure normal. These health conditions came from the public translation after the meeting of lawyers, not public medical records published by the Lhasa public security organs, but since the state deprived Zhang Yi of personal freedom, his life health and timely medical guarantee responsibility has been borne by the detention and case agencies.

Accusations can’t replace evidence: Interpreting photos as “dividing nations” exposes political qualities before legal facts.

At present, public material does not show that Zhang has engaged in violence, organized separatist activities, or taken any other concrete action sufficient to prove that he has "incited the separation of the country." A key element of the public information is that he has shown photographs of the Dalai Lama to Tibetan believers in the Temple of Israel. If the authorities have other evidence, they should be able to openly accept the facts of legal checks; before this, a highly politized crime itself cannot be turned into a proof of crime.

From displaying photos to imprisonment, arrest, there must be a series of concrete acts of power in the middle: on-site control, mobile phone inspection and evidence collection, proceedings quality, criminal detention, petition for approval arrest, prosecution review approval and continuous detention. Every step has a decision, someone signed, someone executed. The Zhang Yi case is therefore not an abstract "Tibetan stability" event that can be covered, but a chain of responsibility that can be locked down along documents, functions and statutory procedures.

Basandogi: Lhasa public security executes the arrest, the director who presides over the global business is the main leader responsible

Lhasa City Public Security Bureau official website currently lists, Barzandogi as deputy mayor of Lhasa city, deputy secretary of the municipal government and law committee, deputy secretary of the party committee of the municipal public security bureau, director, inspector-general, and clarify its "presiding the administrative work of the office."Zhang Yi's arrest notice comes from the public security bureau of the city of Lhasa, so the responsibility of the criminal prosecution of the organ has been clear, and Barzandogi who presided over the administrative business of the office is the main leader of public security power at this level.

The existing public materials cannot prove that Basantogi himself signed the detention documents, personally ordered the arrest of Zhang Yi, this point can not be made in vain. But "no evidence proof personally ordered" is not equal to "no responsibility". A public security director can not have command, management and supervision when public security organs handle political security cases, in the case caused serious rights violations but degraded to the side-spectator unrelated to the case. Zhang Yi case is undertaken by which department, with what evidence to file the case, why to meet the conditions of arrest, whether medical protection during detention is guaranteed, all belongs to the public security administration business scope presided by Basantogi.

Therefore, the responsibility of Barzandogui in the Zhang Yi case is not a widespread "worth concern", but a clear leadership and law enforcement supervision responsibility of the public security organs. If the so-called crime facts are only peaceful expression, the public security organs led by Lhasa are the direct state organs that will criminalize the expression of acts and implement deprivation of liberty, the leadership responsibility of Barzandogui must be recorded.

"Stability above everything" is not a background slogan, but a political command to the public security system.

Lhasa City Committee Secretary Xi Jinping presided over the city's stability video scheduling meeting in March this year, openly requested to always put the stability work in the position of "above all, above all, above all" and demanded that "the layers of responsibility, layers of pressure".

This phrase must be put together with Zhang Ying’s case. The so-called “above all” means that stability is given political priorities that overpower other governance goals; the so-called “layer transmission pressure” means that this priority is not to stay in the meeting room of the Municipal Committee, but to step-by-step pressure on the political law, public security and grassroots enforcement system. Under this political incentive, the common behavior involving Tibet, religion, the Dalai Lama and political expression is very easily identified first as a “security risk”, and then the public security procedure seeks crimes that can accommodate this political quality.

Therefore, Shao Feng is not a decorative name on the chain of responsibility for Zhang Yi. He, as the main head of the Lhasa City Committee, publicly created and strengthened the political pressure of "stability above everything" and assumed the primary leadership responsibility of the City Council for this logic of political security and public security law enforcement. Existing evidence can not prove that he personally advocated the Lhasa City Committee, but his personal deployment of the stability line is the power environment in which Lhasa public security law enforcement is located. Power can be layered down and responsibility can not evaporate in the background of the case.

Zhu Shikoku: Since he calls himself the "first responsible person" for the rule of law public security, he must be responsible for the violation of the rights of the public security system.

The official website of the Tibetan Autonomous Region Public Security Administration shows that the current Vice President of the Autonomous Region, Deputy Secretary of the Political Committee of the Party Committee of the Autonomous Region, Secretary of the Party Committee of the Public Security Administration, Chief Executive Officer and Inspector-General of the Public Security Administration released the report on the construction of the government of the rule of law for the year 2025 more clearly stated that Zhu Shikoku "strictly fulfilled the duties of the first responsible person for promoting the construction of public security under the rule of law", personally asked about major issues, personally coordinated key links, and personally supervised major tasks.

The "first responsible person" can not only exist when summarizing the achievements.The public security department of the autonomous region has the deployment, guidance, supervision and inspection responsibilities of the public security organs in the whole region; Zhu Shikoku also crosses the public security administrative power and the party committee's political and legal power.

If Lhasa public security interpreted the peaceful display photos as endangering national security and depriving citizens of civil liberties accordingly, then the question is not only whether a grassroots police "excessively rigorous", but whether the public security system of the autonomous region can prevent the logic of political security from swallowing the boundaries of criminal law. Zhu Shikoku, as the chief of public security, inspector general and the first responsible for the construction of the public security of the rule of law, is responsible for this model of law enforcement, supervision and the construction of the rule of law.

Wang Jing: From the public security station to the autonomous region's stability command, the head of the highest local Party committee in Tibet personally arranged a set of stability machines

Zhang Yi was taken away by the police on July 1 in the Temple of Shura. On July 3, the secretary of the Party Committee of the Tibetan Autonomous Region Wang Jing went to the Political Law System research.The Tibetan Autonomous Region Party Committee's public report showed that Wang Jing was on the same day to the Lhasa City Public Security Bureau's eight-walled ancient city branch of the Qigong mission to inspect stability measures, grassroots governance and networking management, and then to the relevant departments of the Public Security Administration of the Autonomous Region, and entered the Command Center of the Stability Command of the Autonomous Region to listen to the stability report of the entire region and schedule the stability work of the towns around the place.

The approximation of time cannot be falsified as a result of the “personally deployed Zhang Yi case on July 3” because there is no such evidence at present; but official reports have proven a more institutional fact: when Zhang Yi was under control, the Tibetan public security and stability system was under direct inspection, supervision and regulation by the highest local party committee in the autonomous region.

On August 10, Wang was also chairman of the Standing Committee of the Party Committee of the Autonomous Region, specializing in listening to the public security department's work reporting and deploying public security work. The Chinese government's own system language repeatedly emphasized the leadership of the party's public security work, the party's main responsibility and the main responsibility of the party committee.

When a system presses the pressure to maintain stability from the Party Committee of the Autonomous Region to the Municipal Committee, the Political Law Commission and the public security organs, and then applies this pressure to the mobile phones, photos, imprisonment notices and the iron doors of the custody, so-called "Party Committee leadership" means not only power, but also responsibility. Wang is taking on the highest level of political leadership responsibility for the systematic violations of the rights caused by the Tibetan stability system and the Party leadership of the public security system. This is not the accusation that he personally signed the arrest document of Zhang Yi, but confirms his political responsibility based on his public office, public deployment and actual leadership system.

From Wang Jing to the case police: the power layer is concentrated, the crime layer cannot evaporate

Zhang Yi has presented a clear responsibility structure: Wang Jing leads the party committee of the autonomous region and the stability system of the region, is the political leadership responsible at the highest level; Zhou Ying publicly established "stability above everything" as the secretary of the municipal committee of Lhasa and requires pressure from the layers to assume the political leadership responsibility of the municipality; Zhu Yingko is also the deputy secretary of the party committee of the autonomous region, the public security department, the inspector general and the first responsible for the public security of the rule of law, and assumes the leadership, supervision and rule of law responsibility of the public security system of the autonomous region; Barzandogi presides over the public security administration of Lhasa, which

Later on, there are those who are directly responsible for the public name: the control and search of Zhang Yi's police on the scene, the case-leader who decides to initiate the "incitement to the separation of the country", the police who produce and review the evidence material, the person responsible for deciding the detention, the contractor who submits the arrest to the prosecutor's office, and the prosecutor who reviewed and approved the arrest. These people are not the gear in the abstract system, but are the implementers and decision makers of a concrete act depriving citizens' freedom. The public information temporarily does not disclose their names, and the Chinese prosecution archive lists them as the direct responsible entities that must continue to be locked in the next stage.

Based on the materials that have already been disclosed, focus on China's determination that what is exposed in the Zhang Yi case is not the ordinary law enforcement dispute, but the Tibetan political stability system uses highly politized national security crimes to suppress peaceful expression and carry out serious rights violations of long-term personal deprivation of liberty. If the authorities can finally prove that Zhang Yi has carried out a concrete crime that transcends peaceful expression, public evidence should be examined; if the so-called core act is really just showing photos, expressing opinions or other peaceful acts, then the people who promote the filing, detention, petition for criticism and approval of arrest, are responsible for this arbitrary deprivation of liberty, and the responsibility for law enforcement, and Wang

There must be an important boundary here: responsibility determination does not require fictitious facts. There is no evidence to prove who "personally orders" does not falsify orders personally; but there has been evidence to prove who leads the stability system, who makes political pressure, who leads the public security system, who presides over the specific case agencies, can no longer use "still to be observed" to take responsibility for those who are in power. The more centralized the power, the higher the office, the greater the publicly declared leadership responsibility, the more the responsibility in institutional violations can not be hidden.

* Meltdown and high blood pressure during detention: the state takes away its freedom and takes on the responsibility for life and health.

Zhang Ying is 61 years old. The latest lawyer has met information involving severe high-altitude reactions, dizziness and new high blood pressure during his detention. Continuing to detain a person with the above symptoms in Lhasa's high-altitude low-oxygen environment, the detention and case-making authorities have a clear and continued responsibility for medical protection.

When Zhang Ying is forced into custody by the state, he loses his own choice of medical treatment, free access to drugs and the ability to leave the highland environment. The resulting medical control is in the hands of the detention authorities, and the corresponding responsibility must also be borne by the detention authorities. If there is a delayed inspection, insufficient supply of drugs, refusal of necessary treatment or refusal to evaluate the change of compulsory measures in accordance with the law when the physical condition is inappropriate for detention, the relevant management and case personnel should be held accountable according to their specific actions.

Therefore, whether to accept the formal medical examination, whether the blood pressure is continuously monitored, why the drug has occurred a dispute, whether the medical records are provided to lawyers and family members in accordance with the law, are not small things that the detention can be closed with "internal management", but important evidence to judge whether the detention agency further violates its health rights.

“The system of power that really should be carved into the file of responsibility is the system of power that makes ideas and photographs into national security cases.”

The most revealing part of Zhang's case is that it demonstrates how a set of political security machines process a daily expression of behavior to endanger national security cases: the absolute priority of "stability above everything" is made in politics, the public security system identifies risks from a political security perspective, and the specific case organ converts this political judgment into a criminal offence, and the prosecutor's link decides whether such compulsory measures can continue.

If the ultimate evidence proves that the core of the case is really only a photograph of the Dalai Lama, then the photograph itself does not pose a national danger; the real danger is a system of power that regards citizen ideas, religious symbols and peaceful expression as hostile acts and can use criminal detention, arrest and long-term detention to punish.

The names of Wang Jing, Shao Feng, Zhu Shikeko, and Basandogi should therefore be recorded together with the chain of responsibility for the Zhang Yi case. They respectively hold the leadership of the party committee of the autonomous region, the political leadership of the municipal committee of the autonomous region, the supervision of the leadership of the public security and political law of the autonomous region and the leadership of the specific organs of the public security in Lhasa.

In the case of the Chinese prosecution archives, the recording of the case is not to leave a few question marks, but to leave evidence of responsibility that can correspond to institutions, positions, documents, command systems and specific coercive measures: who is in power, who is deployed, who is executing, who is approving, who is overseeing the departure, who is responsible for his own actions and consequences in this power chain.