In 2007 and 2008, Wu Baoquan, a man from Inner Mongolia, was arrested twice by Ordos police for posting a report on land expropriation on the Internet. He was detained for 65,438+00 days for the first time and sentenced to 65,438+0 years for libel for the second time. Wu refused to accept the appeal. Results In the absence of any new criminal facts, the sentence was changed from 1 year to 2 years after retrial.
According to Xinhua News, yesterday, Hubei Intermediate People's Court said that during the retrial, because Wu Baoquan had no regrets during his bail pending trial, a series of villagers petitioned and were sentenced to one year in prison. On February 26th this year, he was sentenced to two years' imprisonment.
However, according to the villagers, on February 19, Dongsheng District People's Court held a hearing to retry Wu Baoquan's case. In the afternoon, Wu Baoquan was released on bail pending trial, picked up by several villagers, and then checked into a hotel, took a bath and got a haircut. At about 6:5438+00 the next morning, Wu received a notice from the Dongsheng District People's Court asking him to return to the court to sign. Some villagers suggested not to go, but Wu did not adopt it. As a result, he was put in jail again.
"How can you contact us in less than a day?" A villager said.
The retrial judgment did not mention a series of villagers during Wu Baoquan's bail pending trial. In addition, the final signature was "February 2009 19", not February 26th.
Hubei Intermediate People's Court also stated that the court of first instance found Wu Baoquan guilty of libel, not because he "slandered the government", but because he slandered a natural person. The retrial judgment stated that "the defendant Wu Baoquan ... openly fabricated facts and insulted others and the government by posting on many Internet websites, which had a bad influence on individuals and the region and seriously endangered the development order of the region as an advanced urban area in the country, and his behavior constituted a crime of defamation."
He Bing, a professor at China University of Political Science and Law, believes that the public prosecution organ must designate the victim if the right of personal reputation is infringed. Without victims, there is no crime. If privacy is involved, it may not be stipulated in the public documents, but the victim should be clearly defined in the proceedings, otherwise the defendant cannot defend. The speech in this case involves public management and there is no personal privacy. There is no reason not to disclose the name of the victim.
According to the criminal law, libel cases are cases of private prosecution, and only those who have been informed can be dealt with except those that seriously endanger social order and national interests. The Wu Baoquan case is a public prosecution. In this regard, He Bing questioned that "seriously endangering social order means that social management order such as finance, public security and transportation and other public order are seriously damaged, resulting in social disorder and social chaos. This obviously does not exist in the Wu case. If an article can seriously undermine the social order, then the social order is too fragile. And national interests should refer to the overall interests of the country, excluding local public interests. If interpreted broadly, township governments can also claim that national interests are damaged. "
Article 205 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that presidents of people's courts at all levels must submit legally effective judgments and rulings of their own courts to the judicial committee for handling if they find that there are errors in ascertaining the facts or applying the law.
Lawyers of Beijing Qijian Law Firm believe that the trial supervision procedure initiated by Hubei Intermediate People's Court means that Wu's case may be overturned.