【新唐人2013年05月08日訊】近期，中國大陸各地頻頻爆出冤假錯案，其中包括：朱令鉈中毒案、河南趙作海殺人案、浙江叔侄強姦案等。為此，最高法院常務副院長瀋德詠喊出「寧可錯放，也不可錯判」口號。這是中共為社會穩定，放出的一個政治氣球﹖
5月6號，瀋德詠在《人民法院報》撰文說，一段時期以來，相繼出現的刑事冤假錯案給人民法院帶來了前所未有的挑戰，如不妥為應對，將嚴重制約刑事審判工作的發展。
他提出，防範冤假錯案，要像防範洪水猛獸一樣，寧可錯放，也不可錯判。他認為，錯放一個真正的罪犯，天塌不下來，錯判一個無辜的公民，特別是錯殺了一個人，天就塌下來了。
大陸律師唐荊陵指出，在一個正常的法治國家，就應該秉承這種理念，如果證據不足，就應該不去隨便殺一個人。
大陸律師唐荊陵：「他這種表態也許不能立即對各界司法，發生直接的、迅速的、實質性影響，但是理念可能會慢慢變化，尤其像最高法院本身掌握司法覆核權的，它在涉及死刑的案件上，如果能貫徹這種理念，顯然就能發生很大的效果。」
但是，北京憲政學者陳永苗認為，瀋德詠的理念要想實踐，那要等到政法委垮掉，司法獨立之後。
北京憲政學者陳永苗：「公、檢、法三家基本就在政法委的領導下，在黨的領導下的，所以法院雖然有一種去政治化或者抵制政法委的領導，他不要讓司法作為政治刀把子的這種傾向，但是，他還受黨委的領導，所以他說這些話的時候，只能說他內心有這種傾向，但是效果還是不太大。」
網友「藍天」質疑，能夠真正做到依法辦事，怎麼能錯呢？難道法律這個準繩有問題嗎？「寧可錯放，也不可錯判」這種觀點，無疑會成為官員徇私枉法的護身符，貫徹下去，後果很恐怖啊。
中國資深法學專家趙遠明指出，中共的法律本來就是一紙空文，中共當局想打擊誰，搞臭誰，完全是依照政治上的需要，根本不依靠法律。
中國資深法學專家趙遠明：「現在法院院長說的話，但是真正落實到實際情況當中，真正冤假錯案要平反的時候，他依然還是依據政治上的需要，這個歷來也是中共邪黨建政以來多次發生的，你看他們多次政治運動，然後多次又平反。」
瀋德詠還指出，對公、檢、法三機關而言，加強配合有利於形成工作的合力。但是，任何形式的聯合辦案都有可能埋下冤假錯案的禍根，必須要堅決摒棄。
唐荊陵：「民間很多學者包括律師界的很多人早就指出這點了，因為中國存在很嚴重的權力辦案情況，導致這種冤殺，黨官意志殺人變得很常見，經常來說，一些所謂的『必破』的案件，他就可能使用行刑逼供、栽贓陷害的方法把案子破掉了，實際上真正罪犯根本沒抓住。」
趙遠明指出，中共所有的公、檢、法，都在政法委的領導之下，過去十幾年當中，尤其是江澤民在位的時候，它把所有司法權都掌握在它們手裡。
趙遠明：「開始鎮壓法輪功以後，江澤民又成立了一個『601辦公室』，它既不屬於黨的機構，又不屬於政府的機構，但是它擁有的權力卻可以凌駕於所有政法系統之上， 在這種情況下，造成了很多冤假錯案，而且最高人民檢察院、最高人民法院，實際在當時是助紂為虐。」
趙遠明分析，瀋德詠的這番話，只是中共為所謂的社會穩定，放出的一個政治氣球，就是說，要向習近平的「憲政夢」邁進，糾正過去的冤假錯案。趙遠明說，實際這是中共邪黨歷來耍的政治手段，真想要它依法辦事，路還相當遙遠。
採訪編輯/李韻 後製/李勇
New Political Balloon for Stability of Chinese Communist Party Rule?
Recently, exposure of wrongful convictions
across China have continued to occur.
These included Zhu Ling’s Thallium poisoning case,
Zhao Zuohai’s murder case, as well as the rape case
that victimized a Zhejiang citizen and his nephew.
Shen Deyong, executive Vice President of
the Supreme People’s Court, recently proposed:
“It would rather wrongly allow real criminals to
escape unpunished than wrongly charge the cases.”
Is this a political balloon that the Chinese Communist
Party (CCP) released to encourage political stability?
On May 6, the People’s Court Daily published
an article authored by Shen Deyong.
Shen said that for a period of time, continuous wrongful
convictions have brought unprecedented challenges.
He alleged that if not properly dealt with, it will
severely hamper the development of criminal justice.
Shen Deyong stated that it would rather mistakenly allow
real criminals to escape unpunished than wrongfully convict.
Shen argued that Heavens wouldn’t fall if real
criminals were wrongly allowed to go unpunished.
While it would be a big deal for a wrongful conviction,
especially a wrongful execution of an innocent citizen.
Tang Jingling, a Chinese lawyer, commented that this
idea is a legal tenet in any country under rule of law.
Without sufficient evidence of guilt,
it shouldn’t hand down a death penalty.
Tang Jingling: “His statement may not produce
instant and real changes in the judiciary.
But it may help change the notions
of the judiciary sector as time passes.
In particular, those in the Supreme Court who
take charge of reviewing death penalty cases.
By observing this principle, it will
generate great changes in reality.”
A Beijing constitutional scholar Chen Yongmiao,
believes that Shen Deyong’s idea won’t come true.
That is, unless China has an independent judiciary.
That will be possible after the Politics and
Legislative Affairs Committee (PLAC) collapses.
Chen Yongmiao: “The police, the procuratorate and courts
are now under the leadership of the PLAC and the CCP.
The courts are in fact willing to resist the PLAC’s
control, but still haven’t yet broken free of it.
So, his remarks only indicate that he has
such a willingness, but it produces little effect.”
A netizen questioned, “How could it give rise to
injustice, if really acting in accordance with the law?
Is there something wrong with the law itself?
The view that it prefers to falsely allow real criminals
to escape unpunished than give wrongful charges
will undoubtedly become a talisman for the officials,
who will bend the law for their selfish gains.
Carrying out this idea will lead to a dreadful aftermath.”
Zhao Yuanming , an expert in Chinese law,
indicates that CCP laws are all empty words.
He says that the CCP authorities have always been
driven by the political needs, in order to strike down on,
or defame a person, instead of having real legal basis.
Zhao Yuanming: “In reality, when redressing the
injustices, the court president will still serve political needs.
This has occurred repeatedly since the CCP came to power.
This is proof, with continuous political movements,
and repeated redressing unjust cases after that.”
Shen Deyong claimed that reinforcing cooperation among
police, procuratorate and courts helps form joint work forces.
But the joint dealing with a case may give rise to a wrongful
conviction, he said, which must be firmly abandoned.
Tang Jingling: “Many scholars, including
lawyers, have pointed it out long ago.
In China, the authorities have severely interfered with
judiciary justice, resulting in wrongful death penalties.
It’s commonly seen in those “must-be-cracked”
cases, commanded by the Party officials.
They often use frame-ups and tortures to
extract forced confessions to “solve” cases.
But the real criminals are still at large.”
Zhao Yuanming says that in the past decade,
especially during the tenure of Jiang Zemin,
the PLAC was the actual judicial czar in China.
Zhao Yuanming: “After Jiang Zemin openly cracked
down on Falun Gong, he set up the ‘6-10 Office’.
It is neither a Party organ nor a state agency,
but it overrides all the judicial departments.
It has created numerous wrongful convictions.
The Supreme People’s Procuratorate and the
Supreme People’s Court actually aided it to do evil.”
Zhao Yuanming views Shen Deyong’s remarks
as a political balloon, to serve political stability.
He interprets Shen’s statement.
It tells that China is now starting to move towards the
“Dream of Constitutionalism”, correcting past unjust cases.
This is an old CCP political trick, he says, whilst
China’s road is nowhere near the real rule by law.