C.A. Yeung pointed out that the harsh sentence of Liu Xiaobo to 11 years on subversion charges implied a open rejection of public demands for democratic reforms by the Chinese Communist Party. The blogger also translated Chinese dissident Wang Dan's brief comment on Liu's sentence.
Based on the fact the prosecution produced bank record showing foreign remittance, and the verdict liberally using the term “foreign”, the Chinese court saw Liu Xiaobo’s political speech as “exceeding the limit of free speech” is due to foreign funding.
And the fact Liu Xiaobo received over US$650,000 from Uncle Sam via the NED is a matter of public records.
it seems that someone is speaking for the chinese prosecutor and judge for clarifying liu’s crime which has not been spelled out in the official document.
what a living worm in the authorities’ stomach!
Just for the record I’m Taiwanese-American, and I have no connection with the Chinese authority. No one pays me, 50 cent or otherwise.
I just don’t think my tax dollar should be used to advocate abolition of China’s constitution. It appears, Lam, I care more about your country than you!
charter 08 is for constitutional reform. no abolition. if you love the current china constitution so much and find the universal value disagreeable, chinese gov would welcome you a loyal citizen. then you don’t have to waste your tax money. and probably you have a better position to speak for the chinese authority.
It’s one thing (and I agree, important) to monitor how tax dollars are spent, but China’s constitution is a different matter altogether and I think the distinction needs to be made. In addition to the point Oiwan makes, the NED funding you’re referring to is clearly directed toward projects which (among others) promote human rights, transparency, democracy and rule of law, all areas the importance of which even Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao have in recent years vocally emphasized. That said, given the current close economic relationship between China and the U.S., progress in each of those areas is something from which the American private sector, and in turn the American economy, stand to benefit greatly. Perhaps the Google scandal this week adds credence to this line of thinking.
Regarding strengthening of China’s constitution (from Wikipedia):
“…under the legal system of the People’s Republic of China, courts do not have the general power of judicial review and cannot invalidate a statute on the grounds that it violates constitution. Nonetheless, since 2002, there has been a special committee of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress which has reviewed laws and regulations for constitutionality. Although this committee has not yet explicitly ruled that a law or regulation is unconstitutional, in one case…”
It’s rather convenient that you and I are free to interpret China’s constitution and then pass judgment on people like Liu Xiaobo when Chinese courts can’t, particularly when, as Oiwan points out, this is a right that he and the other signees to Charter 08 seek to secure for PRC citizens themselves.