XXXX
On Monday, October 28, 2002, the Vietnam Communist Party government has
postponed the trial of the young dissident Le Chi Quang, which had been
scheduled for this Monday, saying that the court needs more time to study the
case. New date for the trial has not been set.
Le
Chi Quang was arrested on February 21, 2002 at an Internet cafe. He is a
32-year-old lawyer, an activist in the movement for Democracy in Vietnam since
2000. He wrote many essays criticizing the Communist government. The strongest
of them is a report criticizing the government for conceding too much land to
China in a 1999 border agreement.
Hanoi
authorities accuse Le Chi Quang of circulating anti-government documents on the
Internet. Hanoi's People's Office of Supervision and Control (an institution
holding the power of state prosecution) states that Quang will be prosecuted
under Article 88 of the Criminal Code.
Last
week, members of the movement for democracy unofficially procured a copy of
prosecution document (# 11/KSDT-AN) dated September 24, 2002 from the Supreme
People's Office of Supervision and Control, charging Le Chi Quang with
violation of national security.
According
to many Communist Party members and democracy activists in Vietnam and
overseas, the entire content of the document is against Hanoi's 1992
Constitution and current laws of the Communist regime. The charges are
ambiguous and facts are distorted to support accusations. For instance, Le Chi
Quang and his fellows in the movement has just sent their application for
permission to form the "People's Anti-corruption Association" and the
association has never existed. But the prosecution document charges him with
such an "illegal organization."
Angry
Communist veterans strongly protest the detention and the intended trial of Le
Chi Quang. Meanwhile, many foreign personages and human rights organizations
voice their concerns on the brazen violations of the press freedom in Vietnam
in the Le Chi Quang's case.
So
far, four foreign lawyers of international reputation have volunteered to
defend Le Chi Quang at his possible trial. From France is Mr. Emmanuel Dewees;
from Australia is Mr. Ian Spry. Mr. Arthur
Liu from the American law firm Inter-Pacific has also volunteered to represent
Le Chi Quang. It's not known whether Hanoi would allow the foreign lawyers to
appear at the so-called "people's court" in Hanoi.
Why
does Hanoi postpone the trial previously scheduled on October 28? One of the
reasons may have been the growing pressure from outside – Washington, Paris, and
European Union – for human rights and religious freedom.
Since
the early 2002, facing international criticism on human rights, press and
religious freedoms that encourages democracy activists, Hanoi leaders elected
the strategy of intimidation on the activists and other dissidents. Political dissidents, democracy activists,
religious protesters have been closely watched, harassed, threatened by local
Public Security.
In March, Public Security arrested Pham Hong Son, a 34-year-old doctor,
after he translated an article from a U.S. Embassy in Vietnam Web site titled
"What Is Democracy?" and sent it to friends and government officials.
On Sept. 25, Nguyen Vu Binh, a former reporter for a Communist Party
theoretical journal who has written articles calling for political reform, was
arrested at his home in Hanoi.
Binh must have been very faithful to the Communist cause to be
given the job at the journal staff, the most important tool for the propaganda
and indoctrination of the Communist ideology.
But he has just quit the job to become a dissident. Binh is believed to
have been arrested because of a recent essay circulated on the Internet also
critical of the border agreement with China.
Hanoi
is conducting a campaign of cracking down on the movement for democracy that is
growing stronger in Vietnam and overseas. Hanoi leaders are repeating
suppressing tactics they have relied on to eliminate the nationalist dissidents
since 1945.
Usually,
they have their subordinates prepare ground for the final crack down by using
verbal attack.
They
force people in the neighborhood where a dissident is living to join a mass
denunciation. In the meeting, people are required to accuse the political
opponent as taught by local authorities. In many cases, public addressing
systems in city wards or rural villages are harping day and night for weeks on
accusation of the victims as "traitor" and "reactionary."
This
verbal terrorism often brings about tremendous effect, forcing the victim to
total submission to the Communist authority.
The effect may be greater in case his or her children, especially in
elementary schools, are harassed, abused and isolated at their schools. Communist "cultural cops" may
scare the children's schoolmates into acting against the innocent kids in order
to impose the greatest fright on the parents.
Don
Duong's kids are suffering the same persecution for charges brought against him
by the Communist cultural authorities. Don Duong is a prominent movie actor in
Vietnam. He acts in two movies produced in the United States, "We Were
Soldiers" and "Green Dragon."
State-owned
newspapers in Vietnam have quoted numerous government officials as saying that
Duong is a traitor and has "lost his honor" by appearing in two films
that "distort the legitimate war history of our people and the humanity of
the Vietnamese people."
The government has seized his passport and threatened him with heavy fine, with
jail and with a five-year ban on acting or leaving the country.
Last
week, Hanoi authorities also launched an attack against the famous woman writer
Duong Thu Huong. The state-owned news media articles bitterly criticize Ms.
Duong Thu Huong for her various short articles, statements and comments she
made in the last few years, fiercely condemning the Communist leaders of
misleading the country with failing Communism.
She
had been a faithful party member before April 30, 1975. Upon her first arrival
in Saigon right after the war ended, she decided to turn against the Communist
regime. Her novels are the strongest anti-Communist works in Vietnam.
Hanoi
campaigns against Don Duong and Duong Thu Huong may be preliminaries to
large-scale crackdowns if international pressure fails to stop Hanoi from
further violations of human rights and freedoms of speech and religion.
***
==================