2009年10月12日 October 12, 2009
六四學運領袖周勇軍2008年9月底試圖進入香港，結果在未經任何法律手續的情況下被香港有關當局押到中國。他在美國的女友張月衛及周勇軍女兒委託的美國律師李進進將聯同香港何俊仁律師，於今天(2009年10月12日星期一)舉行了記者招待會，要求特首曾蔭權介入，撤查香港警方非法把周勇軍交給大陸公安的事件。
從2008年9月30日起，周勇軍就被秘密關押達七個月之久。周勇軍的家人直到2009年5月8日才接到中國四川遂寧市公安局正式逮捕周勇軍的通知，罪名是“詐騙”香港恒生銀行。2009年8月初，四川省射洪縣檢察院以此罪名起訴周勇軍。案件正在射洪縣法院等待開庭審理。這是周勇軍在1989年逮捕後第三次被逮捕。
周勇軍的女友張月衛及律師李進進在記者會中發佈一份寄給聯合國反對任意覊押工作組《有關中國當局任意關押周勇軍的報告》，以及分別致信給特首曾蔭權及中國最高人民檢察院檢察長對周勇軍被不當關押及起訴表達不滿；何俊仁律師則受周勇軍委託的北京莫少平律師及陳澤睿律師所託要求香港警方調取當時在港調查周勇軍的紀錄及釋放証明文件。
June 4 student leader Zhou Yongjun tried to enter Hong Kong in late September 2008, but he was taken by Hong Kong police to the mainland authorities without any legal procedures. Zhang Yuewei, Zhou's girlfriend in the United States, and Lawyer Jim Li Jinjin together with Hong Kong solicitor Albert Ho Chun-yan to hold a press conference today (Monday, 12 October 2009) to demand Chief Executive Donald Tsang to investigate the incident about Hong Kong police illegally transferred Zhou to mainland public security.
Since 30 September 2008, Zhou was secretly detained for seven months. Zhou's family members only received the notification of Zhou's formal arrest from the Suiling City Public Security Bureau in Sichuan on 8 May 2009. Zhou was accused of "defrauding" Hang Seng Bank in Hong Kong. In early August 2009, the Shehong County Procuratorate in Sichuan Province charged Zhou with this offence. Zhou's case is now waiting for the Shehong County Court's hearing. This is the third time Zhou was arrested after the democratic movement in 1989.
Zhou's US girlfriend Zhang Yuewei and US lawyer Jim Li Jinjin will release a report about the arbitrary detention of Zhou Yongjun by the Chinese authorities which has recently been submitted to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. They will also release two letters which they submit to Hong Kong Chief Executive Donald Tsang and the Procurator-General of the Supreme People's Procuratorate to express their discontent with the improper detention of and prosecution against Zhou. Hong Kong solicitor Albert Ho Chun-yan will demand the Hong Kong police to release the record about the police investigation of Zhou and the document which proved Zhou's release by the Hong Kong police.
致香港行政长官曾荫权的公开信
中华人民共和国香港特别行政区
行政长官曾荫权先生
关于周勇军被香港非法押送至中国大陆一案
尊敬的行政长官曾荫权先生：
我代表周勇军的女儿以及其他关心周勇军生命安全和人身自由的人们给您写这封信并附上我们寄给日内瓦的联合国（反对）任意羁押工作组《关于有关中国当局任意关押周勇军的报告》。从这份报告中您可以看到， 您以及您领导下的香港政府是指控的对象因为你们将周勇军在未经任何法律程序情况下押送给中国大陆警方。 周勇军在中国大陆被秘密关押达七个月之久，现在四川省的射洪县人民检察院以诈骗香港恒生银行的罪名起诉他。案子正在等待审理。
周勇军是1989年民主运动的学生领袖。在1989年被关押后于1992年逃到香港。当时他已经是一个无国籍的人。当年的香港政府帮助周勇军获得了自由并使他成为美国的难民。 1998年他也是通过香港到达中国，但是回国后被当局以“偷渡过境”的罪名被劳动教养三年。2008年9月28日，他再次入境香港的时候，你们却将他送到了中国的深圳，交给了中国的警方。
过去香港的政府在帮助人们获得自由，现在你们却去帮助一个专制的政府打压争取自由的人们。前后17年，变化两重天。我们认为，你们的行为违反了香港基本法，因为你们主动放弃了“高度自治”的行政权和司法权。你们也违背了香港政府负有的保障人权的国际法责任，其中包括来自《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》。你们的行政行为正在放弃香港原来保有并经中英联合声明和香港基本法予以保证的人权和法治的基本价值。
亡羊补牢，未为迟也。希望香港政府在接到此文件后，调查此案，并敦促中国大陆政府释放周勇军先生。
此致
敬礼
¬¬¬¬s/____________
李进进暨“中国司法观察”和“中国民主后援”
Open Letter to HK leader Donald Tsang
September 18, 2009
His Excellency Donald Tsang
The Chief Executive of the Government
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
Hong Kong
Re. Open Letter to Call for Awareness of the On-Going Forfeiture of Hong Kong’s Administrative and Judicial Independence to Beijing
In Re. Matter of Zhou Yongjun
Dear Mr. Tsang:
We, the undersigned, a group of Chinese and American Human Rights Campaigners, are here to express our deep concern over the fate of Mr. Zhou Yongjun, one of the most prominent student leaders of the 1989 Tian An Men Square prodemocracy Movement.
Mr. Zhou has been held in custody behind bars, virtually incommunicado, by the government of the People’s Republic, mostly because the Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, under your administration, volunteered the service of extradition of Mr. Zhou, a prisoner of conscience, to the Central Government in Beijing, without even summary judicial proceedings. As the whole world watches, the Hong Kong government’s police action assists Beijing’s on-going, and accelerating human rights abuses targeting political dissidents in and out of China, and has set a bad precedent in forfeiture of Hong Kong’s judicial and administrative independence, having seriously compromised the fundamental freedoms of the people of Hong Kong.
In September, 2008, Mr. Zhou entered Hong Kong from Macao. He was intercepted, detained, and held incommunicado by your government. Shortly afterwards, the Government of Hong Kong, under your administration, secretly and promptly turned Mr. Zhou into the hands of Beijing government, knowing the latter is an internationally condemned murderer and persecutor of Tian An Men Square prodemocracy activists. This serious development occurred one year ago and has come to light only recently. Such a violation of all well recognized international protocols may have shocked all hearts of the international human rights community. We, the undersigned resolutely condemn such an outrageous offense and affront to freedom loving people all over the world. In the wake of such a disgraceful betrayal, we the undersigned call for the international community to launch an immediate investigation into this serious development.
We are here to call for awareness; for the international community to pay close attention such an indecent and disgraceful police cooperation between the government of the P.R.C. and the current Government of Hong Kong, the former British Colony, in their dirty trade of extradition of political prisoners demanded by Beijing in return for forfeiture of Hong Kong’s administrative and judicial independence.
We are here to call for the Hong Kong Government’s immediate self-restraint from continuing such ignominious deals with Beijing, and for it to take all necessary steps to remedy the grave consequences of such lapses in procedure. We are here to appeal to people, the voters of Hong Kong, to stand up and speak out, in urging the government of Hong Kong to preserve its administrative and judicial independence.
Respectfully signed by:
____________________________________
Ye Ning, attorney and human rights campaigner
____________________________________
Li Jinjin, attorney and chair of China's Judicial Watch
____________________________________
Zhang Yuewei, family member of Zhou Yongjun
____________________________________
John Kusumi, founder of China Support Network
致最高人民检察院检察长曹建明的公开信
最高人民检察院检察长首席大检察官曹建明先生
北京市东城区北河沿大街147号
邮编100726
北京，中国
关于周勇军在中国被任意关押和不当起诉一案
尊敬的检察长曹建明先生：
我代表周勇军的女儿以及其他关心周勇军生命安全和人身自由的人们给您写这封信并附上我们寄给日内瓦的联合国（反对）任意羁押工作组《关于有关中国当局任意关押周勇军的报告》。从这份报告中您可以看到，因为中国的公安当局违反中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法的有关规定任意关押周勇军长达七个月之久，因为您领导下的四川省射洪县人民检察院在没有管辖权的情况下起诉了周勇军诈骗香港恒生银行，同时因为你们的司法行为侵犯了香港的高度自治的行政权和司法独立权，您的政府是报告中的指控对象。
周勇军是1989年民主运动的学生领袖。在1989年六四屠杀后，他被关押达一年半的时间。他在1991年释放后，当地的公安局拒绝登记他的户口，他已经变成了一个没有身份的“黑户”。周在1992年逃到香港后，他便是一个无国籍的人。周勇军在香港政府的帮助下获得了自由并来到美国成为美国的永久居民。
因为中国政府拒绝发给周勇军护照，1998年他不得不“偷渡”回中国。但是回国后当局以“偷渡国境”的罪名给予周勇军劳动教养三年的处罚。2008年9月28日，他再次入境香港的时候，被香港当局送到了中国的深圳，交给了中国大陆的警方。在他被香港当局押送到中国前，周勇军在美国已经申请了加入美国国籍，其入籍申请等待最后的宣誓程序。
四川省射洪县检察院在2009年8月4日起诉了周勇军，案件正在射洪县人民法院等待开庭审理。射洪县检察院指控周勇军冒名试图要求香港的恒生银行转款。可是因为所指控的犯罪地点和受害人都在香港，而根据中华人民共和国香港特别行政区基本法的有关香港高度自治的规定，中国大陆司法当局没有管辖权。另外，周勇军早在1991年已经变成了黑户，当他离开了中国后他就变成了无国籍的人。同时，中国当局拒绝发给周护照，说明中国中国政府不认为周勇军是中国公民。射洪县现在所依据的户籍登记是周迓舟的名字，其出身和名字都不是周勇军原始的记录。故中国大陆司法当局在此案中也没有属人管辖。
我们认为，作为中国最高人民检察院检察长和中国的首席大检察官，您对于中国的公安当局非法关押周勇军的行为失察；您对于您属下的检察院在没有管辖权的情况下起诉周勇军失察。在今天的中国，在检察机关正面对着艰巨的反腐败和反贪官斗争面前，在其人力和财力有限的情况下，您属下的一个检察院却去花人民的钱起诉一个与本县或本地区没有关系的案件。另外，我们也看不出来这个案件与国家的主权、领土的完整、或人民的安危有什么直接的关联。在一般中外律师或检察官都能看出周勇军“诈骗”案的怪异的情况下，您属下的检察院却一意孤行。 这一现象只能表明，中国的检察院不是在进行依法办事，不是对人民负责，而是在完成一个由别的机构或个人指派的政治任务。这对于一个正在进步并向世人承诺要建设一个文明和法治的中国来说无疑是一种悲哀。
为了中国的法治建设，为了香港人民的高度自治，为了在狱中关押的周勇军的人身自由，我们呼请您彻查此案，撤回起诉，恢复周勇军的自由，并追究违法关押周勇军的责任人。
敬请明鉴。
敬礼
¬¬¬¬s/____________
李进进暨“中国司法观察”和“中国民主后援”
周勇军的起诉书
四 川 省 射 洪 县 人 民 检 察 院
起 诉 书
射检刑诉[2009]097号
被告人周勇军, 曾用名: 周迓舟, 男, 生于1967年9月15日, 身份证号: 11010819670915631X, 汉族, 四川省蓬溪县人, 大学文化, 户籍所在地: 四川省蓬溪县赤诚镇南街39号3单元5号. 2009年4月10日,因涉嫌诈骗罪被深圳市公安局刑事拘留. 同年5月8日,经遂宁市人民检察院批准,被遂宁市公安局执行逮捕.
本案由遂宁市公安局侦查终结,以被告人周勇军涉嫌诈骗罪,于2009年7月7日移送遂宁市检察院审查起诉.该院指定本院审查起诉.本院受理后,依法讯问了被告人, 听取了被告人及其辩护人的意见,审查了全部案件材料.
经依法审查查明:
2008年5月8日, 被告人周勇军冒用WANGXINGXIANG名义向香港恒生银行邮寄信函,要求香港恒生银行将WANGXINGXIANG存款帐户239-082258(0002)内的400万元港币转入澳大利亚汇丰银行031027915031帐户.同月19日，被告人周勇军再次冒用WANGXINGXIANG名义向香港恒生银行邮寄信函，要求香港恒生银行将WANGXINGXIANG存款账户239-082258（0002）内的200万元港币转入花旗银行香港分行897304010账户。同月24日，被告人周勇军见面前两次转款未得逞，遂再次冒用WANGXINGXIANG名义向香港恒生银行邮件信函，要求香港恒生银行将WANGXINGXIANG存款账户239-082258（0002）内的400万元港币转入澳大利亚汇丰银行031027915031账户、将200万元港币转入花旗银行香港分行897304010的账户。因与银行预留签名不符，被告人周勇军转款未得逞。
2008年10月1日被告人周勇军持名为WANGXINGXIANG的马来西亚假护照企图进入香港时，被香港入境事务处挡获。
认定上述事实的证据如下：物证、书证、鉴定结论、证人证言以及被告人的供述等。
本院认为，被告人周勇军诈骗公私财物，数额特别巨大，其行为已触犯《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百六十六条之规定，构成诈骗罪。其因意志以为的原因而未得逞，符合《中华人民共和国刑法》第二十三条之规定，属犯罪未遂，犯罪事实清楚，证据确实充分，应当以诈骗罪（未遂）追究其刑事责任。根据《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》第一百四十一条之规定，提起公诉，请依法判处。
此致
四川省射洪县人民法院
代理监察员：李洪志
代理检察院：兰明哲
二00九年八月三日
本件与原本核对无异
附：1、被告人周勇军现羁押于遂宁市看守所；
2、证人名单、证据目录各一份；
3、主要证据复印件一册。
Zhou Yung Jun's Indictment (English translation)
People’s Procuratorate of Shehong County, Sichuan Province
Indictment
No. SPCL (2009) 097
Defendant Zhou, Yongjun, a./k./a. Zhou, Yazhou, male, born on September 15, 1967 in Pengxi County, Sichuan Province. Zhou is an ethnic Han Chinese, and his identification number is 11010819670915631X. He received undergraduate education and his recorded address in his household registration book is Unit 3-5, 39 South St., Chicheng District, Pengxi County, Sichuan. On April 10, 2009, he was detained by Shenzhen municipal Public Security Bureau as a suspect of committing fraud. On May 8, 2009, he was arrested by Suining municipal Public Security Bureau, with the order of arrest approved by Suining People’s Procuratorate.
The investigation of this case was completed by the Public Security Bureau of Suining, and it was determined that defendant Zhou, Yongjun is suspected of committing the crime of fraud. The case was referred to Suining City People’s Procuratorate on July 7, 2009 to review for public prosecution. The City Procuratorate appoints this County Procuratorate for prosecution. This Procuratorate received the case, questioned the defendant according to the law, has heard the opinions and defense of the defendant and his representative, and reviewed all the materials pertaining to the case.
It has been determined according to the law:
On May 8, 2008, Defendant Zhou, Yongjun fraudulently used the name Wang Xingxiang to have sent a letter in to Hong Kong Hang Seng Bank, requesting the bank to transfer 4 million Hang Kong Dollars in Account 239-082258 (0002) belonging to Wang Xingxiang at the said bank into Account 031027915031 at HSBC’s Australian Branch. On May 19, 2009, Defendant Zhou, Yongjun once more fraudulently used Wang Xingxiang to have requested via a letter to Hong Kong Hang Seng Bank for a wire transfer of 2 million Hong Kong dollars from Account 239-082258 (0002) at the said bank into Account 89730410 at Citibank’s Hong Kong Branch. On May 24, 2009, since the Defendant Zhou Yongjun saw the said two transfers were unsuccessful, he once again fraudulently used the name of Wang Xingxiang to send postal letters to Hong Kong Hang Seng Bank, requesting that the bank send 4 million Hong Kong dollars in Account 239-082258 (0002) at the said bank into Account 031027915031 at HSBC’s Australian Branch and also requesting that the said bank to transfer 2 million Hong Kong dollars from the said account into Account 89730410 at Citibank’s Hong Kong Branch. Since the signatures did not match with the record, the requests were denied.
On October 1, 2008, Defendant Zhou Yongjun used a Malaysian passport with Wang Xingxiang’s name, attempted to enter Hong Kong, and was detained by Hong Kong’s Immigration Affairs Bureau.
The evidence admitted in support of the said facts includes: physical evidence, correspondence, expert opinions, testimonies from witnesses and the defendant’s personal confession, etc.
This Procuratorate has determined that Defendant Zhou Yongjun has committed fraud of public or private property, and the amount is considered very significant. The fraudulent acts has constituted the crime under Article 266 of Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China and the defendant is found to commit the crime of fraud. The expected outcomes were not fulfilled due to causes unrelated to his original intent, which conforms to Article 23 of Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China and should be considered criminal attempt. The facts pertaining to his crime are clear and recognized with the sufficient evidence and the defendant shall be prosecuted for his crime of attempted fraud. Pursuant to Article 141 of Criminal Procedural Law of the People’s Republic of China, the case shall be prosecuted according to the law.
Hereby
People’s Procuratorate of Shehong County, Sichuan Province
Assistant Procurator: Hongzhi Li
Assistant Procurator: Mingzhe Lan
August 3, 2009
給聯合國反對任意覊押工作組《有關中國當局任意關押周勇軍的報告》全文
有关中国当局任意关押周勇军的报告
致日内瓦的联合国（反对）任意羁押工作组
（The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention，OHCHR-UNOG）
并抄送中国最高人民检察院最高检察长，香港特别行政区行政长官，美国国务院，欧洲理事会人权专员，澳大利亚首相
中国司法观察
中国民主后援
联络人：李进进律师
Jim Li, Esq.
401 Broadway, Suite 1705
New York, NY 10013
Tel. (212) 334-7200
Fax. (212) 334-0322
[email protected]
2009年10月5日
简介
曾经是1989年民主运动的最早的学生领袖的周勇军在2008年9月底试图进入香港，结果在未经任何法律手续的情况下被香港有关当局押到中国。从2008年9月30日起， 周就被秘密关押达七个月之久，周的家人和朋友对周的关押情况只是通过周勇军被关押过的同号略知一二。周勇军的家人直到2009年5月8日才接到中国四川遂宁市公安局正式逮捕周勇军的通知，罪名是“欺诈”香港恒生银行。2009年8月初，四川省射洪县检察院以此罪名起诉周勇军。案子正在射洪县法院等待开庭审理。
这是周勇军在1989年逮捕后的第三次逮捕。然而，他的第三次逮捕没有引起国际社会的足够重视。 周勇军被关押的情况外人知之甚少。他的家人至今没有能探访他。他的律师也收到来自政府的各种压力。他在中国的家人也因为试图突破当局的各种封锁而受到来自政府的各种威胁。
周勇军的身份，户籍住所及国籍
周勇军原本在中国四川省蓬溪县老家的户籍上注册的名字，出生日期是1967年9月26日。1985年周勇军到北京上学后，他的户口转到了北京海定区，并在北京政法大学的学生户籍处登记注册。1989年6月被逮捕，但他的户籍仍然在政法大学。后来被释放并离开政法大学后，四川当地政府拒绝恢复他的户口。因此从那时候起，周勇军在中国变成了一个没有户口的‘黑户’。在国际法上来说， 仍然是个无国籍的人。
1992年，周勇军逃亡香港并被美国接收为难民。1993年2月，他开始以难民的身份在美国生活，因此在注册难民身份和调整永久居民身份的时候用的都是他原本的身份（其汉语拼音的名字被香港人拼成 Zhou Yung Jun, 出生日期：1967年9月26日）并在1998年12月底他回大陆被逮捕之前一直住在纽约法拉盛王子街33-70号。
2001年周勇军被释放后，中国政府一直拒绝为他注册户口。经过反复交涉，当地政府才为他注册为周迓舟、生日是1967年9月15日。这个名字和出生日期都不同于他原始的户籍记录。中国政府当时之所以用别名给他注册，其实是拒绝承认他原本的真实身份。
2002年5月2日，周勇军在美国政府的帮助下，以周迓舟的名义返回了美国。但他从2002年5月返回到美国后就恢复了他原本的真实姓名周勇军Yung Jun ZHOU。他在纽约、华盛顿以及加州生活工作过。他在2008年9月离开美国时所居住的最后一个地址是1227 S. Del Mar Ave., San Gabriel, CA 91776 USA.当时他是以周勇军的真实姓名与其女儿菲奥娜及女儿妈妈月卫生活在这个地址。
1993年2月4日，周勇军成为美国难民，他的永久居民身份也是从那个时候算起的。2002年他申请了入籍，但因为在美居住的积累时间不够（1998年回中国被捕），没有得到批准；因此2006年又一次提交申请， 在2008年9月他离开美国时，他的申请已经进入最后的程序，等待着宣誓成为真正的美国公民。
周勇军的前两次被捕
第一次被捕
周勇军第一次被捕是在1989年“六四”大屠杀之后。1990年3月，周勇军以反革命宣传和煽动罪被北京市人民检察院分院批准逮捕。但在国际社会的压力下，周勇军被免予起诉并在1991年1月得以释放。周勇军释放后一直被中国当地政府监视居住。1992年他设法逃到香港。
第二次被捕
1998年12月，周勇军因为没有中国的护照只有经香港偷偷潜入中国，后在广州被捕。被捕后，周被中国警察严厉地审问了有关他在美国的政治活动。在广州被任意羁押六个月后，被转到了他四川老家的警方手里。当地政府判了他三年的劳教，罪名是偷越国境。在三年的劳教期间，因为被逼着干艰苦的体力活儿、屡被虐待，周勇军的健康状况日益减退。被释放后，2002年在美国驻中国领事馆的协助下，周勇军得以返回了美国。
周勇军目前被捕、被羁押、被起诉的状况
周勇军于2008年9月26日离开洛杉矶前往中国探望家人，尤其是他曾得过脑中风现在变残疾的老父亲。 但他屡次向中国驻美国领事馆申请护照或者旅行证都没有成功，无奈之下，他只得从一移民公司购买了本署名为王兴翔（Wang Xingxiang），的马来西亚假护照并持该护照试图通过澳门进入香港，计划通过香港回大陆探望病重的父母。但他在机场就被香港警察扣留。警方因为他的假护照上的名字与几封写给香港恒生银行涉嫌诈骗的信件落款名字相同而调查他。 该些信要求恒生银行转两笔款项到其他银行同一户主的名下（Wang Xingxiang）。因为恒生银行认为信上的签名跟银行记录上的签字不符，于是警察就介入了。但经过几小时的盘问并严格地鉴别对照周勇军的签名和涉嫌诈骗信上的签名后，香港警察得出了‘周勇军跟该诈骗事件无关’的结论，当即将周勇军交还给香港移民局处理出入境问题。然而，香港移民局却通知他不许进入香港但也不允许他返回澳门或美国。因此周勇军在机场被扣留了48小时。当时他病得很严重。
2008年9月30日，周勇军被香港有关当局秘密送到中国大陆深圳靠近香港边界的一个小城，然后周勇军的案子就被转到了中国警方及国安部的手里。从那时起，周勇军就一直处于被秘密关押的状态。
2008年11月7日，当遂宁警察到深圳去审问周勇军的时候，其中有两个警察在1998年就处理过周的案子于是当时就辨认出了周勇军，周也向警方承认了自己的真实姓名。尽管从一开始就完全知道了周勇军的真实身份，中国政府却一直拒绝以周勇军的名字予以登记关押。在深圳第一看守所的时候，当局给周勇军注册的是“20号犯人”。2008年11月底，周勇军被秘密转到了深圳市盐田看守所后，被注册的姓名是‘王华’。周勇军曾拒绝在转犯人的文件上签署“王华”的名字，而是签上了自己的真实姓名周勇军。然而在他被转到盐田的整个期间仍然被狱方登记为‘王华’。
周勇军从2008年9月底突然失踪后，他的家人一直在努力地寻找他。在2008年11月份，周通过狱友偷偷地捎信给姐姐。这时周的家人方得知周的下落和处境。姐姐是四川成都的一个法官。在收到这个信息后，她立即飞往深圳第一看守所去探望弟弟。但监狱的公安人员却不让她填写探监申请、并否认他们关押了‘周勇军’这么个人、也没有“20号犯人”。 姐弟俩到今天也没有见上面。
经过7个月的秘密关押之后，周勇军于2009年5月4号被转到四川遂宁市看守所，但在5月8号，遂宁市公安局才电话通知周勇军的姐姐去遂宁市看守所给他送生活用品。2009年5月13号，周勇军的父亲才收到遂宁市公安局对周勇军的‘正式逮捕令’。周的家人这才知道遂宁市公安局按照《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》在处理周勇军的案子，罪名是诈骗罪。这也是中国当局自秘密关押周勇军以来第一次承认关押周的事实。而且所谓诈骗的行为仍然是已经被香港警察调查并否决过的有关要求香港恒生银行转帐的伪造签名信件。
之后周勇军的案子被提交到遂宁市检察院。遂宁市检察院指定射洪县检察院起诉周勇军。射洪县人民检察院在2009年8月4号以‘诈骗未遂’为由起诉了周，指控周勇军以Wang, Xingxiang的名义发了几封信到香港恒生银行要求该银行转两笔款到其他银行的Wang, Xingxiang的名下。该起诉书认定周犯了《刑法》第266条诈骗罪。详情请参见附件中《起诉书》。
自从周勇军被关押以来，中国当局一直不允许其家人去探望。2009年5月25日，周在被关押了8个月后，当局才允许周的家人聘请律师。他们开始聘请了北京勇于为政治异议分子辩护的律师莫少平。莫律师及助手陈泽睿律师在2009年5月25日到遂宁市看守所会见了周勇军。然而，在当局给家人的压力下，周勇军被迫撤换莫少平律师。现在只有莫少平律师的助手陈泽睿律师配合四川本地一唐姓律师来代理周的案子。唐姓律师至今出于压力不敢对外公布自己的名字和联系方式。同时遂宁当局拒绝让唐律师阅卷并一直拖延他会见周勇军的要求。唐律师直到2009年8月6号他才见到了周勇军。但到看守所见过周勇军之后，这位唐律师却表示不敢代理这个案子、怕自己被卷入复杂的政治事件中。他同时也表示‘看不出有什么事实证据可以证明这是一个刑事诈骗案’。射洪县法院也没有允许陈泽睿律师和本地的唐律师参阅全部的卷宗。列在法院起诉文件里的很多重要证据材料都不允许看 。
在不允许请莫少平律师、当地律师不敢介入的情况下，周勇军的姐姐作为成都市的一个法官，曾试图以周勇军的家人身份为弟弟代理这个官司。这在中国的法律上是允许的。但遂宁市当局却拒绝让她代理，并声称她没法证明他们的姐弟关系。中国政府这一立场也充分说明，周勇军的身份在档案里是不完整的。他的国籍也是不清楚的。与此同时，周勇军的姐姐还收到了丢性命、丢工作的威胁 。
根据周勇军狱友提供的信息，周勇军在看守所里受到了残酷的虐待。
法律分析
周勇军的案子让我们看到中国当局是如何将其法律视作一个工具来任意制裁一个政治异议分子的。这个案子昭示出中国当局无视自己的宪法和法律以及全然不顾国际社会的批评。在这方面， 中国当局正在得到香港当局的合作，而此种合作违背了香港的基本法和香港在保护人权方面的国际责任。
第一，周勇军的抓捕完全出于政治动机
香港警方对周勇军涉及几封写给恒生银行的伪造签字的信件看起来属于正常的刑事侦查。除非中国当局对周勇军本人有特别的兴趣，中国当局没有理由对这个普通的刑事侦查案子感兴趣。周勇军的背景恰恰解读了中国当局对周勇军特别感兴趣的理由， 那就是他过去参与民主运动的历史以及和法轮功和中功（张宏堡的中华养生益智功）的联系。这种政治的背景是中国政府当局抓捕周勇军的真实原因。
第二，香港政府违反了香港基本法及其有关国际公约
周勇军一案是香港当局将一个政治异议分子直接从飞机场押往中国大陆管辖地区的首列。 从香港法律和实践来看，香港当局没有任何法律理由将周勇军直接送回到中国大陆的深圳并交由中国警方处理。 周勇军不是从中国大陆飞往香港。按惯例，香港移民当局如果不接受一个外来的访客，香港当局应当遣返此人到其出发地。周勇军也不是中国当局通缉的刑事嫌疑犯。香港当局此举违反了香港当局依据《香港特别行政区基本法》和中英两国关于香港回归的联合声明中有关香港依法“实行高度自治，享有行政管理权、立法权、独立的司法权和终审权”的规定。 从周勇军的案件我们可以看到，香港政府未经任何法律程序将一个政治异议分子交给中国当局，其程度达到了放弃高度自治的的地位和权力。
香港当局在周勇军一案中也 违反了《世界人权宣言》第九条关于“任何人不得加以任意逮捕、拘禁或放逐”的规定，违反了联合国《公民和政治权利公约》第9条关于“任何人不得加以任意逮捕或拘禁。除非依照法律所确定的根据和程序，任何人不得被剥夺自由”。香港是该公约的签字方。香港当局未经任何程序就将一个政治异议分子交给中国当局并导致此人受到长达7个月的秘密关押，违反了此公约规定的国际责任。
第三，中国当局对周勇军的案子没有管辖权
中国当局目前起诉周勇军的罪名是“欺诈”，欺诈行为是所谓伪造香港恒生银行某个客户的签名写信要求恒生银行转款。如果周勇军是刑事嫌疑犯，那么只有香港当局才有管辖权。香港警方对周勇军进行了盘问，也鉴定了周的签字笔迹。香港警方最后认为没有足够的证据指控周勇军，于是将周勇军交还给香港移民当局处理。因为所指控的“欺诈罪”受害人和发生地在香港，而香港有高度自治的行政管辖权和司法权和终审权，中国大陆的法律不适用于香港，中国当局也就不应当用中国大陆的法律去侦查起诉本应由香港管辖管辖的案子。中国当局在周勇军一案的做法，是侵犯了香港政府高度自治的行政和司法权。
即便按照中国刑法第七条关于“属人管辖原则”（“中华人民共和国公民在中华人民共和国领域外犯本法规定之罪的，适用本法，但是按本法规定的最高刑为三年以下有期徒刑的，可以不予追究。”）中国大陆当局也没有管辖权。首先，周勇军在送往中国大陆时，他所持用的是马来西亚护照。中国当局在深圳拘留周勇军的时候也是在拘留证上填写的周所持有的马来西亚护照上的名字（Wang Xingxiang）而不是周勇军的名字。中国当局对一个在境外实施的不针对危害中国主权或领土的犯罪行为的外国人不具有一般管辖权，这是中国的法律，也是国际法上通行的规则。
其次，即便中国当局在逮捕周勇军的时候知道周的中国国籍身份，中国当局也没有管辖权。这是因为周勇军从1991年起就在中国成为一个黑户，没有正式户口登记。当他离开中国后就变成了一个无国籍人。周勇军从1993年起一直在美国保留有居留地而且在美国申请了归化。
周勇军原始户口登记是在四川蓬溪。他在1985年到北京政法大学上学后，就按照规定将户口迁到北京政法大学的集体户口中。可是在他1991年被释放并必须离开北京后，他的户口应当转到原始登记地。可是他中国当局不予登记他的户口。而他1998年“偷回”中国并以“偷越国境”被判三年劳动教养后，当地政府也拒绝给他上户口。为了生活，在他多次努力下，当局只是按照他1998年“偷回”中国时所用的一个身份证件上的周迓舟登记的身份，出生日期也不是原来周勇军的。现在射洪县检察院起诉书上的指出周勇军的户籍根据是“周迓舟”的，不是周勇军原始的登记。周迓舟的户口登记不是确定周勇军的身份和国籍的有效证据。而且，周勇军在美国身份证件的名字是“Yung Jun Zhou”。所以，中国政府要首先恢复周勇军的身份才可以对周有“属人的管辖”权。
从周勇军身份的历史来看，周早在1991年的时候就变成了一个无国籍的人。同时，周曾经在美国申请过中国护照，都被中国当局拒绝。周勇军申请加入美国国籍，只等待宣誓。这些情况讲明，周不具有中国公民的身份。
第四，中国当局在起诉周勇军一案中也没有任何应当保护的利益所在
在周勇军的案件中，所谓的犯罪行为地在香港，受害者是香港恒生银行，所涉及只是几百万港币（对个人来讲是一笔巨款，对一个国家和银行来说这是一笔小的款项）。在香港警方不追究周勇军后，我们看不到一个远在四川中部的射洪县与此案有任何关系。周勇军不是出生在射洪，从没有在射洪居住过，不在射洪保留有户籍，犯罪地不在射洪，所谓受害的人也不在射洪。中国的射洪县为什么要管这个案子？中国在司法部门本身的能力和财力都有限，当地的司法部门本身有很多案子都处理不过来，但是却要花老百姓的钱去处理一个与本地没有任何关系的案子。 除了背后有极强的政治原因，我们找不到任何答案。
第五，中国警察当局非法关押周勇军
根据中国的刑事诉讼法，警察当局应当在48个小时内通知周的家属有关周的拘留， 同时居留时间不得超过37天。可是本案从2008年10月1日计算到2009年5月8日止，周勇军在被关押了七个月零8天后才被宣布逮捕。这远远超过了法律许可的范围。同时，在5月8日之前，中国当局不透露周勇军的关押情况，用别名或数字号码来登记关押。如果中国当局认为，这种关押是因为周勇军的身份不确定而造成的，那么在一开始中国政府就没有属人管辖权。另外，从记录上来看，周勇军的身份是在2008年11月7日予以确定的。即便从那个时候算起，中国政府也非法关押周勇军6个月之久。
第六，中国当局侵犯了周勇军享有律师辩护的权利。中国政府对周勇军家属施加压力，导致周勇军不得继续雇佣北京的莫少平律师。同时，当地法院不让周勇军现在的律师翻阅案卷的全部材料。许多列在案卷里的证据，在律师阅卷时被抽走。
根据以上分析，我们要求中国当局撤回对周勇军的起诉，立即释放周勇军。
周勇军家庭成员的声明
我们的诉求
我们已经一年没有见到周勇军（Majer)了；我们很担心他的健康
—— 由周勇军家人陈述，由张月卫笔录
勇军于去年他的41岁生日那天也就是2008年9月26日离开洛杉矶前往中国去看望他残疾的老父亲以及刚刚经历过大地震的家乡，这一走就再也没有了音讯、始终联系不上他！ 大约两个月以后也就是2008年11月底，我们听说他在香港被中国警察秘密逮捕然后被秘密转到深圳并被秘密关押了起来，这个消息让我们很欣慰，因为至少我们知道他还活着。然而，中国警察始终否认关押勇军的事实。当我们从和勇军关押在一起被释放出来的人那里了解到勇军被关押的处境后，我们意识到勇军又一次被捕了，就像上次回国所经历的一样：1998年勇军回国时，中国政府将他秘密逮捕并封锁了的所有的消息、直到他们找到了关押他的借口、给他扣上个莫须有的罪名。比如说，1998年，中国政府把他秘密逮捕六个月后将他作为非中国籍公民逮捕并判为‘偷渡罪’（本国的公民在自己的国土上算什么偷渡？），而2009年五月中国政府把他作为中国籍公民逮捕、然后判为‘诈骗罪’，他这么多年一直生活工作在美国，是根本不可能在中国犯什么诈骗罪的。
因为中国政府官员不断的对我们家人进行骚扰、恐吓以及威胁并警告我们不许向外界透露勇军的情况（自从2008年11月分开始），因此我们完全可以肯定勇军确实又被秘密关押了，但是我们无法了解到他在监狱里面的情况，到底是已经被暗杀了还是还活着？ 因此我们开始给中国各级政府部门写信请求他们释放勇军。然后三个月、四个月、五个月----过去了，没有任何答复！七个月过去了----仍然没任何回复！直到2009年四月，我们从被释放的人员那里了解到：勇军被秘密关押在深圳市盐田看守所，并被监狱看守改名为王华。这时我们突然意识到勇军也许会被暗杀、并且是以王华的名义被杀害，那么周勇军这个人在这个世界上就没有了痕迹、我们就再也见不到他了。于是我们以及国内的亲戚马上去深圳看守所寻找他，然而中国政府却一再地否认他们关押了勇军。在无可奈何之下、在绝望中，我们不得不向上帝求救、向媒体、向人权组织以及美国政府寻求帮助。荒唐的是，中国政府始终不做回应，而在2009年5月13号，我们收到了中国政府逮捕勇军的‘逮捕令’。然后我们聘请了打人权官司的知名律师莫少平，但不久我们受了很大的压力、中国政府要求我们辞退莫律师、并给我们指定了当地的一个律师。
在巨大的压力下，勇军不得不辞退了莫律师。尽管勇军的下落已经被公开化，但中国政府始终不允许我们探望他。我们从被释放的人员以及律师那里知道，勇军在遂宁市看守所里面健康状况日益恶化，偏头痛、心绞痛、四肢痛开始频繁发作。而在此之前也就是2008年11月开始，勇军在深圳的第一及第二看守所里也被暴打过，打得脸肿腿瘸了很长时间；勇军被秘密关押在深圳盐田看守所的时候，曾绝食要求跟家人或者律师通话，但都被拒绝；每次勇军因绝食而出现严重的胃痛痛得卷缩在角落里、痛得在地上打滚的时候，狱医就强行给他打针要他立即平静下来。勇军的姐姐是个公务员也曾经呼吁国际社会关注勇军的案子，但他受到中国政府的屡次威胁和警告、现在她不得不保持沉默。
马上就是勇军42岁的生日了，我们不知道9月26日这一天他在中国的监狱里会如何庆祝自己的生日。他深爱自己的家人、爱他的母国，然而，他的母国，一个号称‘民主、法制’的东方大国竟然如此对待他：在二十年里把他三次投入监狱、无数次的虐待。勇军只不过是一个努力寻求民主和自由的热血青年，这究竟有什么错？他没有犯任何错！
自从1989年被捕入狱，勇军中国的监狱里经受了很大的精神折磨和身体的伤害、以及所造成的创伤后果，这一次我们很担心他的健康。我们很想念他，但是我们不允许探望他。他80多岁的正值的老父老母需要他，他的孩子们更需要他！我们期待着他能早日返回美国
在此，我期待着在坐的每一位、每一个热爱民主、自由、人权和世界和平的人士关注一下勇军的情况、第三次被中国政府投入监狱。I
非常感谢，
张月卫谨代表勇军的子女、父母、及兄弟姐妹。
9-18-2009
Zhou Yung Jun's Family Impact Statement
We Haven't Seen Zhou Yung Jun (Majer) for One Year Already; We're Quite Worrying about His Health
——from Yung Jun's families, written by fiancée Yuewei Zhang
Yung Jun left Los Angeles for China Last year to visit his disabled father and his earthquake-hit hometown, on his 41st birthday, September 26, 2008. Then immediately, he went missing and we couldn't hear from him at all! About two months later in November, 2008, we were relieved to learn that he was arrested secretly in Hong Kong by the Chinese police and then was secretly transferred to Shenzhen and put in secret custody. However, the Chinese police denied that they held him. As we learned about Yung Jun's situation on the inside from released inmates, we realized that he was experiencing a replay, quite similar to the last time in 1998, when he was secretly arrested and the Chinese government tried to block all the information about him, until they found a pretext to charge him with a crime. For example, in his 1998 arrest, he was charged with "Secretly Entering China as a non-Chinese citizen." In May of 2009, he was charged with fraud as a Chinese citizen, a crime that he never committed.
Based on Chinese government officials' harrassment, threats, and intimidation for our family (since the end of November, 2008), we knew that Yung Jun was in custody again, but we had no way of knowing his condition (dead or alive?) inside the prison. So we began to write to all levels of the Chinese government repeatedly begging them to release Yungjun. Three months, four months, five months passed with no answer -- until seven months passed, there was no reply! Until April of 2009, we heard from another released inmate that Yung Jun was held in secret custody in Shenzhen Yantian Detention Center under the name Wang Hua, a name given to him by the jailers, we suddenly realized that Yongjun might be killed or murdered inside as Wang Hua, and we would never see him again. However, the Chinese government still denied that they held Yongjun and threatened Yongjun's relative who went to the detention center looking for Yongjun. Helplessly and hopelessly, we had to cry for help from God, from the media and human-rights-protecting groups and people, from the U.S. government. Ridiculously, we got Yongjun's Arrest Warrant from them--the Chinese government--on May 13, 2009. Then we retained Mr. Mo Shaoping, a well known human rights attorney. But soon thereafter, we received a lot of pressure to fire Mr. Mo.
Under the pressure, Yongjun had to dismiss Mo. In the time since Yongjun's whereabouts were disclosed, we haven't been allowed to visit him. We learned from the released cellmates that Yongjun suffered migraine, chest pain, and extremities pain in Suining Detention Center. And back in November of 2008, Yongjun was even hit and beaten so much by the jailers that he had a swollen face and a limp for a long time while he was held at Shenzhen Second Detention Center and Shenzhen First Detention Center; in Shenzhen Yantian Detention Center, Yongjun went on a hunger strike to request to talk with us or an attorney, but all his requests were refused; every time Yongjun was rolling about on the ground with severe stomachache or just shrinked in a corner, the jail doctor would give him shots to make him calm down. Yongjun's sister is herself a government employee and had called international attention to Yongjun's case. She has received warnings and she has to keep silent about Yongjun's case.
It will be Yongjun's 42nd birthday soon, and we don't know how he will celebrate it in China on September 26. He loves his family and his motherland China, however, this motherland, ostensibly an oriental big "DEMOCRACTIC AND LAWFUL" country has treated him with three imprisonments and cruel tortures within 20 years. Yongjun has been just a hot-blooded youth working hard to seek democracy and freedom. What's wrong with this? It's nothing wrong!
Since 1989, Yongjun suffered both mental tortures and physical injuries in the Chinese prisons and the serious consequences. We're quite worrying about his health. We really miss him now, however, we're not allowed to see him. His 80-year-old upright parents need him, and his children need him more. We've been looking forward to his return to the U.S.A.
I am, hereby, expecting everybody here present who loves and supports democracy, freedom, human rights and world peace to keep an eye on Yongjun's third imprisonment by the Chinese government.
Thank you very much,
Yuewei Zhang on behalf Yongjun's children, parents, sisters and brothers
9-18-2009
Letter to Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
c/o Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
Ms. Navanethem Pillay
United Nations Office at Geneva (OHCHR-UNOG)
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
CH-1211, Geneva 10
Switzerland
October 6, 2009
Dear Ms. Pillay,
We respectfully request an urgent action and expedited determination of arbitrary detention in the case of ZHOU Yung Jun, also spelled as Zhou Yongjun. Mr. Zhou is a famous Chinese political dissident exiled to the United States. Zhou was the first Tiananmen Square student leader elected to lead the Autonomous Students Federation of Beijing Universities, the group which was then occupying Tiananmen Square.
Hence, Zhou was a key figure in the student uprising that led to the June 4, 1989 massacre when the army used live ammunition to retake Tiananmen Square. Zhou was a political prisoner from 1989-1991, and again from 1998-2001.
He has now become a political prisoner for a third time. The particulars of his case are found in our submission, and his case has had press coverage in the world news. On May 13, 2009, Western news wires reported the formal arrest of Zhou, based on an arrest warrant dated May 8, 2009 citing suspected fraud. His detention was kept secret by the Chinese government for more than seven months prior to mid-May, 2009. On Sept. 4, 2009, Radio Free Asia reported that Zhou will soon go on trial for the trumped up charge of attempted financial fraud.
We must point that the within report will disclose the arbitrary actions that not only have occurred in the People’s Republic of China, but also, based on a finding that Zhou was detained at Hong Kong airport by the Hong Kong immigration authorities and sent to the police authorities of the Mainland China, have occurred in Hong Kong, a Special Administrative Zone of the PRC that should remain the self-governance, judicial independence, and common law tradition based on the Sino-British agreement.
On September 18, 2009, our group, the Rescue Alliance for Zhou Yung Jun (co-founded by the pro-democracy China Support Network, with Zhou family members and more supporters), held a New York City press conference to call attention to the document in your hands as we submit the case of Zhou Yung Jun to the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.
We hope that you will review our submission that follows, beginning with the model questionnaire that is the standard form of a new case submission for the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. We would appreciate receiving notices of progress, steps and status changes in this case, and of course we stand ready to assist you with research if further information is required.
Please note that, you should have received a prior communication (on or about 08/27/2009) in this matter from Yuewei Zhang, the mother of Fiona Laong, the daughter of Zhou Yongjun. She is now a part of our group here, and this submission should replace her prior appeal for your help.
Thank you sincerely,
/s/ Jim Li, Esq., Director of China Judicial Watch
/s/ John P. Kusumi
Director emeritus, the China Support Network
for the Rescue Alliance for Zhou Yung Jun
Enclosed:
Authorization letter by the daughter of Zhou Yung Jun
Model Questionnaire
Case report with Appendix in English
Case report with Appendix in Chinese
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS FROM THE MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE
I. IDENTITY
1. Full name in Chinese: 周勇军 （Zhou Yongjun in Chinese pinyin）
2. Family name: Zhou
3. First name: Yung Jun (spelled when registered as refugee status in the United States, which is now the official name)
4. A/K/A: Yazhou Zhou; for the benefit of those in the English speaking world, Zhou chose to also be known as Majer Zhou.
5. Sex: male
6. Birth date, or age at the time of detention: September 26, 1967 (The Chinese authorities currently uses the identification of Yazhou Zhou with date of birth of September 15, 1967).
7. Nationality/Nationalities: stateless, but a legal permanent resident in the U.S. and the naturalization application is pending before the United States Department of Homeland Security
8. Identity document (if any): U.S. Permanent Resident Card, issued by: U.S. Department of Homeland Security on Feb. 4, 1993, No.: A071889900
9. Profession and/or activity (if believed to be relevant to the arrest/detention): Best known as a political dissident, a former student leader in the Tiananmen Square uprising in Beijing, China in 1989
10. Address of usual residence: 1227 S. Del Mar Ave., San Gabriel, CA 91776 USA
II. ARREST
1. Date of arrest: 09/28/2008
2. Place of arrest (as detailed as possible): Hong Kong
3. Forces who carried out the arrest or are believed to have carried it out: Hong Kong port of entry forces
4. Did they show a warrant or other decision by a public authority? Not at that time.
5. Authority who issued the warrant or decision: More than seven months later, an arrest warrant was issued by the Suining Public Security Bureau of Sichuan Province, P.R.C. (dated 05/08/2009)
6. Relevant legislation applied (if known): There is no legal basis for this arrest and detention.
III. DETENTION
1. Date of detention: 09/28/2008
2. Duration of detention (if not known, probable duration): 12 months already; still in custody; trial pending
3. Forces holding the detainee under custody: Sichuan Suining Detention Center (Sichuan Province of the P.R.C. is holding Zhou on orders from higher up.)
4. Places of detention (indicate any transfer and present place of detention):
a. Secret detention In Hong Kong, 2 days; then transfer to
b. Secret detention at Shenzhen Second Detention Center, 7 days; then transfer to
c. Secret detention at Shenzhen First Detention Center, 49 days; then transfer to
d. Secret detention at Shenzhen Yantian Detention Center with an alias Wang Hua assigned by Chinese police, 6 months; then transfer to
e. Public detention Center at Sichuan Suining Detention Center 4 months
5. Authorities that ordered the detention: The family believes that the Hong Kong and Shenzhen detentions were at the behest of the Ministry of Public Security. After transfer, the authorities responsible are now the Sichuan Suining People's Procuratorate.
6. Reasons for the detention imputed by the authorities: They cite suspected attempted financial fraud.
7. Relevant legislation applied (if known): Seen in an attachment, the official indictment of Zhou cites Article 266 of Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China.
IV. Describe the circumstances of the arrest and/or the detention and indicate precise reasons why you consider the arrest or detention to be arbitrary:
In September 2008, Zhou attempted a return to China from exile, out of concern for the declining health of his aging parents and the effects in his hometown of the Sichuan earthquake, which ravaged that area early in 2008.
Using a false Malaysian passport that Zhou purchased from an immigration company, Zhou went to Macao and tried to enter Hong Kong. At that point, Hong Kong police questioned him about an allegedly fraudulent letter that was written to Hang Seng bank by a person named Wang Xingxiang, which happens to be the name on the false passport that Zhou presented.
Zhou has made it clear that he did not author the letter in question. The bank had declined to transfer money in reply to the letter, because it had discerned that the signature did not match its records. After questioning, Hong Kong police concluded that Zhou was not the man in whom they were interested.
Zhou was then notified that immigration still needed to verify his identity, and that he was not allowed to enter Hong Kong, nor return to Macao nor the US. HK immigration authorities held him at the border for 48 hours, from September 28-30, 2008. In the words of Zhou, “Later they said ‘sorry’ to me that they misidentified me and turned me back over to immigration.”
Hong Kong immigration authorities experienced some mercurial lark and turned Zhou over to authorities of the People’s Republic of China. This was arbitrary arrest, not supported by any provocation, nor legal basis, nor any shred of due process of law. With no proceedings, no official decision, no chance for review, hearing, representation, or appeal, Zhou found himself moved to “a small hotel in Shenzhen.” What Zhou experienced may accurately be called an extrajudicial kidnapping.
To have a case against him in the Mainland is arbitrary because, since Zhou did not set foot in Mainland China for several years prior to these charges – and he was intercepted before ever reaching the Mainland – it is physically impossible that Zhou committed a crime in China. Furthermore, the Mainland authorities lack jurisdiction to prosecute the case that they have brought against Zhou. If a Hong Kong bank were victimized, such a case would be for Hong Kong authorities to prosecute, not the Mainland. Hence, their criminal indictment of him in Sichuan province is a ruse and a pretext to hold Zhou in this case of political persecution.
V. Indicate internal steps, including domestic remedies, taken especially with the legal and administrative authorities, particularly for the purpose of establishing the detention and, as appropriate, their results or the reasons why such steps or remedies were ineffective or why they were not taken:
From his arrest in late September, 2008, for over seven months until mid-May, 2009, the Chinese government denied that they held Zhou. This secrecy made it impossible for Zhou’s family to use China’s legal system. They were denied recourse, visitation, and communication with Zhou. The family learned some information from other prisoners who were released and passed along messages from Zhou.
During the secret detention interval, Zhou's family wrote many letters to all levels of Chinese government, demanding release of Zhou, to no avail. The letters were met with harassment, threats, and intimidation that officials directed against Zhou’s family.
Once the secrecy was over, the family retained the services of a famous attorney, Mo Shaoping of Beijing. The government then placed enormous pressure on the family to dismiss the attorney and to hire a more local attorney in the Suining area of Sichuan province. The more local attorneys have been fearful to take a case of a political nature.
The family has turned to international media and to the China Support Network, where we formed the alliance that authors this document; and, prepared this submission for the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, among other activities intended to raise pressure in this case.
VI. Full name and address of the person(s) submitting the information (telephone and fax number, if possible):
Date: 09/21/2009
Signers and contact info:
John P. Kusumi
The China Support Network
1035 S. Main St., #230
Cheshire, CT 06410 USA
1 (203) 640-2715
mailto: [email protected]
Jim Li, Esq.
China Judicial Watch
401 Broadway, #1705
New York, NY 10013 USA
1 (212) 334-7200
fax: 1 (212) 334-0322
mailto: [email protected]
Yuewei Zhang, parent and on behalf of the prisoner’s daughter, Fiona
1229 S Marguerita Ave,
Alhambra, CA 91803 USA
1 (626) 497-5687
mailto: [email protected]