【新唐人2012年12月07日讯】受到舆论广泛关注的“河南截访案”，日前被媒体证实，涉案的10名“黑保安”都是河南禹州农民，其中3人还未成年，“黑保安”的头目王高伟的家属说，王是受禹州信访部门的邀请。评论指出，中共体制下的信访部门雇佣截访，侵犯人权，成千上万人涉及，是国家集团的犯罪，官员却可以逃脱责任。那么，受害者是谁呢﹖
下面就跟本台记者去了解：
北京朝阳区检察院起诉书显示，现年42岁的禹州农民王高伟，2月在朝阳区承租了涉案截访的两所“黑窝点”。王担任截访头目，他的表舅，身为村官的付朝新，负责在老家招聘年轻人。
王高伟的父亲透露，去年禹州市信访局的人到他家，说给他儿子找了一个“好活”。王高伟进京后，打电话说，自己负责为政府送上访人员，让老人不要担心。
涉案的3名未成年人，一名被逮捕，另两名被取保候审，他们告诉媒体，付朝新曾在当地做广告，至少招聘了十几个人，付朝新还承诺，他们“进京锻练”后，将进入小区“做保安”。
曾被关在朝阳区“黑窝点”的河南许昌14名访民，其中4人4月底被截访回家，5月初，她们再次返京报案，王高伟等7人因此被北京警方抓捕，10名访民获救。
11月28号，北京朝阳区法院开庭审理了这个案子。12月2号上午，各大媒体争相报导，但当天下午，朝阳区法院“辟谣”说，消息不实。随后，媒体通过采访涉案访民，证实了这一事件，从而将“截访事件”推到舆论的风口浪尖，遭民间猛烈抨击。
原山东大学教授孙文广：“有一些农民、下岗工人他们生活所迫，要生存，到处打工，有时候能找到，有时候找不到，那么政府雇他们做些事，每天给多少钱，他也就愿意干了，至于他干的事到底违法不违法，有些人也不知道详细的情况，那么就会被雇佣来截访，侵犯人权，那么这些官员就可以用这种方法来逃脱责任了。”
目前，禹州市一位副市长已经赴京，与北京的有关部门“协调”这个案子，同时，许昌市也召开专门会议，研究如何处理。
大陆律师唐荆陵指出，“截访”是中共维稳的一个重要组成部分，也是中共为了维持垄断政治的集团犯罪。
唐荆陵：“这个不是一个小的犯罪集团，这是很多个犯罪集团，因为每个政府都有截访的队伍，他们都普遍使用非法拘禁，殴打、酷刑，各种各样的犯罪手段，这个涉及到的人可能成千上万， 而且涉及到很多官员，那些官员的阶层不会太低的。”
唐荆陵指出，中共阻止访民到北京，主要是怕人太多引发游行示威，威胁到它的政权，所以就搞了一套很严酷的考核体系，如果一个地方太多人去北京上访，当地的官员就会承担政治上的风险。
唐荆陵：“所以地方当局在当局这种政治考核体制下，就有很强的驱动力，要去做这种维稳，那么中央这些官僚们就能够收获政府稳定的好处，就不会面对这种大规模群众上访这样一种政治潜在威胁，那么地方官员，就是通过中央政府搞的这么庞大的维稳基金，从这里分享一部分的财政好处，它就变成一个黑产业链的犯罪集团。”
唐荆陵指出，即便这次截访者获刑，如果不去追诉其他的类似案件和涉案的官员，也解决不了大量以截访为名镇压访民的问题。
采访编辑/李韵 后制/萧宇
CCP Petition Office Hires Farmers to Intercept Petitioners
The case of Henan petitioner interception has become
a focus of public and media attention.
Media recently confirmed that the 10 implicated
interceptors are all farmers from Yuzhou, Henan province.
Three of them are even minors.
The father of gang leader Wang Gaowei says that
Yuzhou’s Petition Office invited his son to do it.
Commentators say this is an organized crime
in violation of human rights.
Tens of thousands of people are involved in such interceptions
in China, including Chinese Communist Party (CCP) officials.
However, those officials can easily offload liabilities,
but who has become ultimate victims?
Charges presented in a Beijing court show that Wang
Gaowei, 42, is a farmer from Yuzhou, Henan province.
The court said that in February, Wang rented two
residences in Chaoyang District in Beijing for detaining the intercepted petitioners.
Wang is head of the interceptor group.
His uncle, a village official, recruited young men in his town.
Wang Gaowei’s father says that officers from Yuzhou’s
Petition Office made a home visit, offering “a good job” to his son.
Wang, when staying in Beijing, told his father that he was
responsible for abducting petitioners for the authorities.
One of the three minors involved was arrested,
while the other two were released on bail.
They told the media that Wang Gaowei’s uncle advertised
in a local paper, and hired at least over a dozen people.
Wang’s uncle also promised them “security guard” positions
in Beijing’s residential zones after gaining “work experience”.
A total of 14 petitioners from Xuchang city in Henan province
were detained in Wang’s “black jails”.
Four of them were intercepted and sent back to Henan.
Early in May, they returned to Beijing and reported to the police.
Thus, the Beijing police captured Wang Gaowei
and six other interceptors. 10 petitioners were rescued.
On Nov. 28, Beijing Chaoyang District Court
trialed the case.
On Dec. 2, the case had become a heated topic for China’s media.
But the court dismissed it as a rumor,
saying the information was false.
Following the dismissal, media interviewed
the concerned petitioners, and verified the case.
Ultimately, strong public criticism was unleashed on further
exposure of the case.
Sun Wenguang retired professor of Shandong University:
“Some farmers or jobless workers seek jobs everywhere for survival.
So when the government pays them to do some work,
they’re usually willing to accept the offers.
They usually don’t know whether “the job” violates laws
or not, for being given little information on it.
That’s why they were hired as tools to intercept petitioners
and violate human rights.
But this becomes a way for the officials
to shirk their liabilities."
Yuzhou CCP authorities have now sent a deputy mayor to
Beijing to “coordinate” relevant departments in case proceedings.
Xuchang authorities held a special meeting
to study how to deal with the case.
Lawyer Tang Jingling comments that “petitioner-interception”
is an integral part of the CCP’s stability preservation policy.
It is also a proof of the CCP’s organized crime which aims to
sustain its political monopoly on power.
Tang Jingling: “It isn’t a small crime group,
but a complex composed of many crime groups.
Authorities in each locale has its own team tasked with
intercepting petitioners.
Their common approaches include illegal detention,
beatings, tortures, and various other criminal means.
This business most likely involves tens of thousands of
people in China, including those high-level officials."
Tang Jingling pointed out why the CCP prevents petitioners
from going to Beijing.
He says it fears too many people may stage demonstrations,
posing a threat to its regime.
Thus, it uses a very rigid system to assess local officials’
job performance.
If too many people from a region go to petition in Beijing,
the local officials would risk their political future.
Tang Jingling: “So such a political assessment system is
used as a driving force for local officials to ‘maintain stability’.
The method can enables CCP central officials to enjoy
the regime’s stability and avoid seeing large-scale protests.
Plus local officials can gain financially by taking a share from
the central government’s huge stability preservation fund.
In this way, it has evolved into an underworld supply chain
for organized crime.”
Tang Jingling says merely sentencing interceptors,
like those in this case, without investigating
other similar cases and punishing implicated officials,
suppression of petitioners cannot truly be resolved.
