During a defense hearing for his client, a Falun Gong adherent, lawyer Xie Yanyi was repeatedly interrupted by the judge and finally expelled from the court.
Immediately after he was driven from the Hui County courtroom in China’s Henan Province, he was arrested by local police. He was released later that night.
The incident, which occurred during the Feb. 17 trial of Falun Gong adherent Zhang Suqin, is a sign that the Chinese legal system is dead, Xie told The Epoch Times.
In China, Falun Gong adherents and their lawyers stand together against a system that no longer even makes a show of being legal.
China’s Human Rights Lawyers
In China, trials result in an over 99 percent conviction rate. Yet some lawyers continue to work with the legal system to attempt to obtain justice for their clients. Their efforts often earn them jail time and torture. But a tiny fraction of China’s lawyers have the goal of “chip[ping] away at the power of the Communist Party, one case at a time,” according to the Reuters report.For years, this tiny but heroic group of human rights lawyers—about 300 of China’s approximately 500,000 lawyers—have been a thorn in the communist regime’s side. Like Xie, they defend those who are unjustly accused, often Falun Gong adherents.
Xie is defending multiple Falun Gong adherents. “All of the cases involving Falun Gong adherents have been a political persecution,” he said to the Chinese language edition of The Epoch Times on Feb. 18.
The ancient practice of Falun Gong is rooted in Chinese culture and emphasizes the cultivation of truth, compassion, and tolerance. The practice has gained hundreds of millions of adherents worldwide.
A Trumped-Up Trial
Zhang Suqin is a Falun Gong practitioner in Hui County. Local police detained her twice for insisting on her belief. She is currently being held in the Xinxiang Detention Center.Xie said Zhang’s case is false, has nothing to do with laws, and is simply a political witch hunt without any evidence.
During the court session, presiding judge Qin Keyan interrupted Xie at least seven times. Xie said: “I listed all the legal grounds to stop her unreasonable interruption. But then she started to question my relationship with Zhang.”
According to Xie, Qin targeted his defense qualifications and stressed that his relationship with his client was one of friendship.
Xie had submitted the relevant authorization statement and materials according to the legal procedures. However, he said, “During the trial, the presiding judge maliciously attacked my acquaintance with Zhang.”
He explained that all materials presented were confirmed by the court. However, the judge’s persistent questions about how, when, and where he met his client, and their private exchange of information, went too far: it was “beyond the duty of a judge.”
After Xie raised objections and protested her questions, the judge suddenly announced an adjournment, saying that she would consult with leadership for instructions. The adjournment lasted for about 30 minutes before the trial resumed.
Xie said: “Zhang Suqin insisted that I defend her, and I also insisted that my status as a defender and the rights of a defender cannot be taken away. I asked the court to protect the right of defense.”
Nonetheless, the judge attacked Xie as “violating the court order,” “publicizing for Falun Gong,” and “refusing the reprimand twice.” Xie was expelled from the court.
A Police State
The judge also told Xie the police had been notified. Xie said: “This is something I can’t tolerate. A judge relies on the police to adjudicate disputes between the defender and the court. It is a very shameful and sad act, which shows the judiciary’s dignity is gone.”To Xie, the judge’s actions indicate that China is now a police state. It means the complete loss of the right to defense, the disappearance of China’s criminal justice system, and the death of the entire legal system, which until recently has at least maintained an appearance of legal proceedings. “This is not a trivial matter,” he said.
Although Zhang will most likely be imprisoned, Xie said that he will not give up on the case.
The 709 Incident
Xie was a victim of the 709 Incident—the targeting of hundreds of Chinese human rights lawyers that took place on July 9, 2015.After the incident, like many other human rights lawyers involved in cases with religious groups, Xie lost his license to practice law.
According to attorney Wang Yu, losing the license to practice imposed great obstacles on China’s human rights lawyers. However, Wang said they continue to insist on defending their rights.
Cloaking Persecution Under Guise of Law
In 2016, new additions to China’s “Lawyer’s Law”—“Law Firm Management Measures” and “Lawyer Management Measures”—allowed China’s Ministry of Justice to revoke a lawyer’s license on arbitrary grounds, a lawyer using the pseudonym Fang Yuan told The Epoch Times.In addition, Fang said, cases involving Falun Gong adherents are tried in specially designated courts.
Although Xie’s lawyer’s license was revoked, a provision in Chinese law allows defendants to choose guardians, relatives, or friends as their defenders, “so that they can fully exercise their right to defense.” Xie was legally able to appear in court as Zhang’s defender, under this provision.
Zhiwei (a pseudonym) is a fellow lawyer who once represented Falun Gong cases.
He told The Epoch Times he shares Xie’s respect for the Falun Gong adherents he defended. Their “kindness, good faith, and sense of rules” are “rare” in China, he said.
Shining Light on Evil
Xie said he believes the judge deliberately obstructed his defense in order to minimize the impact of his defense during the court hearing. Although there is little chance of his words changing the outcome of the trial, he knows that someone will hear what he has to say, and perhaps hearts will be changed.Xie said there is a positive side to the incident: namely, it exposed the illegal forces at work in China today.
“I have seen people’s heart’s change,” Xie said. “There are good people. The power of justice is unstoppable. This is what I felt [on the day of the court hearing].”