[ Translator's Note: Du Daobin, a prolific internet political essayist from Hubei Province and a member of the Independent Chinese PEN Center (ICPC), was taken into custody about one month after this letter appeared on the internet. In this letter, he asks Vaclav Havel to assist in the campaign to free Liu Di, a young internet essayist who had been detained for nearly a year without formal charges or trial at the time the letter was written. Liu Di was subsequently released before indictment due to lack of evidence. Du Daobin, however, was formally indicted of ¡°inciting subversion¡± in late April 2004. A trial date has not been set yet.]

September 27, 2003

Dear Mr. Havel,

Human rights are rights shared by all people of the world. There are no exceptions; neither for nationalities, nor for individuals. Today, no one can possibly question the universal value of human rights. It is precisely because of the universality of human rights that whenever a government ¨Cregardless of its location-- violates the human rights of its people, such persecution should be viewed as a harm to all people, and should be unanimously condemned by all of mankind.

Although today many more people enjoy freedom and dignity compared with any other period in history, the shadow of autocratic dictatorships has not vanished from the world. In some countries, such as the P.R.C. and North Korea, when compared with the middle ages, although the techniques of authoritarianism have changed¡ªtoday there isn't as much blood ¡ª the destruction of freedom and the deprivation of human rights has not abated in the slightest. Indeed, after 9/11, because terrorism in the Middle East has attracted so much attention and because global cooperation is needed to fight against terror, attention to the human rights records of countries around the world has weakened. For a time during the 1990s, authoritarianism was constrained; now China and other countries are seizing this opportunity to bring it back to life. Beginning in late 2002, the Chinese government intensified its attack on political dissidents, and sent over 40 political dissidents, one after the next, to prison. We can painfully see that the international community is not paying sufficient attention to the Chinese government's actions against human rights; the media seems to be filled only with admiration for China 's so-called economic miracle. Absent is condemnation of this country's disastrous human rights record.

Ms. Liu Di, is one of those who has been caught up in this new round of suppression. Before she was arrested, Liu Di was a student in the psychology department of Beijing Normal University , and she was a fairly well known internet essayist. Using the pen name ¡°Stainless Steel Mouse¡± to post essays on the internet, many of Liu Di's social commentaries and thought pieces received good reviews from readers on the Chinese internet. This young woman, who will turn 23 this October 9 th [2003], was removed from campus by Beijing 's secret police, who failed to follow prescribed legal procedures when they took her into custody. As of the date of this letter to you, eleven months have passed since Liu Di was taken into custody. The Beijing authorities have neither made public any evidence supporting her arrest, nor have they clarified what crime she is suspected of, nor has there been a public indictment or public trial, let alone a sentence. As of today, Liu Di's family still has not been able to see her. During this year, many of Liu Di's basic human rights have been violated: for example, the right to personal liberty, the right to freedom of association and expression, the right to know, the right to a fair and public trial, the right to receive an education. She has also been deprived of the right to see her family.

According to Liu Di's family, some old friends, and Li Yibin and two other suspects in the same case, it is fairly clear that she has been arrested solely for writings in which she peacefully expressed her views and opinions. For example, she publicly posted approximately ten essays on the ¡°Democracy and Freedom¡± website, in which she resolutely seeks democracy and freedom and implicitly satirizes the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime for arbitrarily violating human rights. Liu Di also appealed openly on behalf of another political dissident who had been illegally arrested. In her actions and behavior , Liu Di was simply exercising her right as a citizen to freedom of expression. Some Chinese legal experts have also pointed out that the government's arrest of Liu Di not only violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but also contradicts the Chinese constitution and many provisions of Chinese law.

In civilized countries, not only would Liu Di not be persecuted, she would be the object of the police's protection. But, in fact, Liu Di was taken into custody simply for exercising her right to freedom of expression. Using the measure of civilized countries to evaluate Liu Di's case, it is clearly a classic example of a miscarriage of justice. Liu Di's detention has aroused a public protest in China . From the day she was first taken into detention, the protest has not stopped. We have launched two fairly large scale petition movements. Over 1800 people signed petitions to release Liu Di, and many famous Chinese scholars both inside and outside of China also participated in these two petition drives. On the BBSs this past year, concern about Liu Di has consistently been one of the hot topics. October 9 is Liu Di's birthday. As October 9 [2003] is approaching, civil society activists are planning a variety of collective activities to give further support to Liu Di, for example, the mass mailing of birthday cards to Liu Di in prison and to engage in a ¡°mock detention.¡± We also considered taking to the streets to protest, but because the Chinese authorities strictly prohibit demonstrations, we decided against this course of action.

The Chinese people are not afraid of getting into trouble. The blood on Tiananmen Square in 1989 amply proves this point. We do not lack the courage to engage in a revolt to attack the current Chinese equivalent of the Bastille ¨C Qincheng Prison. It is simply because too much blood has flowed in the past that we have now soberly recognized that it is useless to use flesh and blood to fight bullets; violent revolution will most likely lead to a new cycle of violence. During this past year, we used peaceful methods with the hope that we could reach a common understanding with the Chinese government to release Liu Di. We hoped that through persuasion we could convince Beijing to adopt new ways and to correct their mistake. However, the autocratic regime that has blind faith in violence simply regards the sound of peace as being empty of content; it pays absolutely no attention to either protests or petitions. The leaders completely disregard human rights and international human rights covenants as well as public opinion. To this day, Liu Di still hasn't been released or put on trial. Nor has the government provided any explanation about her case to the Chinese citizenry. From the perspective of their matchless weapons of violence, the CCP government is a tiger. However, from the perspective of culture, the CCP is like a gigantic hedgehog. In the face of the powerful tide of freedom and democracy, it is extremely panic-stricken, and attempts to rely on curling up together in order to achieve a sense of security.

When the Czech people overthrew the autocratic government there and walked towards democracy and freedom, many intellectuals in China sincerely wished you happiness and success. The road to democracy in China has faced numerous obstacles; each time an obstacle appears we think we must rely on our own efforts. Although there is no lack of beggars among the Chinese people, most Chinese advocate self-reliance. I have seen many of these kind of people; when they have lost their hammer, they would prefer to use a brick for the task, rather than asking to borrow a hammer from their neighbor.

With respect to Liu Di, during the past year, on the one hand, we hoped that the Beijing regime would act benevolently; on the other hand, we hoped that we could resolve the issue through the efforts of civil society. But as of today, there has been no result. We don't know how long this situation will last. Consequently, we are forced to appeal to the international community; we hope an appeal will lead to a broad base of support for Liu Di. Through this widespread support, we hope to exert greater pressure on the Beijing regime. Through these efforts, we hope to secure Liu Di's early release and to urge the Chinese government to end political persecution. In our plan to appeal to the international community, we first thought of you. Chinese intellectuals hold you in great esteem; you are a warrior and sage who has fought for freedom and has been imprisoned by an autocratic regime. My friends asked that I write a letter to you in the hope that our actions to aid Liu Di could receive your strong support! We hope that through the help of you and other famous international figures, we can draw the attention of the whole world to Liu Di and to China 's extremely grim human rights situation. Although you are not Chinese, the political persecution of Liu Di harms not only Chinese political dissidents, but also the dignity of all persons in our global village.

Finally, I should explain, just yesterday when I contemplated writing you a letter, I thought it was an unimaginably bold move. I am simply an ordinary writer and not well-known. To write a letter to you ¨Csomeone who possesses matchless honor and glory¡ªI may well be ridiculed as aiming to ¡°attach myself to a bigwig.¡± Let them ridicule me; if an international appeal can lead to a reversal of the injustice of Liu Di's case, my own gains and losses, at least at present, are not important. In addition to this internal resistance, there is also an external factor that leads me to speak in this way. In China , if a Chinese citizen tells someone from another country about China 's domestic affairs, he may be condemned as ¡°harming the honor of the nation.¡± A Chinese would rather be maltreated by ¡°family members,¡± than lose face before foreigners. However, I am a liberal who believes that human rights transcend sovereignty. I view the issue in this way: today I am a Chinese citizen, but if my assets were sufficient and the Czech Republic accepted me, and most important, if I were willing to leave my motherland, wouldn't I possibly become a Czech citizen in just a few months? Regardless of whether I am in the Czech Republic , or in China , my rights are similarly inviolable. I think this reasoning can be applied to anyone, including you. Regardless of the relative difference in our status, I am fortunate to live in the same era as you. We are identical in one respect: we are both free human beings.

My friends and I hope that you will sign your honorable name to our petition letter.

Wishing you good health and a long life!

A student and loyal reader in China ,

Du Daobin

[Originally posted in Chinese on Xinshiji ÐÂÊÀ¼Í , New Century Net]

[Chinese original available at: http://dajiyuan.com/gb/3/10/31/n403261.htm ]

Translation by Andrea Worden