Li Tie (李铁)Comments Off on Li Tie (李铁)
Li Tie 李铁
Crime: Subversion of state power
Length of Punishment: 10 years’ imprisonment
Court: Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court
Trial date: April 18, 2011
Sentencing date: January 18, 2012
Dates of Detention/Arrest: September 15, 2010 (detained), October 22, 2010 (arrested)
Place of Detention: Huangzhou Prison (Huanggang City, Hubei Province)
Detained in September of 2010 and arrested the next month, Li Tie , from Wuhan City in Hubei Province, was tried in April of 2011 but not sentenced until January of 2012. Li’s family had originally hired human rights lawyer Jin Guanghong(金光 鸿) to represent Li, but Jin was never allowed to meet with his client and was subjected to enforced disappearance about 10 days before the trial. In waiting eight months to issue its verdict, the court violated Article 168 of the Criminal Procedure Law, which dictates that a court has a maximum of two-and-a-half months to issue a verdict after it accepts a case. In the decade before his detention, Li had written many online articles promoting democracy, constitutional government, and direct local elections. Born on March 29, 1959, Li has also organized activities to honor the memory of Lin Zhao (林 昭), the well-known Beijing University student jailed in the 1950s and executed by the government in 1968 for her views and writings.
At Li’s trial, his mother and daughter were the only supporters of Li permitted to attend. They reported that the “evidence” the procuratorate offered against Li included the following: articles Li wrote criticizing the government, in particular his online article titled “Human Beings’ Heaven Is Human Dignity” (人以尊严为天); his membership in the China Social Democracy Party; his participation in discussions hosted on “reactionary” websites, and his “reactionary” comments made at gatherings with friends. During the trial, the prosecutors argued that Li’s articles and speech demonstrated that he has “anti-government thoughts,” and because he has such thoughts, it should be presumed that he would engage in anti-government actions, and thus he should be found guilty of “subversion.” Li’s lawyer argued for his client’s innocence, and in Li’s statement to the court, he said that he was innocent because his words and deeds were in accordance with the Constitution, which gives Chinese citizens the right to freedom of expression.