translation by SMHRIC
|April 20, 2008
[Click here for the Chinese version of the
Regarding the crime of splitting the country:
the country refers to the act of an organization to plot and
implement splittism and sabotage to a country. However, I am
an ordinary intellectual and a manager of a private
bookstore who did not commit any concrete actions fitting
the conditions of the crime of splitting the country.
referendum I referred to was not intended for the current
social condition. It referred to a referendum that will take
place in a future democratic China. Referendum is a common
practice of the modern world to address nationality
questions. For example, secession of Quebec in Canada and
reunification of West and East Germany were addressed
through a referendum. No country in the world sees the call
for a referendum as a crime.
Southern Mongolian Democratic Alliance is a social entity,
not an anti-revolutionary clique. Freedom of association is
a legal right of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution.
Therefore, it should be protected by the Constitution.
no term called the “crime of anti-revolutionary and crime of
splitting the country” in China’s existing or previous
Criminal Acts. We must ask who invented this crime? This
itself is an illegal act.
constitute the “Crime of Splitting the Country”, first of
all, there must be an act of armed insurrection which I have
never carried out. Therefore, the objective condition of the
Crime of Splitting the Country is apparently not satisfied.
By no mean does it constitute a crime.
any country in the world that has a sense of justice would
not consider me a criminal. Only the Chinese Government sees
me as a criminal, sentenced me to a long jail term. I have
been framed and all my appeals have been ignored.
of Taiwan should be considered as a criminal then. But he
has not been punished but been seen as the guest of honor by
though the “Ethnic Minority Region’s Autonomy Law” has been
issued, the government leaders of China and the Inner
Mongolia Autonomous Region, especially the ethnic Han
leaders, have never taken it seriously as a law. Therefore,
our rights have frequently been violated. Mongols are afraid
to express their thoughts.
of autonomy issue, modern international laws clearly state
to uphold “ethnic self-determination”. I believe the Mongols
as an ethnic group should also have the right to
self-determination. However, I did not say to implement it
today, but in the future. Therefore, I have not violated any
the issues of training courses and publication, it was sound
in nature and small in scale. In fact, I and Tegexi (who was
sentenced to 10 years in jail at the same time --- note by
SMHRIC) had never participated in these activities. Heilong,
Changming and Chen-haishan had directly participated in, but
were released, which proves that this is not an illegal act.
Therefore, the allegation against me is also groundless.
Regarding the Crime of Engaging in Espionage:
never passed on any classified document to any foreigner.
never received a dollar from any foreigner. Indeed, I had
some dollars, but that was earned from my bookstore
business. During the interrogation, I was forced to admit
that I did so. Otherwise, they would not stop the torture.
Now, I am telling you the truth. If you do not believe,
please show me the evidence.
why I was so interested in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous
Region Party Committee issued Document No.13 1994 was to
uncover the inconsistency between the Communist Party ethnic
policy doctrine and its actual implementation. This document
helped me understand that it has been playing the leading
role of policy and everything else is just an empty promise.
No.13 was not classified at all. It was widely disseminated
among the faculties and students of the Inner Mongolia
Normal School. Most of the students are, like myself,
non-Party members. On the other hand, there were many
hand-written variations and what I saw was also a
Constitution of China clearly states that no one shall
exercise ethnic discrimination and ethnic repression.
However, the Party Committee of Inner Mongolia Autonomous
Region has cooked up a document that is full of ethnic
repression contents. It is intolerable that those who made
it up have never been prosecuted but have been given the
right to abuse the power to frame others like myself.
Regarding the court decision:
decision says that the prosecution’s evidence was ALMOST
sufficient. Can this satisfy the conditions for any of the
four types of punishment – detention, placing under
surveillance, setting a term of imprisonment and life
imprisonment? Or does this satisfy all of these four? Why
does this happen? This is definitely not unintentional. The
reason is very simple: I am not guilty! Therefore, I
strongly urge the Supreme Court to re-try my case and my
innocence will be proved.
believe the responsible parties including the Public
Security Bureau, Procuratorate, and the Court must be
brought to justice if my case is fully redressed. Those
political leaders who orchestrated my arrest must also be
held responsible. Meantime, cases of all those arrested
should be redressed and the victims should be compensated.
My bookstore should also be compensated accordingly.
As far as
the prison authorities are concerned, they have constantly
employed cruel torture, brutal corporal punishment, and
ill-treatment during these 11 years, causing me irreparable
consequences. They asked inmates to beat me, confiscated my
large amount of belongings and properties, and destroyed
their large amount of criminal evidence. All these criminal
activities must be thoroughly investigated by the Supreme
People’s Court. I will provide evidence and oral accounts.
law enforcement personnel have violated these laws and
Constitution and Criminal Law; b) Criminal Investigation Law; c)
Police Law; d) Compensation Law; e) Procuratorate Organizational
Law; f) Judge Law; g) Procuratorator Law; h) Court
Organizational Law; i) Prison Law; j) Anti-stimulant Act.
Chinese Government has violated international conventions
including laws and regulations against torture and
cruelty….. ( here, our phone
conversation is disconnected.
NOTE: This appeal letter is based
solely on Hada’s dictation, and was not able to be checked
against the original written version that was confiscated by the
prison authorities. Therefore, this is a paraphrase of the
visited Hada on March 18, 2008 --- note by SMHRIC )