【新唐人2013年09月11日讯】美媒：“两高”司法解释荒唐而残酷
中共最高法院和最高检察院（“两高”）日前公布的《关于办理利用信息网路实施诽谤等刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》，继续受到海内外舆论谴责。
《美国之音》评论说，“两高”推出的这个司法解释是一个笑话，是在为中共当局的警察国家做法提供法律掩护。
美国《个人电脑世界》杂志（PCWorld）则向读者介绍说：“根据中共两高推出的新举措，互联网用户的网路贴，假如被观看了五千次以上或被转发五百次以上，就有可能面临诽谤指控，假如被判罪名成立，有可能获得高达三年的刑期。”
《美国之音》在引述这段报导时说，中共两高司法的解释像开玩笑一样荒唐而残酷。
这个所谓“诽谤信息”转500次，就可判刑的“两高”司法解释，也引起大陆民众的强烈反弹。
除了大批律师指出“两高”越权违法外，一些媒体和媒体人也发声反击，他们指出﹕由中共政府发布的误导性信息，危害性比“民谣” 更大，打击网路谣言更应该从治理“官谣”做起。
而普通网民则找出中共当局历年发布的虚假信息大量转发，要求对“官谣”治罪。
四川网友“摆古论今”举例说：“ 央视义正词严的宣称：‘欧美制裁使叙利亚4500 万个家庭遭灾！’ 叙利亚总人口才2219.8万﹗”
大陆作家罗志渊则说，《新华社》、《央视》摆乌龙，把东京说成了伊斯坦布尔，害惨全国报纸，《长沙晚报》连夜追回几十万份报纸！官方造谣，应该如何处理？
一名广州律师（“我要法网”）也表示，不能把造世界谣、奥运谣的《新华社》、《央视》新闻责任人抓进去，就不是好解释，就是护官谣、打民谣的双重标准！
郭飞雄法律后援团已达百人
大陆维权人士郭飞雄，8月8号，被广州市公安局天河分局以涉嫌“聚众扰乱公共场所秩序罪”刑事拘留，之后，由大陆律师王成、唐吉田、江天勇等人发起的“郭飞雄案法律后援团”，8月17号启动。截至9月9号，联署参与这个“法律后援团”的各地维权律师和法律工作者已有108人。
上海七访民天安门撒千张传单
9月9号，上海盲人陈永成、胡义忠等7名访民，在北京天安门东抛撒了近千份传单，讲述自己的冤情，揭露当地政府的腐败。
事后，他们被十多名警察和特警抓捕，目前，已被遣返回当地。
7人中，除了盲人陈永成，是因为残疾人福利待遇和基本合法权益，长期被黄浦区政府剥夺而喊冤，其他人都是因暴力拆迁上访。
编辑/周玉林
VOA: China Judicial Interpretation of New Measures
CruelAnd Nonsensensical
China’s Supreme Court and top procuratorate jointly issued
interpretation on new regulations for online rumors.
It was continuously condemned by public opinon
at home and abroad.
Voice of America (VOA) reported that this interpretation is
nonsense.It provides legal support for the regime’s police.
PC World magazine in the US reported that China’s judicial
interpretation of “new measures said, internet users can face
defamation charges if their online posts have been read 5,000
times or reposted 500 times.
If found guilty, users could face jail for up to three years.”
VOA said that China’s judicial interpretation of the new
measures is nonsense and cruel.
Official Rumors Do More Harm Than Netizens
Judicial interpretation of “defamation information reposted
500 times incurs charges” caused widespread netziens’debates.
Lawyers pointed out that the Supreme Court and highest
Procuratorate violated the law.
There are also some voices from the media against this.
They said the Chinese regime had published many fake news
stories which were misleading the public.
These did more harm than netziens’ online rumors.
To clear out online rumors it should start with clearing out
the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) rumors.
Netizens dug out many fake news made by the CCP in the past.
They were widely reposted, and netizens requested charging
the officials who created the rumors.
Netizens in Sichuan said China’s Central Television(CCTV)
claimed that “European and US sanctions over Syria had
brought 45 million families disasters. Netizens questioned that
Syria only has a population of 22.4 million!
China-based writer Luo Zhiyuan said that Xinhua news and
CCTV are producers of lies.
Recently, they issued fake reports saying that Istanbul was the
winning city for the 2020 Olympic Games.
Actually it is Tokyo. Changsha Wanbao had to recall several
hundred thousands newspapers.
Lou questioned that the CCP created rumors, so
how to punish them?
A Guangzhou lawyer said that if the CCP doesn’t punish the
people creating rumors in Xinhua news and CCTV, it will be
hard to justify implementing the new measures for online rumors.
It will obviously only be used for protecting officials but
applying suppression to public expression.
Hundreds Of lawyers Join Legal Support Group Of
Guo Feixiong’s Case
On August 8, activist Guo Feixiong was detained by Guangzhou
police on allegations of “gathering crowds, disturbing social order”.
Later, Lawyer Wang Cheng, Tang Jitian, Jiang Tianyong and
other supporters formed “Guo Feixiong’s case legal support group”.
It started on August 17. By Sept. 9, 108 lawyers and legal workers
signed their names to join the group.
Seven Shanghai Petitioners Threw Thousands Of
Flyers Into The Air In Beijing
On Sept. 9, seven Shanghai petitioners including a blind man
Chen Yongcheng threw thousands of flyers into the air in Beijing.
The materials are about their mistreatment,
and exposing their local government’s corruption.
Later, they were detained by police. Now they are being taken
to their hometown.
Blind man Cheng Yongcheng appealed that his disabilities
benefit had long been deprived by the local government.
Other petitioners appealed for their homes
being forcibly demolished.
