A Shanghai Court denied Wang Huaizhong's right to defend his daughter in court. Wang is the father of imprisoned Shanghai Falun Dafa practitioner Wang Yiyi. Wang has requested legal assistance from a Shanghai law firm.

Ms. Wang Yiyi, 32, was a senior manager in the Silica Gel Division of General Electric's Shanghai branch. On the evening of November 24, 2004, Yiyi was abducted by police while distributing truth-clarification materials in Shanghai. She was detained in the Xuhui detention center. On June 17, 2005, more than half a year after her illegal arrest, the Shanghai Xuhui Court organized a show trial for her.

Since Yiyi's arrest, Mr. Wang, a senior engineer in Dalian Tiancheng Construction Company Ltd., has visited all relevant offices and written hundreds of appeal letters to the government. He has exposed how the Xuhui People's Court has persecuted his daughter. Mr. Wang is demanding a legal explanation for the abduction of his daughter. The judiciary department, however, has been unable to provide any legal grounds for Yiyi's persecution.

The Shanghai Court rejected Mr. Wang's application to defend his daughter. Mr. Wang sent a letter entitled "Searching for Legal Assistance" to Shanghai law firms. In this letter, Wang revealed how Judge Lu Wenjia and his accomplices in the Xuhui Courts have violated the Chinese Constitution in trying Yiyi. Mr. Wang has presented strong evidence for his case. The courts under the Communist Party's control are a full fledged criminal organization.

Mr. Wang's defense statement and appeal letters have induced a strong response from senior officials and members of judicial organizations in Shanghai. As an ordinary citizen, Mr. Wang has used the law to expose the unconstitutional nature of the persecution against Falun Gong. The statement claims that people in China are awakening to the horrific persecution and are reassessing Falun Dafa. Practitioners' selfless efforts in clarifying the facts have not been in vain. Truth, Compassion and Forbearance will prevail.

The following is Mr. Wang Huaizhong's letter:

To Shanghai law firms:

In the trial of Wang Yiyi, Judge Lu Wenjia and the court he led have violated the Chinese Constitution. As the father of Wang Yiyi, I have filed grievances to the Shanghai Superior Court, Shanghai City People's Procuratorate, Xuhui District People's Procuratorate. I have also appealed to the Shanghai People's First Appellate Court. I am seeking legal assistance for the following case.

1. Exceeding the 50-Day Limit for a Trial:

On March 18, 2005, Wang Yiyi was tried in the Xuhui People's Procuratorate. On March 19, Justice Lu Wenjia of the Xuhui People's Courts had notified Wang Yiqiang that he could hire a lawyer to defend his sister. The entire proceeding of this case, from the day the Court opened the case to the issuance of the verdict, took 3 months and 4 days. Clause 168 of the Criminal Law dictates that "In the trial of a case by the People's Court, a sentence should be announced within one month. In no circumstances should it exceed one and a half months." To the best of my knowledge, Judge Lu Wenjia has violated this clause in the trial of Wang Yiyi. Meanwhile, Lu also violated the regulation on time exceeding arrests and detention in the proceedings of the Procuratorate as set forth by the Superior People's Procuratorate on September 24, 2003.

2. A Rigged Trial:

Around 9 a.m. on June 17, I saw an old man walk into the Court. The chief justice Lu Wenjia then announced that "too many people are here to audit the trial. I will issue only three audit permits." In the Sixth Court, Lu arranged for us to sit in the second to last row. The last row was filled by policemen in uniform or plain clothes. The old man sat in front of us. None of the newspapers, television stations, and websites in China report trials of Falun Gong practitioners, so how did this old man hear of this trial? There is only one possible explanation. Besides my family, all other people were there on the order of Judge Lu. This public trial was rigged.

3. Announcing the Sentence Under the Table

Without informing me or my son, the Court requested my younger daughter Wang Yiqiang to pick up the verdict documents. Lu secretly declared the sentence, which is a violation of clause 163 in the Criminal Law requiring that "All verdicts must be declared publicly".

4. No One to Defend Wang Yiyi in the Trial

At 9:30 a.m. on June 17, 2005, Wang Yiyi was not given legal representation. Her designated attorney Wang Huaizhong was not permitted to defend in the trial by Judge Lu Wenjia. Shi Haiming, the lawyer who sat in the defense attorney's chair, did not defend Wang Yiyi. A defense attorney must first apply to the Court and the Judge, who will decide if the applicant meets the requirements set forth by the Criminal Law to represent the defendant. Lu Wenjia told me that, "If you want to defend Wang Yiyi, you must have her authorization." Clause 32 in the Criminal Law also states that the defense lawyer must have the defendant's authorization. Shi Haiming, however, did not have Wang Yiyi's formal authorization to be her lawyer. Clearly, Shi Haiming does not meet the requirements to represent Wang Yiyi in court. Furthermore, Shi was appointed by Lu Wenjia.

5. An Unjust Trial That Tarnishes The Dignity of Law

In the trial, when Wang Yiyi mentioned Falun Gong for the first time, the presiding judge Peng Tao interrupted sternly that, "Wang Yiyi, you are not allowed to mention Falun Gong in court." I objected immediately that, "You must allow her to talk; this is her right!" Peng Tao yelled at me "You are not allowed to speak. If you speak again, I'll throw you out of the court." When Wang Yiyi mentioned Falun Gong for the second time, Peng shouted "Wang Yiyi, you are not allowed to say 'Falun Gong'!" The state prosecutor Xu Zhenhui, however, used the words Falun Gong seven times in his statement, and Peng did not object. The court made it illegal for the defendant to mention Falun Gong in the trial of a Falun Gong practitioner. This action is against clause 11 in the Criminal Law that states "The defendant has the right to legal defense, and the People's Court has the duty and obligation to make sure that the defendant receives a defense." Clause 154 states "In a trial, the presiding judge should notify the defendant that he has the right to defend himself." Clause 160, "After the presiding judge announces that the prosecution and the defense have finished their statement, the defendant has the right to make a final statement."

6. Lu Wenjia Conceals the Facts and Rejects Evidence

I am Wang Yiyi's father and her authorized defense lawyer. On May 20 this year, I submitted a statement of defense to Lu Wenjia. In the statement I discussed the four major flaws in the prosecution's statement and requested the court to validate the truthfulness of the allegations. In the trial, only the prosecutor was allowed to question witnesses, and the four major problems that I highlighted were not investigated at all. Lu Wenjia and the court he led did not conduct a fair public trial. This is in violation of clause 6 in the Criminal Law, "Judge with evidence and legal support."

7. Depriving Our Rights

After receiving my daughter's formal authorization to act as her lawyer, I sent my son Wang Yiqiang to the Xuhui People's Court to apply fill out an application. On April 20, 2005, Lu Wenjia accepted my application alone with a copy of Yiyi's authorization letter. Within a few days, Lu Wenjia demanded that Yiyi's original authorization letter must be submitted. On May 9, the original letter was sent to Lu by express mail.

At 3:50 p.m. on June 16, I visited Shi Haiming in the Shanghai Nanpu law firm. I asked, "Can you read my defense statement in the court?" Shi replied "No. if you are the defense attorney, you must give the statement yourself." "Can you give me a copy of the trial notification?" I asked. Shi said "No. I'll contact Judge Lu immediately. You need to discuss the matter with him."

At 4:30 p.m. on June 16, Lu Wenjia and secretary Liao Jun received my son and me in the first floor reception room. I asked Lu, "Have you talked to the detention center?" Lu replied, "They requested me to send them a formal letter, but right now I am very busy. I have no time to do that. Have you brought your proof documents from your workplace?" I showed him my documents, and Lu kept a copy. "I am the defense attorney, legally authorized by Wang Yiyi" I said. Lu replied, "Shi is also the defense attorney." "Clause 39 in the Criminal Law dictates that the defendant has the right to appoint his own lawyer. You have the power to deny me to be the defense lawyer, but Shi works for us, and we have the right to terminate our contract with her immediately." Lu answered, "That is not permitted. There can be one or two defense lawyers, and Shi will be one of them." Lu claimed that he has to report to his superiors immediately.

At 9:20 a.m. on June 17, judge Lu Wenjia brought up a 2003 document by the Shanghai Superior People's Court and told me that, "You do not meet the requirements outlined in this document and are not allowed to be the defense lawyer." I objected, "This is not a legal document, and it has no legal basis. I cannot accept it."

Lu Wenjia has violated the following laws:

I am a senior engineer in the Dalian Tiancheng Construction Company Pte. Ltd. I have worked on trials involving up to 240 million dollars, so I have a fairly good understanding of the law. As the consignee, I have appeared in the Liaoning Province Superior People's Courts, Beijing Supreme People's Courts for trial. With Wang Yiyi's authorization letter, I am fully authorized to defend for her in the court. Lu Wenjia has deprived my right to appear in court represent Wang Yiyi. Lu also denied Yiyi the right to her own lawyer. Lu violated the first regulation in clause 238 in the Criminal Law and has infringed upon citizenship rights of my daughter and me.

Lu Wenjia denied us the right to terminat our contract with Shi Haiming. This is in violation of clause 410 of the Contractual Law, "the individual or someone authorized by the individual has the right to terminate the contract with the lawyer at any time."

Lu Wenjia and the court he led did not obtain information from the Dalian City Renmin Road Police Station or my workplace, so they falsely claimed that I do not meet the requirements to be a defense lawyer? Lu Wenjia is a liar. His use of the 2003 document is in violation of Clause 33 of the People's Courts Organization Law that states "The People's Superior Court must clearly explain the use of laws and legal actions in trials."

8. My requests are as follows:

  1. Acquit Wang Yiyi.
  2. Investigate Lu Wenjia and the court he led regarding the case of illegal sentencing of Wang Yiyi.

I hope that you can offer legal assistance. Please contact me at: 011-860-411-83682810


Wang Huaizhong

July 6, 2005