Today, I received Lin Hongnan lawyer mail, learn from the message, the Fuzhou Municipal Bureau of justice has to stop practicing lawyer Lin Hongnan officially made administrative punishment for a year. The book read the punishment decision, I on activist lawyers felt sad fate! Here, I just want to say one word to Fujian, you are really crazy!

 In view of this, Fujian three netizen's decision also soon, the results is not optimistic. Here, I would like to call attention to the lawyer industry colleagues, lawyer Lin Hongnan was an administrative penalty case, hope is the media coverage of this punishment.

Administrative reconsideration

Applicant: Lin Hongnan, Fujian Wei lawyer,

Tel: 139502805028711141987114671

The respondent: Fuzhou City Bureau of justice,

Legal representative: Ye Lunteng,

Quanta road Fuzhou city Taijiang District No. 51

The applicant refuses to accept the penalty decision for our word [fig 2009] No. 4 "Fuzhou City Bureau of justice of administrative punishment decision book" decision, especially to your office to apply for reconsideration. The request shall revoke its decision according to the facts.

The facts and reasons:

One, to have ulterior motives., suspected retaliation against

The applicant is in accordance with the law on the death of Yan Xiaoling in Fujian caused by netizens, catch petitioners case involved Wu Huaying perform the duty of a lawyer, appeared eight years ago (a victory in the Anti Japanese war or the two victory of the liberation war) an investigation department into the volume "meeting minutes", is wrong in the punishment. This punishment speculation as early as five years ago, and has been solved.

No wonder Fuqing Discipline Inspection Commission explosion wouldn't cause of Wu Huaying said: the catch her revenge. Fuqing Discipline Inspection Commission bombing is a serious criminal cases to public hearing, without any impact on national security, national unity, foreign relations. The case file material is not confidential state secrets law significance. China has not yet been restrictions on lawyers to file material disposition prohibition. "Meeting minutes" can come into contact with the personnel involved in the public prosecution, law, lawyer. There is no facts and evidence confirmed that this document is the rumor.

The matter, the applicant reiterated in the eighth session of the Fujian provincial CPPCC Standing Committee, this meeting minutes reflect individual cadres ignore central give repeated orders and injunctions, typical in speech generation method, illegal intervention in judicial work. In 2005 May, "Youth Daily" Chinese female reporter the interview, the applicant also let her read the file. The applicant in the respondent to the survey process, emphasize if suspect families reflect to the central Fuqing bombing, the applicant will give, but never said this file is that the applicant to. The copy from here out materials are: "signed copy from the Fuqing City Public Security Bureau Investigation volume, in line with the original", and affix the seal Fujian Wei law firm. A copy of the applicant's current charges, no sign, no seal, is also different with the original from the Fuzhou City Intermediate People's court investigation volume copy. In addition, no other evidence to prove.    

The "meeting minutes" leaked in 2001 December with the volume to the conclusion of the investigation, in 2002 July transferred to the Fuzhou City Intermediate People's court prosecution, legal marking, copy. 2004 (04.11.24), 2005 (05.5.31), 2006 (06.4.20) years have found, why are not relevant personnel shall be disposed of. Why drag to the end of the month, 6 at the beginning of 2009 7 to catch users, to visit the people's case, to use "high-voltage lines" (state secrets highly mystical color) to punish lawyers. No matter from which a time period, have been more than two years of aging of administrative penalty.

  Two, guarantee [Fig2006]2"A number of Fuqing Municipal Committee of political science and law [filed2001]27The minutes of the meetings of the security authentication, the reply ("2006.4.20) is not a substitute for Fujian Province, the State Secrecy Bureau "level identification book", forced substitution is wrong

According to "the people's Republic of China Law on Guarding State secrets" and "the people's Republic of China Law on Guarding State secrets" measures for the implementation of the State Secrecy Bureau Guo Baofa [1998] and 8 "leaking state secrets cases security classification appraisal regulations" second, three, the provisions of Article Eight or nine, Fuzhou City, the State Secrecy Bureau"Reply" to review the main error. The review is the subject of Fujian Provincial Security Bureau and the State Secrecy Bureau.

Secondly, "reply" normative documents cited provisions "secret state politics and Law Committee work and scopes of the specific scope (" politics and law [1992] 10 article) is wrong. And in this case the actual lack of correlation. "Meeting minutes" after examination, investigation, control on both sides of the arrest of Xie Qing ("decision" paper, Xie Qing mistakes should be corrected, the objection, as) to show responsibility, police will "meeting minutes" binding in the detection volume, the two level of the procuratorial organs prosecution, prosecution, transferred to the court, the legal papers, copy, the court publicity, quality certificate file materials -- "meeting minutes", should not be state secrets. The "meeting minutes" binding in the Fuqing City Public Security Bureau Investigation volume (p 00000139-140). As the six suspect's lawyer, when ten, in the Fuzhou City Intermediate People's court papers were seen, and copy. Therefore,In this case the applicable specification file should be the "people's court secret work state and scopes of the provisions on the specific scope of" (1989.10.24)The "Regulations"; and no will file material as state secrets, the applicant in accordance with the law in court papers copy files materials is not a state secret.

Before the hearing, the applicant submitted by the applicant commissioned by the Fujian Provincial Security Bureau on "meeting minutes" make a secret, decryption confirmation. Unfortunately, so far the respondent did not according to the law to have determined the request Authority security classification appraisal rights, "meeting minutes" to make "security identification book" (whether the state secrets? What secret? Whether it has been declassified deadline?). Moreover, the applicant in accordance with the provisions of "the appraisal conclusion is controversial, can be brought to the identification of a secret guarding department,Conclusion the State Secrecy Bureau and ruled as the final conclusion".

Third, the hearing procedure law. Hearing against "the judicial administrative organ the hearing procedures of the administrative penalties" in the procedure, investigation of the case were not related to the audit evidence and punishment proposal to the publicity will be in the pre existence of surprise attack, too (a copy of the bill of prosecution of public prosecution shall be distributed at least ten days ago on the defendant). Identification of people in Fuzhou City, the State Secrecy Bureau did not attend, Chen Kebin, Wu Huaying, Chen Wei and other witnesses absent, deprived of applicant's identification, witness testimony right. Lawyers asked the audience to be shut sb., without prior informed the applicant is not a public hearing reason. The hearing, punishment is in accordance with the red head file commands, without hearing the first penalty, due to the legal procedure, as a mere formality. At the same time, also in violation of the "judicial administrative hearing procedure of administrative punishment regulations" article twenty-second "judicial administrative organ shall, within fifteen days after the hearing, notify the parties in writing of the punishment decision results."Regulations," decision "not to the applicant within 15 days after the hearing.

Three, the weight of evidence, investigation and study, do not believe the statement

In November 24, 2004, Fuzhou city police detachment fault on 2001 "6 · 24" the Fuqing Commission for Discipline Inspection of bombing three lawyers Yang Zhimin, Lin Hongnan, Ma Yiliang (the applicant) for criminal summons, referred to the "outside" of the meeting minutes. The applicant immediately informed of this material is in the Fuqing public security bureau investigation volumes, as evidence of publicity material, and in court testimony. The applicant that: I am responsible for, don't toss. At the time of interrogation personnel do not believe that, after second days to applicants copy go. A survey has been clarified. In the past five years. The applicant said: "it's not what i". The respondent said: "looks like you."

"Decision" the emphasis on "without court approval" marking and copying, is completely wrong. Fuqing Discipline Inspection Commission bombings, is still a second, is not yet closed archive cases, lawyers in accordance with the law, without the approval of copy papers. At the hearing, the applicant is pointed out: case investigation provides a higher people's Court of Fujian province relevant file archive management file, copy to be approved by the court stressed the director of general office is completely wrong. Suggestions on the people should do one or two criminal cases to lawyers, also can know this is common sense of handling.

Never thought about for nearly five years, publication, examination of the file material "meeting minutes" and the storm. The applicant as Wu Huaying's lawyer, where individual leaders and the public, examination of the documents for speculation, even no facts, no evidence, with red head file mandatory judicial organs around the Fuzhou City Bar Association, given administrative punishment to the applicant, a serious violation of the Central Party committee of political science and law about, coordination, supervision and guidance inspection, examination, public, our method, work, does not allow arranged, substitution, law enforcement, judicial organs in accordance with the relevant provisions of the interference independent.

The first National Lawyer Yu Ping divulges State secrets case, although the second confirmed classified materials, but these materials does not belong to important state secrets, not national security law on the meaning of the state secrets. Yu Ping lawyers also is not the file copy materials by illegal means, and not out of bad motives, so the identification error, the applicable law or rescind the original judgment, commuted innocence to Ping, worth learning.

The central give repeated orders and injunctions "to let people talk, heaven won't fall", "encourage and protect the members to speak the truth, speak from the heart", "strengthen the anti-corruption network public sentiment information", "expand the people participating in the anti-corruption network report channel", "party and government leaders at all levels, regardless of rank, authority, shall be in speech generation method, the personal opinion as the law, forcing others to perform" , "party and judicial organs have the task, cannot replace each other, cannot be confused with each other","......There are a few cadres, especially some leading cadres, and their relatives, there is a privilege thought, like make specialization, even no party discipline and state laws, the use of terms, engage in malpractices for selfish ends, the suppression of democracy, take revenge, the old feudal bureaucratic style of official corruption and bad habits into the party and state organs, seriously the erosion of the body of the party, damage the relations between the party and the masses, damage the dignity of the socialist legal system in our country","......This is a direct question to the party and the state "reputation; if not implemented," our party will lose the trust of the people."

To sum up, please the expensive department in accordance with the law according to the facts, not bow to any pressure, take the repeal of Ficus penalty will our word [2009] No. 4 "the written decision on the administrative penalty decision".      Yours sincerely

Fujian Provincial Department of Justice                 

                                 Applicant: Lin Hongnan

Attached: the evidence materials four                Two 00 nine years in December 24th

Attached:Fujian netizen frame case to trial, lawyers receive business...

Fujian netizen frame case before a trial, defense lawyer faces suspension...

Fuzhou City Bureau of justice hearing Lin Hongnan lawyer punishment