You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding article in Chinese. (January 2019) Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
Inciting subversion of state power (Chinese: 煽动颠覆国家政权罪; pinyin: Shāndòng diānfù guójiā zhèngquán zuì) is a crime under the law of the People's Republic of China. It is article 105, paragraph 2 of the 1997 revision of the People's Republic of China's Penal Code.[1]
The "inciting subversion" crime is related to earlier Chinese laws criminalizing activities deemed "counterrevolutionary"; as was the case with its predecessor, the charge is wielded by the government as an instrument of political repression.[2] The Chinese government frequently uses "inciting subversion of state power" as a "catch-all" charge used to target and imprison political activists, human rights campaigners and dissidents.[3] In 2009, prominent dissident and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years in prison for "incident subversion of state power" based on his drafting of the Charter 08 manifesto calling for political reform.[2] A 2008 report by the Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) website lists 34 people convicted under this law, many of them for having posted articles on the internet that were critical of the government.[4] The Chinese authorities have used the charge against Chinese human rights lawyers and activists in the 709 crackdown, which began in 2015.[5] In 2019, Zhen Jianghua, a human rights activist and anti-censorship campaigner, was sentenced to two years in prison for "inciting subversion of state power";[6][7] later the same year, Wang Yi, the pastor of the Early Rain Covenant Church, a Chengdu-based house church (congregation operating outside of government control), was convicted and sentenced to nine years in prison in charges of "illegal business operation" and inciting subversion of state power.[3]
Gao Mingxuan, one of the editors of the 1980 Criminal Code of the People's Republic of China, defended on the application of the law in the Liu Xiaobo case, contending that the laws are not greatly different from similar ones in other countries and that each country sets limitations on freedom of speech, such as England's Treason Act 1351 (last used to prosecute William Joyce in 1945 for collaborating with Germany in World War II), Germany's Strafgesetzbuch § 90b, and 18 U.S.C. §§ 2383–2385.[8]