【新唐人2012年11月06日讯】香港《争鸣》杂志报导，中共“十七届七中全会”就司法体制改革当中的热点──劳教制度的存废，进行了不公开讨论，主张废除劳教的温家宝再次遭到“政法委和维稳派”势力的阻挠。为何双方在十八大前要再次就这一制度针锋相对呢？请看分析。
《争鸣》的文章引用来自北京的可靠消息说：温家宝希望在胡温新政结束以前，彻底废除劳教制度。但中央政法委和维稳派系则主张，从缩短劳教期限入手来改革，但保留劳教制度。
文章说，废除劳教制度不仅牵涉到劳教体系的几万名司法警察和武警的饭碗，而且必将涉及到中共“防范和处理邪教”领导机构，也就是原名“610”办公室的合法性。
时事评论员张杰连：“‘610’之所以能够把这么多人关押进来，主要的一点就是在利用这个不经法律审判，就可以任意给人定罪，就是先把人关起来进行迫害这么一个手段。所以江系人马一旦失去这个打人的棍子的话，他的迫害在司法这条线上就断掉了。”
文章分析：目前中国劳教体制关押的19万人中，真正按劳教制度本意该关押的人，仅占31%。此外，法轮功修炼者占37%，超过7万人；上访维权人士占15%，接近3万人；其它“非登记”的宗教团体参与者占9%，有1万7,000人。这些异议人士和不同信仰者的刑期，如果都是经过法院审理而判决的话，会让中共在人权方面的劣行大面积暴露。
民间自由学者以及体制内的大部分知识份子主张废除劳教制度，而民众对废除劳教制度的呼声更高。但政法委的一些高官则再次坚持保留劳教制度。此前在“北戴河会议”时，面对温家宝强烈呼吁废除劳教制度，周永康就“警告”说，劳教制度是镇压国内“敌对势力”的制度保证，如果全面废除，共产党将面临下台的危险。
山东维权律师李向阳：“在中国，政法委的设立彻底的把中国公、检、法的框架打乱了，在这种情况下，假如废除劳教制度的话，他们就会失去用权力来作威作福的这么一个工具。他们的权力不就小了吗？他们作威作福的能量不就小了吗？所以说，他们就是坚决的要保留这个制度。”
目前中共劳教制度主要的依据，是1982年修定的《劳动教养试行办法》。但这一“试行”的办法一试就是30年，一直遭到学者和法律界人士抨击，认为它实际是“党大于法”的产物。
山东维权律师李向阳：“中国的劳教制度，首先说是违反宪法的。从本质上说，就是因为中国是‘人治’，权大于法，就在这种国情下，出现这个劳教制度。这是中国没有法治的一个最明显的标致。”
备受抨击的劳改制度能否被废除，开始从“人治”向“法治”转变，被认为是未来习近平政治是否具有道德性的重要标志。
张杰连：“围绕着劳教制度的存废，互相之间的斗争，发自民间的呼声一直都有，最近一段时间越来越激烈了。所以我相信，这个应该是作为是真改革还是假改革，真的是要废除黑手段，真正的走上法律民主道路，实际上它可以成为一个‘试金石’。”
李向阳：“习近平这一届，假如说，他们要想让社会向公平、公正合理化推进的话，废除劳教制度势在必行的。习近平这一届他们上去之后，还是死抱着劳教制度不放的话，就说明习近平他们这一届领导人还是不改变共产党邪恶的本质，继续向反人民这个路子走下去。”
《争鸣》的文章还提到，虽然劳教制度存废是内部讨论，但很可能对将来政策产生影响，有可能引发一场党内政治斗争。而坚持不废又不公开劳教人员的构成，也可以引发大规模的社会抗议，乃至成为中国版“阿拉伯之春”的诱发点。
采访/田净 编辑/尚燕 后制/柏妮
Hong Kong media: Wen proposed abolishing Labor Reeducation
System and claimed “610 office” illegal.
Hong Kong’s Chengming magazine reported
during the meeting of 7th Plenary Session of the 17th,
there a closed discussion if Labor Reeducation System (LRS)
should be kept. LRS is the hot topic of the judicial system reform.
Wen Jiabao, who proposed abolishing LRS, is again obstructed
by the group of Politics and Law Committee and the maintaining stability faction.
Why did the two factions play tit for tat on this
before the 18th Congress? Let’s see the analysis.
The Chengming article quoted reliable sources from Beijing,
that Wen Jiabao hoped to abolish LRS completely at the end
of “Hu(Jintao)-Wen(Jiabao)” new policies.
However, Politics and Law Committee and the maintaining
stability faction proposed reform through reducing the time of labor reeducation, but keeping the LRS spirit.
The article said that abolishing LRS is not only involved in
the work of many thousands of judicial and armed police but also involved in the legitimacy of the “610 office”.
The “610 office” later changed its name to Central Leading
Group on Dealing with Heretical Religions.
Zhang Jielian, Current Affairs Commentator: “‘610 office’
can detain so many people, taking advantage of the LRS.
This system can first detain and then persecute people
who are sent without trial to labor camps.
So once Jiang (Zemin)’s faction lose this weapon,
their persecution method will be cut off in the judicial areas.
The article analyzed that currently, among 190,000 detainees of
LRS, only 31% should be detained for the real purpose of LRS.
Also 37% detainees are Falun Gong practitioners, over 70,000.
15% are petitioners, about 30,000 of them; 9% are participators
of other non-registered religious groups, about 17,000.
If these dissenters were sentenced through trial in court, the
CCP’s human rights evil violations will be widely exposed.
Independent scholars and most intellectual within the system
support abolishing the LRS.
The publics’ voice to abolish the system are also very high.
However, some high officials of the Politics and
Law Committee insisted on keeping the LRS.
Wen Jiabao also strongly called on the abolishing of the
LRS in “BeiDaiHe” meeting.
However, Zhou Yongkang warned that the LRS is to ensure
the crack down the domestic hostile forces.
If it is abolished completely, the Chinese Communist Party
(CCP) will be at risk of collapse.
Human right attorney in Shandong, Li Xiangyang: “In China,
the Political and Law committee completely disordered the law frame system of public security, procurator and court.
In this situation, if they abolish the LRS,
they will lose the tool by which they can be domineering.
Will their energies of domineering reduce?
They will keep the system firmly in place.”
Now, the main basis of LRS is the trial measure
for reeducation through labor collated in 1982.
However, the trial measures were performed 30 years.
The scholars and legal professionals attacked it thinking
it was the production of “Party’s power is bigger than the law”.
Li Xiangyang: “First,
the Chinese LRS violated the constitution.
In essence, just because the CCP power is bigger than the
Law in China, the LRS came out in this situation.
This is the most significant sign of lawlessness in China.”
Whether abolishing the controversial LRS, from “man rule”
to “law rule”, is an important sign of Xin Jinpin’s policy plan.
Zhang Jielian: “The argument on abolishing the LRS always
exists, including different factions’ struggle and peoples’ voices.
Recently, things have intensified.
I believe it is the touchstone of real reform, by really abolishing
gangster means and going down legal democratic road.”
Li Xiangyang: “for Xi Jinpin’s leaderships, if they hope to keep
social justice and developing reasonably, they must abolish LRS.
If under Xi’s leadership they still want to keep the LRS, it shows
that Xi can’t change the CCP’s evil nature which will continue.”
The article also mentioned, though it was an inside discussion,
it could influence the future policies.
And it could trigger a political fighting inside the Party.
Keeping LRS and not opening up its composition
can lead to large-scale social protest, even becoming the trigger point of a Chinese “Arab Spring”.
