|
Diqing Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture People’s
Procuratorate Indictment
Diqing [Tibetan: Dechen] Procuratorate (2008) Criminal Indictment No. 11
Defendant Gonpo Tserang,
male, born December 13, 1976, identification number: 523232197612131519,
from Ruoergai [Dzoege] County, Aba [Ngaba] Prefecture, Sichuan Province,
understands Tibetan and English and [is employed as a] guide in the
expeditions department of the Xianggelila Travel Service. Prior to arrest,
resided at 3-1-2 Old Civil Aviation Development, Jiantang Town, Xianggelila
County. Placed under criminal detention by the Diqing Prefecture Public
Security Bureau on March 23, 2008, on suspicion of inciting splittism. On
April 26 of the same year, after approval from our procuratorate, he was
arrested by the Diqing Prefecture Public Security Bureau in accordance with
the law. He is now in custody and has no prior criminal record.
The Diqing Prefecture Public Security Bureau completed its investigation and
sent the case of Gonpo Tserang, suspected of the crime of inciting splittism,
to our procuratorate on June 25, 2008, for review and prosecution. After
receiving the case, we notified the defendant of his right to retain defense
counsel, questioned the defendant in accordance with the law, and reviewed
all of the case materials. On July 31, 2008, the case was sent back to the
Diqing Prefecture Public Security Bureau for additional investigation, and
on August 29 the bureau concluded its investigation and reported [its
findings] back to our procuratorate.
Following investigation in accordance with the law, it was ascertained that
from March 16 to 18, 2008, defendant Gonpo Tserang used the Internet and a
mobile telephone to send inflammatory emails and messages that distorted the
facts and true situation regarding social stability in the Tibetan area
following the “March 14 incident” to Daiwei, Jimu, and Pan Feilaici, [who
were all] outside the country.
Evidence to support the aforementioned facts is as follows:
1. Registration record of
criminal case received;
2. The confession and
explanation provided by the defendant;
3. Record of
identification made at the crime scene;
4. Identification
photographs;
5. List of items and
documents seized;
6. Report of electronic
data evidence obtained;
7. Remote investigation
report;
8. Attorney authorization
letter;
9. English translation
aptitude certificate;
10. English translation
report.
Our procuratorate finds that
defendant Gonpo Tserang used the Internet to deliberately fabricate rumors,
distort the true situation, and incite splittism. His actions violated
Article 103(2) of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China [PRC].
The facts of the crime are clear, the evidence is certain and abundant, and
he should be held criminally responsible for the crime of inciting splittism.
In accordance with Article 141 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the PRC, we
[hereby] file this indictment and request that you impose a sentence in
accordance with the law.
Sincerely,
Diqing Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture Intermediate People’s Court of Yunnan
Province
Procurator: Su Meiyu
September 19, 2008
Attachments:
1. Defendant Gonpo
Tserang is currently being held at the Xianggelila County Detention Center
2. One copy of list of
evidence, copies of primary evidence [blank] items [blank] pages
*
Higher People’s Court of Yunnan Province
Criminal Decision
(2008) Yunnan Higher Criminal Court Final No. 1685
The original prosecuting
organ is the Diqing Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture [TAP] People’s
Procuratorate of Yunnan Province.
The appellant (defendant
in the original trial) is Gonpo Tserang, male, born on December 13, 1976,
from Ruoergai [Dzoege] County, Aba [Ngaba] Prefecture, Sichuan Province,
Tibetan ethnicity, primary school education, [employed as a] guide in the
expeditions department of Xianggelila Travel Service, and resides at 3-1-2
Old Civil Aviation Development, Jiantang Town, Xianggelila County. [The
appellant] was placed under criminal detention in this case on March 23,
2008, arrested on April 26 of the same year, and is currently being held in
the Xianggelila Detention Center.
The Yunnan Provincial
Diqing TAP Intermediate People’s Court tried the case brought against Gonpo
Tserang, defendant in the original trial, by the Yunnan Provincial Diqing
TAP People’s Procuratorate on charges of inciting splittism and issued a
criminal verdict on October 27, 2008, for the case (2008) Diqing Criminal
First Instance No. 12. The defendant in the original trial Gonpo Tserang did
not accept the verdict and appealed. This court formed a collegiate bench in
accordance with the law and, after reviewing the case file, determined that
the facts in the case were clear and decided that the case would be tried
without a hearing. The trial has now been concluded.
The original verdict found that, from March 16 to 18, 2008, defendant Gonpo
Tserang used the Internet and a mobile telephone to send inflammatory email
and text messages that distorted the facts and true situation regarding
social stability in the Tibetan area following the “March 14 incident” to
Daiwei, Jimu, Pan Feilaici, Kaili Yasi, Teleisha, and Fute, [who were all]
outside the country. Based on the aforementioned facts and related evidence
and in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations, the original
verdict found that defendant Gonpo Tserang committed the crime of inciting
splittism and sentenced him to three years’ imprisonment with subsequent
deprivation of political rights for one year. The laptop computer (IBM) and
mobile telephone (Nokia) used in the crime were confiscated in accordance
with the law.
After the verdict was
announced, the defendant in the original trial Gonpo Tserang appealed,
saying that the messages he sent had no connection to the “March 14
incident”; that his actions incited ethnic hatred, but that the
circumstances were not serious and should therefore not constitute either
the crime of inciting ethnic hatred or inciting splittism; and that his
acknowledgement of and attitude toward the damage caused by his actions had
been relatively good, he had shown remorse, and no longer posed a threat to
society.
Through trial, it was
ascertained that from March 16 to 18, 2008, appellant Gonpo Tserang had,
following the “March 14 incident,” used the Internet and a mobile telephone
to send inflammatory email and text messages that distorted the facts and
true situation regarding social stability in the Tibetan area to Daiwei,
Jimu, Pan Feilaici, Kaili Yasi, Teleisha, and Fute, [all of whom were]
outside the country.
The aforementioned facts
are confirmed by evidence that was presented and cross-examined in the trial
of first instance, including the investigation report and related materials
prepared by the public security organ, photographs of the seized portable
computer, and a certified investigation report on data from the portable
computer, a remote investigation report, certified conclusions based on a
mobile telephone, a translation report, and appellant Gonpo Tserang’s
confession. As the aforementioned evidence was obtained following lawful
procedure and its sources are true and lawful, it may be accepted [in this
trial].
This court finds that the
appellant Gonpo Tserang used the Internet and a mobile telephone to send
email and text messages that distorted the facts of the “March 14 incident”
to persons outside the country and that his actions were a violation of the
Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China [PRC], constitute the crime
of inciting splittism, and should be severely punished. Appellant Gonpo
Tserang [himself] clearly knew that the email and text messages he created
distorted the facts and incited splittism, yet he proceeded to use the
Internet and a mobile telephone to disseminate them on several occasions to
persons outside the country, viciously attacking state political power,
slandering the measures taken by law-enforcement agencies to stabilize
society and establish normal social order. His reasons for appeal do not
accord with the facts as found, and this court cannot accept them. In
summary, the original facts as determined in the verdict of first instance
are clear, the evidence is certain and abundant, the crime and laws are
applied properly, the sentence is appropriate, and the adjudication process
was in accordance with the law. Therefore, in order to uphold the
territorial integrity and security of the PRC and severely combat against
criminal elements who incite splittism and undermine national unity, in
accordance with Article 189(1) of the Criminal Procedure Law of the PRC and
Articles 103(2), 55, 56, 64, and 47 of the Criminal Law of the PRC, this
court rules as follows:
The appeal is rejected
and the original verdict stands.
The ruling in this case is final.
Presiding Judge: Lin Li
Judicial Officer: Yang Zhigang
Judicial Officer: Bai Chongliang
January 5, 2009
[Court] clerk: Chen Lijuan
|