In June 16th, Li Qinghong case six foreign lawyers before the courts to Guiyang Xiaohe Li trial problems made a summary, as a summary, generally involves ten aspects of the problem, and make a brief report to the relevant departments. The original report (part of the contents of a certain modification), to be published. The new situation after reporting to the relevant departments to appear, we will further report it.

Serious anti law Guiyang Xiaohe court in "Li Qinghong's case" inThe program

The parties legitimate rights infringement defense

Reflected

 

Respect of leadership:

On the river court in Li Qinghong, Guiyang57Defendants charged with organizing, leading, participating in the underworld nature organization crime case (hereinafter referred to as the "Li Qinghong case") in multiple violations of legal procedures, serious violations of the legitimate rights of the parties and counsel, to reflect as follows, please handle.

A final, illegal jurisdiction to become "a trial", the defendant has no justice without access to a higher court judicial relief.

"Li Qinghong case" defendant Li Qinghong etc.17People charged with organizing, leading, participating in the underworld nature organization crime case, once Guiyang City Intermediate People's Court of first instance, the Guizhou Provincial Higher People's Court of second instance cassation remand. After the withdrawal of Guiyang City People's Procuratorate, the case was returned to the Guiyang City Public Security Bureau for supplementary investigation, and then to the prosecution.

After review, the criminal suspect from the original17Increased to67People, the total charges from8Increased to27A case, criminal suspects in the crime was less, less to Guiyang City Intermediate People's Court of Guiyang City procuratorate, but the case is specified by Guiyang Xiaohe District People's Procuratorate to the river district court litigation prosecution, and by Guiyang City procuratorate prosecutors to send River District procuratorate assistant procurators identity to support the prosecution.

In case the defendant in the river area is no crime, no living River, the river court no jurisdiction over the case, after accepting the case, then the Guiyang City Intermediate People's Court of law for designation of jurisdiction, jurisdiction of "Li Qing Hong case" forced. This makes Li Qinghong have been Guiyang City Intermediate People's court sentenced, but by the superior court remanded defendants retrial, finally the Guiyang City Intermediate People's court to exercise the power of final adjudication, so this case become essentially a trial. The defendant encounter unfair trial will be unable to obtain the superior court justice relief.

Two, the illegal expulsion of defenders, violation of the defendant's right to defense.

"Li Qinghong case" in2012Years1Month9To14In the court, the court on the defendant, counsel, avoidance, jurisdiction of illegal evidence exclusion issues caused by improper disposal, lawyers objection. The court ignored the defender as citizens criticized, on state and national staff suggestion right, regardless of the defendant's right to defense, illegal will expel more than the defense of the accused people out of the court, and in the defense of the accused were deported or remove entrust, no one to defend the case, continue to court, serious violation of the defendant's right to defense.

Three, stress the many defendants "not" lawyers entrusted to relatives, illegal defendant designated aid lawyer.

The court of "Li Qinghong case" in the trial of1Month14Days after the adjournment, the relevant personnel to the court, the detention center"To do the work"The defendant "instead of" the original commissioned by their own relatives and lawyers. The defendant was held in a detention center, and the outside world, families can not communicate, information blocking, grasp the jurisdiction of the court"To do the work", is tantamount to stress on the defendant. Results, for violations of the law court battle over fierce defense of the accused person, in1Month14Days after the adjournment, "the defendant was in custody, but not" by the court to appoint lawyers aid. Including the recess accept defendant family lawyer, the defendant relatives for his entrusted a defender, a total of20Lawyer was "not".

Legal circumstances of this case the defendant does not belong to the legal aid, but in the "no" lawyer accused the defendant of relatives to entrust, the court has appointed lawyers to the accused of illegal, illegal implementation of "legal aid"; even the original no defender court does not want to implement "the defendant legal aid", but also "inclusive" illegal "to implement legal aid", the defendant's seat was "accounted for pit", avoid the defendant relatives and lawyers involved in defense.

The River Court stress the defendant "not" lawyer accused family commissioned, not in the business of defendant relatives consent, the defendant illegal and legal aid, destroyed the defendants and their families to the court and appointed counsel should trust relation, make the public lose to should expect justice. Not only is an outrage against the right to a lawyer, is a serious infringement to obtain effective defense for the accused of the procedural rights, and will damage the justice of entity.

Four, do not give counsel necessary to defend the time and defense, damage to the defendant's right to defense.

According to the judicial interpretations of the Supreme Court, the defendant in court refused to defend defended, request the court to entrust defenders, should be allowed, and announced the postponement of the hearing; if the defendant requests entrust another defender, the collegial panel shall announce the postponement of the hearing, the defendant also entrust his or the people's court for further the appointed defense lawyer. The defendant to request the people's court shall appoint lawyers, the collegial panel agreed, shall announce the postponement of the hearing. Entrust, specify the counsel or attorney, the court should grant10Day time to prepare his defense.

However, "Li Qinghong case" in1Month9Days of the trial, the defendant Cai Feng's lawyer Yang Mingkua lawyer, lawyer He Xianwu was ousted by the court and termination of authorization, entrust Beijing lawyer Wang Shihua defense, the court has not deferred trial, not necessary to defend the time. The court in "work" to "no" the defendant lawyer entrusted to relatives, otherwise the defendant lawyer is appointed, and have not given to defend the time trial, to three days before the appointed defense lawyers receive notice, no time at all familiar with the case, for the case of more than two hundred copies are not copied the files, even more than 50000 words are not enough time to look at the indictment, they rush to the accused.

In the6Month8Recovered after the trial, the defendant "not specified" original defender after aid lawyer, and not the original defenders by court in during the recession to the designated aid lawyer, the court should be the defendant Li Qinghong back to court, accept questions these lawyers, to verify the facts of the case and the parties. The court will not ask Li Qinghong to accept the "new" defender. These designated by the court to the defendant's right to defense the new defenders, apparently did not receive due protection.

Five, do not according to the law, served notice to the defendant in court, to advocate to do to prepare, violation of the defendant's right to defense.

According to the provisions of the criminal procedure law, the people's court notice defender session later in three days before the hearing to counsel served notice of court session. In other words, the people's court shall notify the defender session, should be able to more early notification to the early notification, not later than three days before the hearing served notice of court session.

However, identified in the6Month8The court hearing, until6Month4Days before the court session, called for in this case57The defendants defendants before three6A defender. The defense lawyer challenged, this can come to counsel by mail the court notice, in order to avoid not in late three has served to notice this legal Yingshang, have to overnight "flight service". Results the huge waste of taxpayer's money, "flight service", can only be in the6Month4Day night to6Month5The notice of court session has served6A foreign lawyer, but failed to avoid delivery of illegal "yingshang".

Provisions regarding notification Lawyers Law of criminal procedure, is required as early as possible to inform, to inform without notice, leading lawyers cannot coordinate fixed working arrangement, can not appear in court, it also belongs to the substantive law.

Because the river court not as early as possible to inform the defender sessional time, also does not have the latest three days before the hearing of the hearing notice on defense, in this case57The defendants defendants before three6A defender, have3Lawyers cannot coordinate established working arrangements, fails to appear in court for the defense of the accused, leading to the defendant's right to defense is unnecessary infringement.

Six, in violation of the principle of open trial, against the defendant the right to a public trial and the public on the court's right to know.

Public trial is not only the protection of human rights standards, clearly defined and the law in our country. The open trial, is to allow free public hearing, allowing free media. The court judgment on "Li Qinghong case", legal principle completely against the public trial.

In the1Month9To14During the trial, the court hearing, take out beside the way, limiting the public gallery, in the existence of a large number of the vacancy situation, do not allow the public to hold ID enter the courtroom. Even hold auditing certificate will be their audit certificate for others to attend, also not allowed.6Month8Day in court, the court of public access limits more extreme, in addition to the court notice for auditing certificate defendant relatives and relevant public officer, any citizen can not enter the courtroom, although there are a large number of vacancies in the galleries. The court within the media seats, linked to the people's daily, Xinhua news agency, CCTV, Legal Daily, the people's court newspaper, golden Guizhou online media such as tablets, but in the days of the trial, but can not see the media reporter; a professor at the Guizhou University made a special trip to attend court request was rejected, published an article criticising the court limited audit issues, has been leading questioning "work".

Seven, with the underworld qualitative case have a significant impact on the "umbrella", accused of harboring the crime of the underworld organization of the defendant, the original Guiyang Municipal Public Security Bureau of Criminal Investigation Detachment vice captains Pan Lixin is accused of non classified cases, engage in a secret trial, even accused of organization, leadership, to participate in organized crimes of the underworld society the co defendant's counsel, are prohibited from participating in the trial, not only against the public's right to know, but also against the defendant's right to defense.

In this case the defendant Pan Lixin, the former Department of Guiyang City Public Security Bureau Criminal Investigation Detachment vice captains, was identified as the underworld property organization"Umbrella", was accused of harboring the underworld property organization, deliberately leaking state secrets, three counts of bribery. The court in the complex court on the morning of seventh, state secrets to Pan Lixin crime involving alone is not a public hearing, pan, requirements in addition to Pan's lawyer's co defendant's lawyer shall not present, then not pan Lixin to court for other defenders on crime problems relating to the defendant's pan the court asked. This is the river court for our legal system of public trial is extremely serious damage. The criminal procedure law is not a public hearing, refers to the public not to open, but not for in defense of the accused person is not open.

In particular, this case the defendant Li Qinghong had accused Pan Lixin of "black" the blackmail blackmail attempt; the "black", be hit into "black boss". Was identified as "umbrella" of Pan Lixin, is in the protection of Li Qinghong, or in the framed Li Qinghong et al, the alleged cover up the crime of the underworld organization can be established, the defendant Li Qinghong was accused of organizing, leading, in the crime syndicate important content to defend. Pan Lixin should be acceptable to the other and the defendants' human inquiry, to find out the facts. Limit co defendant's counsel to participate in Pan Lixin trial, is to limit the right to defense of the accused. Moreover, Pan Lixin was accused of deliberately leaking state secrets in other than the two crime does not involve state secrets.

The court of criminal Pan Lixin is accused of is not a public hearing, what is in disguise?

Eight, indulge the defendant does not answer questions with other defenders, investigating the facts of the case, damage to the other defendant's right to defense.

6Month8DayThe first seven court, judge repeatedly in the defendant replied prosecutors and defenders of their own after questioning, the defendant has the man refused to answer questions from other defenders strongly suspected cases, indulge the defendant refused to answer questions on other defenders, the defendant claimed that "if the answer is you" right, "said the defendant the right of silence". This makes the co accused the defender on the other defendants and their related parties "crimes", it is difficult to verify.

The river court judge on the defendant refused to answer the questions of the processing, is a serious mistake. First of all, our law does not stipulate that the defendant"The right of silence"The presiding judge, shall inform the defendant shall truthfully answer the trial in court to ask questions rather than"Whether the answer is right for you"Secondly, the presiding judge; even if it first in Guiyang River Court as defendant in criminal cases China implementation"The right of silence"After, should also be in an accused person was brought to court, we must first inform to the defendant"If the answer is right for you"Instead, after prosecutors and defenders of their finished, then have the right to inform the other defenders refused to answer questions. This mistake Creek court, preventing other defendants defendants exercise defense rights, and fundamentally undermine other defendants are entitled to effective defense right.

Nine, do not allow the defender to the defendant supplementary questions, prevent ascertain the facts.

According to the judicial interpretations of the Supreme Court, the presiding judge for both sides, ask the defendant, questioning the victim and the plaintiff of the supplementary civil action, the defendant's content is irrelevant to the case or questioning, questioning the way improper, shall stop. In other words, the questioning, questioning the content related to the case, questioning, questioning is not inappropriate, the presiding judge shall not stop.

6Month8DayStart of the trial, the trial to improve the efficiency of the trial is a long, to the defendant, supplementary interrogation asked prosecutors and defenders are not allowed. This is totally wrong. The court investigation aims to find out the facts of the case, and the added interrogation, asking questions is to identify the facts of the case. The court not only efficiency at the expense of the truth. For efficiency, the presiding judge can avoid repeated questioning, but the new addition to the do not belong to repeat ask questions, there is no reason not to allow the court. The court did not allow supplementary questions, substantially hinder clarifying the facts of cases, damage to the defendant's right to defense, and defense lawyers' rights according to law.

Ten, illegal monitoring defender.

In the6Month13Days of the trial, the bailiff without trial long instruction situation, who are searching for defense lawyer, seats, and the seizure of defense attorney Si Weijiang work items.

Defense lawyers carry what items appear, depending on their needs, as long as not prohibited items, all of the work required, the lawyer has the right to the court. Si Weijiang lawyers into the small bell and a court, obviously belong to the own work items, no, but also may not have any effect on the order of the court.

During the trial, the bailiff without trial long instruction to search the defense attorney Si Weijiang work items, someone was apparently illegal monitoring on the defense table lawyer, and thinks the lawyer brought items have the problem, ignoring the presiding judge the existence of illegal command, bailiff take raids on lawyers. This not only seriously disrupting the order of the court, but also to the lawyer added a huge psychological pressure, direct against the counsel for the defence of normal perform defense duties.

The river court above all sorts of serious violations of laws and regulations, and gross violations of the lawyer rights, serious damage to the accused the right behavior, as in the case of the defense lawyer, we has the responsibility and obligation to point out, and the relevant departments to reflect, hope relevant departments timely urged small river court correct illegal behavior, protect the lawyers' rights, guarantee the defendant's legal rights, to maintain a good image of our judicial.

 

Yours sincerely

The case of Li Qinghong lawyer:

 2012 Years6Month16Day