你的位置:主页 > 真钱开户官网 > 浦志强7条微博测试中国言论自由

浦志强7条微博测试中国言论自由

admin 发布于 2016-12-28 11:03
BEIJING ??Many Chinese Internet users are watching with great concern the case of the civil rights lawyer
Pu Zhiqiang
, in which prosecutors brought charges against Mr. Pu based on
seven short posts
he wrote from 2011 to 2014 on Weibo, a Twitter-like platform.
北京??许多中国互联网用户正在忧心忡忡地观察着人权律师
浦志强
的案子,检察机构起诉浦志强的根据来自他在2011年至2014年间在类似Twitter的微博平台上发的
七个短帖子

Foreign officials have broadly denounced the case as political persecution, but few have paid attention to the specific legal implications surrounding the question of free speech, the issue that is vexing many Chinese who are following Mr. Pu’s plight.
虽然外国官员普遍谴责这个案子是政治迫害,但很少有人关注围绕言论自由问题的具体法律后果,而这才是许多关心浦志强困境的中国人所忧虑的问题。
Mr. Pu’s posts included criticism of China’s policies toward ethnic Uighurs in the western region of Xinjiang and mockery of the national legislature and a legislative advisory body. He also made some acid comments about Mao Zedong’s grandson, Mao Xinyu, a major general in the People’s Liberation Army.
浦志强帖子的内容包括对中国政府在西部新疆地区对维吾尔族所采取的政策的批评,以及对立法机关和立法咨询机构的嘲讽。他还发过一些关于毛泽东的孙子、解放军少将毛新宇的尖刻评论。
Kin Cheung/Associated Press
抗议者在中国政府驻香港联络办公室门外打出人权律师浦志强的照片,要求中国释放浦志强。
The case is the latest one that Chinese officials are using to set a benchmark for criminalizing online speech. Mr. Pu has been charged with “inciting ethnic hatred” and “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.” If found guilty, he could be sentenced to up to eight years in prison, his lawyers say.
中国官员正在把一些案子树为非法网络言论的典型,此案是最新的一个。浦志强被指控犯有“煽动民族仇恨罪”和“寻衅滋事罪”。他的律师说,如果有罪判决成立,浦志强可能被判处八年徒刑。
In late 2013, legal officials
expanded the charge
of “picking quarrels” to cover online speech, and since then, police officials and prosecutors have used the accusation as a basis for detaining and imprisoning a wide range of people, including lawyers, writers and artists.
2013年底,中国法律官员把“寻衅滋事罪”的
适用范围扩大
到网络言论,自那以后,警方和检察部门基于这个指控已拘留和监禁了各种各样的人,其中包括律师、作家和艺术家。
Mr. Pu’s trial lasted a little over three hours on Monday, and Mr. Pu and his supporters now await a verdict. In the courtroom, Mr. Pu said he was willing to apologize to anyone whose feelings might have been hurt by his posts, said Mo Shaoping, one of his lawyers. But the defense team also presented a case to the judges of why Mr. Pu’s posts did not constitute crimes.
浦志强案周一在法庭的审理仅持续了三小时多一点儿,浦志强及其支持者现在在等待判决。莫少平是浦志强的律师之一,莫少平说,浦志强在法庭上说,他愿意向任何感情受到自己帖子伤害的人道歉。但他的律师队伍也在法庭上作了浦志强的帖子为什么不构成犯罪的辩护。
莫少平在采访中介绍了此案在言论自由方面的重要性,以及辩护律师的法律论据:
“此案的重要性在于:用尖刻粗暴的言辞批评公众人物和事件与言论自由之间的界限在哪里?我们的观点是:
“First, apart from speech that leads to immediate danger, speech should not be deemed a criminal act. For instance, if you spread the lie that a theater is on fire and that triggers a stampede where people are injured or die, this would be speech that causes an immediate danger. Anything else should just be tolerated as free speech.
“首先,除了导致直接危险的言论,言论不应该被视为一种犯罪行为。比如,如果你散布电影院失火的谣言,导致电影院里发生踩踏,使人受伤甚至死亡,那是导致直接危险的言论。其他言论都应该作为言论自由而得到容忍。
“Second, the public has the constitutional right to criticize public figures. It’s enshrined in the Chinese Constitution. Public figures should be more tolerant and should not charge someone just because his or her language is rude.
“第二,宪法赋予公众批评公众人物的权利。这一权利是庄严载入中国宪法的。公众人物应该更宽容,不应该仅仅因为他或她的语言粗鲁就起诉别人。
“Third, Weibo is a special platform of expression, and it’s an instant channel where people comment on events and public figures. Therefore, control over Weibo should be more tolerant than control over conventional media. It’s different from conventional media because it involves the expression of emotions. There should be a greater degree of free speech there compared with conventional media.
“第三,微博是一种特殊的表达平台,是一个人们对事件和公众人物发表意见的瞬时渠道。因此,对微博的控制应该比对传统媒体的控制更宽容,开户送真钱。微博与传统媒体不同,因为微博涉及情绪的表达,与传统媒体相比,微博上应该有更大程度的言论自由。
“So this case should not be taken on as a public criminal indictment. If anyone is hurt by Pu Zhiqiang’s Weibo posts, that person can file a civil suit against him in court. Think about Fang Zhouzi and Cui Yongyuan. Only when you have exhausted all the civil and administrative ways can you really resort to public criminal indictment.”
“因此,这个案子不应该被作为一个需要国家出面的刑事犯罪案。如果有人受到浦志强微博帖子的伤害,那么该人可以在法庭上对他提起民事诉讼。想想方舟子和崔永元的事儿。只有用尽了所有的民事和行政手段之后,才可以动用国家的刑事起诉手段。”
Mr. Mo was referring to an
anti-defamation lawsuit
that Mr. Fang, a biochemist who has
campaigned against academic fraud
, filed against Mr. Cui, a former state television host, in January 2014. The two had engaged in a heated debate on Weibo over genetically modified food, as Mr. Cui questioned why Mr. Fang had become a big supporter of genetically modified corn. In their posts, they started hurling personal insults at each other.
莫少平指的是方舟子对崔永元的
诽谤起诉
,方舟子是生物化学家,以
打击学术造假
为业,崔永元曾在中央电视台任主持人,开户送真钱。他俩人在2014年1月曾在微博上进行过有关转基因食品的激烈辩论,崔永元质疑方舟子为什么是转基因玉米的主要支持者。他们开始在贴子中互相辱骂对方。
A Beijing court began hearing arguments in July 2014. This June,
the court said both men were at fault
and ordered each to pay the other 45,000 renminbi, or about $7,000, delete their Weibo posts and apologize publicly to each other. Both men appealed the decision, and a second trial is underway.
北京一家法院于2014年7月开始审理他们的案子。法院在今年6月做出结论,
认为两人都有错
,判处各方向对方支付4.5万元人民币,删除各自的微博帖子,并公开向对方道歉。两人均提出上诉,二审正在进行中,开户送真钱