百家争鸣
为了方便阅读,博讯暂停广告播放,博迅需要您的支持。
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    郭国汀律师专栏
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[郭国汀律师专栏]->[值得中国律师学习的起诉书: 诉江泽民\李岚清\罗干\刘京\王茂林损害赔偿两千万加元]
郭国汀律师专栏
·福建省首例著作权争议案代理词
·果园承包合同纠纷案代理词
·借贷纠纷上诉案代理词
·借款纠纷上诉案代理词
·“天下第一剑”商标侵权争议案代理词
·析产争议案代理词
·不当得利争议案起诉状
·不当得利争议一审代理词
·不当得利争议案上诉状
·不当得利争议案上诉状
·不当得利重审案代理词
·出租车乘客伤害应向谁索赔?
·服务合同争议案代理词
·“权利质押借款合同”争议案代理词
·涉外商品房屋买卖合同质品争议案代理词
·抚恤金争议案上诉审代理词
·劳动争议(运钞车被劫)争议仲裁代理词
·航空货运代理合同争议案答辩状
·航空货运代理合同争议案代理词之二
·航空货运代理合同争议案代理词
·运输费争议案代理词
·租赁合同争议案代理词
·房屋预售合同(债权转让)争议案代理词
(8)海事海商名案要案
·“国鸿”轮光船租赁合同争议仲裁案代理词
·船舶碰撞侵权争议案代理词
·Ocean Glory轮碰撞争议案代理词
·海上货运保险合同(代位权)争议案代理词
·安泰轮船舶保险合同上诉案情代理词
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议上诉审代理词(正)
·翻船货损代位追偿案初步法律意见
·扣押船舶申请书
·海上货运合同争议案初步法律意见
·船舶保险合同争议案上诉状 郭国汀
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议案代理词
·船舶买卖合同争议上诉案代理词/郭国汀
·造船合同争议案上诉审代理词/郭国汀
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议案上诉答辩状/郭国汀
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议上诉审代理词/郭国汀
·海上货物运输货损争议案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货物运输运费争议案代理词/郭国汀
·无单放货争议案上诉代理词/郭国汀
·新世纪轮船舶保险合同争议上诉案代理词/郭国汀
·航空货运代理合同争议案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货运合同争议案代理词/郭国汀
·船舶碰撞争议案代理词/郭国汀
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货运货损代位追偿案代理词/郭国汀
·越权放行提单争议案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货物运输运费争议案代理词/郭国汀
·放行提单侵权争议听证代理意见书
·诉前还船海事强制令申请书/郭国汀
·渔业船舶碰撞侵权争议案代理词/郭国汀
·关于“8•5”油污染事故损害赔偿的初步法律意见/郭国汀
·关于新世纪轮船舶保险合同纠纷上诉案代理词之二
·强制执行令复议申请书/郭国汀
·诉前海事强制令听证代理意见书/郭国汀
·诉前还船海事强制令申请书/郭国汀
·沉船货损索赔争议案重审代理词/郭国汀
·关于进口货物货方要求签发两套提单有何风险的法律意见/郭国汀
·进口鱼粉自燃货损争议案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货物运输货损争议案起诉状/郭国汀
·清风洲轮货损争议案代理词/郭国汀
·航空货运运费争议案析/郭国汀
·上海亚通股份有限公司不服行政行为纠纷案代理词/郭国汀
·货代合同争议案上诉答辩状/郭国汀
·船舶保险合同争议上诉状/郭国汀
·涉外航空运输侵权争议案代理词/郭国汀
·苏东台渔02051与苏赣鱼02981船舶碰撞案情分析/郭国汀
·华亭进出口公司无单放货案代理词/郭国汀
·提单丢失应如何处理?郭国汀
·无单放货(记名提单)案评析/郭国汀
·五矿国际货运福建公司与厦门外轮代理有限公司保函争议再审案/郭国汀
·“新世纪”轮船舶保险合同(固定物、浮动物? )争议案的反思/郭国汀
·新世纪轮船舶保险合同争议上诉案代理词/郭国汀
·修船作业火损争议上诉案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货物运输合同争议案代理词/郭国汀
·一起重大船舶保险合同(告知义务)争议案之代理词/郭国汀
·浙江金纺诉日本川崎汽船株式会社无单放货争议案代理词/郭国汀
·中钢轮沉船货损争议案代理词/郭国汀
·中钢轮沉船货损争议上诉案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货运保险合同争议仲裁案代理词/郭国汀
(9)财产保险,船舶保险,海上保险经典名案
·建达轮船舶保险合同争议上诉案代理词
·船舶保险合同争议案补充代理词
·海上货运保险合同争议案仲裁代理词
·海上货运保险合同货损争议案代理词
·驾驶员意外伤害保险争议案代理词
·保险代理合同答辩状
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议上诉审代理词
·住房按揭保险合同争议上诉答辩状
·住房按揭保险合同争议上诉答辩状
·保险代理合同答辩状
·运输货运保险合同争议案代理词
·保证保险合同争议案代理词
·驾驶员意外伤害保险争议案上诉审代理词
·保证保险合同争议案答辩状
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
值得中国律师学习的起诉书: 诉江泽民\李岚清\罗干\刘京\王茂林损害赔偿两千万加元

Falungong v Jiangzeming statement of claim
   Court File No. 04-CV-278915CM2
    Issued on Nov. 15/2004
   Ontario
   SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
   B E T W E E N :
   KUNLUN ZHANG, SHENLI LIN, LIZHI HE,
   TIANQI LI, CHANGZHEN SUN and NA GAN
   Plaintiffs
   - and -
   JIANG ZEMIN, LI LANQING, LUO GAN, LIU JING and WANG MAOLIN
   Defendants
   STATEMENT OF CLAIM
   TO THE DEFENDANTS
    A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the Plaintiffs. The claim made against you is set out in the following pages.
    IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, you or an Ontario lawyer acting for you must prepare a statement of defence in Form 18A prescribed by the Rules of Civil Procedure, serve it on the Plaintiffs lawyer, or where the Plaintiffs do not have a lawyer, serve it on the Plaintiffs, and file it, with proof of service, in this court office, WITHIN TWENTY DAYS after this statement of claim is served on you, if you are served in Ontario.
    If you are served in another province or territory of Canada or in the United States of America, the period for serving and filing your statement of defence is forty days. If you are served outside Canada and the United States of America, the period is sixty days.
    Instead of serving and filing a statement of defence, you may serve and file a notice of intent to defend in Form 18B prescribed by the Rules of Civil Procedure. This will entitle you to ten more days within which to serve and file your statement of defence.
    IF YOU FAIL TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, JUDGMENT MAY BE GIVEN AGAINST YOU IN YOUR ABSENCE AND WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO YOU. If you wish to defend this proceeding but are unable to pay the legal fees, legal aid may be available to you by contacting a local Legal Aid office.
   Date: __________________ Issued by: _________________________
    Court Office: 393 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1E6
   TO: JIANG ZEMIN
    Zhong Nan Hai
    Beijing, 100017
    People’s Republic of China
   AND TO: LI LANQING
    Zhong Nan Hai
    Beijing, 100017
    People’s Republic of China
   AND TO: LUO GAN
    Zhong Nan Hai
    Beijing, 100017
    People’s Republic of China
   AND TO: LIU JING
    Zhong Nan Hai
    Beijing, 100017
    People’s Republic of China
   AND TO: WANG MAOLIN
    Zhong Nan Hai
    Beijing, 100017
    People’s Republic of China
   CLAIM
   1. The Plaintiffs claim:
   (a) General damages in the amount of $5,000,000;
   (b) Special damages including past care costs, future care costs, loss of income and future loss of income, loss of property, presently estimated in the amount of $10,000,000;
   (c) Punitive, aggravated and exemplary damages in the amount of $5,000,000;
   (d) Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest pursuant to Sections 128 and 129 of The Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C. 43;
   (e) Costs of this action on a substantial indemnity basis, and the Goods and Services Tax;
   (f) Such further and other relief as this Honourable Court may deem just.
   SUMMARY
   2. This is an action for damages against the Defendants, being certain individuals who made all the key decisions and had control over how those decisions were carried out, to torture, persecute and terrorize the Plaintiffs. While the Defendants used, or more accurately abused, their positions as top officials of the Chinese Communist Party (“CCP”) and the government of the People’s Republic of China (“China”) to force the initiation and implementation of this campaign of terror, they did so contrary to and acting outside Chinese and international law and the legal authority of their offices. Thus, they acted in their private capacity and are not entitled to immunity from suit.
   3. The Defendants used and abused their power in China to force or compel other members of the CCP and the Chinese government, through all levels of both throughout the country, to participate in the campaign of terror against the Plaintiffs. The Defendants employed threats, intimidation and rewards – all of which they had the power, more than any others in China, to carry out -- to compel others to execute their orders. The Defendants are thus primarily and directly responsible for the harm done to the Plaintiffs.
   4. The Plaintiffs are named in this action with their given names first and their surnames second as is the custom in Canada where all Plaintiffs now reside. The Defendants and others residing in China are named in this action with their surnames first and their given names second, as is the custom in China. All references to Chinese language text or statements (laws, orders, statements of the Defendants and others carrying out the persecution, etc.) have been translated by the Plaintiffs into English.
   5. All Plaintiffs were at all times material to this action, practitioners of Falun Gong, and are practitioners of Falun Gong to this day. This is the reason for their persecution and torture.
   6. Falun Gong (also known as Falun Dafa), is an internationally recognized, peaceful, spiritual discipline devoted to the self-improvement of the body, mind and spirit through adherence to principles of “Truthfulness–Compassion–Forbearance” with roots in ancient Chinese culture. Falun Gong consists of practicing five sets of simple, gentle meditative exercises, and following the three principles in daily life.
   7. The practice of Falun Gong in China spread quickly after its master teacher, Li Hongzhi, brought it to the public in 1992. It is estimated that about 100 million people in about 30 countries worldwide (most in China) were practicing Falun Gong as of July 1999. At that time Falun Gong had more practitioners in China than the Communist Party of China had members. And at that time, Jiang Zemin, then head of the CCP and Chairman of China, outlawed the practice of Falun Gong in China.
   8. Thereafter, Jiang Zemin and the other Defendants led and orchestrated a systematic persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in China, which included detention in forced labour camps without trial, threats and intimidation, surveillance and wiretaps, public hate mongering, physical and psychological torture (including brainwashing techniques) designed to force practitioners to renounce Falun Gong and turn other practitioners in to authorities, taking and destruction of personal property, loss of employment and income, and separation from family and community. Torture of practitioners often resulted in severe injury, trauma and even death.
   9. The nationwide Chinese policy established by Jiang Zemin and implemented by him and the other Defendants was the eradication of Falun Gong. Such eradication was to occur through forcefully securing practitioners’ renunciation of their spiritual beliefs (through persecution and torture), or through death (from torture or other means). The Falun Dafa Information Center (a volunteer-run not-for-profit corporation registered in the state of New York, which compiles, cross-checks and publishes information on the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners) has confirmed 1006 deaths of Falun Gong practitioners as a result of torture, from July 1999 to July 2004. The actual number of deaths of practitioners as a result of the persecution campaign might be much higher.
   10. The persecution and torture in China continues to this day, along with tactics employed by the Defendants and other Chinese officials residing in Canada and other countries, which defame and instil fear and hate of Falun Gong practitioners including the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs continue to fear for their lives and their safety.
   11. This claim is grounded in Canadian common law. The Defendants intentionally perpetrated against the Plaintiffs: forced and unlawful confinement, assault and battery, taking and/or destruction of property without right, economic interference, physical and psychological torture, defamation, severe mental and emotional distress.
   12. Canadian common law is itself informed by and adheres to international human rights law, which the Plaintiffs hereby additionally plead and rely on. The acts of the Defendants as against the Plaintiffs are part of a systematic persecution by the Defendants of Falun Gong and its practitioners, constituting gross violations of fundamental human rights and international law, including:

[下一页]

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场