【标题】：
中国一个民主实验遭遇剧烈抵抗
【链接】：
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0903/p01s01-woap.html
【翻译】：QChen
【翻译方式】: 原创翻译
【原文作者】：Peter Ford
【声明】
本文翻译仅限Anti-CNN内部使用，谢绝转载。
A CHINESE EXPERIMENT IN DEMOCRACY MEETS FIERCE RESISTANCE
One villager's fight against corruption results in abuse and arrests.
By Peter Ford | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
from the September 3, 2008 edition
Reporter Peter Ford describes the challenges facing small-scale democratic efforts in China.
HUIGUAN, CHINA - When Fang Zhaojuan began organizing her neighbors here to impeach village leaders whom she suspected of corruption, she had no idea that the challenge would lead her first to the hospital and then to jail.
She was following the law, after all, and had launched legal petitions signed by a large majority of villagers. They believed they had been cheated of proper compensation when their village council had sold land for industrial development to the government of a nearby township.
Mrs. Fang, her family, and colleagues on a recall committee, however, found themselves plunged into a violent political drama. This, they say, has shown residents of the hamlet just how narrow the boundaries remain for their democratic rights. It has also, they add, hardened their resolve to enforce them.
Huiguan, a nondescript cluster of brick houses outside the port of Tianjin, is like tens of thousands of other Chinese villages, on the verge of being swallowed up by a fast-expanding city. Its farmland has all but disappeared under new factories, and under circumstances that Fang, a 43-year-old widow, found suspicious.
"She never expected this," says her sister, Fang Zhaohui, displaying photographs of Fang's bruised and bloody body taken in the hospital six weeks ago, after thugs had broken into her home and beaten her. "She never expected it would be so difficult and that the government would be so black."
"The township government is abusing its power," complains Li Guangde, a village activist who has so far avoided jail. "They are putting difficulties in our way and a lot of pressure on us. Perhaps some township officials were involved in the land sale and maybe there was corruption. I don't know."
DEMOCRATIC HOPES SPUTTER
Chinese law prescribes direct democratic elections for village councils, and provides for recalls if a majority of villagers lose faith in their leaders. "But that is only the law," cautions Yawei Liu, head of the China Program at Atlanta's Carter Center, which has worked with the Chinese authorities to strengthen village self-rule.
"Once you move into the real world it is very difficult to enforce," he adds.
Ten years ago, when China's definitive law on village elections came into effect, many officials and some foreign scholars touted it as heralding broader democracy nationwide.
Today, such hopes are sputtering. Fang's fate illustrates one key weakness of the experiment: It is very hard for grass-roots democracy to thrive in a vacuum where superior levels of government are undemocratic.
"Unless there are changes higher up, this kind of democracy cannot be sustained," fears Dr. Liu.
"At any point in the process the authoritarian system can come into play" to frustrate villagers' democratic aims, says Kevin O'Brien, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who has studied village governance in China for years. "This story is an example of bottom-up democracy being swamped by undemocratic people who are used to giving orders."
On the other hand, Dr. Liu points out, "the beatings and the jailings are a reflection ... that the villagers are so keenly aware of their rights there is nothing else the government can do."
Recent events in Huiguan show that "when people know they have been given some political rights, they are going to take advantage of this," adds Li Lianjiang, a village elections expert at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. "This is a positive sign of democratic growth."
ROOTS OF DISPUTE
The drama here began last November, when Han Baocai, an 80-year-old farmer, filed a complaint with the Tianjin municipal government about the way in which the Huiguan village council had sold more than 50 acres of commonly held land to the higher-level township government of nearby Xiaozhan.
Villagers claim now that Xiaozhan paid 10,000 RMB per mu ($8,500 per acre), and sold it to developers for 800,000 RMB per mu ($685,000 per acre), alleging that the Xiaozhan and Huiguan authorities shared the profits at the villagers' expense.
Xiaozhan deputy Communist party secretary Liang Hongbin insists that the township paid a fair market price for agricultural land and that villagers were compensated according to the law.
Party Secretary Hao Shumin acknowledges the Xiaozhan government sold the land to developers for nearly twice what it paid for it, because the land's status had changed from village agricultural land to nationally owned industrial-use land, increasing its value. But he says the price was less than a tenth of what the villagers claim.
Huiguan villagers, however, believed they had been cheated, and in January they began the process specified by the village democracy law to recall their elected council.
From the start, they say, the Xiaozhan authorities put obstacles in their way, which villagers sometimes managed to overcome by appealing to officials at higher levels of the district government hierarchy.
But with a recall committee of five villagers duly elected in February to oversee the impeachment referendum, Xiaozhan stopped sending representatives to Huiguan village meetings. Villagers complain that since the law requires all village votes to be observed by an official from the local township, the local government could nullify all their decisions simply by refusing to witness them.
The conflict sharpened with a disagreement over who had the right to participate in the recall vote. Xiaozhan government officials said eligibility restrictions imposed by Huiguan's activists were illegal, which rendered the recall process null and void.
When appeals to the Tianjin authorities to resolve the dispute went unanswered, villagers say, they went ahead with preparations for the recall vote, deciding on procedures, publishing a voter list, distributing ballots, and inviting local and district officials to witness the vote on July 5.
VIOLENCE FOLLOWS VOTE
The day before the vote, village council president Yuan Shiwan and his two colleagues abruptly resigned. The recall vote went ahead anyway, garnering 617 votes in favor and none against, well over the 50 percent of village residents required for the motion to pass.
Despite the resignation and the vote, however, villagers said a crowd of them found Mr. Yuan and his colleagues still occupying the council offices on July 8. What happened next is unclear: Yuan claims to have been manhandled, knocked to the ground, and beaten; villagers at the scene say he was not touched.
Three days later, however, seven people including two of Yuan's sons showed up at Fang's house and beat her savagely, according to eyewitnesses who also photographed her injuries after an ambulance had taken her to hospital. One man was detained but later released, and nobody has yet been charged with the assault.
The next day Fang's son and a friend of his were arrested in connection with the alleged attack on Yuan. They were released two weeks later, and no formal charge was filed. A district court has, unusually, accepted their lawsuit against the police for wrongful arrest.
THE OLYMPICS FACTOR
On Aug. 13, Fang and her fellow recall committee members mailed complaints about their treatment to a variety of offices, including the Supreme Court Anti-Corruption Office and the Tianjin prosecutor. But they abstained from visiting petition offices because "the government did not want anything to disturb the social order during the Olympics; they wanted a party spirit," explains Mr. Li.
The day after the Olympics closed, however, Fang and other villagers approached district officials to press their case. On their return to Fang's home, police arrested her; three other members of the recall committee; Han Baocai, the 80-year-old who had first raised the issue in contention; and one other villager, said Li, who was detained with them but released a few hours later.
The six others, and another member of the recall committee arrested later, remain in detention. They are being held on suspicion of "disturbing the social order," according to plainclothes police officer Zhang Congying, but neither Mr. Zhang nor the Xiaozhan police chief, Wang Jinting, would say what they had done to incur such suspicion.
Xiaozhan Deputy Communist Party Secretary Liang insists that Fang and her colleagues "were not arrested because of their recall effort. Nobody would be arrested for seeking to recall officials according to the law."
CONSEQUENCES OF DIRECT DEMOCRACY
Fang's sister, however, sees their detention as a warning to others. "If they arrest Fang Zhaojuan, other people won't dare cause any more trouble," she says. "They do it to suppress ordinary people."
A "barefoot lawyer," who is advising Huiguan's recall committee, but who asked not to be identified since he has already been jailed once for "counterrevolutionary activities," agrees.
"This case is a natural result of the social environment," he argues. "When ordinary people try to use their democratic rights, they will definitely suffer the consequences. The phenomenon of having a law supporting people's rights that they cannot actually enjoy is too common in our country."
The villagers say they are not giving up, however. "We want a fair solution to all the problems ... and a clear response to our vote," says Li. "We insist on it."
译文：
一个中国人的民主试验遇强阻
一位村民与腐败之间的斗争，导致受辱，被捕。
作者 Peter Ford | 基督科学箴言报记者
2008年9月3日出报
记者Peter Ford阐述中国小规模民主活动面临的挑战。
会馆(村)，中国 – 当方招娟(音译)开始在这里组织邻居告发被疑有腐败行为的“村官”时，她不知道这种对抗会让她先进医院，后进监狱。
最终，她遵循法律，发起了由大多数村民签名的合法诉状。他们认为，村委会将土地卖给邻镇政府用于工业开发后，骗取了他们正当的赔偿。
不过，方女士，她的家人以及同伴组成的罢免委员会，发现他们自己已经卷入一场暴力政治戏剧。他们说，这让村里的居民看到了，为他们民主权利所留下的边界是多么狭窄。他们又补充说，这同时也坚定了他们坚持的决心。
会馆，天津港外一串砖楼组成的无名小村，就像中国其它成千上万的村庄一样，处在被发展迅速的城市吞没的边缘。农田在新工厂，新环境下消失，而方，一位43岁的寡妇，发现了疑点。
“她从来没想到过这些”，她的妹妹，方招惠(音译)说，展示着方于6个星期前在医院所拍的照片，暴徒冲进方的家里并猛打她之后受伤而流血的身体。“她从没想过会有这么困难，政府会这么黑暗。”
“镇政府在滥用权力，”李广德(音译)诉苦道，他是一位村里的活动分子，目前没有进过监狱。“他们在我们的路上布置了困难，在我们身上施加了很大压力。或许一些镇上的官员参与了土地的买卖，可能里面有腐败。我不知道。”
民主希望破灭
中国的法律规定了村民委员会的直接选举，也规定了如果大多数的村民对于他们的领导失去了信心可以罢免的权利。“但是这仅仅是法律，” 曾同中国当局一起合作于加强乡村自治工作的亚特兰大卡特中心中国项目负责人刘亚伟警告说。
“一旦进入到现实世界，实施是非常困难的，”他补充道。
10年前，中国农村选举的权威法律开始实施时，很多官员和一些外国学者将其吹捧为全国性更广泛民主的预兆。
如今，这样的希望破灭。方的结局以实例说明了该次试验的一个关键弱点：在更高一级政府不民主的空间之下，草根阶层的民主很难茁壮成长。
“除非有更高一级的改变，否则这种民主无法维持。”刘博士担心。
“程序中的任何一个点，独裁的体制都可以进入操纵”阻碍了村民们的民主目标。研究中国村治多年的加州大学伯克利分校教授Kevin O'Brien表示。“这个故事是基层民主被常下命令的不民主人士压倒的一个实例。”
刘博士指出，另一方面，“殴打和监禁即是一种显示…村民们如此强烈地意识到他们的权利，政府除了这样别无它法。”
会馆村的最近事件体现了“当人们知道他们被赋予了一些政治权利之时，他们就准备利用起来，” 香港中文大学的一位村委选举专家李连江补充说。“这是民主发展的一个积极信号。”
争议的根源
剧情始于去年11月，当韩宝财(音译)，一位80岁的老农民，向天津市政府对于会馆村委将超过50英亩公共土地卖给更高一级的小站邻近镇政府的方式申请控告。
村民们现在提出，小站以每亩人民币10,000元(每英亩$8,500美元)的价格买回，又以每亩人民币800,000元(每英亩$685,000美元)的价格卖给开发商，声称小站镇和会馆村当局以村民们的损失为代价一起分摊了所得的利润。
小站党委副书记梁红斌(音译)坚持说镇政府以一个合理的市场价格购买耕地，并按照法律村民们得到了补偿。
党委书记郝树民(音译)承认小站镇以将近2倍于购价的价格将土地卖给了开发商，因为土地的类别已经由村里的耕地变为国家所有的工业用地，提升了土地的价值。但他说，卖价不到村民所说价格的十分之一。
不过，会馆村民认为他们已经被骗，于1月他们开始了乡村民主法律里明确的程序罢免他们所选举的村委。
他们称，从一开始，小站镇当局就在他们(前进的)路上布置障碍，村民有时要设法通过上诉到区政府级别的更高一层官员来克服。
但是，随着二月份适时地推选出一个由五名村民组成的罢免委员会监督弹劾公民投票，小站镇停止派遣代表到会馆乡村集会。村民们不满，因为法律要求所有的乡村投票要有一名当地镇政府官员出席，当地政府可以简单地通过拒绝出席而使得他们所有的决定无效。
矛盾在于谁有权利参与罢免投票的争执之中变得尖锐了。小站政府表示，由会馆村活动分子强制推行的效力约束是非法的，这会使得罢免程序无效作废。
村民们说，上诉到天津市当局解决争议没有回音之后，他们继续准备罢免投票，按程序决定，公布投票人名单，发布投票结果，邀请当地及区政府官员出席7月5日的投票过程。
投票之后的暴行
投票前一天，村委会主席袁石万(音译)和他的2个同事突然辞职。罢免投票还是继续进行，取得617票赞成，无票反对，远远超过所要求通过这项提议要达到的50%的村民数量。
不过，尽管有辞职有投票，村民们说，他们有一群人发现袁先生和他的同事7月8日还是占据着村委会。下面发生了什么还不清楚：袁宣称，他受到粗暴的对待，被撞倒在地，遭殴打; 现场的村民说，没有接触到他。
3天后，根据目击者所说，7个人，包括袁的2个儿子出现在方的家中，粗暴地打她，目击者在救护车将她送往医院后也拍下了她受伤的照片。其中一个男人受拘留后又被释放，并且没有任何一个人因此侵犯人身事件而被起诉。
次日，方的儿子以及他的一个朋友被指和攻击袁有关而被捕。他们2个星期后被释放，也没有任何正式的控告记录在案。区法院异常地受理了他们起诉警察非法逮捕的诉讼案件。
奥运会因素
月13日，她及她同伴组成的罢免委员会成员将她们所受(不公)待遇的投诉信寄至了各个办公室，包括最高法院反腐办公室以及天津检察院。但是他们放弃了去拜访信访办公室因为“政府不想要任何事情在奥运期间扰乱社会秩序；他们想要一个盛会的精神，”李先生解释说。
李先生说，奥运闭幕后的一天，方和其他村民走近区政府官员催促处理他们的案件。在他们回方家的路上，警察逮捕了她；罢免委员会内的其它3个成员；韩宝财(音译)，那位最先提出有争议的问题的80岁老农民；和另外一个村民，他被拘挽留在一起几个小时后放出。
其他6个人，和后来被捕的另一个罢免委员会的成员，还在拘留中。根据便衣警察张聪应(音译)所说，他们是被以“扰乱社会秩序，”为嫌疑而受拘留，但不管是张先生还是小站镇派出所警长王金庭，都没有说他们有过什么行为而导致了这样的嫌疑。
小站镇党委副书记梁坚持说方以及她的同伴“不是因为他们组织罢免的事情而被捕。根据法律，没有人会因为试图罢免官员而被捕。”
直接民主的结果
但是，方的妹妹，了解他们的拘留是对其他人的警告。她说，“如果他们逮捕了方招娟(音译)，其他人就不敢再制造更多麻烦。他们这样做是为了压制平民百姓。”
给会馆村罢免委员会建议的“赤脚律师”同意这样的说法，但他要求不要透露其身份，因为他曾已经因为“反动活动”而进过监狱。
“这个案例是社会环境的自然结果，”他争论着说。“当普通百姓尝试使用他们的民主权利时，就必将会经受这样的结果。有一部支持人民权利的法律但实际上却不能享有的这种现象在我们国家太普遍了。”
不过，村民说他们没有放弃，“我们想要对所有问题一个合理的解决…对我们的投票有一个明确的答复。”李表示说。“我们会坚持下去。”
[
本帖最后由 QChen 于 2008-9-7 14:04 编辑 ]
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
8楼：
人民网
天津小站镇会馆村村民要求村委会“集体下课”
http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/cn/viewthread.php?tid=97465&page=1#pid1360061
10楼：
天津会馆村罢免风波
http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/cn/viewthread.php?tid=97465&page=1#pid1360078
11楼：
中国法制新闻网：
天津津南区小站镇会馆村的罢免村官拉锯战
http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/cn/viewthread.php?tid=97465&page=1#pid1360085
16楼：
《八阕》
罢免村官－基层民主实验遭遇剧烈抵抗
http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/cn/viewthread.php?tid=97465&page=1#pid1360295
