The tragic case of Tibetan language advocate Tashi
Wangchuk highlights how Beijing 'games the system' on political disputes
Sang Jie(sangjey kep)
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.
沒有留言:
張貼留言