Translation:People v Sheng Zhonghua (2021)

Ganjingzi District People’s Court Dalian, Liaoning, PR China

Criminal Judgement

[2020] Liao 0211 Xing Chu No 459

Prosecution Authority: the People’s Procuratorate of Ganjingzi District, Dalian, Liaoning (the ‘Prosecution’).

The Defendant, Sheng Zhonghua, male, born on 19 March 1980, ID No: 230 [redacted], Han Chinese, bachelor’s degree, unemployed, household registration location at [redacted]  , Dalian, Liaoning, currently residing at the same address of the household registration aforementioned. The Defendant was criminally detained for the present case by the Ganjingzi Branch of Dalian Public Security Bureau on 15 May 2020, and was formally arrested on 18 June 2020. He is now detained in Dalian Detention Centre.

Designated defence counsel: Su Huanhai, a lawyer with Liaoning Lijin Law Firm.

On 3 September 2020, the Prosecution filed the present case with this Court by the Indictment [2020] Ganjian Gongsu Xingsu No 460 against the Defendant for the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble. Upon receipt of this case, this Court then formed a collegial panel in compliance with the law and held a public hearing of the case. Assigned by the Prosecution, Prosecutor Zhang Fuli and Assistant to the Prosecutor Liu Zhonglin appeared in court on behalf of the People to present the case. Both the Defendant and the defence counsel appeared before the court and attended the proceedings. The trial of the case has now been concluded.

The Prosecution alleges that, in March 2019, the Defendant registered an account on the American social network ‘Twitter’, with the username of ‘kinglock@ikinglockjoe’. From March 2019 to June 2019, the Defendant, while residing in his flat located at [redacted], Dalian, bypassed the internet blockade, signed in to Twitter with the aforesaid account, reposted and disseminated one hundred and thirty-nine (139) tweets of inappropriate remarks that insulted the leader of the Party and the state as well as of false information that concerned major domestic events.

After the aforesaid Twitter account was suspended by the relevant department for the illegal activities mentioned above, the Defendant re-registered another Twitter account in August 2019 with the username of ‘卡西麗@kinglock10’. The Defendant then set the new account to private and reposted another thirty (30) or so tweets of inappropriate remarks that insulted the leader of the Party and the state as well as of false information that concerned major domestic events.

To sustain these charges, the Prosecution has submitted to this Court documentary evidence, testimony of witnesses, the ‘Confession and Justification of the Defendant’, ‘Records of Inspection and Examination’, and other evidence.

The Prosecution holds that the Defendant has created disturbances in a public place and caused serious public disorder. The criminal facts are clear, and the evidence is reliable and sufficient. Thus, the Defendant shall be held criminally responsible for the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble, and the Prosecution, therefore, pleads with this Court for a judgement according to law.

The Defendant has no objection to both the criminal facts and the name of the offence charged by the Prosecution and expressed in court that he would voluntarily plead guilty. He argues that the purpose of his Twitter activities was to browse overseas information and news, and his focus was not exclusively on domestic false information. The Defendant has also raised that there were only about one hundred (100) tweets among the over one thousand (1,000) tweets he reposted in total concerning insults towards the state leader, which made up merely ten (10) per cent. Thus, it was not his subjective intention to repost remarks that were insulting the state leader, only that he had not realised this issue while reposting. As for the other Twitter account of the Defendant that was set to private, the Defendant argues that the account was used to meet his craving for collection and was never intended to disseminate any information.

The defence counsel agrees with the arguments made by the Defendant and has added defence opinions as follows: The Defendant is a first-time offender with no previous criminal record, and given that the Defendant has truthfully confessed upon summons, pleaded guilty in a good manner, and demonstrated signs of remorse, the defence counsel, therefore, pleads for a lighter or mitigated punishment be given to him.

The Court, upon trial of this case, ascertains that, in March 2019, the Defendant registered an account on the American social network ‘Twitter’, with the username of ‘kinglock@ikinglockjoe’. And between March 2019 and June 2019, the Defendant, while residing in his flat located at [redacted], Dalian, bypassed the internet blockade, signed in to Twitter with the aforesaid account, reposted and disseminated one hundred and thirty-nine (139) tweets of inappropriate remarks that insulted the leader of the Party and the state as well as of false information that concerned major domestic events, which sparked a large number of comments, reposts and likes, causing an execrable impact.

On 14 May 2020, the Defendant truthfully confessed to the aforesaid acts after being summoned by the public security organ via telephone.

The aforesaid facts are sufficient to establish by the evidence corroborated in the case files that has been cross-examined in court, reviewed and adopted by this Court as follows: documentary evidence of ‘Source of the Case’, ‘Course of Appearance of the Suspect’, ‘Household Registration Certificate’, ‘Certificate of Criminal Record Enquiry’, ‘Detention Centre Admission Health Examination Form’, and ‘Statement of Circumstances’; testimony of witnesses from Song [redacted], Su [redacted]  , and Song [redacted]  ; the ‘Confession and Justification of the Defendant’; the ‘Work Log of Remote Inspection’ provided by the Cybersecurity Brigade of the Ganjingzi Branch of Dalian Public Security Bureau, and other evidence of such.

This Court holds that the Defendant has disseminated false information on the information network with the full knowledge that such information was fabricated to insult and vilify the leader of the Party and the state, in which he has created disturbances and caused serious public disorder; his acts, therefore, have constituted the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble. The facts and the name of the offence charged by the Prosecution are established. The Defendant has truthfully confessed to his past acts of reposting inappropriate remarks after being summoned via telephone. Although he argues about the nature and subjective awareness of his commission of criminal conduct, it does not affect his confession to be recognised as voluntary surrender. Therefore, a lighter punishment is to be given according to law. The sentencing recommendation provided by the Prosecution is appropriate and thus shall be adopted. In summary, in accordance with Paragraph 1 of Article 293, Article 67 of The Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, and Article 5 of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate’s Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of Criminal Cases of Defamation and Other Such Crimes Involving the Use of Information Networks, the Court hereby rules that:

The Defendant committed the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble and is sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of ten (10) months.

(The term of imprisonment shall be counted from the date of execution of the judgement. Where the Defendant is detained on remand prior to the execution of the judgement, one day of such detention shall be credited as one day of the sentence, that is, the term of imprisonment begins on 15 May 2020 and ends on 14 March 2021.)

If the Defendant refuses to accept the present judgement as final and binding, a petition for appeal may be submitted through this Court or directly to the Dalian Intermediate People’s Court of Liaoning within ten (10) days commencing on the day following the day of receipt of this judgement. In case of a written appeal, one (1) original copy and two (2) duplicate copies of the petition shall be submitted.