Fiery Lawyer Puts China's Judiciary on Trial

After a speedy trial laced with controversy, a Chongqing court recently sentenced Beijing-based lawyer Li Zhuang to 30 months in jail for pressuring a client to testify falsely.

The January 8 conviction was a nasty turn of events for Li, 48, who was representing an alleged crime figure in a case tied to Chongqing's ongoing effort to stamp out organized crime. Only 28 days elapsed between his arrest and the sentencing.

Li pledged an appeal, saying he's won nationwide support from the legal community. "China's 160,000 lawyers will appeal on my behalf," Li said as police led him from the courtroom. "Time will bring truth into the sunlight."

And as soon as the gavel fell, the debate over Li expanded to encompass a nationwide discussion over judicial due process, as well as the professional and social challenges facing trial attorneys in China.

Lawyers across the country have generally defended Li in the public sphere, saying his case points to a need to protect lawyers as they practice their profession and uphold the right of every accused citizen to have access to a defense attorney.

Tough Talk

Li has a sharp tongue. And while being tried as a defendant for the first time December 30, 2009, he snapped at the judges and procurators.

He began his defense by asking that the judges and procurators withdraw on conflict of interest grounds, citing their direct involvement in his case. The plea was denied. He then filed for withdrawal of the court panel, but that also was denied, as were his later requests that the sitting judge and chief procurator pull out of the case.

Tense moments were frequent during the 14-hour trial. At one point, Li turned to the panel and lashed out: "Why don't you go to the bathroom, come back and tell me that a decision was reached by the panel. That would sound more convincing."

Confrontations with law enforcement and judicial staffers are nothing new to Li, who has a reputation as a fearless, even reckless lawyer who has practiced the craft for 14 years.

During an April 2007 trial, Li raked through 1,000 pages of documents before finding evidence that his client had been tortured and forced to give false testimony. He then delivered a tough defense speech in a courtroom in the city of Shahe, Hebei Province. As soon as the trial ended, Li was taken into custody and detained for five hours. Li sued the police department but lost.

In another incident in 2008, Li stormed out of a Liaoning Province courtroom to protest what he said was an unfair trial for his client, an organized crime suspect.

"Li used to serve in the army and has a very tough character," said Gao Zicheng, Li's defense lawyer and his law firm partner. "His style might be a little problematic, causing trouble for Chongqing (law enforcement). But this shouldn't land him in jail."
 
Media reports in Chongqing painted a negative image of Li, repeatedly referring to a checkered professional record. Some accused Li of overcharging clients while bribing judiciary officials and legal experts.
On December 14, a feature in China Youth Daily claimed Li had accepted a huge, 2.45 million yuan payment from clients. The article was largely based on a news release from Chongqing police. The actual charge was much lower.

Other reports called Li greedy and claimed he often greased judicial palms to help clients dodge punishment. The media also claimed Li was shielded over the years due to close government ties enjoyed by his employer, the Beijing-based law firm Kangda.

Established in 1988, Kangda has 11 branches across China. Its director is Fu Yang, the son of Peng Zhen, a former chairman of the Standing Committee of National People's Congress (NPC). Fu used to head the economic law office for the legislature's Office of Legal Affairs. Two Kangda deputy directors are also well-connected: One is the son of a retired supreme court justice, and another is a daughter of a former deputy NPC Standing Committee chairman.

A number of Beijing lawyers interviewed by Caixin said Kangda has typically kept a low profile in legal circles. Li and his unconventional working style have stood out from the rest of the firm's 200 attorneys.

A source close to Chongqing's organized crime task force told Caixin that two important elements played into Li's case – local media and the work of another attorney who defended the crime suspects.

As the crackdown on organized crime began, Chongqing media played up the fact that lawyers from Beijing had swarmed into their city to represent suspects. Li was among the outsiders.

Meanwhile, local officials apparently got nervous during a trial for a suspect defended by lawyer and senior law professor Zhao Changqing. Zhao, an experienced professional, built an excellent defense.

Trouble Signs

Li got involved in the Chongqing legal storm after being contacted by a relative of gangland suspect Gong Gangmo for legal advice in June 2009. Five months later, he agreed to represent Gong and went to Chongqing with other lawyers to defend several suspects accused of organized crime.

Gong's trial was originally slated to begin December 7. But Li won a delay by claiming his client had been tortured by police, and that the prosecution's evidence failed to prove guilt.

But Li was already in trouble. In late November, Chongqing police had notified the Beijing judiciary bureau saying they had audio and visual evidence that Li had tried to persuade Gong to retract testimony. The bureau contacted Kangda and suggesting pulling Li off the case.

When Li met Gong on December 4, four police officers shot video and snapped photos. Smelling something fishy, Li stopped using his mobile phone and changed his lodging several times.

On a December 5 flight from Beijing to Chongqing, flying first class, Li found himself sitting beside the Chongqing police chief. But the two men did not speak, leading Li to guess that he was already a wanted man.

A few days later, while Li was talking about the case with Kangda directors, he got a phone call from the judge handling the Gong case. He was told his client was emotionally unstable and wanted to meet the lawyer.

"Right away, I told my supervisor (at Kangda) that Chongqing was trapping me," Li later told reporters.

That night, Kangda officials held an urgent meeting and decided to pull out of the case. They notified the Ministry of Justice, the Beijing judiciary bureau and the Chongqing judge.

But it was too late. Five hours after sending the withdrawal notice, Chongqing police detained Li in Beijing during a meeting with Gong's wife to terminate the contract. Li was transferred to Chongqing, and a day later he was formally arrested.

On Trial

What Li did not know, however, was that he had been framed by his client. Court documents say Gong told Chongqing police December 10 that Li had asked him to withdraw testimony. Gong later told a television reporter that Li's enticement was conveyed through "winks."

Also testifying against Li were Gong's relatives, his assistant Ma Xiaojun, and local lawyer Wu Jiayou, who worked with him on the Gong case. The indictment said Li enticed Gong to fabricate the torture experience, asked Gong to give false testimony about his alleged organized crime ties, and asked Wu to bribe local police in exchange for false testimony about torturing Gong.
 
But none of the seven witnesses appeared at Li's trial. The judge said one was in a Beijing hospital while the rest were unwilling to appear in court. In fact, all six were either in local police protective custody or were being held for alleged crimes.

A procurator said the testimonies against Li were lawful, valid and effective. But Li and his lawyer, Gao, weren't convinced. Gao noted it is illegal for witnesses under police control not to appear in court. And it was a breach of duty for the procurator to use testimonies unlawfully obtained.

An expert from Southwest University of Political Science & Law who attended Li's trial told Caixin that procurators had nothing more than verbal evidence against him, and that the case's integrity was undermined by the fact that none of the witnesses appeared in court.

"I doubt whether the judge, if working with nothing but his own conscience, would have decided that Li was guilty," said the expert. "A better way to handle this would be to let witnesses testify in court. At least Gong should be here."

Gao sought a change of venue due to the involvement of Chongqing police and court officials. He also asked for Li's trial to wait until after Gong's, since a judgment on the torture charge was key to Li's case. Both requests were turned down.

Eight days later, the judge declared Li guilty on all counts.

Mood Control

During Li's trial, a committee of legal experts formed by the Chongqing court met local media. The experts explained judicial strategies and were encouraged to express views favorable to prosecutors.

A legal expert who prefers to remain anonymous told Caixin that officials had contacted him at 10 p.m. December 30 to invite him to an urgent meeting because local leaders "are not happy about the effect of the trial, and have called for outside experts to give advice on their measures."

The meeting was held in the office of the court where Li was on trial, and some reporters attended. A source at the meeting told Caixin local leaders expressed impatience after the experts said they had found loopholes in the trial process. That's because the meeting's real purpose was to encourage experts to support procurators and "help" local media set the "right direction for public opinion," said the source.

When Li was arrested, Beijing lawyer Liu Yang was on his way to Chongqing to meet his own client in the organized crime campaign. To his surprise, Liu found local police unusually cooperative. Police provided documents and helped him meet his client.

Liu said he wondered whether Li's case had anything to do with their friendly attitudes. He proceeded cautiously. And he spent little time on the due process issue during his client's trial December 24.

"Challenging the lawful status of obtaining evidence will dismay procurators," said Liu. "The procurator office is a supervisory legal body, and a major confrontation with them probably would not have benefits for my clients."

Liu said if every lawyer had the courage to fight infringements of their rights, however, the judicial environment would be better.

Professional Plight

Li's case reflects the difficult environment facing trial lawyers, who are vastly outgunned by official judicial organs in China. 

Several months before Li's case, the Chongqing judicial bureau issued an opinion, asking court lawyers to "stress politics, think about the big picture and obey the rules (讲政治、顾大局、守纪律)." It also advised lawyers "not to tangle with details." And the opinion told lawyers that media interviews were forbidden.

A December 2009 survey by the Beijing Political Advisory Commission showed only 36 percent of criminal cases in Beijing involve defense lawyers. The national average could be much lower.

Reasons why litigators are missing include professional difficulties, such as problems with meeting clients, viewing related documents and obtaining evidence. Moreover, there is little legal protection or practical help for lawyers, a fact underscored by the frequency with which their requests are turned down by law enforcement officials.

Lawyer Qian Lieyang of the Beijing Dacheng Law Offices said such obstructions have encouraged some lawyers to find "back door" solutions by exploiting personal connections or bribing.

Procedural justice has long been overlooked, said Zhang Qingsong of the Beijing Shangquan Law Firm. He noted that China's system of judicial agencies, police and procurators dictate a system of measuring career performance based on ratios and results, not proper adherence to legal procedures.

"If illegal procedures incur no legal consequences, why should people care?" asked Zhang.

(Translated by LX)