Last month, a tragic incident occurred in Zhuhai where a driver rammed into a crowd, resulting in significant injuries and casualties. On December 27th, the driver, Fan Weiqiu, was sentenced to death, sparking widespread attention.
According to the official Xinhua News Agency, on December 27th, the Zhuhai Intermediate People’s Court publicly tried the case and pronounced the verdict on the same day, sentencing Fan Weiqiu to death for endangering public safety by dangerous means, along with deprivation of political rights for life.
The court stated that Fan Weiqiu, driven by “the breakdown of marriage, life dissatisfaction, and discontent with the divorce property division, decided to vent his personal grievances by intentionally ramming into a crowd with a vehicle.” The court further emphasized that the “criminal motive was extremely despicable, the nature of the crime was extremely heinous, the means of the crime were particularly cruel, the consequences of the crime were particularly serious, and the social harm was enormous,” leading to the death penalty verdict.
On the evening of November 11th, the 62-year-old Fan Weiqiu drove a newly purchased off-road jeep into a crowd at Zhuhai Sports Center, causing significant casualties. Following the incident, numerous videos from the scene circulated online. It took authorities 24 hours to acknowledge that the incident had resulted in at least 35 deaths and 43 severe injuries. However, the authorities did not provide further updates on the number of casualties, leading to public questioning of the official data.
This shocking and malicious incident that resonated both domestically and internationally concluded with a first-instance trial and verdict in just a month and a half. Responding to this, Chinese human rights lawyer based in the United States, Wu Shaoping, expressed to Radio Free Asia that the speed of this process was extraordinary.
He pointed out that apart from the previous strict crackdowns, looking at cases from 2000 onwards, very few cases involving death have been resolved so swiftly. He highlighted that the expedited judgment itself indicates that this case did not undergo a normal legal procedure.
Another Chinese human rights lawyer based in the United States, Teng Biao, also told the media that the verdict in this case was too quick compared to the usual criminal procedural law and ordinary criminal case trials in China.
He mentioned that in typically significant and complex cases like this one, there should be more time dedicated to presenting evidence, following various legal procedures, and making a judgment based on the evidence and legal procedures.
Regarding the court’s assertion about Fan Weiqiu’s motive for the crime, Teng Biao also raised doubts. He remarked that it is hard to believe that such a violent act was solely due to marital property problems, suggesting that the situation might be more severe than what the authorities disclosed, possibly involving undisclosed facts.
Wu Shaoping pointed out that the authorities’ swift and harsh handling of this case did not aim to pacify society genuinely; rather, it was more about threatening those contemplating indiscriminate retaliation against society by signaling, “If you intend to do this, we will swiftly sentence you to the death penalty.”
However, he believed that those seeking to retaliate against society often have a resigned attitude, and the authorities trying to address China’s societal issues through such legal methods were akin to a hasty treatment of a critical illness.
The verdict stirred discussions online. Many netizens expressed their views, commenting, “Wow, that was expedited, a month and a half for a verdict,” “Looks like they don’t plan on letting him celebrate the New Year,” “The death penalty outcome was entirely expected,” “My first reaction was also, it’s too quick,” “It seems like an attempt to disrupt the Zhuhai International Airshow,” “In mainland China, the true motives behind all incidents are never disclosed,” and “Censorship will only instill panic among the populace.”