(Minghui.org) (Continued from Part 1)
Shortly after I was released, my wife and another practitioner were arrested when they told someone about Falun Dafa at a market. I submitted numerous legal documents to government agencies. Because I blended the facts about Dafa with legal provisions, the results were very good.
Before my wife’s hearing, I went to the court with all kinds of materials and as her relative I applied to defend her. Because of good preparation, things went well and I was able to meet the judge in charge of the case. I shared my thoughts asking for his feedback. I talked lot: from what Falun Dafa is to the persecution in 1999, from the peaceful nature of Falun Dafa to the misapplication of the charge: “using a cult organization to undermine the implementation of the law,” from the basic characteristics of crime to the principles of “no crime without law,” from numerous political campaigns in the past to the judicial persecution of Falun Dafa practitioners. The judge listened quietly and kept nodding.
One person said, “What is your profession? You have explained things so well!” I turned around and it was a female judge. I looked around and I saw this was a large office and several judges worked there.
I thanked the female judge and continued talking to the judge assigned to the case. Although I was a defender as a relative, he told me some case files could only be viewed not photographed according to policies from higher officials. I asked him to provide legal basis. There were none, he said.
I went to the court’s disciplinary inspection department and was received by someone who claimed to have served as a criminal court judge in the past. He initially promised to help me copy the case files. As soon as he heard the case was related to Falun Dafa, he balked, “Falun Dafa cases are not allowed to be photographed!” When I asked for the legal basis, he said it was a political issue and then he rambled on about some unrelated things.
While sending forth righteous thoughts to clear the negative elements behind him, I looked at him in the eye and said, “We need to follow the written policies, not whatever people say.”
He calmed down and said, “You are a scholar and I won’t argue with you. It is what it is and there’s nothing I can do.”
Although I hired a human rights lawyer for my wife, I still said yes when the court asked if I needed a legal aid. I wanted to explain things to this new lawyer so that he or she would know the facts. After I reached out to a lawyer surnamed Ma, she told me frankly, “I’ve worked on cases related to Falun Dafa and I know practitioners are innocent. But I dare not say so in a court.” I explained I invited a human rights lawyer to lead the discussion and plead not guilty. Ma just needed to say in court that she agreed. She nodded.
This way, my wife had three defenders although no more than two are usually allowed. But I wasn’t worried. If the judge raised this question, I would give this opportunity to Ma because I wanted to help save her. During the hearing, the judge did not bring up this topic—probably because the other practitioner who was persecuted had no defender. In the court room, three of us worked together well. The human rights lawyer led the main statement while I added sensitive contents that might displease the officials. Ma only needed to say, “I agree with the other defender.”
My wife was arrested again several years later. At that time, I was also in danger and planned to stay away from home. I told myself, “If I stay away from home, how can I rescue my wife or oppose the persecution?” So I decided to face the situation directly.
After arriving at the police station, I said, “I want to go home, but I don’t have the keys. I heard my wife was arrested and detained here. I want to know why she was arrested and I also need to get the keys from her.” The police officer on duty said the officer who handled this would come back in an hour and he asked me to wait.
Two or three hours passed but that officer still did not come. The officer in charge of this case told me the officer responsible for confiscated items was drunk, and he asked me to come back the next day. I said, “I’ve been waiting here for several hours. Where can I stay tonight?” He said there was nothing he could do. In front of him, I called the police hotline (110) and the receptionist said they would resolve it. So I received the keys and returned home.
I went to the police station again several days later with two documents. One was the No. 39 announcement from the Ministry of Public Security in 2000 that listed 14 types of cult organizations. Falun Dafa was not on it. The other the No. 50 announcement from the General Administration of Press and Publication in 2011 that revoked the ban on Falun Dafa books. The receptionist was unwilling to accept them. I said seriously, “These are related to my case because they can prove my wife is innocent. They show the items confiscated from my home are our lawful possessions.” So he accepted them.
At that time, the materials provided by the practitioners’ Justice Forum was very thorough. Following the examples, I sued the police officers involved this case. I sent the paperwork to the national, provincial, city, and district level justice system as well as the officers themselves. I received several phone calls. Some people were sympathetic and some provided advice. None of them disagreed with me. As the case went further, I mailed additional documents to relevant government agencies.
When the case reached the procuratorial office, I went to the officer in charge of the case and I requested to retrieve confiscated items that were not related to the case. He said all of them were relevant and he refused to give me anything. I asked for an inventory and he tried to brush me off. I repeated my request per Procuratorate Provisions on Open Case Handling Information. He had no choice. He returned the computer, cell phone, and several other items a few days later.
After receiving the verdict, I saw it said the publication was not made by the defendant herself. So I went to the police station again requesting that items unrelated to the case be returned. The officer who handled the case did not do anything, so I went to the petition officer of the police department. The petition office was supportive, but the police station still did not do anything.
When I went to the petition office again, an officer said the director as well as political security office manager were having a meeting in another building, and he asked them to come after the meeting. Shang, the political security office manager, was hostile and said all Falun Dafa practitioners’ possessions were related to the case. “How is our printer is relevant?” I asked. He could not answer and was embarrassed.
With help from the petition office, Liu, a deputy director of the police station said we could retrieve the items. By that time, my wife returned home and we went there together. Liu told us he could not give those micro SD cards with information against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). I said we could discuss this at a later time and Liu sent the remaining items to my home.
Because we insisted on getting back our Falun Dafa books, police station director Zhang was involved. “I read your documents and I know you are right. But if I give you the Falun Dafa books, I will lose my job,” he explained. He also told us how he helped practitioners in the past at other police stations. We said it was fine for now, but we would not give up. He seemed happy and gave us the micro SD cards when I asked.
Upon hearing my story, other practitioners gained righteous thoughts. Some retrieved items that were confiscated from them, such as tricycles.
Although my wife returned home, her case was still not closed. I applied to defend her as a family member and the judge approved it. When she asked if we needed legal aid, we said yes because we wanted other lawyers to know the facts.
My wife and I examined every instance where the officials violated the law. We prepared the materials, and submitted them to the intermediate court. We also told the judge the facts about Falun Dafa when we met with her.
Deng, a lawyer assigned by the justice bureau reached out to us several days later. We met her in her law firm and she said she knew officials committed some wrongdoings. We thanked her and requested a public hearing for the second instance of the trial. She said she would check with the judge. We also thanked her.
While we waited my wife read an article on Minghui that recommended sending letters about persecution cases in order to clarify the truth. So she wrote a letter requesting a public hearing for the second instance trial. The letter listed all the instances where officials violated the law when handling this case. I also added practicing Dafa is lawful plus the ban on Dafa books had been revoked. We sent about 200 copies of this letter to various government agencies and received some positive feedback.
About one month later, Deng said the judge had repeatedly requested the defense statement. I said we could not do that; otherwise, the judge may skip the public hearing and we would lose the opportunity to defend my wife. Seeing Deng faced too much pressure, we ended our contract with her and she understood.
The justice bureau assigned another lawyer named Han. She didn’t know about Falun Dafa and was willing to listen. We talked for more than two hours, starting with this case to the overall persecution, from the unconstitutional judicial interpretations from the Supreme Court as well as Supreme Procuratorate to how local officials violated the law in handling Falun Dafa cases, from the CCP’s support of Dafa before 1999 to the persecution in the past 20 plus years, and from Cultural Revolution and the June Fourth Incident in 1989 to the serious consequence of persecution based on faith.
Han was busy and some other people needed her help from time to time. But we were able to resume the conversation. She was willing to help us. When other practitioners were arrested later on, she also offered to help and charged a low fee.
We spent several months trying to get a public hearing, but it did not work. The judge called us one day saying the hearing concluded and we could petition if we wanted. An appeal usually involves a ruling from the court of the first instance, while a petition involves ruling from the court of the second instance. We did not know any practitioners who previously did this.
So we sought help from the Justice Forum, and practitioners shared their thoughts: our goal was to expose the persecution; more importantly, we are helping more people to learn facts in this way. Compared to appeals, a petition is more flexible. We would clarify the truth from the legal, social, moral, and other aspects.
My wife and I worked together, and we finished a draft. After practitioners in the justice forum reviewed it, we printed it out for submission to the intermediate court. We also sent forth righteous thoughts so that everyone who read the documents would understand the facts and stop doing bad deeds.
After the petition was submitted, the chief judge was changed several times. On the surface it seems we had to repeatedly go there. In reality we knew it was because more people needed to know the facts. After one year, someone from the court notified me to attend a petition hearing.
We consulted the Justice Forum and practitioners there provided some advice. Because we didn’t know how things would go, my wife and I each wrote a 10-page long defense statement so that each of us could defend the case individually. We told other practitioners about this and they agreed to support us with righteous thoughts.
After arriving at the hearing, we realized the case went through three judges and returned to the original judge. Probably because the other judges read our documents and no longer wanted to participate in the persecution. The judge just wanted to brush us off and arranged to hear another case at the same time. But we did not give up.
Seeing how well we were prepared, the judge was surprised. The hearing was over in an hour. My wife summarized the case and pointed out how officials violated the law in this process. I then began to read my defense statement. The judge tried to interrupt me, but failed. And I was able to read my entire defense statement, requesting the intermediate court to schedule another trial for this case.
I learned a lot from this process.
First of all, solid cultivation is critical. Master said,
“You can’t let up with your individual cultivation. No matter what you are doing, be it clarifying the facts or doing projects that validate Dafa, you must first put cultivating yourself well as top priority; only then can the things that you do be more sacred, for then you are a Dafa disciple, and are doing things as a Dafa disciple to validate the Fa.” (“Fa Teaching at the 2007 New York Fa Conference”, Collected Teachings Given Around the World, Volume VIII)
As practitioners, we may have skills and capabilities. Without faith in Master and Dafa, without clear understanding of Dafa, and without strong righteous thoughts, we cannot do anything.
I practiced those talking points many times and I could even recite them. But my mind would go blank at critical moments. Even if I could say something, it did not carry the energy a practitioner should have.
Second, a show off mentality can be very harmful. Master said,
“Right now, whether Dafa disciples are validating the Fa as a group or clarifying the truth as individuals, all of those are what Dafa requires. As long as Fa-rectification requires it, you should do it well, and there’s no room for negotiation. And don’t get conceited because of your roles, and don’t think you’re different from others. You’re each a particle. And in my eyes nobody is better than anyone else, since I scooped all of you up at the same time. (Applause) Some are more capable when it comes to one thing, others with another—you definitely shouldn’t let your thoughts run wild based on that. You say that you have such great abilities and so on and so forth, but that was all bestowed upon you by the Fa! Actually, it wouldn’t work if you failed to attain that level of abilities. Fa-rectification required your wisdom to reach that point, so you definitely shouldn’t think that you’re so capable. Some practitioners want me to check out their abilities and skills. But actually, what I think is, all of that was given by me, so there’s no need to look.” (“Teachings Given on Lantern Festival Day, 2003”)
Falun Dafa practitioners are good people. If this persecution hadn’t happened, we wouldn’t need to read these legal provisions unless it was our job. But the persecution did happen and it continues, so we have no choice.
Some practitioners who have put effort in these areas and made some achievements may be praised by other practitioners. I always remind myself all my capabilities come from Dafa and Master. I have no reason to show off.
Third, not counting on others. Opposing the persecution not only requires the ability to express ideas well, but also the courage to speak and write. Some practitioners have fear and they rely on others.
But Master expects every practitioner to succeed. Counting on others or being the one who is counted on isn’t right. When we get attached to doing things with a strong showing off mentality, we may have problems with our own cultivation. The attachment to dependency may also negatively affect other practitioners.
Master has mentioned numerous times that we need to let go of fear. One practitioner in a nearby area was arrested last year and practitioners there asked me to help. I suggested they call the procuratorial office and check if the case had been submitted. But they wanted me to make the phone call. I thought about it and replied, “If you cannot make this phone call, then I cannot help you.”
Some practitioners did not understand. I explained that every one of us needs to walk his or her path. If they cannot do these simple things because of fear, it means they need to improve in this area. Our cultivation is the most important.
Last, there’s a question about hiring lawyers. I started to interact with lawyers many years ago to oppose the persecution. In recent years, few lawyers are willing to plead not guilty for practitioners. This is because they face pressure.
Another reason is that some practitioners praise and admire these lawyers in a way that’s related to CCP culture. This may push these lawyers in the wrong direction. Plus, there are many persecution cases throughout the country, and these lawyers may be very busy.
I knew we should reach out to local lawyers and give them opportunities to defend Dafa. By telling them the facts we can help save them, improve the local environment, and more lawyers will be willing to plead not guilty on behalf of practitioners. Local lawyers are easy to contact and their fees are relatively low.
Both times my wife was arrested, I contacted local lawyers, and it wasn’t difficult. They are waiting to be saved. The second time my wife was arrested, more than 20 lawyers were willing to help. The highest fee was only 10,000 yuan (or USD $1,400) and some asked for less than half of this price.
I also encountered some interference while I wrote this. My understanding is that, no matter what, we need to do what we are supposed to do. This is because that is what we are here for.
(The end)
(Selected submission for the 22nd China Fa Conference on Minghui.org)