【新唐人2014年06月21日訊】中國三名要求官員公示財產的活躍人士，被稱為「新余三君子」的劉萍、魏忠平和李思華，6月19號被江西省新余市渝水區法院以「尋釁滋事」等罪名，分別判處6年半和3年的有期徒刑。「新余三君子」到底做了甚麼罪而被中共重判呢？請看以下報導。
中國三名要求官員公示財產的活躍人士，被稱為「新余三君子」的劉萍、魏忠平和李思華，6月19號被江西省新余市渝水區法院以「尋釁滋事」等罪名，分別判處6年半和3年的有期徒刑。「新余三君子」到底做了甚麼罪而被中共重判呢？請看以下報導。
去年4月，江西新余市民劉萍、魏忠平、李思華被拘捕時，被指控「煽動顛覆國家政權罪」，到正式逮捕時改控「非法集會罪」，到法庭上又改成了「尋釁滋事罪」、和「聚眾擾亂公共秩序罪」、「利用邪教組織破壞法律實施罪」等。
可是，法庭在9500字的判決書中，始終沒有提及「三君子」他們是如何「尋釁滋事」和「聚眾擾亂公共秩序」。
其實，「三君子」只是一起在房前公開展示了標語，一幅是「人民代表人民選！公民精神萬歲」，另一幅則是寫著「強烈要求官員財產公開」。
面對如此荒唐的當局，魏忠平在法庭最後陳述中怒吼：「我本應該站在原告席上，去控告這些濫用權力的人。」
大陸律師鄭建偉：「我認為他們是無罪的。有罪、無罪，我們評判的就是對社會有沒有危害嘛，他們的哪一件事情對社會造成危害，危害到哪一集體的人，他（們）危害的是誰？」
劉萍的律師斯偉江對英國《路透社》說，判決「既不公平，也不公正」。他表示，在政治案件中，「政府希望有甚麼樣的結果，法庭就作出怎樣的判決。」
國際人權組織「大赦國際」在一份聲明中強烈譴責這次的判決，並認為「荒謬可笑」。「大赦國際」中國問題研究員威廉•尼說，「小型私人集會，在大樓門廳前打出標語要求公示官員財產，無論如何也構不成「尋釁滋事」以及「非法集會」。」
其實，劉萍等人要求官員公布財產觸痛了中共。
2010年，國務院研究室、和中紀委、及中國社會科學院，合作完成的《全國地方黨政部門、國家機關公職人員薪酬和家庭財產調查報告》顯示，131萬中國縣團級以上官員及其家屬占有全民財富的80%，到2010年6月底全國個人儲蓄存款達75200億元，其中縣、團、處級以上官員（包括離退休）及其家屬的個人儲蓄佔40000億元﹔股市證券市場中60000億元，幹部及其家屬也是佔了45000億元。
劉萍是下崗工人，她曾在2011年參選人大代表，當年她曾組織網友強闖山東東師古村探望盲人維權人士陳光誠。她還赴烏坎支持村民「維權」。
中國浙江異議作家陳樹慶：「她的行為衝擊了現有的體制，說白了就是衝擊了中共權貴們的政治特權、整個社會其他特權。」
中國浙江異議作家陳樹慶指出，劉萍敢於說真話，所以中共非常害怕。
北京社維權人士胡佳：「重判他們的目地仍然是當局慣用的震懾維穩的手段，而且你也可以看到，就是今年的6.4對當局的挑戰滿大的，它們其實是相當恐慌的。」
北京社維權人士胡佳表示，中共當局今年想通過震懾老百姓來「維穩」，一開始就對維權人士許志永、丁家喜等人判刑。但仍有很多中國百姓去建三江、和曲阜等地聲援。
胡佳：「這種重判只會激發起更多的人對這個體制的反感，對這個體制的不滿，對這個體制的徹底的絕望。」
最近，香港人為了爭取特首普選，發起「全民公投」活動，但民意調查的普選投票網站，遭到疑似來自中國100億人次的駭客攻擊，造成網站癱瘓。
香港《蘋果日報》的評論指出，在中共當局眼中，無論在香港、在內地，公民要求行使選舉權，就是對中共統治權的挑釁，就是顛覆國家政權，因此瘋狂打壓、不擇手段。
新余法院開庭當天，拒絕劉萍的女兒和母親旁聽，當地多名維權人士被「喝茶」和失蹤。而成功到達新余的十幾名維權人士中，劉向陽、孫濤、楊崇等人則被抓。
採訪/朱智善 編輯/宋風 後製/陳建銘
Why have Xingyu Activists Receive Heavy Sentences?
The three Xingyu activists, Liu Ping, Wei Zhongping,
and Li Sihua, were sentenced over the crime of provocation
on June 19.
Yushui District court of Xingyu City ruled,
six and a half years and three years imprisonment.
What have the three activists done to deserve
such heavy sentences?
The following is our report.
In April last year, Liu Ping, Wei Zhongping, and Li Sihua,
three activists from Xinyu City, Jiangxi Province, were first
accused of inciting subversion of state power.
They were arrested on unlawful assembly, which was changed to
provocation, gathering people to disturb public order and
crimes of sabotaging legal enforcement by organizing and
using evil religion, in court.
However, within the 9,500 words of the court’s verdict,
nothing about how they have picked on, quarreled or disturbed
public order were mentioned.
In fact, the three of them were only displaying banners stating,
“Representatives ought to be elected!
Long live the civil spirit," and “Strongly demand official
property declaration" in front of their home.
Faced with such absurd authorities, Wei Zhongping roared
in the end of his statement in court: I should have taken
the plaintiff’s chair and accused those who abused power.
Zheng Jianwei, lawyer: I don’t think they’re guilty.
Guilty or not is based on whether or not they have caused
any damage to the society, what have they done to cause
the damage, and who are the victims of the damage.
Si Weijiang, Liu’s lawyer to Reuters: It isn’t fair,
it isn’t just.
The laws can just be bent however the government
wants it in politicized cases.
Amnesty International issued a statement condemning
the heavy sentences of the three activists.
William Nee, Amnesty International’s China Researcher:
The charges against these activists were preposterous.
Having a small private gathering and holding a banner in a
lobby entrance demanding financial transparency from officials
should not in any way constitute “picking quarrels"
and “illegal assembly."
In fact, the demand of publicizing official wealth has touched
the CCP’s tender spot.
A 2010 survey by the State Council Research Office,
the Central Discipline Inspection Commission, and the Chinese
Academy of Social Sciences compiled data of 1.31 million
governmental official wealth.
The data showed these officials occupied 80% of
the national wealth.
In the national personal savings of 7.52 trillion yuan
(USD 1.2 trillion) by the end of June 2010, these officials’
personal savings were 4 trillion yuan (USD 640 billion).
In the total investment of 6 trillion yuan (USD 960) in the
stock market these officials again accounted
for 4.5 trillion yuan (USD 720 billion).
Liu Ping, as a laid-off worker, had intended to represent
laid-off workers in the 2011
National People’s Congress election.
She had organized netizens to visit Shandong
blind activist Chen Guangcheng.
She also went to Wukan in support of the villagers’ rights.
Chen Shuqing, Chinese dissident writer: Her acts were a shock
to the existing institution.
Frankly, it attacks the political privileges of the CCP
bigwigs and other privileges of the entire society.
Chen Shuqing Zhejiang indicates that Liu Ping’s daringness
frightens the CCP.
Hu Jia, Beijing activist: The heavy sentence continues
to be the custom of the regime to threaten
and to maintain stability.
It is also clear that this June 4 has imposed great challenges
to the regime. They are in a panic.
Hu Jia says that the regime has posed heavy sentences
to activists Xu Zhiyong and Ding Jiaxi earlier this year.
Despite the threat and the maintenance of stability, many
Chinese continue to pay their solidarity
to Jiansanjiang and Qufu.
Hu Jia: This type of heavy sentence will only
disgust more people.
Many more will get dissatisfied and totally disappointed
by the system.
Recently, the unofficial universal suffrage in Hong Kong was
subject to 10 billion hacker attacks suspected from China.
The online voting system was subsequently crashed.
Hong Kong’s Apple Daily commented that in the eyes
of the Communist authorities, any demand of right to vote
in Hong Kong or mainland is to challenge the ruling CCP,
is to subvert state power, and thus be subjected
to unscrupulous suppression.
On the day of the Xinyu court hearing, Liu Ping’s daughter
and mother were refused to attend, while many local activists
were “having tea" and disappeared.
More than a dozen activists made it successfully to Xinyu.
Among them, Liu Xiangyang, Sun Tao and
Yang Chong were arrested.
Interview/ZhuZhiShan Edit/SongFeng Post-Production/ChenJianMing