In southern China’s Jiangsu province, rights activist Xu Jian stood trial for allegedly “provoking trouble” at the Haimen District Court in Nantong on June 5. The court session was restricted, with attendees required to undergo identity checks by local police before being allowed into the courtroom to observe the proceedings.
Lawyers raised concerns about the lack of independence in the judicial process when even the right to observe the trial was controlled by authorities. The court limited public access, leading to empty seats inside the courtroom despite interested individuals being present.
During a recess at 6 p.m., defense attorney Li Yongheng requested the recusal of all court personnel, citing the inability of the Haimen court to ensure basic observation rights, raising doubts about the impartiality and fairness of the trial. However, the judge rejected the request and continued the trial.
Xu Jian, a resident of Haimen District in Nantong City, became entangled in a legal battle after his wife, Zhu Peijuan, was detained by authorities last December for speaking out on behalf of her deceased uncle involved in a gas explosion incident five years ago. Xu Jian was later charged with “provoking trouble” for defending his wife’s rights.
Several activists, including Liu Yongguo and Shi Chongguang, issued public appeals calling for a lawful trial process at the Haimen court. However, police interference marred the proceedings, prompting criticism from the rights activists.
According to constitutional provisions cited by the activists, Xu Jian’s actions do not amount to the crime of “provoking trouble.” Concerns were raised about the arbitrary detention and lack of legal basis for the monitoring measures imposed on Zhu Peijuan.
The case has attracted attention due to the alleged retaliatory actions taken against Xu Jian and his wife for seeking justice. The incidents highlight a pattern of repression targeting individuals speaking up against perceived injustices, with jurisdictional disputes further complicating the legal proceedings.
Legal experts argue that the supervision measures imposed on Zhu Peijuan lack legal justification, as she maintains a permanent residence in Haimen District and should not be subjected to monitored living arrangements. The jurisdictional complexities and retaliatory actions demonstrate the challenges faced by individuals advocating for justice and accountability.
As the trial of Xu Jian concluded on June 6 after two consecutive days of hearings, the case remains emblematic of broader issues surrounding rights advocacy and legal accountability in China.