(Minghui.org) Many articles on Minghui.org about Falun Dafa practitioners being persecuted in China use terms such as “illegal arrest,” “kidnap,” “illegal search,” and “illegally enter.” These articles often don’t provide factual details but instead use descriptive words and draw conclusions.
When the general public reads these reports, factual details are much more convincing than descriptive adjectives and adverbs. In the following two examples, the first one reads more like an accusation, while the second one sounds much more believable.
Example 1: The police illegally entered the home of a Falun Gong practitioner, made an illegal search of the premises, and illegally arrested the practitioner.
Example 2: Three people who appeared to be in their 30s, two male and one female, forced themselves into Ms. Li’s home. They weren’t wearing police uniforms and refused to show any identification. They seized two computers without issuing a receipt and forced Ms. Li, who was preparing dinner at the time, into a private vehicle. The police didn’t inform Ms. Li’s family where they took her.
Most readers generally do not like to have conclusions drawn for them. They prefer to come to their own conclusions from the available details. To better clarify the truth, Minghui reporters should avoid using the terms “illegal” and “illegally” as the only argument or evidence. Many readers do not trust this type of narrative. Also, it is important to make sure the facts present a logical account.
For an arrest to be legal, the following must be satisfied:
1. Identity of law enforcement personnel and warrants (Legal Identification)
Law enforcement personnel must show their police ID to prove their legal identity. To detain someone, the police must show a warrant of detention authorized by a public security bureau at the county level or higher.
That means that a description of the police not in uniform and refusing to show identification or legal documents before making an arrest will allow readers to see that what the police are doing is illegal. If reporters can back their claim by providing a relevant law, readers can verify this and be further convinced.
2. Time limits for summons and detention (Legal Time Limits)
In China, the law sets time limits for summons. The duration of a criminal detention should not exceed 12 hours. For more serious violations or complex cases, the duration should not exceed 24 hours. Also, if summons were issued repeatedly to extend the time of detention, this may constitute an illegal detention. Such facts need to be recorded in Minghui.org reports.
How do facts indicate illegal procedure? For example, a report could say, “The practitioner was held in the police station for over 48 hours, during which time he was never given a notification of detention, nor was he released after he was interrogated.” If the report only mentions “illegal detention,” readers will not understand what happened, may lose interest, and may even find the reporting emotional.
3. Obligation to notify family (The Right to Know)
The law requires the police to notify the arrested party’s family of their arrest or detention, including the reasons for the arrest and the place of detention, within 24 hours. There are a few exceptions, including when the family is not available or the case involves national security or terrorist activities.
To describe a violation of the Right to Know, the report can say, for example, “The practitioner was missing for three days. Her family made many inquiries before learning that she was being held in a detention center. The authorities had made no attempt to inform the family.”
4. Search and seizure (Property Rights)
When the police conduct a search, the law requires that they show a search warrant, except in urgent circumstances, and even then, a post-search warrant must be produced. For any items seized, a receipt must be provided at the scene and signed by the practitioner and a witness.
To describe an illegal search, the report could say, “The police entered the practitioner’s residence and raided the place without a search warrant. They removed several boxes of private property and did not issue a list of seized items (nor did a witness sign any such list).”
5. Police brutality (Personal Safety)
The law bans the use of torture to extract a confession and prohibits collecting evidence by means of threat, inducement, or deception. The use of restraints such as handcuffs is limited to preventing a criminal from escaping or being violent.
To describe the overuse of force, the report could say, “During the arrest, people without police badges pinned an elderly man to the ground, injuring his arms in several places. The officers deprived him of sleep for several days during their interrogation.”
The above examples are meant to encourage the use of key facts in articles instead of adjectives and adverbs. By providing a specific date, time, details of police actions or their missing badges, lack of legal documents, as well as the places where practitioners are incarcerated, readers can decide for themselves whether laws have been violated. It would be even better to consult with a legal professional and cite the laws that have been violated.
Of course, readers may still doubt if the details provided are factual, so it is best to include appropriate photos, videos, or third-party evidence. This will help them overcome any reservations.
Some readers may wonder why the laws in China, which are stipulated so clearly, are being violated on such a large scale. News reports can briefly mention the reasons for biased enforcement without going into an in-depth discussion.
In reality, practitioners may be very nervous when they are arrested, making it hard for them to focus on remembering officers’ names and badge numbers and to ask for legal documents. It is hard, but we must try our best to do that. If we don’t try to collect the facts needed for truth clarification, we are not doing our best to clarify the “facts” of the persecution to the general public.
Some practitioners think that, since the Chinese Communist Party doesn’t respect the law, arguing that laws are being violated won’t do anything to stop the persecution. I believe it will, however, because the law represents the principles of everyday society, and this helps to deter participants in the persecution, awaken the officers’ consciences, and also helps readers acknowledge the truth.
In summary, practitioners should learn to witness and document what they see instead of being a victim crying out for justice. The persecution articles must contain key facts and logic that can convince readers, leading them to develop a sense of justice and to support practitioners’ efforts to end the persecution.
Category: Cultivation Insights
