2018年10月15日 星期一

Sang Jieja 
China 
October 15, 2018

After years of negotiations, the Vatican and China finally announced in late September that a consensus had been reached on the appointment of Chinese bishops and the two sides signed a provisional agreement.
As a Tibetan bystander, I wasn't optimistic about the agreement. I have been subjected to violations by the Chinese government for more than 60 years.
Catholics in China have been divided between the state-sanctioned church and the underground church that is loyal to the Vatican.
Now, Pope Francis says that he has the final decision on the appointment of bishops, not Beijing. The poperecognized eight illegal bishops appointed by China and admitted the agreement would be painful for Catholics who had suffered.
The Vatican may think that the agreement will be a success as it will make it possible for China to accept the pope as the leader of the Chinese Catholic Church and he can give Chinese Catholics more guidance.
But let us look at the results of the 67-year-old agreement between Tibet and the Chinese government before we become too optimistic.
On May 23, 1951, the Tibetan and the Chinese governments signed the "17-Point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet", in which it states: "The central government will not change the current political system in Tibet and the inherent status and authority of the Dalai Lama. The Tibetan officials at all levels serve as usual."
It also promises to: "Respect the religious beliefs and customs of the Tibetan people and protect the Lama Temple."
In fact, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) never complied with the agreement. The Chinese army arrived in Lhasa and soon tore up the document and forced the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government into exile in India.
Another example is the "Regional Ethnic Autonomy Law" relating to Tibet, which in theory gave ethnic minorities the right to self-administration. But did the CCP respect this law? The sheer number of Tibetan protests, including the 152protesters who set themselves on fire, gives us a chilling answer.
The Chinese government has also signed the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide; and the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid.
Has the CCP government complied with any of these conventions? China's poor human rights record tells us "no."
The Chinese government does not even comply with its own laws or constitution.
Ironically, the agreement with the Vatican reflects the CCP's violation of Article 36 of its constitution, which stipulates that "citizens of the People's Republic of China have freedom of religious belief" and "religious groups and religious affairs are not subject to any foreign influences".
This begs the question of whether the Sino-Vatican agreement is truly possible?
The agreement means the Chinese government would have to abandon its principle, and the Chinese side is very clear about the results of the abandonment.
Judging from the above, the so-called commitment of the Chinese government is only for political expediency, and the latest agreement will be torn up once its aims are reached.
The essence of the autocratic Chinese Communist government determines that religion is only a tool to consolidate its rule. Moreover, true religion has no space under the rule of the Communist Party of China — the Tibetans are convinced of this.
Since the Chinese Communist regime came to power, it has continued to suppress all kinds of religions.
For Tibetan Buddhism, they razed temples, expelled thousands of monks, set up party organizations in monasteries and Buddhist colleges for managing reincarnation.
For Christianity, hundreds of churches and thousands of crosses were demolished, the faithful were expelled and the Catholic underground church was suppressed.
For Islam, millions of Uyghurs were placed in re-education camps.
After Chinese President Xi Jinping took office, he intensified crack downs on religious circles, forced Tibetan Buddhism to "adapt to socialism", and enforced "a new interpretation of the teachings of Tibetan Buddhism".
When the CCP is capable of all evil, it casts doubts on their reasons for signing the agreement with the Vatican.
As the Chinese government severely suppresses all the religions, it is difficult to conceive that China will treat Catholic communities and its believers well.
The tolerance, compassion, and love of the Vatican needs to face the hegemony of the CPP, which is based on the Thick Black Theory — thick face and black heart — and kills people without shame and cruelly.
Over the years, people have hoped that the Vatican's contacts with the Chinese government can improve the situation of the Chinese Catholics, and that the Chinese government will improve its policies on all religions. However, from Xi Jinping's recent handling of religious incidents, that hope is becoming more and more of a dream.
Tibet is occupied by the Chinese government, which of course is not comparable to the Vatican's situation. However, the religious policy imposed on Tibet after China's occupation can be instructive and the Vatican must be cautious.
As Kung Lap Yan, associate professor of the divinity school at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said: "No matter how much the Catholic Church earns in this matter, it will be lost in the end."

2018年10月2日 星期二

一名藏人看梵中「臨時性協議」

標籤連結:  ,  ,  ,  ,  , 


2 October 2018
【評論】一名藏人看梵中「臨時性協議」
前王天主教堂於今年八月遭強拆,耶穌苦像等聖像被破壞掉。

梵蒂岡和中國最近就有關主教任命問題達成了一份「臨時性協議」。除了梵蒂岡和中國政府進行積極的評價外,也有很多不同的聲音,包括樞機、信眾和專家學者。
作為一名藏人和旁觀者,看到西藏六十多年來遭受中國政府一次又一次地違約迫害,再來看梵蒂岡和中國簽訂的協議,筆者就無法持樂觀態度。
中梵經過多番談判後,終在今年九月廿二日宣布,就中國主教任命問題達成共識,雙方簽訂了一份「臨時性協議」。
天主教教宗方濟各表示,自己就主教任命有最後決定權,而不是北京政府;又承認接納了八名中國非法主教;也坦言協議讓曾受苦的天主教徒,會感到痛苦。
方濟各或梵蒂岡可能認為簽訂了這份臨時性協議,是成功的開始,因為有可能讓中國接受了教宗是中國天主教會的領袖,也能給中國天主教徒更多的指引。但也許讓我們看看西藏與中國政府簽訂了協議後所得的結果,才再下判斷吧。
西藏政府和中國政府一九五一年五月廿三日簽訂了《十七條協議》,其中「對於西藏的現行政治制度,中央不予變更。達賴喇嘛的固有地位及職權,中央亦不予變更。各級官員照常供職。」「尊重西藏人民的宗教信仰和風俗習慣,保護喇嘛寺廟。」
事實上,中國政府從來不遵守自己簽訂的協議;中國軍隊抵達拉薩不久撕毀了所謂的《十七條協議》,最後迫使達賴喇嘛及西藏政府流亡印度。
還如,與西藏有關的所謂《民族區域自治法》,中共又有幾條真正遵守過?藏人歷次的抗議運動和一百五十二位自焚抗議者便是最佳的答案。
中國政府不僅不遵守自己簽訂的協議,自己簽署的國際公約也同樣踐踏。如中國政府加入和簽署了《經濟、社會及文化權利國際公約》、《消除一切形式種族歧視國際公約》、《防止及懲治滅絕種族罪公約》,以及《禁止並懲治種族隔離罪行國際公約》,但是,中國政府有遵守過這些公約嗎?中國每年糟糕的人權記錄給了我們答案:「沒有!」
更具諷刺的是,中國政府對自己訂立的法律,甚至《憲法》也同樣不遵守。像如今的梵中「協議」真實地反映了中國政府違反了《憲法》第卅六條說的「中華人民共和國公民有宗教信仰自由」、「宗教團體和宗教事務不受外國勢力的支配」。如果中共政權遵守了這一條,梵蒂岡和中國有必要簽訂協議嗎?
從以上種種來看,中國政府對「協議」的所謂承諾,都只是為其政治目的,當目的達到後就會撕毀。
中國共產黨專制政府的本質決定了宗教只是鞏固其統治的工具而已。而且,真正意義上的宗教在中國共產黨的統治下沒有生存空間,對此,西藏人深信不疑。
看自中共政權上台後,無止境地一直打壓其統治下的各種宗教:針對藏傳佛教,他們強拆僧舍驅逐數千僧侶、寺院和佛學院設黨組織管理、控制轉世靈童;針對基督宗教的,強拆數百座教堂、拆掉教堂尖塔上的十字架並驅逐教眾、打壓天主教地下教會針對伊斯蘭教的,百萬東突人關進「教育轉化中心」。
特別是習近平執政後,更是加大力度打擊宗教界,強迫西藏佛教「適應社會主義」、強制推行「藏傳佛教教義新闡釋」等等。在中共無惡不作的當下,很懷疑中國政府簽署中梵臨時性協議的目的。
在中國政府對其統治下的所有宗教進行嚴酷打壓之際,很難看出中國會有可能善待天主教組織和信眾。
梵蒂岡的寬容、慈悲和愛需要面對的是,以厚黑學為基礎殺人不睜眼、殘忍無賴的中國共產黨霸權。
更重要的是中國政府一直強制實施「宗教團體和宗教事務不受外國勢力的支配」。按「臨時性協議」的內容中國政府要放棄這個原則,中國方面非常清楚放棄的結果。
多年來人們希望梵蒂岡與中國政府的接觸,能改善中國的天主教組織和信眾的狀況,甚至希望中國政府改善對所有宗教的政策,但是,從習近平最近幾年的執政和對宗教事件的處理方式來看這個希望越來越渺茫。
當然西藏是被中國政府佔領,這跟梵蒂岡沒有可比性,但是,中國佔領西藏後對西藏實施的宗教政策可以是一面鏡子,因此梵蒂岡必須慎之又慎,不要赴西藏之後塵。正如香港中文大學文化及宗教研究系副教授龔立人稱:「無論天主教廷在這事上賺到多少,到最後都是輸的。」
__________
撰文:桑傑嘉,一位藏族作家及時事評論員。
【完】

2018年9月29日 星期六

写在土鼠年和平抗议十周年


桑杰嘉

西藏之声2018926

2008310日开始,西藏首都拉萨为主的各地发生抗议中国政府的运动,从参加抗议示威的人数、覆盖的地域和持续的时间等各方面是规模空前的抗议示威运动。对2008年的抗议运动西藏人称土鼠年和平抗议,也有境内藏人学者称“土鼠年革命”。 虽然,西藏土鼠年和平抗议发生已经十年了,在西藏境内仍然以不同的方式进行抗议,示威游行、自焚抗议、单独上街抗议等,这些都是2008310日发生的土鼠年和平抗议延续,所以,这十年来西藏土鼠年和平抗议从未停止,因为,中国政府的迫害从未停止,西藏问题还没有解决。


土鼠年和平抗议爆发十周年之际,西藏境内发生第152起自焚抗议事件,已知130名自焚抗议者牺牲。另外,境内藏人单独上街抗议不断发生,很多抗议者被失踪、判刑—-境内藏人的抗议运动仍然在中国政府严厉的打击下艰难地继续,在自由世界里的我们除了纪念和向世界介绍境内藏人的抗争外,必须要思考如何继承土鼠年和平抗议精神,以及在中国政府的歪曲宣传兴风作浪和霸权国际社会的情况下如何揭露中国政府的谎言,介绍土鼠年和平抗议真相更加重要。

土鼠年和平抗议的影响

2008310日,在西藏发生的土鼠年和平抗议对西藏境内、流亡藏人社会,以及对中国、国际社会产生了巨大影响。在这里主要谈2008年土鼠和平抗议对境内藏人的影响。

西藏著名作家唯色在《鼠年雪狮吼—2008年西藏事件大事记》中写道的:“—在发生了三月间的大事之后,图博(藏语,西藏)已不是过去的图博了,所有的博巴(藏语,藏人)也不是过去的博巴了。”中国政府对西藏全国各地发生的抗议进行的血腥镇压后,冲击到了西藏境内一直比较低调的西藏知识分子,一群西藏知识分子史无前例地表达了对镇压的愤恨,公开谴责中国政府的行为。这些知识分子不仅敢言,而且,开始探索维护藏人权利的方法和出路,包括利用中国法律、国际法等争取藏人权利,这是西藏知识的一个新的起点,也可以称为西藏知识界维权抗争的兴起。

土鼠年和平抗议之后,西藏境内的两大教育体系的知识分子前所未有的觉醒,且广泛地支持抗议民众,谴责中国政府对抗议者的血腥镇压。在以往的大多数抗议运动中,特别是政治权利的抗争中寺院教育体系中的知识分子总是占绝大部分,如在西藏首都拉萨每次抗议都由僧人或者尼师发起。相对而言,现代社会教育体系中的知识分子并不怎么活跃,很少公开参与抗议,体制内的知识分子更是如此。但是,土鼠年和平抗议遭到镇压后两大教育体系中的知识分子空前的团结,各寺院的僧侣和普通民众发起的大规模抗议运动立即得到各高等院校西藏学生和知识分子的广泛地支持和声援。简而言之,西藏知识界和普通民众之间出现未曾有过的团结一致。

土鼠年和平抗议发生之后,僧人、尼师和普通民众接二连三地在各地展开抗议游行,西藏知识分子也开始用以往不同的方式支持和声援抗议运动。他们主要通过记录、书写、出版专著公开谴责政府,以及思考西藏的未来。他们不仅仅是抗议和谴责中国政府的行为,而且开始研究探讨通过什么途径和方法更容易或者更有力的争取西藏人权利的问题。如,扎加、笃拉丹、铁让、晋美朗嘉、阿什、卓仓果羌、丹增扎瓦、扎仁博等等。其中,扎加和笃拉丹最具代表性,扎加先生2010年用母语撰写出版了《開天闢地》(另譯《土鼠年和平革命》等)。笃拉丹先生用母语撰写了《生命筑建的话》和《依法抵抗维权》(西藏人权与民主促进中心出版了藏文版和英文版)。他们冒着极大的危险,公开撰写对土鼠年和平抗议运动支持,以及记录中国政府对抗议运动采取的屠杀镇压的感受、体会,并对西藏的未来进行思考和探索。

扎加首先定义土鼠年和平抗议。他指出:统治者(中国政府)定义土鼠年和平抗议定义狭小、没有确认性、具有玷污、歧视和立场性。而藏人对土鼠年和平抗议概念定义失去了“有组织、有目的”运动的特点,该运动不仅仅是对压迫者反抗,而且具有起义的特点,另外,为了反抗统治者不是采用常用的武力反抗,具有和平特点。我认为,时间是土鼠年,性质是革命既具“改造自然界或对社会改革进行创新,粉碎旧的社会体制创新体制的基础,以及推动社会向前发展”。因此,我称为“土鼠年革命”。

他强调了各种和平抗争的运动中印度圣雄甘地的非暴力不合作运动是适合西藏,并重申了必须要从普世价值的角度思考和行动的重要性。作者还提出了西藏在历史上从印度引进了佛教,如今应该引进印度的非暴力不合作运动。作者认为西藏早在2006年的焚烧珍贵野生动物皮毛的运动是非暴力不合作运动的一次实践,而2008年土鼠年和平抗议就是以非暴力不合作方式展开的。

笃拉丹,以一个僧侣知识分子的角度深入地探讨了法治、自由、和平、平等、非暴力等主题,并着眼于以达赖喇嘛、甘地、马丁•路德•金、乔治•华盛顿等的奋斗历程思索西藏抗争道路。而且,也对西藏和中国间六十三年的关系进行了回顾和总结。

他指出中国和西藏的关系是:坚守独立的十七个月、九年的无爱蜜月、留下无法愈合之仇恨的二十年、镇压与谈判交织的30年、生命和火焰中的四年等。作者用这五个阶段阐述了西藏国家非法占领和民族遭受中国政府殖民统治的情况。作者并在“生命和火焰中的四年”中以:自焚抗议的产生、燃烧的是你的人民、带着汽油的消防队、被火焰更高温的“法”等阐述了自焚抗议的原因,以及中国政府对藏人自焚抗议采取的镇压政策的严厉批评。

总之,土鼠年和平抗议对西藏社会的影响深远,从知识分子到普通民众,从学校到寺院,从农区到牧区,加深藏人的民族认同和同甘共苦精神,对整体民族命运的担忧和责任感倍增,并开始严肃地探索和思考西藏的未来。真是:“图博已不是过去的图博了,所有的博巴也不是过去的博巴了。”而抗议活动从抗议示威游行到自焚抗议、单独上街抗议等方式至今仍然延续。

需要澄清和揭露的问题

20083月土鼠年和平抗议发生时由于中国政府的颠倒黑白的宣传,严重曲解土鼠年和平抗议运动的真相,十年有更多的信息可以揭露中国政府的谎言,而且,可以更深入的研究抗议运动的各个方面。当然,首先要澄清一些基本的问题作为世人认识土鼠年和平抗议运动基础,以及向世界证明虽然中国独裁专制政府非法占领西藏、实施了六十多年的殖民统治后西藏人民继续为西藏的自由事业奋斗的真相。也应该向世界宣示二十一世纪中国政府以经济、市场、军事等作为利器向世界文明、民主国家进行报复打击,以及强迫世界文明向共产独裁政府低头的当今,一个只有六、七百万的弱小民族在向全球最大的共产帝国说不!已经抵抗了六十多年,而且在接续抵抗,将来也会抗争到底的誓言。

2008年西藏人的土鼠年和平抗议被中国政府的官方媒体和大汉族主义们颠倒是非、丑化的面目全非,所以,作为西藏人有几点必须要中国人解释清楚。

首先,土鼠年和平抗议是310日发生的,中国政府大量宣传的314日的抗议事件是藏人土鼠年和平抗议运动的第5天。

其次,2008年西藏人的抗议运动一直坚持了和平抗议。

再次,土鼠年和平抗议第五天中国政府所谓的“3.14暴力事件”的幕后操作者是中国政府,实施暴力的是警察、国安等部门的特务纵队。

还有,中国政府对土鼠年和平抗议者的屠杀问题,从照片、录像、现场记录者和中国官方资料证明屠杀了数百名的藏人。 最后,还有数千计藏人被失踪、拘捕和判刑。

另外,中国政府对土鼠年和平抗议连续十年的打压,造成严重的民族隔离、经济边缘化,制造了西藏人和中国人的严重对立,对西藏的文化、语言和宗教等实施文化灭绝政策,使西藏文化语言面临严重的危机,西藏的人权状况日益恶化。


https://www.vot.org/cn/%E3%80%90%E8%97%8F%E4%BA%BA%E8%B0%88%E8%A5%BF%E8%97%8F%E3%80%91%E6%A1%91%E6%9D%B0%E5%98%89%EF%BC%9A%E5%86%99%E5%9C%A8%E5%9C%9F%E9%BC%A0%E5%B9%B4%E5%92%8C%E5%B9%B3%E6%8A%97%E8%AE%AE%E5%8D%81%E5%91%A8/

2018年9月19日 星期三

2008年图伯特人抗议十周年(之三)



作者: 桑杰嘉
民主中国首发   时间: 9/19/2018 

2008年图伯特人抗议事件发生第五天,既314日在拉萨小昭寺的僧人抗议时和中国执勤人员发生肢体冲突。中国军警当众殴打抗议的僧人而引发民众大规模的抗暴行动,导致发生过激事件。军警不但没有制止事态蔓延,而且撤离了现场,过激事件发生数小时没有任何部门进行制止,加上中国军警假扮图伯特人混入抗议队伍实施暴力和引诱人群使事件更加恶化。再后来中国政府以抗议者实施“暴力”为由进行了血腥镇压,十年后更多的各方信息揭露了中国政府的弥天大谎,314日抗议事件的真相更加清晰,中国政府大力宣传的所谓“3•14拉萨打砸抢烧暴力犯罪事件”谎言丢进垃圾箱的时刻已到。

之前已谈到中国政府对和平抗议事件向过激事件发生后数小时没有制止任其发展,最后导致事态进一步恶化的情况,其实,事态恶化到如此地步的原因除了过激事件任其发展之外,最主要的是中国政府幕后操作的结果,最初中国有关部门不去制止真是给他们的“造势部队”充分的时间展示“暴力”。本文主要以各方信息为基础谈论314日抗议事件由于中国军警假扮图伯特人实施暴力和引诱民众,为中国政府血腥镇压图伯人特抗议者创造条件的情况,如今很多信息证明2008年中国政府故伎重演派遣“特务纵队”破坏和平抗议,因此,和平抗议为什么很快转变成过激事件,谁才是真正的幕后黑手,谁对整个事件负有责任等问题更加明了。

中国政府故伎重施
2008年图伯特发生抗议后中国著名学者王力雄先生在《西藏事件的责任该由谁负?》一文中说:“这次事件的起因,和导致1987101日的拉萨骚乱起因非常相似,几乎就是重复。”他还指出:“事隔二十年,西藏当局不知道是失去了记忆力,还是因为权力在手的骄横,这次同样是使用警察暴力,对在帕廓街和平游行抗议的僧侣进行殴打。僧侣被打的惨状再次引起了藏族民众的愤怒,导致爆发,开始攻击实施暴行的警察。”其实,不仅仅中国政府对图伯特人抗议采取的镇压手段重复,甚至重施了“特务纵火”故伎,这一事实得到了当时在拉萨现场的藏人、外国人和研究者的证实。

314日,图伯特人在拉萨的抗议事件发生不久,抗议者和执勤者之间发生肢体冲突,中国军警不但不制止,反而撤离了现场,之后事态更加恶化砸了商店、烧了车、打了人----这就是中国政府大力宣称的“3•14拉萨打砸抢烧暴力犯罪事件”。但是,当我们仔细研究整个314日的照片、录像和当时现场的记录等,就会发现中政府再次故技重施---派遣“特务纵队”诱引民众进行更过激的行动,并砸商店、烧车、打人---以及发生中国政府大力宣传的“13名无辜群众被烧死或砍死”(虽然这个说法还存在诸多疑点)的情况。

《拉萨现场日记:拉萨的天空彷佛仍在燃烧》这样记录:“一些“暴徒”在老城区附近的街道上殴打汉人,而一些示威者在制止殴打。一些“暴徒”似乎为表明藏人身份而穿着不太合体的藏装。需要说明的是,一名“暴徒”的身影出现在几天后的电视上时,很多当地人私下里指出他曾是某公安单位的警察。当一些受伤的汉人逃离老城区时,另一些包工队模样的汉人则兴高采烈地提着麻袋,在被砸商店周围捡拾东西。令人奇怪的是,周围的“暴徒”们并不理会这些汉人“拾荒者”。一些“暴徒”在“打、砸、抢、烧”时似乎有意避开派出所、新闻单位等要害部门,只是象征性地在一些重要单位附近草草了事之后,就号召人群奔向下一个目标。一些“暴徒”在行凶结束后走进了公安派出所、安全部门等单位,有很多目击者证实了这一点。这令人不免回想起89年当局派出的“打、砸、抢、烧”的“造势部队”----”

从上面的记录中可以看出,示威者和“暴徒”是完全不同的两个群体。

《拉萨的天空仿佛仍在燃烧——拉萨现场日记》也指出:据观察和了解,这次事件的参与者,多数为城市贫民及子女、进城务工人员---和平示威的同情者,其中不排除当局“造势部队”人员的可能。

“造势部队”是19893月,图伯特首都拉萨发生抗议后,中国政府采取了血腥镇压。中国新闻记者唐达献对此次镇压进行记录,他在《刺刀直指拉萨--一九八九年西藏拉萨事件纪实》中指出:“三月五日凌晨,中共西藏武警部队接到了由中共武警总司令李连秀签发的作战动员令后,立即编排了战斗序列计划;它包括以下几个方面的内容其中第五是﹕特务分队紧急抽调三百人扮成市民和僧侣在五日上午打入八角街和拉萨其他闹事地点,配合公安厅、市公安局的便衣完成造势的任务。烧毁大召寺东北方向的经塔。砸抢闹市区的粮店,引发市民哄抢粮食,并对藏甘贸易公司进行煽动性攻击。鼓励民众哄抢商店物资。除指定地点外,不得对其他设施进行攻击。”

2008314日拉萨发生抗议事件之后,华人学者陈破空先生立即质疑:“暴力的登场相当诡异。----谁是暴乱的幕后黑手?又是谁扮演了暴徒?”

西藏著名作家唯色女士的记录提到了“参杂便衣假扮藏人”的消息。

另外,指证中国警察扮演图伯特人实施暴力的是一位当时在拉萨学习的泰国华人,她是近距离亲眼目睹,而且,从媒体播放新闻图片中认出了警察身份。

“这名泰国华侨到拉萨学习,和当地一名警察是朋友,经常到派出所去,因此也认识其他警察。14日拉萨发生了藏人的示威游行。当时她和其他外国人被集中到八角街派出所,名义上是保护他们。这个女士亲眼看到一名警察,手里拿着刀,跟着一些被抓的人一起走进来,之后这个人脱掉藏人服装,换回警察服装。”(1)后来,这泰国华人离开拉萨到了国外后在媒体上认出了这位装扮图伯特人的警察。
 
持长刀者是中共特务人员
“这位女士第二天和其他外国人士一起被迫离开拉萨。经过尼泊尔抵达印度。她在BBC电视画面中和中共大使馆发给媒体的图片中认出了这个假冒藏人的警察。”(2

这位泰国华人认出来的这位“造势部队”成员的照片是中国政府向外界宣传图伯特人314日实施“暴力”的“最有力”证据之一,但是,“造势部队”成员实施暴力的照片发出不久被人认出他是警察之后,中国政府对照片进行了修改,而这位警察从照片中消失了。

“这位女士向印度的流亡藏人组织讲述了她的发现。在17日(317日)的集会上,藏人组织向外界宣布了这是一张假照片。中共大使馆向媒体先后发送了两组图片,但是在同样的画面中,第二组的照片里这个假冒藏人消失了。”(3

经过对各方信息和中国政府一贯的做法等进行综合分析后真相更加明了。从图伯特人的现场记录、照片和录像等中不难看出314日拉萨发生抗议事件,特别是当抗议变成过激事件后“抗议者”和“暴徒”虽然集聚在同一地点,但是,他们的所作所为完全不同,很明显“抗议者”和“暴徒”有着不同的目的。“暴徒”的行为是“抗议者”所反对和制止的。另外,中国政府面对大型的抗议运动,一次又一次地派遣“造势部队”从拉萨到北京的六四抗议,中国政府采用过抹黑抗议者的恶劣手段。十年后各路信息证明了2008314日中国政府故技重施,派遣“造势部队”进行施暴,误导民众,使和平抗议向过激事件引领。说白了中国政府所宣传的“3•14拉萨打砸抢烧暴力犯罪事件”真正的幕后黑手是中国政府,实施“打砸抢烧暴力犯罪”是中国政府派遣的公安、国安等部门特务人员。

中共处理后散发给媒体的照片中特务人员没有了
也许有人会说,中国政府不会笨到派遣本地公安等部门的人员执行这一特殊任务。不过请记住图伯特人和中国人很容易区分,特别是常住拉萨的图伯特人和外地来的中国人有着完全不同的肤色,所以,当时派出武警或者军队中的中国人扮演造势部队”会太显眼,一看就会知道,肤色差异很明显,所以,中国当权者只能让当地的警察、安全等部门担任此“重任”。

中国政府这样的策划似乎很完美,但是,当中国政府在媒体上大肆宣传图伯特人在萨拉实施“暴力”打、砸、抢、烧时,很多当地人认出这些罪该万死的“暴徒”竟然是公安、国安等部门的人员,甚至,外国人都认出“暴徒”施暴照片中的警察。

总之,2008年图伯特人抗议十年后,各方信息证实了314日中国政府派遣公安、国安等人员假扮成图伯特人混入抗议队伍实施暴力,并引诱抗议群众按他们规划好的路线一路打、砸、抢、烧数小时,中国政府以抗议者实施“暴力”为由展开武力镇压。2008年图伯特人抗议十周年后越来越清楚的是中国政府大肆宣传的所谓“314日打砸抢烧暴力犯罪事件”事实上是中国政府有关部门实施的暴力恐怖事件,中国政府对314日实施暴力活动造成的枪杀、逮捕、失踪、判刑等非法行为和所有损失负有不可推卸的责任。

注释:
1http://www.epochtimes.com/gb/8/3/21/n2053838.htm
2)同上。
3)同上。
2018/9/5

2018年9月10日 星期一

How far is Tibet from real human rights and rule of law?



The tragic case of Tibetan language advocate Tashi Wangchuk highlights how Beijing 'games the system' on political disputes

Sang Jie(sangjey kep)


Tibet.net, the official website of the Central Tibetan Administration, calls for the immediate release of Tibetan language advocate Tashi Wangchuk from prison on June 6 after he was jailed for five years for inciting separatism. (Photo supplied)
Liang Xiaojun, a defense lawyer for Tibetan language advocate Tashi Wangchuk, posted a message on his Twitter account on Aug. 22 relaying the verdict in Tashi's appeal after he was charged with inciting separatism for seeking broader inclusion of the language in the local curriculum.
Earlier on May 22, the Yushu Intermediate Court in China's western Qinghai province had sentenced him to five years in jail, and the Qinghai Higher People's Court found no reason to overrule this.
"According to the verdict we received, Tashi Wangchuk's personal argument and his lawyer's defense statement were not adopted at the appeal, and the original judgment has been upheld," Liang tweeted.
The case dates back to Jan. 27, 2016, when The New York Times released a documentary about a lawsuit filed by Tashi, who had accused the Tibetan local government of failing to protect and promote Tibetan culture. After the video was broadcast, Tashi was arbitrarily detained. His case was finally opened for trial on Jan. 4.
The higher court's verdict angered several human rights organizations and groups supporting Tibet, who said it highlighted how the rule of law was being ignored in the region when dealing with Tibetan issues.
On Aug. 23, the Tibetan Advocacy Coalition released a statement criticizing the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) for trampling on the constitution.
"China's dismissal of Tashi Wangchuk's appeal is a mockery of justice and shows a disdain for [how the rest of the world views this]," it said.
The International Tibet Network also issued a statement denouncing the verdict.
"The rejection of [his] appeal is clear proof that people should be trembling with fear. China's new policy aims to criminalize Tibetan culture, such as by attacking people or groups that are only trying to promote their own language and culture. China should immediately release Tashi Wangchuk unconditionally," it read.
But the higher court's ruling was not unexpected given that higher courts routinely support the original verdicts in China on matters of national security, attempts to "split the country" or other political issues especially in Tibet.
Since the rule of the CCP almost always trumps the rule of law in China, under the guiding principle of national stability, the law often seems like little more than a kind of wallpaper or decoration that can be stripped away or changed whenever the government feels like it.
This is especially true for Tibetans.
In Tashi's case, there were no legal grounds for his arrest, prosecution and sentencing as the charge leveled against him could not be supported in a real, functioning court of law.
The so-called evidence presented against him at both courts was nothing if not ridiculous. The centerpiece was a documentary released by the Times detailing Tashi's original lawsuit accusing the local government of failing to protect and promote Tibetan culture.
It was broadcast online, meaning it was viewable by anyone around the world with an internet connection. Everyone, that is, except those who live in a few countries including mainland China as Beijing promptly blocked it.
That being said, more savvy Chinese, especially in big cities, can still get around the censors in most cases by using a virtual private network.
To anyone not concerned with protecting the party's power in China, the documentary showed nothing to justify the charge Tashi was facing. But this is China and if the government wishes to find fault with someone, especially in Tibet, it doesn't need to worry about finding a suitable pretext.
However, all Tashi was doing in launching his appeal was exercising his right to freedom of speech and fighting to preserve his region's traditional language.
During his appeal, his lawyers noted how his conviction was "a violation of the people's right to enjoy freedom of speech and the media's right to supervise and report on [matters of law]."
"Tashi Wangchuk is just a young Tibetan who expressed his simple concern for the reduction [in the scale] of Tibetan culture and language classes," they continued.
"We implore the higher court to reduce the heavy sentence … to safeguard the basic rights of citizens and the dignity of the law."
Those pleas fell on deaf ears, however, with the Qinghai Higher People's Court delivering a stinging reply.
"The court believes that when the appellant, Tashi Wangchuk, became actively involved in the filming [of the documentary] and accepted interviews from the media to deliver comments that undermined the solidarity of ethnic groups and the unity of the state, he committed acts commensurate with the offense of inciting separatism."
As such, the court said it had no choice but to dismiss the appeal and uphold the original judgment. It stressed this ruling was final and could not be challenged at any other court in the future.
Some researchers of human rights issues in Tibet and Chinese law in general have pointed out that, in many cases involving political issues in Tibet, the lower court seeks advice from the appellate court before delivering its verdict. This is a clear violation of the rule of law and ridicules the whole concept of appealing an unfair decision.
Even more egregious is how such a system reconfigures the role of Chinese lawyers. They are not the guardians of the law but rather "witnesses to the legal process."
As Ling Qilei, the second of Tashi's defense lawyers, noted, one of the great humiliations for those who are part of China's legal machinery is that they are cogs in a machine with almost no power to fight against such morally wrong decision.
"There's no other way. We are just witnesses to the legal process," he said.
Sang Jieja is a Tibetan writer, commentator and a former Chinese spokesman for the exiled Tibetan government. He is now studying in Spain.