simplified Chinese Traditional Chinese About HRIC Jobs and Internships Contact Us Search
Go
Home
What You Can Do
What We Do
Active Issues
Beijing Olympics 2008 | Take Action!
Ethical Globalization
Technology And Human Rights
Legal Reform
Human Rights Defenders
Media Work
Press Releases And Statements
HRIC In The Media
June 4th Crackdown
HRIC June 4th Podcast Series
64 Memo Virtual Archive
Support the Tianamen Mothers
Multimedia Resources
Publications
China Rights Forum
Ren Yu Renquan
Huaxia Dianzi Bao
HRIC Reports and Papers
Publication List
HRIC Resources
Daily News Brief
Monthly Brief
Action Bulletin
Trends Bulletin
HRIC Submissions
IR2008: HRIC's Olympic Campaign
Case Highlight: Shi Tao and Yahoo
 
 
Media Work / Press Releases and Statements / Mao Hengfeng held in abusive conditions, appeal denied April 16, 2007
Print What You Can Do
 
     
Mao Hengfeng held in abusive conditions, appeal denied

April 16, 2007

Human Rights in China (HRIC) has learned that Shanghai petitioner Mao Hengfeng was denied her appeal for the two-and-a-half year sentence for "intentionally destroying property," following a ten-minute session at which only her judgment was read. Neither Mao nor her lawyer were permitted to present any argument or evidence.

The Shanghai Municipal No. 2 Intermediate People's Court opened a session on April 16 during which the judge read the judgment to affirm the original sentence against Mao Hengfeng. After this, the session ended, and when Mao protested the result, she was forcibly removed.

Mao, 46, who has petitioned the authorities since 1989 on family planning and other issues, has repeatedly been harassed and abused for her activities, including being detained, forcibly admitted for psychiatric treatment and sentenced to Reeducation Through Labor (RTL). Mao's most recent detention occurred several days before the 2006 anniversary of the June 4 crackdown, where she was detained by Shanghai's Yangpu Public Security Bureau in a guesthouse. During her detention, Mao broke two table lamps in the guesthouse room, and as a result was formally arrested on June 30, 2006, on charges of "intentionally destroying property." Mao was sentenced to two-and-a-half years by Shanghai Yangpu District Court on January 12, 2007. The judgment was based on evidence that the lamps were worth over six thousand yuan despite the fact that guesthouse rules require only 50 yuan in compensation per broken table lamp.

During her appeal, Mao Hengfeng's husband, Wu Xuwei, and her lawyer presented new evidence with regard to the value of the lamps to demonstrate the disproportionate nature of her sentence. Further, her lawyer argued that her first sentence was unjust because Mao's case was not open to the public. Only her family was able to attend her hearing, and her lawyer, Li Boguang, was prevented from entering the room. However, Mao's appeal hearing provided no opportunity to present these issues, and her sentence was affirmed without their consideration.

In addition, according to Mao Hengfeng's family, before her trial in January, Mao was held in a very small cell where urine and excrement covered the floor. Guards covered the only window in the cell, and Mao was unable to sleep due to the smell. Since her trial, the condition in which Mao is being held is unclear.

HRIC condemns this new development in Mao's case and the abusive conditions in which she is being held. Mao Hengfeng has the fundamental right to petition the authorities, but has been consistently harassed and abused by local authorities, most recently by placing her in substandard detention conditions. HRIC urges the international community, including governments and relevant UN bodies, to raise her case with the Chinese authorities and ensure that detention conditions comply with international standards. The handling of Mao's case by local public security and judicial authorities raises serious concerns of retaliation against individuals invoking their constitutionally-protected right to petition the authorities. HRIC calls for a full, fair and transparent review of Mao's case.







     
 
 

Back | Top

 
 
Copyright | Privacy