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]->[the open letter to Mr.Hu Jintao from Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada for Gao Zhisheng]
郭国汀律师专栏
·亚洲的国际商事仲裁中心及其仲裁制度的特点-颜云青 郭国汀译
·亚洲的国际商事仲裁中心及其仲裁制度的特点-颜云青 郭国汀 译(下)
***郭国汀律师专译著
·《现代提单的法律与实务》译者的话/郭国汀译
·《审判的艺术》译者的话/郭国汀
·《国际经济贸易法律与律师实务》作者的话/郭国汀
·《当代中国涉外经济纠纷案精析》主编的话/郭国汀
·《国际海商法律实务》主编前言/郭国汀
(1)《协会保险条款诠释》陈剖建/郭国汀译 郭国汀校
·寄语中国青少年——序《英国保险协会保险条款诠释》
·《英国保险协会保险条款诠释》译后记
·《协会保险条款诠释》陈剖建/郭国汀译
·《协会保险条款诠释》陈剖建/郭国汀译 第二编 海上货物保险格式
·《协会保险条款诠释》陈剖建/郭国汀译 第三编 海上船舶格式保险单
·《协会保险条款诠释》陈剖建/郭国汀译 第四编 对船东的附加保险
·《协会保险条款诠释》陈剖建/郭国汀译 第五编 为各利益方的保险
·《协会保险条款诠释》陈剖建/郭国汀译 第六编 战争和罢工险格式
(2)英国协会保险货物保险条款英中对译
·1934年1月1日协会更换保险条款/郭国汀译
·1982年1月1日协会货物(A)条款/郭国汀译
·1982年1月1日协会货物保险(B)和(C)条款/郭国汀译
·1982年8月1日协会恶意损害保险条款/郭国汀译
·1983年9月5日协会商品贸易(A)(B)(C)保险条款/郭国汀译
·1984年1月1日协会黄麻保险条款/郭国汀译
·1986年1月1日协会冻肉保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶战争险和罢工险条款/郭国汀译
·1982年1月1日协会货物罢工险条款/郭国汀译
·1982年1月1日协会货物战争险保险条款/郭国汀译
·1982年10月1日协会煤炭保险条款/郭国汀译
·1983年10月1日和1995年11月1日协会船舶定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1984年1月1日协会天然橡胶(液态胶乳除外)保险条款/郭国汀译
·1986年1月1日协会冷冻食品(冻肉除外)保险A条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会运费定期战争和罢工险条款/郭国汀译
·1986年1月1日协会冷冻食品(冻肉除外)保险(C)条款/郭国汀译
·1983年2月1日协会散装油类保险条款/郭国汀译
·1983年12月1日协会盗窃、偷窃和提货不着保险条款(仅用于协会保险条款)/郭国汀译
·1986年1月1日国际肉类贸易协会冻肉展期保险条款(仅适用于协会冻肉保险(A)条款/郭国汀译
·1986年4月1日协会木材贸易联合会条款(与木材贸易联合会达成的协议)/郭国汀译
(3)英国协会保险船舶条款英中对译
·1983年10月1日和1995年11月1日协会船舶定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1987年7月20日协会船舶港口险定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1988年6月1日协会造船厂的风险保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶乘客设备定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶航次保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶全损、共同海损和3/4碰撞责任航次保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶运费定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会机器损害附加免赔额保险条款/郭国汀译
·1985年11月1日协会游艇保险条款/郭国汀译
·1987年7月20日协会船壳定期保赔保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日附加免赔额适应条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶额外责任定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶全损定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶限制危险定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶运费航次保险条款/郭国汀译
·1996年1月1日协会运费共同海损-污染费用保险条款/郭国汀译
·1987年1月1日协会集装箱定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1987年7月20日协会渔船保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶搬移另件保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶附加危险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶全损、共同海损、3/4碰撞责任定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶营运费用和增加价值(全损险,包括额外责任)定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶租赁设备定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1997年3月1日协会船舶抵押权人利益保险条款/郭国汀译
(4)英国协会保险运费、战争、罢工险保险条款英中对译
·1982年1月1日协会货物罢工险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶营运费用和增值定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶战争险和罢工险条款/郭国汀译
·The Practice of Marine Insurance: Marine Insurance Policy Forms
·1982年1月1日协会货物战争险保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会船舶运费定期保险条款/郭国汀译
·1995年11月1日协会运费定期战争和罢工险条款/郭国汀译
·1996年1月1日协会运费共同海损-污染费用保险条款/郭国汀译
(5)《CIF 和 FOB 合同》第四版 郭国汀主译校
·《cif与fob合同》序
·《cif与fob合同》译后记
·郭国汀译《CIF 和FOB合同》读后
·《CIF和 FOB合同》第四版 郭国汀主译校
·《CIF 和 FOB合同》郭国汀主译校 第二章 装运
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第四章 保险(王崇能译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第五章 交单和付款(高建平译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第六章 法律救济(梅欢雪译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第七章 冲突法(黄辉译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第八章 各种类型的FOB合同(陈真,王崇能,黄辉,郭国汀译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第九章 FOB交付(蔡仲翰译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第十章 FOB价格条款
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第十一章 付款与接受(王力耘译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第十二章保险 (李小玲译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第十三章 法律救济(李小玲译)
·〈CIF 和 FOB 合同〉郭国汀主译校 第十四章 法律冲突(王力耘译)
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
the open letter to Mr.Hu Jintao from Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada for Gao Zhisheng

LAWYERS’ RIGHTS WATCH CANADA
   Promoting human rights by protecting those who defend them
   3220 West 13th Avenue, Vancouver, B.C. CANADA V6K 2V5
   Tel: +1-604-738-0338 Fax: +1-604-736-1175
   Toll free Canada/US 1 877 662 7344
   Email: lrwc@portal.ca www.lrwc.org
   Mr. Hu Jintao
   President of China
   Zhongnanhai
   Beijing, P.R. China
   Postcode: 100017
   April 7, 2005
   Dear Mr. Hu:
   Re: The Illegal Persecution of Lawyer Gao Zhicheng, the illegal suspension of all lawyers in his firm, and the illegal closure of the Cheng Zhi Law Office
   Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada (“LRWC”), as you know doubt will recall from our previous correspondence with you concerning Lawyer Guo Guoting, is a committee of Canadian lawyers providing support internationally to advocates whose rights, safety, or independence are threatened as a result of their human rights advocacy.
   I very much regret the necessity to record that since our last letter to you, the abuses committed by your government against Chinese lawyers and other Human Rights advocates has greatly increased both in terms of number and of severity.
   Lawyers have had their licences to practise confiscated on patently specious grounds; lawyers and other human rights advocates have been intimidated, beaten, and in one case very nearly killed. There is every reason to believe that these outrageous acts, calculated to ensure that the Rule of Law cannot be implemented in China, are the direct result of conscious policies approved and implemented by the Government of China and the Chinese Communist Party.
   In the near future, LRWC will be writing individual letters to you concerning each act of persecution committed by your government as part of your central policy to prevent the Rule of Law in China, of which we have been made aware.
   LRWC is particularly gravely concerned for the safety of Lawyer Gao Zhicheng and all the lawyers who practised in the Cheng Zhi Law Office, and for the acts of intimidation perpetrated against them by your government and the Chinese “Justice” Ministry, acts which are calculated to prevent these courageous lawyers from carrying out proper advocacy on behalf of their clients.
   I am writing, as the China Country Monitor for LRWC, in response to information obtained from a wide variety of sources. It is abundantly clear from these sources that all the intimidation against Lawyer Gao and his colleagues has occurred as a direct consequence of the open Letter to you which Mr. Gao published and disseminated widely. Your government’s public announcement that Mr. Gao’s office had been closed for alleged failure to comply with certain local office registration requirements would be laughable, were it not for the serious implications inherent in this draconian move for the future of democracy and legal due process in China.
   It is abundantly clear to the entire world that this retribution against Lawyer Gao and his colleagues was triggered solely by his courage in invoking the freedom of speech guaranteed by the Chinese Constitution, but routinely ignored by the Chinese Government. Mr. Gao’s only “crime” was to write the truth about the barbarity of the persecution against Falun Gong being carried out by the Chinese Government.
   The conscious, systematic persecution in China of all lawyers and human rights advocates with the courage to stand up against illegal and undemocratic acts of government, and indeed against the perpetration of mass murder and torture by the Chinese Government, shocks the conscience of lawyers, jurists and legal scholars everywhere. These acts by the Chinese Government are in violation not only of every relevant international convention or covenant to which China is a signatory, but of Chinese law itself, conspicuously including the Chinese Constitution.
   China has a responsibility to adopt such measures as are necessary to guarantee the life, livelihood, and physical safety of Lawyer Gao and of all lawyers in China. This duty arises from China’s membership in the United Nations (UN). This same responsibility also arises from many UN conventions and covenants to which China is a signatory including: the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, and the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, especially Article 1 of that document, which states: “every person has the right, individually or collectively, to promote the protection and fulfilment of human rights and fundamental liberties at the national and international levels”.
   We ask that the Chinese government apply, and proceed in accordance with, the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 9 December 1998.
   China, as a member of the United Nations General Assembly, is also bound by the “Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers”, welcomed by the UN General Assembly in 1990.
   Article 16 of that document states that:
   “Governments shall ensure that lawyers are able to perform all their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference”. Clearly there could be no clearer contravention of this provision than the acts which have been perpetrated against Gao Zhicheng.
   Article 17, furthermore, states that
   “Where the security of lawyers is threatened as a result of discharging their functions, they shall be adequately safeguarded by the authorities”. In this case, it is the Chinese authorities themselves which are committing the violations.
   The Declaration on Human Rights Defenders further requires (see Articles 9(5) and 11) your government to conduct a prompt, impartial and effective investigation of the shocking actions and coercive measures taken against Lawyer Gao and the other lawyers of the Cheng Zhi Law Office.
   Article 12(2) creates the mandatory responsibility of member states to protect lawyers in the practice of their profession: The recent acts of the Chinese “Justice” Ministry are deliberately designed to accomplish the opposite. That is to say, these acts prevent these very brave lawyers from legitimately practising their profession.
   Failure to protect and investigate violations of the rights of Gao Zhicheng constitutes an egregious breach of China’s duties under binding international laws and principles set out in several international conventions to which China is a signatory.
   China’s systematic violations of the rights of Gao Zhicheng, his colleagues, and of all effective human rights lawyers in every part of China, make a complete mockery of China’s frequent claims to be implementing the Rule of Law. Clearly there can be no Rule of Law, and no legitimate legal system deserving of international respect can exist, in an environment where lawyers are routinely deprived of their livelihood and professional status, and even incarcerated, solely for taking on cases of which the Chinese Government or the Chinese Communist Party disapproves.
   LRWC respectfully urges your government to act in accordance with the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the other relevant international and regional pacts and covenants ratified by China. The Chinese legal system can never hope to achieve the respect of the international community so long as the Chinese government, courts, police, and Justice Ministry continue to routinely violate virtually every international convention to which China is a signatory.
   Arbitrary arrest and detention without charge are not legitimate acts of state. Neither are arrests on charges couched in vague, subjective, and undefineable terms.
   I respectfully remind you that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which China is a party, sets out a number of minimum guarantees to ensure fair trial standards. It is unfortunate that to date, the standard procedures of China’s police, prosecutors, and courts have not come close to the most minimum standards set by the international community.
   In addition, any torture or ill treatment is strictly prohibited by both the ICCPR and customary international law.

[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