Judgment from the Zhejiang Province Ningbo City Yinzhao District Intermediate People’s Court on the Zhang Guoxi Bribery Case (Excerpts)

• Author: China Law Digest compiled news from Sina blog

The Defendant, Zhang Guoxi, was formerly the Assistant of the Director of Ningbo City Dongqianhu Tourist Holiday Resort Management Committee. According to the facts and evidence found, this Court concludes the verdict as follows:

(A) In Relation to Procedural Law:

1. Based on the Court’s findings, the Defendant Zhang Guoxi was detained by the Anti-Corruption Bureau of the People’s Procuratorate of Ningbo City Yinzhou District at noon on July 22, 2010. He was subsequently taken to a small hotel for interrogation until he was summoned at 10:55 p.m. on July 23. During that period, the investigation unit did not follow legal procedures and did not keep any written record of Zhang Guoxi’s interrogation. Therefore, the Court considered that the preliminary investigation conducted by the investigation unit was flawed.

2. In his defence, the Defendant alleged that his confession made prior to the trial was a result of the investigation unit’s use of coercion and inducement. It was made against his conscience. Based on information provided by Zhang, the Court obtained Zhang’s physical examination report dated July 28 2010 from the Ningbo City Yinzhou District Detention Center. The report clearly stated that Zhang’s right upper arm had a small area of bruises and a cut of 2 cm.

The Defendant Zhang and the defence counsel had petitioned to this Court several times requesting the Prosecutor to provide the entire video record of Zhang’s interrogation for cross-examination before the Court. The Prosecutor responded that the video record was associated with classified information and that the release of such information before the Court would damage its confidentiality; therefore, such record could not be delivered to the Court.

The defence counsel also petitioned to the Court requesting the investigators to appear before the Court and to explain the situation. The Prosecutor indicated that the investigators would not appear before the Court, but instead presented to the Court a Declaration signed by the investigators and affixed with the...