Australian Government Steps in to Argue for Diplomatic Immunity in Chen Shaoji Case
By Cao Zhen
(Clearwisdom.net) The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is acting out of desperation in
Australia. After the default judgment was rendered against CCP official Bo
Xilai in early November for his crimes against Falun Gong, the Australian
courts were scheduled to have a hearing on a default judgment against CCP
official Chen Shaoji. Then a letter was unexpectedly delivered to the New
South Wales (NSW) Supreme Court, declaring that regardless of what Chinese
officials do in any capacity, whether official or private, they should
have immunity, and that any lawsuit against them is illegal. When the barrister for plaintiffs Xie Yan and Li Fuying went to apply
for the default judgment, three solicitors from the Australian Attorney
General's office arrived and submitted the letter to the court from the
Chinese Embassy in Australia. Foreign Minister Alexander Downer issued and
signed a certificate on November 15, 2007, granting defendant Chen Shaoji
diplomatic immunity, claiming the defendant was not subject to the
jurisdiction of the court, and the 22nd Australian
Attorney-General submitted a document to the court using the Foreign
States Immunity Act 1985 to protect Chen Shaoji from the proceedings. The Supreme Court had held a hearing on CCP official Chen Shaoji, who
was sued for illegal imprisonment and torture. The two plaintiffs, Falun
Gong practitioners Ms. Li Fuying and Ms. Xie Yan, were detained and
tortured when defendant Chen Shaoji was the political and judiciary
secretary of the Guangdong Provincial Party Committee and Minister of the
Guangdong Province Public Security Bureau. At the time, Ms. Xie was an
unmarried young woman, and Ms. Li was over 70 years old. Now Ms. Li Fuying is nearly 80 years old. She was imprisoned in
Guangzhou City twice for remaining steadfast in her belief in Falun Gong.
Her daughter, Ms. Yan Haiyu, was sent to Chatou Women's Forced Labor Camp
for a two-year term without any legal procedures having been followed. She
was physically and mentally tortured and was force-fed many times. After
she served the term, she was sent to the Guangzhou City Brainwashing
Center, where fresh air was only let in once every 24 hours. She suffered
various tortures, brainwashing, and other cruel means of persecution and
was greatly traumatized. When Ms. Li Fuying recalled the persecution that
she, her family, and other Falun Gong practitioners had been subjected to
in China--and who are still being brutally persecuted today--she couldn't
control the sadness in her heart and burst into tears several times. Plaintiff Xie Yan said: "Because I refused to denounce my belief
in 'Truthfulness, Benevolence, and Forbearance,' I was illegally
imprisoned for two years in China, and suffered brutal torture in a forced
labor camp." She said that during the two years and three months of
forced labor, she was tortured brutally. During the first two days, she
was handcuffed and hung on the metal window frame of a cell for 48 hours
with only the tips of her toes touching the ground. During the next three
days, she was handcuffed and hung in the same way for 18 hours a day.
Other tortures included being tied up for a long time, force-feeding,
brainwashing, and forced labor 16 hours a day. Defendant Chen Shaoji headed up a 610 Office and assisted
and instigated police officers to strengthen their brainwashing techniques
to attack Falun Dafa practitioners, among his other crimes. Chen Shaoji
cannot shirk the responsibility for his involvement in crimes against
Falun Gong in Guangdong Province. In December 2006, Ms. Li Fuying and Ms. Xie Yan filed the lawsuit
against Chen Shaoji, and successfully delivered the summons to the
defendant, who was leading a Guangdong delegation in Sydney. The
plaintiffs said that a hearing of the defendant's crimes against Falun
Gong and a judgment in an Australian court may help the plaintiffs attain
justice in the free country of Australia, something that is not
possibleThe New South Wales Supreme Court has held several hearings, and
Chen Shaoji has not responded. With defendant Chen Shaoji failing to
respond to the case, the plaintiffs applied for a default judgment, in the
hope that the court would use Bo Xilai's case as a reference. Australian Falun Gong practitioner Pan Yu sued former Chinese Minister
of Commerce Bo Xilai for torture. When Bo failed to provide a defense for
the case, the NSW Supreme Court in Sydney issued a default judgment in
favor of Pan Yu on November 5, 2007. The court ruled that plaintiff Pan Yu
won the case, and may ask for compensation for injuries caused by Bo. Former CCP diplomat Chen Yonglin said that the loss of CCP official Bo
Xilai's case in Australia is a huge setback and frightening to CCP
officials who have directly led and participated in persecuting Falun
Gong, because none of them will then be able to evade trial. Chen Yonglin
thought that, because Bo Xilai's case has had such a big impact, if Chen
Shaoji faces the same judgment this time, more CCP officials will be faced
with default judgments. This might lead the CCP to threaten the Australian
government with ceasing China-Australia relations, canceling their free
trade agreement, etc., which would mean huge economic losses for
Australia. The November 13, 2007, letter from the Chinese Embassy states:
"Immunity shall prevail no matter in what capacity such officials
act, official or private. All proceedings against these officials are
unlawful no matter whether they are incumbent or have ceased to perform
their duty." Plaintiff Ms. Xie Yan hopes that the Australia judicial system won't
submit to the CCP's pressure and that it will persevere, recall the fair
procedures in Bo Xilai's case, and issue defendant Chen Shaoji a default
judgment. Ms. Xie also said that the path of Chen Shaoji's promotions to
becoming a high-level CCP official is covered in Falun Gong practitioners'
blood: "The crimes against humanity committed by CCP officials in the
persecution of Falun Gong will exist forever in history."
Plaintiff Ms. Xie Yan wrote an open letter to the Australian people on
November 23. She stated, "Adolf Hitler was a government official and
he did what he did based on the laws of Nazi Germany. I would like to
know, if Hitler were on trial today, would Minister Downer and the
Attorney General use the same reasoning to excuse him?"
Chinese version available at
http://minghui.ca/mh/articles/2007/12/4/167741.html
Yearly Archive
Printer Version
feedback@clearwisdom.net