[Click here for the Chinese version of the testimony]

1. Regarding the crime of splitting the country:

1. Splitting the country refers to the act of an organization to plot and implement splittism and sabotage to a country. However, I am an ordinary intellectual and a manager of a private bookstore who did not commit any concrete actions fitting the conditions of the crime of splitting the country.

2. The referendum I referred to was not intended for the current social condition. It referred to a referendum that will take place in a future democratic China. Referendum is a common practice of the modern world to address nationality questions. For example, secession of Quebec in Canada and reunification of West and East Germany were addressed through a referendum. No country in the world sees the call for a referendum as a crime.

3. The Southern Mongolian Democratic Alliance is a social entity, not an anti-revolutionary clique. Freedom of association is a legal right of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution. Therefore, it should be protected by the Constitution.

4. There is no term called the “crime of anti-revolutionary and crime of splitting the country” in China’s existing or previous Criminal Acts. We must ask who invented this crime? This itself is an illegal act.

5. To constitute the “Crime of Splitting the Country”, first of all, there must be an act of armed insurrection which I have never carried out. Therefore, the objective condition of the Crime of Splitting the Country is apparently not satisfied. By no mean does it constitute a crime.

6. Therefore, any country in the world that has a sense of justice would not consider me a criminal. Only the Chinese Government sees me as a criminal, sentenced me to a long jail term.  I have been framed and all my appeals have been ignored.

7. Lian Zhan of Taiwan should be considered as a criminal then. But he has not been punished but been seen as the guest of honor by Hu-Wen Administration.

8. Even though the “Ethnic Minority Region’s Autonomy Law” has been issued, the government leaders of China and the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, especially the ethnic Han leaders, have never taken it seriously as a law. Therefore, our rights have frequently been violated. Mongols are afraid to express their thoughts.

9. In terms of autonomy issue, modern international laws clearly state to uphold “ethnic self-determination”. I believe the Mongols as an ethnic group should also have the right to self-determination. However, I did not say to implement it today, but in the future. Therefore, I have not violated any law.

10. Regarding the issues of training courses and publication, it was sound in nature and small in scale. In fact, I and Tegexi (who was sentenced to 10 years in jail at the same time --- note by SMHRIC) had never participated in these activities. Heilong, Changming and Chen-haishan had directly participated in, but were released, which proves that this is not an illegal act. Therefore, the allegation against me is also groundless.

2. Regarding the Crime of Engaging in Espionage:

1. I have never passed on any classified document to any foreigner.

2. I have never received a dollar from any foreigner. Indeed, I had some dollars, but that was earned from my bookstore business. During the interrogation, I was forced to admit that I did so. Otherwise, they would not stop the torture. Now, I am telling you the truth. If you do not believe, please show me the evidence.

3. The reason why I was so interested in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Party Committee issued Document No.13 1994 was to uncover the inconsistency between the Communist Party ethnic policy doctrine and its actual implementation. This document helped me understand that it has been playing the leading role of policy and everything else is just an empty promise.

4. Document No.13 was not classified at all. It was widely disseminated among the faculties and students of the Inner Mongolia Normal School. Most of the students are, like myself, non-Party members. On the other hand, there were many hand-written variations and what I saw was also a hand-written copy.

5. The Constitution of China clearly states that no one shall exercise ethnic discrimination and ethnic repression. However, the Party Committee of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region has cooked up a document that is full of ethnic repression contents. It is intolerable that those who made it up have never been prosecuted but have been given the right to abuse the power to frame others like myself.

3. Regarding the court decision:

1. The court decision says that the prosecution’s evidence was ALMOST sufficient. Can this satisfy the conditions for any of the four types of punishment – detention, placing under surveillance, setting a term of imprisonment and life imprisonment? Or does this satisfy all of these four? Why does this happen? This is definitely not unintentional. The reason is very simple: I am not guilty! Therefore, I strongly urge the Supreme Court to re-try my case and my innocence will be proved.

2. I firmly believe the responsible parties including the Public Security Bureau, Procuratorate, and the Court must be brought to justice if my case is fully redressed. Those political leaders who orchestrated my arrest must also be held responsible. Meantime, cases of all those arrested should be redressed and the victims should be compensated. My bookstore should also be compensated accordingly.

3. As far as the prison authorities are concerned, they have constantly employed cruel torture, brutal corporal punishment, and ill-treatment during these 11 years, causing me irreparable consequences. They asked inmates to beat me, confiscated my large amount of belongings and properties, and destroyed their large amount of criminal evidence. All these criminal activities must be thoroughly investigated by the Supreme People’s Court. I will provide evidence and oral accounts.

4. So far, law enforcement personnel have violated these laws and related regulations:

a) Constitution and Criminal Law; b) Criminal Investigation Law; c) Police Law; d) Compensation Law; e) Procuratorate Organizational Law; f) Judge Law; g) Procuratorator Law; h) Court Organizational Law; i) Prison Law; j) Anti-stimulant Act.

5. The Chinese Government has violated international conventions including laws and regulations against torture and cruelty….. ( here, our phone conversation is disconnected. )

NOTE: This appeal letter is based solely on Hada’s dictation, and was not able to be checked against the original written version that was confiscated by the prison authorities. Therefore, this is a paraphrase of the original.

Xinna,

March, 2008          (Xinna visited Hada on March 18, 2008 --- note by SMHRIC )

<Back>