Monday 23 February 2009
Public probe into prison death faulted and praised
Yunnan propaganda authorities have hailed the work of a netizens’ “independent investigation” into the mysterious death of a man in detention as a breakthrough in transparency. But legal experts say the move raises concerns about interventions in the justice system.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Public probe into prison death faulted and praised
Vivian Wu
23 February 2009
Yunnan propaganda authorities have hailed the work of a netizens’ “independent investigation” into the mysterious death of a man in detention as a breakthrough in transparency. But legal experts say the move raises concerns about interventions in the justice system.
Li Qiaoming, a 24-year-old resident from Yuxi city, Yunnan province, was taken into custody at the Yining county detention house for the illegal felling of trees on January 27. On February 8, he was found with serious injuries and died from a wound to his head in hospital four days later, according to mainland media.
Custody officers claimed Li hit his head on a wall playing a game of hide-and-seek with other inmates, but The Yunnan Information Daily reported Li’s father as saying he saw his son’s body “with a purple and swollen head” and he doubted that a depressed person in custody would have played such a game.
The case has been headline news and generated heated public discussion, especially among a large number of angry netizens who called for an investigation.
To quell the public outcry, Yunnan propaganda authorities invited a group of netizens to visit the detention centre last week and listen to the police explanation.
In their report on Saturday, the group said they had no evidence to challenge the police conclusion that Li had died playing a game of hide-and-seek.
Wu Hao, a Yunnan propaganda official, praised the netizens’ probe in an online interview yesterday. “This invitation was a way to show the government’s attention to the public’s opinion, especially as expressed on the internet. This is a criminal case but it is becoming a public case, and we are trying to provide a way to satisfy the right to know.”
But after a brief celebration among some netizens of the “positive move to respond to public opinion through a transparent channel”, some in the legal community have raised concerns.
Beijing media lawyer Pu Zhiqiang said he doubted that such an organised investigation could be balanced and independent, and that the investigation itself was “an illegal action which couldn’t disclose the truth but was just an intervention in the judicial process”.
“Can such group of netizens represent the entire population?” Mr. Pu said. “This is a setback for a society claiming to follow rule by law and may be an attempt to varnish over the truth using a public relations stunt.
“The propaganda department has no right to organise individuals to freely enter or exit a custody centre.
He said the fact that netizens had asked for an investigation showed the credibility of the state mechanism had collapsed, and the organised trip was just for show.
Peking University Law School professor Chen Ruihua said the case was the result of a systematic problem in China’s legal system that allowed detention houses to become sites for possible physical abuse and interrogations that used torture.
“In China, detention houses are administered and governed by the police, who hope to advance their investigations by putting pressure on suspects in custody,” Professor Chen said.
“Under such a legal structure, any conclusions drawn by the police will be challenged by the public.”
Post a Comment