Shanghai human rights activist Wang Huifang has been criminally detained and sent for psychiatric evaluation, entering the psychiatric evaluation process recently. The lawyer appointed by her family has found out that the police did not enter the case information into the public security network system during the “law enforcement” process, which constitutes a violation and may even be illegal or criminal behavior.
On March 19, Wang Huifang and three other human rights activists in Shanghai, including Gu Guoping, were forcibly intercepted and sent back to Shanghai while on a bus in Beijing, where they were all criminally detained. The 72-year-old Wang Huifang was subjected to a forced psychiatric evaluation.
Wang Huifang’s son hired a senior lawyer with thirty years of experience in criminal defense to handle Wang Huifang’s case. The lawyer has repeatedly tried to understand the situation from the Shimen Erlu Street Police Station in Jing’an District, Shanghai Public Security Bureau. However, the deputy director of the police station, the leader of the criminal investigation team, and the chief of police always stonewalled, providing various reasons to deny access. The lawyer pointed out that this is a right granted to lawyers by the “Criminal Procedure Law,” which allows defense lawyers to understand the charges and circumstances related to the case during the investigation period. This is one of the important ways for lawyers to understand the case.
Shanghai human rights activist Yu Zhonghuan told a reporter from Epoch Times that the police have made mistakes in Wang Huifang’s criminal detention case.
On the morning of April 8, the lawyer went to the Jing’an District Public Security Bureau in Shanghai and was told by the receiving police officer, “There is no information about Wang Huifang’s recent criminal detention in the internal police network. Are you sure Wang Huifang was detained?” The lawyer angrily responded, “Look, here is the ‘detention notice,’ here is the letter of attorney from the family. I have also been to the Shimen Erlu Street Police Station to inquire, and I have met with Wang Huifang in detention. Are all of these just a dream?” The officer said he would report to his superiors first and asked the lawyer to return at 2 p.m.
In the afternoon, as scheduled, the lawyer returned, and the officer went upstairs to call the superiors. After inquiring about the situation, the officer came back down and said that they had checked and indeed could not find any information about Wang Huifang’s recent detention.
The lawyer stated that this is unacceptable and illegal. The leader then called the Shimen Erlu Street Police Station in front of the lawyer, and the response was, “The case of Wang Huifang has not been handed over to the sub-bureau yet.” The lawyer pointed out that this clearly indicates an attempt to cover up the illegal handling of the case.
Upon leaving the sub-bureau, the lawyer immediately rushed to the Shimen Erlu Street Police Station and questioned the leader of the criminal investigation team. Initially, the team leader denied and tried to evade the questions, but under the lawyer’s skillful questioning, the real name of the police officer handling the case was revealed. The lawyer warned, “This is a serious case of suspected retaliation and framing. With the consent of Wang Huifang and her family, I will request that the police handling the case be recused.”
According to Article 112 of the Criminal Procedure Law, the failure of the public security authorities to promptly input information about a criminally detained suspect into the internal police network constitutes a violation and may even be illegal or criminal.
Yu Zhonghuan stated, “For decades, the police have been colluding to fabricate cases, issuing fake detention orders and really detaining individuals without reasonable suspicion of any crime. They criminally detain human rights lawyers, activists, petitioners, etc., without timely inputting information about the detention into the internal police network as stipulated by laws such as the ‘Criminal Procedure Law.’ In recent years, they have even gone as far as not providing any detention notices or release certificates, leaving the detained individuals without any proof of their detention or custody. In fact, the police have been fabricating cases all along. In the age of the internet, most of what cannot be verified online is likely fake evidence.”
He further added, “According to the Criminal Procedure Law and other regulations, the police must promptly input information about suspects who have been criminally detained into the internal police network. By knowingly and intentionally failing to do so, it is clear that they are aware of their own wrongdoing and know that these ‘criminal suspects’ have no real suspicion of any crime. Countless innocent people have been unjustly detained and held without any trace on the police internal network.”