致诺贝尔基金会董事会主席马尔克斯 · 斯多克的公开信

致诺贝尔基金会董事会主席马尔克斯 · 斯多克的公开信

尊敬的马尔克斯 · 斯多克先生:

最近,为了防止中东与北非的茉莉花革命波及中国,中国政府大肆逮捕异议人士,仅国际人权组织可确认的人数就已达到二百多人。此外:

· 外国记者遭到驱赶甚至中国警察的殴打。

· 著名艺术家艾未未于四月三日在北京机场准备登机赴香港前被警方逮捕,其助手也相继失踪。

· 著名维权律师高智晟去年四月再次被绑架失踪至今,中国政府拒绝提供任何信息。

· 人权活动家、萨哈罗夫奖获得者胡佳健康恶化申请保外就医被拒绝。

· 年仅42岁已两次坐牢十五年的异议分子刘贤斌仅因发表批评腐败的言论又被判十年重刑。

· 刑满出狱的人权活动家陈光诚、哈达等继续遭受警方迫害。

· 众多异议人士如王炳章博士、诗人师涛、作家杨天水、教授郑贻春、郭泉等依然在监狱服刑,其待遇令人忧虑。

· 特别应指出诗人、人权活动家力虹因在监狱遭受虐待而保外就医但于2010年12月31日死亡,年仅五十二岁。

上列事实只是冰山一角,但足以表明中国的人权状况持续恶化。中共当局已受到国际社会的强烈谴责。

鉴于上述事实,我们难以接受一篇违背上述事实的文章依然刊登在诺贝尔奖官方网站,那就是2010年和平奖获得者刘晓波的《我没有敌人——我的最后陈述》(http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2010/xiaobo-lecture.html)。在此陈述中刘晓波赞扬中国人权状况有“宏观改善”、“中共执政理念进步”和“人权已经成为中国法治的根本原则之一”、“政权对社会的多元化有了日益扩大的包容性,对不同政见者的迫害之力度也大幅度下降”、中国监狱也变得“人性化”、“柔性化”等等。

尽管刘晓波先生在这篇法庭陈述中称赞中国的人权进步,作出不把中共视为敌人的友好姿态,而中共操纵的法庭却依然践踏其应该享有言论自由和其它人权,判他十一年重刑。这一判决本身就是中国人权状况恶劣的明证,也是对他本人这篇陈述的反讽。

此篇陈述是刘晓波为2009年12月23日的法庭审判而写的。事实上法庭也没有让他全文朗读这篇陈述而只给了几分钟时间解释内容。众所周知,中国政治犯的审判一向都是不公开的,也不许国际记者和外交官出席。法庭审判的文件都被视为国家机密,有外传者以泄露国家机密罪被判刑。例如,前中国人权主席刘青因为散发魏京生先生(后来是瑞典乌拉夫·帕尔梅奖获得者)的法庭陈述被判重刑,那份陈述是担任法庭摄影记者的朋友曲磊磊(现居英国)秘密带出法庭的。很多中国政治犯和外界无法联络,只言片语都无法外传,甚至见不到家人。

中国政治审判不公开这一事实,使得刘晓波在陈述中所说的“六•四后我最富有戏剧性的经历,居然都与法庭相关;我两次面对公众讲话的机会都是北京市中级法院的开庭提供的,一次是1991年1月,一次是现在”也不能成立。他全无可能因开庭而“面对公众讲话”。他的错误信息曾经误导一位瑞典记者在其颁奖典礼报道中说“感谢法庭审判,使刘晓波有唯一的机会直接对中国人民说话”(见《瑞典日报》SVD,2010年12月11日)。实际上刘晓波的这篇陈述至今为止在中国是被禁止的。相反,刘晓波忘记了计算他在六四之后确实有一次真正直接面对中国公众讲话的机会,而且是唯一的一次,那就是1989年秋他在中国官方电视台(CCTV)上公开作证说六四时天安门广场没有人被打死,而指责学生领袖撒谎。这次讲话后来引发异议人士的强烈批评,连刘晓波本人也表示过悔恨,愿意忘记可以理解。

正因为刘晓波先生“我没有敌人”这篇陈述对于中国人权状况的美化描述有违事实,2010年初发表于国际媒体后引起海内外不少中国民主人士的严肃批评。他所谓“我没有敌人” 的说法也引起争议,因为争取民主、自由和人权的斗争和个人有无敌人无关。有十多名民主人士在得知刘晓波2010年被提名为诺贝尔和平奖候选人后,曾于2010年3月给诺贝尔和平奖委员会发出公开信,建议委员会审慎评选,清楚表明了不赞同刘晓波获奖的意见,其中一条意见就是不能认同刘晓波的上述美化中共的观点和立场。如果中国人权真有如此进步,那么不是更应该给中共发和平奖吗?

令人遗憾的是,诺贝尔和平奖委员会不顾这些民主人士的反对意见,仍作出决定,授予刘晓波诺贝尔和平奖。更令人遗憾的是,刘晓波赞扬中共人权状况进步改善的文章《我没有敌人——我的最后陈述》竟成为2010年12月10日奥斯陆诺贝尔和平奖颁奖典礼上的表演朗诵稿。在这样一个以和平和人权为主题的世界注目的典礼上,这篇朗诵稿不但大篇幅地为中共政府的人权状况美言,还特别地点名表扬了几位“善意”的监狱管教和检察官。对比一九七五年萨哈罗夫的诺贝尔和平奖颁奖词,萨哈罗夫不仅抨击了苏共恶劣的人权纪录,还特别点出数十名苏联狱中政治犯的名字,为他们的自由呼吁。

我们相信,六十年来中共极权制度下的牺牲者、对抗共产党专制的付出者、依然在监狱内遭受迫害的受难者以及他们的亲友和后代,不会认同和接受刘晓波先生的这篇陈述。上述被捕的中国异议人士、艺术家、失踪的律师、维权人士、监狱中受虐待的政治犯,也不会同意这篇陈述。一篇违背事实含有错误信息的陈述,也有损诺贝尔奖官方网站的声誉。

因此我们郑重建议诺贝尔基金会将刘晓波的这篇陈述从诺贝尔奖的官方网站上撤销。

签名(名字排列按姓氏汉语拼音):

卞和祥 (纽约,中共制度的政治反对派)

陈迈平 (瑞典,中文作家,瑞典笔会理事)

还学文 (德国,自由作家)

黄河清 (西班牙,自由作家)

刘晓东 (芝加哥,自由撰稿人,笔名三妹)

鲁德成 (加拿大,中共制度的政治反对派,因参加八九年天安门运动而被判刑十六年)

王胜林 (芝加哥,异议人士,银行风险分析师)

许毅 (伦敦,异议人士,大学教授)

羊子 (纽约,流亡异议人士)

张国亭 (丹麦,网络工作者,受中共政治迫害坐牢长达二十二年)

张良生 (香港,独立时政评论家,笔名张三一言)

仲维光 (德国,自由作家)

2011年4月18日

An Open Letter to Mr. Marcus Storch, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Nobel Foundation

Dear Mr. Marcus Storch,

Recently, in order to prevent the ”jasmine revolution” in the Middle East and north Africa from spreading in China, Chinese authorities have arrested many dissidents without cause. According to international human rights organizations, more than two hundred dissidents have disappeared. In addition:

Ø Foreign journalists have been driven away from public places and some were beaten by police.

Ø The artist Ai Weiwei was arrested by police at Beijing Airport when he was about to leave for Hong Kong, and his assistants have also disappeared.

Ø The Chinese government still refuses to give any information about the lawyer Gao Zhisheng, who disappeared last April.

Ø The human rights activist and EU’s Sakharov Prize winner Hu Jia has been refused medical parole although his health has obviously deteriorated.

Ø The human rights activist Liu Xianbin was recently sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for his criticism of corruption in China, at the age of 42, although he has already served two terms of imprisonment for 15 years together since the 1989 student demonstration.

Ø Dissidents who have been released after serving full terms of imprisonment, such as Chen Guangcheng and Hada, continue to suffer from police persecution.

Ø Many dissidents are still serving long term imprisonment, including Dr. Wang Bingzhang, the poet Shi Tao, the writer Yang Tianshui, Professor Zheng Yichun and Professor Guo Quan, and their conditions are very alarming.

Ø The poet Li Hong suffered so seriously in prison that he died on 31 December 2010, at the age of only 52.

These cases are only a few among many but enough to show the human rights situation in China today. This situation ought to be condemned by the international community.

Because of this situation, it is very difficult for us, the signatories to this letter, to accept that the statement which praises the “macro level progress” on human rights in China, claims that “human rights have already become one of the fundamental principles of China’s rule of law”, maintains that there is ”an ever‑growing tolerance for social pluralism on the part of the regime and substantial decrease in the force of persecution of political dissidents”, and describes China’s prison system as now under “humane management”, is still on the official website of the Nobel Prize (http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2010/xiaobo-lecture.html). This statement, titled “I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement”, is by Mr. Liu Xiaobo, the winner of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize.

Although Mr. Liu praised the progress of human rights and rule of law in China and tried to show a reconciliatory attitude to Communist Party rule, he was still sentenced to 11 years imprisonment. Ironically, the sentence itself has become evidence against his own statement on the progress of human rights in China.

This statement was written for Mr Liu’s trial on 23 December 2009. In fact Mr. Liu was not allowed to read it as whole at the trial but only explained the content for a few minutes. Political trials are not open to the public and closed to foreign journalist and diplomats. Statements made at political trials are regarded as national secrets. For example, Mr. Liu Qing, previous chairman of Human Rights in China, was sentenced to many years imprisonment when he circulated Mr. Wei Jingsheng (later Swedish Olof Palme prize winner)’s court statement which was secretly taken out by an official photographer Mr. Qu Leilei (now in England). Many political prisoners cannot even get a single word made public.

This fact that political trials are not open to the public makes Mr. Liu’s own statement invalid when he said “my most dramatic experiences after June Fourth have been, surprisingly, associated with courts: My two opportunities to address the public have both been provided by trial”. He could not address the public in China at all by trial. His wrong information misled a Swedish journalist to write that Mr. Liu’s statement was “the only opportunities after June Fourth 1989 that he could directly address to Chinese people, thanks to the trial” (SvD 2010-12-11). In fact, Mr. Liu’s statement is forbidden in China even today. On the contrary, Mr. Liu forgot to count that he did have one opportunity to address the public in China, and it was his only one after June Fourth and had nothing to do with court trial. That was in the autumn of 1989, Mr. Liu was interviewed on Chinese government’s CCTV to testify that no student was killed at the Tian-An-Men Square in Beijing on June Fourth and criticized student leaders for lying. It was an interview that dissidents in China strongly criticized and Mr. Liu himself regretted later and would like to forget, understandably.

Mr. Liu’s statement was first made public abroad in January 2010 and after that it gave immediately rise to debates among Chinese dissidents both inside China and abroad since it appeared to ignore the facts about the human rights situation in China. Mr. Liu’s declaration that he had no enemies has also provoked criticism since fight for democracy, freedom and human rights has nothing to do with whether a person has enemy or not . When it was known that Mr. Liu had been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize 2010, a number of dissidents wrote a letter to the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize committee suggesting caution in making this decision. Among the questions raised is that if there has in fact been such progress in human rights in China, should not the prize have been awarded to the Chinese Communist Party.

It is to us a matter of great regret that the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize committee awarded the prize to Mr. Liu. It is even more regrettable that his statement “I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement” was presented at the award ceremony on 10 December 2010 in Oslo. Mr. Liu’s statement ignored the fact that hundreds of Chinese dissidents still sit in prison, and some are being tortured to death. His statement praised conditions within the prison and praised the rule of the Chinese Communist Party. It named several “kind-hearted” Chinese jailers and court prosecutors but no imprisoned dissidents. In contrast, the statement sent by Sakharov at his award ceremony in 1975 named dozen of imprisoned dissidents and appealed for their freedom as well as condemning the dictatorship in the Soviet Union.

It is difficult to believe that the millions of Chinese who have died under Communist Party rule and the political prisoners who still suffer in Chinese prisons and their families will ever accept Mr. Liu’s statement on Nobel peace prize website, neither will those now arrested dissidents and artists, disappeared lawyers and human rights defenders, and the tortured political prisoners accept that. A statement which has wrong information and contrary to facts will also harm the Nobel prize website’s reputation.

We therefore respectfully suggest that the Nobel Foundation withdraw Mr. Liu’s statement from your official website.

Signatories (Names in alphabetical order):

Bian Hexiang (Anti-CCP activist in exile in U.S.)

Chen Maiping (Chinese writer in exile in Sweden, Swedish PEN board member)

Huan Xuewen (Chinese writer in exile in Germany)

Huang Heqing (Chinese writer in exile in Spain)

Diane Liu (Chinese writer in exile in U.S.)

Lu Decheng (Chinese writer in exile in Canada. Imprisoned for 16 years)

Wang shenglin (Chinese dissident in exile in U.S.)

Xu Yi (Chinese dissident in exile in England)

Yang zi (Chinese dissident in exile in U.S.)

Zhang Guoting (Chinese internet writer and anti-CCP activist in exile in Denmark. Imprisoned already in 1960 at age 16 for reactionary crimes and altogether for 22 years)

Zhang Liangsheng (Independent commentator in Hong Kong)

Zhong Weiguang (Chinese scholar in exile in Germany, Radio Free Asia correspondent)

Contact persons:

Maiping Chen
email: maiping.chen@comhem.se
Cell phone: + 46 73 6577477
Home telephone: + 46 8 50024819

Yi Xu, Ph.D.

Reader in Speech Science

Department of Speech, Hearing and Phonetic Sciences

University College London

Chandler House

2 Wakefield Street

London WC1N 1PF

UK

Cell: +44 07910 455 428.

Tel: 020 7679 4082 (internal 24082)

Fax: 020 7679 4238

email: yi@phon.ucl.ac.uk

http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/yi/

评论

三妹也说说:这是一封内容丰富翔实的信件,我把它看作一封留给当代年轻人和后人去研究刘晓波的历史资料。这封信指出一个以前从没有人指出的问题:中国政治犯的审判一向都是不公开的,也不许国际记者和外交官出席。法庭审判的文件都被视为国家机密,有外传者以泄露国家机密罪被判刑。而刘晓波却说“我两次面对公众讲话的机会都是北京市中级法院的开庭提供的,一次是1991年1月,一次是现在。”实际上,这里,刘晓波又巧妙地对这个世界耍了一次流氓。

他所说的两次开庭其实都没有面对公众,而他真正面对公众的一次他却没提。那次是1989年秋他在中国官方电视台(CCTV)上公开为中共六四屠杀作证。

有人指责我说,刘晓波正在坐牢而不能说话反驳,所以现在我们要厚道不能批评他。我说,情况不是你说的那样,他不但说话了,而且还在国际舞台把共产党人权改善说得很响亮,说得全世界都知道。他也不是一个简单的犯人,而是个国际人物和公众人物。为了人权这个重大的原则,我们必须说话,而且还要及时地说话,要及时地让西方人知道中国恶劣人权的状况和其他政治犯境况的险恶。刘晓波美化中共恶劣的人权记录才是不厚道。他如果“人性化”“柔性化”地住十一年监狱,我们就十一年不能说话?只由着他发表“监狱陈述”为共产党的人权说话?

所以,我感谢这封信的执笔人陈迈平,没有他,我这个一直分析批评刘晓波的批评者就没看出刘晓波耍的这个小小的流氓花招。

Advertisements

发表评论

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / 更改 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / 更改 )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / 更改 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / 更改 )

Connecting to %s