我很喜欢《早熟》，如果没有终局那场法庭戏。尔东升导演年纪不轻了，拍起法庭戏来却像…

北京人权人士胡佳家人和律师陆续向外界透露更多庭审不公的细节，而胡佳在看守所期间受不人道对待的情况也一一得到证实。另外同样被控涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权罪的黑龙江维权人士杨春林案件将于周一宣判。以下是自由亚洲电台特约记者丁小的采访报道。

请听报道录音
下载声音文件
北京人权人士胡佳涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权案件本周二开庭，当局曾用各种手法阻止庭审情况曝光，包括不准公众旁听，甚至要求家人从法院侧门进出避开法庭外等候的众多海外媒体。近日家人和律师渐渐向外透露出更多的内幕。

据了解，庭审期间，检察官多次粗暴打断辩方律师的陈述，甚至拍桌子和用与法律工作者身份极不相称的文革式的指控。而在法官的阻止下，两位辩护律师甚至无法完成辩护词宣读。李方平说：“检察官在律师宣读辩词时表现的很情绪化，我们还是尊重法庭意见，虽然法庭也多次打断我们，最后也停止了我们宣读辩护词。我们总体觉得辩论时间太短，第一轮辩护限制我们二十分钟，时间太短我们无法有效的维胡佳辩护。”

据了解检控方指案件情节严重，律师说这种情况下法院如果定罪成的话刑期会超过五年。

胡佳在庭上的陈述承认自己有言辞过火的地方，也原谅了国保警察长期对他进行的暴力打压，他说能够接受判决，表现得十分从容。当天唯一一名能够出席庭审的亲人–胡佳的母亲告诉本台，此前一名公安副局长曾向胡佳道歉：“在里面预审处的人和他一起‘学法’时他说只是不能原谅国保对他的一些不公，后来胡佳在庭上就说杀人不过头点地，公安局长都跟他道歉了，国保他也原谅了，就是不存这个结了。说不管是什么结果他都接受。律师说只要是有良心的人都会被感动的。”

另外，家人和律师在星期五接受记者采访时也证实了一些本台此前从可靠途径得到的胡佳在看守所和审讯期间受到不人道的待遇。

据了解在被捕头一个月，胡佳受到每次六至十四小时的夜间审讯，与此同时白天不准睡觉，对他的精神产生很大影响，律师李方平说，当局这种做法有疲劳审讯之嫌：“比如说胡佳审讯回去以后，只能睡两个小时就要起来参加看守所的活动，又得不到补休，我们觉得这有疲劳审讯之嫌。从胡佳反映，第一个月是非常难过的，他现在才慢慢调整过来。”

与此同时有消息指在被捕长达两个半月的时间里，胡佳只获得放风三次。本台周五就此向律师查询时，李方平表示不便明言，但肯定当局在这方面严重违规：“根据看守所管理条例，每天最少有一到两个小时的防风时间，胡佳的情况的确远远没有达到这个标准。　”

另一位受国际社会关注的被捕大陆维权人士杨春林一案将于下周一下午在黑龙江佳木斯市中级法院开庭宣判。也在该案中任辩方律师的李方平告诉本台这一消息。

因组织万名失地农民公开信活动并打出“要人权不要奥运”口号被捕的黑龙江维权人士杨春林，是被以和胡佳同样的罪名–涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权抓捕指控的。这一罪名经常被大陆当局用来打压和他们持不同意见各个领域的人权人士，律师质疑这一刑事罪名与宪法列明的公民言论自由权相悖的同时，也质疑当局在这类型案件中往往包括在侦查审讯阶段用案件涉密剥夺当事人会见律师的权利，李方平律师在办理胡佳和杨春林两个案件过程中都分别遇到这种情况。

以上是自由亚洲电台特约记者丁小的采访报道。
见胡佳印象与家人的担忧/RFA张敏
(博讯北京时间2008年3月22日 转载)

（自由亚洲电台“心灵之旅”节目主持人张敏采访报道2008，03，21 ）
3月18日胡佳案在北京市第一中级人民法院开庭以后，胡佳的妻子曾金燕带着四个月的女儿、与胡佳的母亲一起，获准与胡佳见面几分钟。
现年三十四岁的胡佳先生多年从事环保、艾滋病等方面的社会工作和维护人权活动，多次被警方绑架、拘押、软禁。去年12月27日，胡佳被以“涉嫌煽动颠覆国家政权罪”刑事拘留，一个多月后，被以同样涉嫌罪名逮捕。曾金燕带着现在四个月的女儿，一直处于警方严密监控之中。胡佳案3月18日结束庭审，法官说，合议后择期宣判。
据可靠消息来源，此后至今，曾金燕仍然对胡佳的健康深感担忧。
她说“看到他脸色比较苍白而且发青，据现在所知，胡佳头七十天只有三次‘放风’机会，每次不到半小时，从这个情况看，身体健康不会好到哪里去。我们现在还有好多信息不知道，所以很难判断”。
曾金燕责怪自己太粗心大意，说2月10日她“见胡佳的时候问他‘每天都干啥呢’，他就是不回答，警察就在那边哼哼哈哈讲‘每天六点还是八点钟起床’‘中午吃饭是吧？’‘吃完饭睡午觉对吧’。。。
曾金燕说“我当时就怀疑，但没有深究”。
胡佳的案子是2月16日转到检察院的。胡佳的家人最近才知道“最初的一个月对胡佳是晚上提审，白天基本上不让睡觉，一共提审四十八次，一个月没睡多少觉”。
曾金燕因此认为，现在可能还有很多事家人和外界都不知道：“例如胡佳现在一方面说他‘释然’，他也是非常失望，说‘讲道理、讲法律根本没有用’。他根本没有能力去追究，在这种情况下，他已经非常疲劳，没有抵抗能力了”。
曾金燕说“至于从其他人口中听到说情况有多好，不要追问，问都不要问”。曾金燕举例，如有人对她说“‘每天给胡佳吃素食的套餐’，开始还说‘住单元房，有独立卫生间，每天都洗澡’，其实没有。后来一问“‘吃什么呀？’，‘吃土豆丝，西红柿鸡蛋’也并不是特别给他的。问他每天都干什么，他答不出来。。。自己哪有不知道自己每天干什么的？”曾金燕几次问国保，胡佳每天干什么，国保也回答不出来。
曾金燕曾在3月18日问胡佳‘体检怎么样?’，相当于进去后的第二次体检，胡佳说“结果现在还没出来”。
据曾金燕所知，2月10日与胡佳见面之前，曾作过一次体检。但曾金燕至今怀疑警方所说的报告结果是否真实――“因他们说什么都好”。有一天国保还告诉曾金燕“胡佳的肝硬化已经好了”，以致曾金燕当时就发火，说“你们朦我，也得考虑清楚怎么朦法，别把我当成三岁小孩，肝硬化是不可逆转的，你说检查的哪项比较正常吧，‘病毒载量’怎样呢？”对方“啊、啊。。。”根本答不出来。
基于以上情况，曾金燕对胡佳身体状况仍然非常担忧。

我打电话给胡佳的母亲，她是3月18日胡佳案开庭她是胡佳一方唯一获准到庭旁听的人，并在庭审结束后与胡佳短暂见面几分钟。
我想请胡佳的母亲详细讲讲那天她见到的情况，胡佳的母亲说：“我那天是从南门进去的，所以就躲开了所有的人，只有几个胡佳的朋友见到我，详细情况您在网上看吧，有一个电话记录，那就是我的感受。”

以上是自由亚洲电台“心灵之旅“节目主持人张敏采访报道。

Hu Jia’s mother’s plea for justice and conciliation

19 March 2008

1. Why was only I allowed to attend the trial?

Among his family, only I was allowed to attend the trial of Hu Jia. About Jinyan and Hu Jia’s Dad they [the prosecution] said that they were witnesses – but [as witnesses] they had not received a summons to come to court. And as to what was called their ‘witness statements’, they were only asked a few simple questions. They asked Hu Jia’s Dad: Did you take Hu Jia along to the Tsinghua University Anniversary celebrations? The answer was, yes. Then they asked, wasn’t the second gate of Tsinghua [University] destroyed in the Cultural Revolution? The answer was, yes. So therefore, our lawyers in their defence pointed out that these questions had nothing to do with the case [against Hu Jia]. As to Jinyan, they asked her, what brand-name computer was Hu Jia using to write his pieces; and did you know what he was writing? Jinyan answered, we each used our own computers and did not read what each other was writing. (And this was the reason why Hu Jia’s wife and his father could not appear in court as witnesses for the prosecution.)

Perhaps they did not want the family members to grant interviews to the media, and therefore the court asked me to enter the building from the Southern gate whereas everybody else was asked to enter from the Western gate. Around the Western gate, there were about 70-80 people assembled, some were from Hu Jia’s NGO circles, some were from legal circles, several friends from the AIDS [activist] circle. They were all not allowed in. The courtroom was small, it had only 24 seats, many of which were taken by the staff of the pre-trial unit [预审处] while three or four seats remained empty. Of the remaining audience, many were women. I guess that these were housewives randomly brought together from wherever they could find them to fill up the number [of seats]. Some foreign journalists applied to be admitted to attend the trial three days ahead, but got no permission. Even a distantly related uncle of Hu Jia’s [姨父 – the mother’s sister’s husband] wanted to attend. They asked for a police station certificate (to show that he was a relation of Hu Jia’s) and then they said that it must be a direct family relation; so that uncle also could not go.

Therefore, at the trial, the only person Hu Jia knew (apart from the lawyers) was me. He did not know any of the others.

2. The lawyers were in a weak position at the trial

During the trial hearing, Lawyer Li was interrupted several times while making his defence statement. At one time, when he said that China Youth Daily once ran an article which was positive about Hu Jia’s work as an environmentalist, the judge interrupted him and said that this had nothing to do with the case. Another time, Lawyer Li said: The state security [guobao] squad of the police beat Hu Jia several times for no reason, behaving irrationally. The prosecutor thereupon knocked on the table. Lawyer Li said angrily, ‘Prosecutor, how can you be so uncivil in court?’ The judge then admonished both sides to restrain themselves.

I think that the trial did not seem fair. The presiding judge was shielding the prosecutor. The defence was interrupted several times, and they kept alerting them, ‘you only have two minutes left,’ ‘you have one minute left.’ When the lawyer made the point that the people should be given freedom of speech and that the USSR dissolved [because of] suppression of speech…. the presiding judge again interrupted him. The lawyers defending Hu Jia were put under a lot of pressure; they were putting their own lives on the line. The bureau of justice came and talked to them. They only got copies of Hu Jia’s case file last Tuesday and did not have enough time to prepare. Lawyer Li Jinsong in particular – he rented a flat, and then the police spoke to the landlord (instructing him not to rent to Lawyer Li Jinsong); he had to move several times and each time the police would [speak to the landlord]; now he can only sleep in his own office. And in June, he will have to leave Beijing. This is a really difficult situation.

3. How can it still be like this?

Hu Jia is a classical example of a prisoner of conscience criminalized simply for what he said, and Hu Jia himself says that he hopes he will be the last person to be criminalized for what they said in this country. I myself was condemned as a rightist for what I said in 1957, and endured twenty-two years of unjust treatment. I should not have thought that today, my son, too, would be criminalized for what he said. What is the matter with this country and this government; how can it still be like this? The words of the prosecution were not materially different from the ‘great criticisms’ of the Cultural Revolution; both times, they would talk about ‘viciously attacking’ and so on…’ Is that not criminalization of speech? Is that not putting people in prison for what they have written?

They even used a private letter which Hu Jia wrote to a few friends in 2001. We do not know who put it online. The lawyers said that this was six years ago and ought not to be prosecuted, but the prosecution said that there was no limitation on the prosecution in effect.

When will we have a just legal process? Why cannot ordinary people be allowed to speak their minds? Why is that the moment they say something that goes against what the government says, they are treated as criminals? All through our history it has been like this, from the First Emperor’s [Qin Shi Huang Di] burning of the books to Mao Zedong’s Anti-Rightist campaign and the Cultural Revolution; and even now they still do not let ordinary people speak their minds? They used methods of oppression to deprive the ordinary people of protection. At the time, was it not because the people were angry at heart that such as thing as June Fourth happened?

When I saw Hu Jia for the first time [after his detention and arrest] I paid special attention to his neck and wrists and saw that they bore no traces of shackles, and he was not beaten in there. But of course, Hu Jia considered himself innocently imprisoned and his attitude was not co-operative at all from the beginning. He was subjected to 48 interrogations (from February onward he was barely interrogated at all). Each interrogation lasted 6 to 14 hours and they all happened at nighttime. And during the day, they would not let him sleep. (This is also a form of cruel treatment!)

As a mother, of course, I feel great pain for my son. But Hu Jia himself is quite peaceful and composed.

4. Hu Jia forgives them

When Hu Jia made his final statement at the trial, it was quite moving. Many people sunk their heads; they were moved. Whatever Hu Jia does, he does not do it covertly or surreptitiously. All his work for the defence of human rights was done openly and boldly. His words come from the heart. He himself felt that not everything he had done was a hundred percent right, and he had some second thoughts on certain angry words he had used, and said he had spoken too angrily [at those times]. But, he said, how could he be punished merely for what he had said?

A commanding officer of the pre-trial investigation department said, ‘during the days Hu Jia spent in the police detention I rather came to like him.’ And the police security unit officers also said to us several times, ‘Hu Jia is a good person.’ ‘Hu Jia does not have a bad nature.’

That is just the kind of person Hu Jia is. He is kind-hearted, almost naively so, toward other people. He has dignity and charisma. So when this happened to him, there was not one person who spoke ill about him on the internet. And in terms of his political views, he was also completely straightforward, as frank as a child. I used to say, the most scary thing about Hu Jia is that he himself is not scared. Knowing full well what the dangers were, he would still go ahead.

The state security [guobao] squad of the police behaved unreasonably. They beat Hu Jia several times. Even during those days when Jinyan gave birth to their child, they beat Hu Jia on the mouth when he wanted to bring Jinyan home. For that, Yu vice head of the Beijing Police Bureau apologized to me on the morning of 30 January. He said that the guobao police had done wrong and that they had rather messed up that time.

Before, Hu Jia said that he could not forgive the state security police. Now that they have apologized, he does forgive them. He forgives them for what they did as individuals.

Of course, I am hoping for a just verdict. But we have no result yet and one has leaked to me what the result might be.

Hu Jia is calm and composed, he shows no great anxiety about the outcome of the trial. Jinyan is just now nursing the baby. Please tell all their friends that they should not worry.

But if Hu Jia should be convicted, he will become a sacrificial lamb on the political altar, sacrificed for social progress, a child of the motherland that was beaten by mistake. This happened to us, his parents, and it would happen to him, too.

Further Remark: It is reported that during the first seventy days of his detention, Hu Jia was only given three opportunities to go outside for fresh air, and each time for not longer than half an hour. He took his shirt off to make the most of the sunlight.