Deadline Nears for Release of Rural Activist Guo Feixiong

November 29, 2005

Lawyers for rural activist Guo Feixiong are taking advantage of a December 27 deadline to request his release from detention, according to articles in the South China Morning Post (SCMP) (subscription required) on November 10 and 16. The filing of their request on November 11 comes two weeks after the Panyu District Procuratorate returned Guo's case to public security officials for further investigation. Guo remains in official custody and has ended the hunger strike that he began on September 13 to protest his detention.

Lawyers for rural activist Guo Feixiong are taking advantage of a December 27 deadline to request his release from detention, according to articles in the South China Morning Post (SCMP) (subscription required) on November 10 and 16. The filing of their request on November 11 comes two weeks after the Panyu District Procuratorate returned Guo's case to public security officials for further investigation. Guo remains in official custody and has ended the hunger strike that he began on September 13 to protest his detention.

The procuratorate's "Return for Verification Notification from the Panyu District Procuratorate" (Notification), posted November 8 by Chengdu University Law Professor Wang Yi on his blog, says:

After examining [Guo Feixiong's] case, this office has decided to return the case for verification. Criminal suspect is now detained at Panyu District Detention Center, Guangzhou Municipality, [and the] legal detention period ends on December 27, 2005. According to the PRC Criminal Procedure Law regulations, during this time, now [we] inform you that you have rights to apply for changing compulsive measures. In the case of exceeded detention, you have rights to file suit with the supervision department of this procuratorate.

Article 140 of China's Criminal Procedure Law (CPL) authorizes the procuratorate to request up to two supplementary investigations when necessary. In ordinary criminal cases, each supplementary investigation imposes a one-month time limit on investigators and grants the procuratorate one additional month to decide whether to proceed with prosecution. During the period of supplementary investigation, public security officials may continue to detain the criminal suspect. According to the November 10 SCMP article, Guo's lawyers did not find it out of the ordinary that their client's case was returned for supplementary investigation. Nonetheless, Professor Wang has analyzed the procuratorate's Notification, including its explicit mention of a December 27 deadline for Guo's release, as a sign of disagreement between the Panyu Public Security Bureau and the Panyu Procuratorate about whether to prosecute Guo.

Authorities formally arrested Guo Feixiong, whose real name is Yang Maodong, on October 4 for "gathering people to disturb public order," a crime under Article 290 of the Criminal Law. Chinese scholars and legal experts have questioned the legality of Guo's detention and other related government actions designed to suppress a recall campaign by villagers in Taishi village, Guangzhou city, against an allegedly corrupt village committee head. In the wake of the failed recall campaign, Chinese authorities detained dozens of Taishi villagers, shut down several Web sites describing local protests, and allegedly permitted the beating of several reporters on the scene.

Although the procuratorate's returning the case for supplementary investigation indicates that the evidence currently in hand is inadequate to prosecute Guo, the issuance of a Notification does not guarantee that he will be released imminently. On November 4, Gao Zhisheng, Guo's lawyer, received an order to shut down his law firm. Gao commented in the November 10 article by SCMP that he fears making an appearance on behalf of his client in Panyu "because [the authorities] have spread word around: 'Take care of Gao Zhisheng by any means if he shows up in Guangzhou.'" Professor Wang noted that "[u]nless a lawyer takes over the case, Guo's right to defense will not be protected and the opportunity to apply for 'changing compulsive measures' may be missed." Chapter 6 of the CPL defines "compulsive measures" as restraints on a criminal defendant's personal freedom and includes detention.