Du Daobin: “Will My Going to Prison Change Anything?”

By Andrea Worden*
May 27, 2004

Du Daobin, a 39 year-old internet political essayist, stood trial in Hubei Province on May 18, 2004 on charges of “inciting subversion.” During the hearing, which lasted less than three hours, Du argued for his innocence. According to a report on Radio Free Asia, the lawyer Du retained, well-known criminal defense attorney Mo Shaoping, was not present at the trial because the court only informed Mo on Friday, May 14 of the trial date, and he was unable to rearrange his schedule for May 18 on such short notice. Given that there is close to a 100% conviction rate of defendants in politically sensitive cases in China , Du's conviction is a virtual certainty.

Before he was detained in late October 2003, Du was a frequent commentator on politics and human rights in China and Hong Kong . His detention came after his public efforts to organize support for Liu Di, a college student and fellow internet essayist who had been detained without formal charges for nearly a year when Du helped organize a campaign for her release. His efforts on her behalf included an open letter to Vaclav Havel, which he posted on the internet. Du wrote (in Chinese):

[I]t is fairly clear that [Liu Di] 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 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.

After about two months of investigative detention, the public security bureau submitted Du's case to the prosecutor's office with the recommendation that Du be indicted for “inciting subversion.” In early February 2004, the prosecutor's office returned the case to the public security bureau for supplemental investigation due to insufficient evidence. Observers were hopeful that this move would mean Du's imminent release, because Liu Di had been released a few months earlier after her case had similarly been returned to the public security bureau for lack of evidence. At the conclusion of a month of supplemental investigation, however, Du's case was transferred back to the prosecutor's office, which apparently decided that the problem had been rectified, because Du was subsequently indicted.

The indictment alleges that:

“between July 2002 and October 2003, the defendant Du Daobin, posted 26 essays on the internet (including one entitled “On the Legitimacy of Subverting State Power”) and used rumor-mongering, slander and other methods to attack the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party and the people's democratic dictatorship. Moreover, his essays slandered the socialist system and openly disseminated the ideas and views that ‘subverting state power is legitimate' and that the CCP and state leadership are ‘arch usurpers of state power.' Consequently, he incited subversion of state power and the overthrow of the socialist system.”

To the extent that Du Daobin was detained and tried for the peaceful expression of his political views -- which in light of the allegations in the indictment seems likely -- the PRC government's actions contravene the freedom of expression provisions contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Du Daobin's detention and trial (and likely conviction) also violate the Chinese Constitution's provision protecting freedom of expression and the recent amendment to the Constitution in which the Chinese government obligates itself to “respect and safeguard human rights.”

The allegations contained in Du Daobin's indictment highlight the inherent arbitrariness of the crime of “inciting subversion,” which is defined in a circular fashion as “inciting others by spreading rumors or slander or any other means to subvert state power or overthrow the socialist system.” Devoid of any specificity or standards, the crimes of “inciting subversion” and “subversion” are used arbitrarily by the Chinese authorities to suppress any behavior they find threatening, or simply don't like. So the labor protest leaders in Liaoning , Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang, were convicted of subversion, as was webmaster Huang Qi, on whose behalf Liu Di had issued an appeal.

Other essayists and activists -- such as the four members of the New Youth Study Group and lawyer Zhao Changqing, who drafted an open letter to the 16 th Party Congress that was signed by nearly 200 activists, which called for, among other things, the release of all political prisoners -- were convicted of subversion or inciting subversion. And Liu Di, for whose release Du Daobin so actively campaigned, was arrested for suspicion of inciting subversion.

In February of this year, the well-known Beijing-based freelance writer Liu Xiaobo, who is also the president of the Independent Chinese PEN Center (ICPC), along with about 100 other prominent writers, journalists and academics (including Liu Di, who was by then released from detention), signed a petition calling for Du's release and requesting that the National People's Congress and the Supreme People's Court issue interpretations that would set forth standards for the crime “inciting subversion.” The petition notes that the law is so vague that it provides no guidance regarding what speech might possibly be construed as “inciting subversion,” (and thus is easily abused by the authorities), and that the law (and its application) were at odds with the Constitution's provision protecting freedom of speech. To date, there has been no response.

Du Daobin boldly and successfully fought to secure Liu Di's release from detention. Others, such as his fellow ICPC members, are now appealing for his release. But now that Du's case has progressed to trial, the prospects for his release do not look good. About two months before Du was taken into custody last fall, he presciently posted an essay on the internet in which he discussed the possibility that he might end up in prison. Du wrote (in Chinese):

My essays fall under the category of freedom of speech and are protected by the Constitution, thus they don't qualify as grounds for my being sent to jail. But maybe in China , where human rights are not fully protected; speaking the truth according to my conscience may be viewed by some people as breaking the law. That truth may be labeled “harmful information.” The machinery of dictatorship doesn't have much human feeling; perhaps there will be a day when I will be taken away just like Liu Di or Yang Zili [of the New Youth Study Group].

 But even if I do end up in prison, I am not really that afraid. . . . I've dared to hold dissenting political views, and I'm an unrepentant true believer in freedom and democracy. . . . In my subconscious, I don't doubt that I already have one foot at the doorway of the prison. If there comes a day when I actually do face the fire of prison, I will be calm and confident. But will my going to prison change anything? Will it resolve anything? Is it possible that, after serving time in prison, I will abandon liberalism, and start believing in communism?

 *Andrea Worden, a former senior counsel for the Congressional-Executive Commission on China , is currently a fellow at the Yale Law School .

Last Updated: June 2, 2004