Chen Wei and Lin Hong report from Beijing
A man named Zhang from Hebi, Henan, used video to report in his real name a disciplinary committee cadre. Unexpectedly, the police took him away from his home just 40 minutes later, and he was arrested within 48 hours. Two friends who helped him film and release the video were also taken away. The public opinion caused by this case subsequently attracted the attention of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate. After the Henan Provincial Procuratorate intervened and supervised for a year, the three whistleblowers were acquitted and restored to freedom.
However, unexpectedly, during the period when the disciplinary committee publicly announced that it would conduct a “no leniency, serious investigation” of the reported person, the cadre of the disciplinary committee who was reported for bribery was unexpectedly elected as the director of the People’s Congress of Shancheng District, and has remained in that position until now.
According to insiders, the reported person is in a “supporting” relationship with Xu Guang, the fallen vice governor of Henan Province. The results of further investigations by the local police showed that the bank accounts of the reported person’s wife and relatives (all of whom are local departmental-level cadres) had tens of millions of yuan in transactions. The local police allegedly discovered this clue of official violations but did not hand it over to the local Discipline Inspection and Supervision Commission within two years.
According to the latest news learned by Chiyan News, multiple departments in Henan Province are conducting a comprehensive investigation into this major incident of suppressing whistleblowers.
A man in Hebi, Henan, was “arrested in seconds” after posting a report video
On December 11, 2021, Zhang from Hebi City, Henan Province, released a video on social media through a friend, reporting in his real name Zhang Mouhui, the general manager of a real estate company in Hebi City, for bribing Ai Moujun, the then director of the Discipline Inspection and Rectification Office of the Hebi Municipal Discipline Inspection Commission. Zhang Mouquan, the whistleblower, said in the video, “Because of the unapproved construction of a certain residential area, the Hebi City Urban-Rural Integration Comprehensive Law Enforcement Bureau planned to impose a huge fine on the residential area in accordance with regulations. To solve this matter, Zhang Mouhui, the general manager of a real estate company, sought help from Ai Moujun, and finally settled the matter with a fine of 50,000 yuan.”
▲ Whistleblower Zhang Mouquan
Zhang Mouquan also said, “To express gratitude, on the morning of December 20, 2019, Zhang Mouhui arranged for me to take out 1.9 million yuan in cash and drive with Ai Moujun’s wife to a certain residential area.” The whistleblower stated in the video that he was responsible for the authenticity of the reported content and was willing to bear legal responsibility.
Only forty minutes after the video was released, the whistleblower was taken away by the Hebi police, and was subsequently criminally detained on suspicion of “false accusation and framing.” He was arrested by the Qibin District Procuratorate in less than 48 hours.
The police and the Discipline Inspection and Supervision Commission responded separately to the report
On December 16, 2021, the Hebi Municipal Discipline Inspection and Supervision Commission issued a notice stating: Recently, it was reported online that Zhang Mouquan from Hebi reported in his real name that developer Zhang Mouhui bribed Ai Moujun, a public official. In this regard, the Hebi Municipal Discipline Inspection and Supervision Commission attaches great importance to it and immediately launched a verification procedure. Once any violations of discipline and law are found, they will be dealt with seriously in accordance with discipline and law, and there will be no leniency.
▲ Screenshot of the Hebi Discipline Inspection and Supervision Commission’s notice
On December 17, the Qibin Branch of the Hebi Municipal Public Security Bureau issued a public notice in response to the online report that “a man from Hebi reported in his real name that a developer bribed a public official”: On December 11, 2021, Zhang Mouhui and Ai Moujun reported to the public security organs that they were falsely accused and framed online. After receiving the report, the police conducted an investigation in accordance with the law. After investigation, Zhang Mouquan and Yang Moubin had an economic dispute with Zhang Mouhui during the joint development of real estate. In order to retaliate against Zhang Mouhui, Zhang Mouquan, together with Yang Moubin and Niu Mou, fabricated the fact that Zhang Mouhui asked Ai Moujun for help to reduce the administrative penalty from 5 million yuan to 50,000 yuan, and that Zhang Mouhui returned 1.9 million yuan of the purchase price to Ai Moujun as a bribe, and produced a report video, which was spread in multiple WeChat groups, intending to subject Zhang Mouhui and Ai Moujun to criminal prosecution. The actions of Zhang Mouquan and the other three people were suspected of the crime of false accusation and framing.
On December 20 of that year, relevant staff of the Hebi Municipal Public Security Bureau told the media, “The case is under investigation, and the details are not convenient to disclose.” Relevant staff of the Hebi Municipal Discipline Inspection and Supervision Commission responded to the media, “The Hebi Municipal Discipline Inspection Commission and the public security department have respectively established working groups to investigate the matter, and have issued notices at the first time. (The Discipline Inspection Commission’s) investigation is still in progress, and the results will be announced in a timely manner if there are any.”
On the same day, in response to the online questioning about “criminal detention during the investigation,” staff from relevant departments in Hebi City responded, “The nature of the case should be determined, and the specific disputes are still under investigation. The original intention of the police’s notice may be different.”
The local police and procuratorate seamlessly connected, and the judicial process was unbelievably fast
After the case occurred, the national public opinion paid high attention, and media reports followed one after another, creating a bombing effect.
However, the police and the procuratorate closely cooperated, and the judicial process was unbelievably fast, which can be described as a seamless connection: the police arrested the whistleblower, the person who helped with the filming, and the person who helped with the release, etc., within forty minutes after the report video was released, and detained them that night, and criminally detained them the next day; at the same time, the police also reported the arrest to the Qibin Procuratorate at an unbelievable speed. After receiving the police’s application for arrest, the Qibin Procuratorate spared no effort, and on the third day, all three parties were arrested by the Qibin Procuratorate.
“If it were not for the high-level instructions of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate later, and the strong supervision of the Henan Provincial Procuratorate, the three people would definitely be in prison now,” Fan Chen, the lawyer representing the case, told Chiyan News.
Just as the Hebi police and the procuratorate closely cooperated and proceeded step by step at an astonishing speed to hand over to the trial organ, preparing to advance the judicial process at an astonishing speed, a turning point suddenly appeared in the case, and the local runaway judicial process also came to an abrupt end.
After the high-level leaders of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate paid attention to the media reports and the strong backlash of public opinion, they made timely and severe instructions on the case of “Hebi’s arrest of whistleblowers in seconds.” According to Chiyan News, the instructions of the Supreme Procuratorate were quickly transferred to Henan Province. The Henan Provincial Procuratorate, which was responsible for supervising the case, attached great importance to it, and the provincial procuratorate immediately asked the Hebi City and Qibin District Procuratorates to report the progress of the case to Zhengzhou, and required the Hebi City Procuratorate to “not allow to transfer the case for prosecution without the consent of the provincial procuratorate.” It was against this background that the three parties were successively released on bail.
During this period, insiders of the Hebi Municipal Police revealed that “the absurd behavior of arresting whistleblowers in seconds in this case was not what the police wanted to see, and the police also had their own difficulties.” A major leader of the Qibin Procuratorate also revealed that “this case was personally handled by the (then) main leader of the local municipal party committee, and there was not much we could do.”
The decision not to prosecute was announced two years after the incident: the reported person Ai Moujun cannot be ruled out as being involved in the case
After the “Hebi’s arrest of whistleblowers in seconds” incident attracted high attention from the Supreme People’s Procuratorate and strict supervision from the Henan Provincial Procuratorate, after more than a year of investigation, on February 21, 2023, the Qibin District Public Security Bureau of Hebi City withdrew the review of Niu Mou’s prosecution, and the Qibin District Procuratorate of Hebi made a decision not to prosecute Zhang Mouquan and Yang Moubin.
▲ Explanation of the reasons for not prosecuting
Two years after the incident, Chiyan News has just obtained the “Explanation of the Reasons for Not Prosecuting” issued by the Hebi procuratorial organs under the attention of the Supreme Procuratorate and the supervision of the Henan Provincial Procuratorate.
The “Explanation of the Reasons for Not Prosecuting” shows that, until today, the reported person Ai Moujun still cannot be ruled out as being involved in the case, and the reasons for not prosecuting Zhang Mouquan and Yang Moubin for the crime of false accusation and framing are as follows:
Regarding the nature of the 1.9 million yuan in question, the facts are unclear and the evidence is insufficient. After reviewing the prosecution, Zhang Mouquan and others made reasonable explanations for their belief that the money in question was a bribe, not a house purchase payment. Key witnesses changed their testimonies, and new witness testimonies and other evidence have changed the evidence of the whole case. At this stage, the Discipline Inspection Commission has not provided a conclusive opinion on the nature of the 1.9 million yuan. The question of whether the money in question can be completely ruled out as a bribe is unclear and the evidence is insufficient.
Regarding whether there was an intention to fabricate the facts of the crime is unclear. Whether Zhang Mouquan and others fabricated the facts with the knowledge that the money was a bribe, intending to subject others to criminal prosecution, is unclear. The evidence in the case points to a relatively vague subjective intention. Although Ai Moujun and Liu Mou (Ai Moujun’s wife) provided documentary evidence of the source of the 1.9 million yuan, and explained the nature of the money, because it was also a fact that Zhang Mouhui gave Ai Moujun 1.9 million yuan in cash, Zhang Mouquan and others believed that if it was a house purchase payment, why didn’t it go through the company’s account, why wasn’t a receipt issued in the company’s name, and why didn’t the 1.9 million yuan transfer all in cash, etc. The information of unusual transaction habits was superimposed, leading to a misunderstanding of the nature of the 1.9 million yuan, prompting Zhang Mouquan and Yang Moubin to mistakenly believe that there was a certain relationship between the small fine for “unapproved construction” and the 1.9 million yuan. As Zhang Mouquan was a firsthand witness to the two events, and he himself was likely to be held criminally liable, he filmed a video to report in his real name. Even if the fine of 5 million yuan was fabricated, the facts described in the report video were basically true. Zhang Mouquan and Yang Moubin, as shareholders of the company, even after others explained the money, still did not believe that the money was a house purchase payment, and believed that there was a possibility of bribery, which was reasonable to a certain extent.
Regarding whether someone greeted the unapproved construction of a certain residential area and who greeted it, the facts are unclear and the evidence is insufficient. Combined with the whole case and the cases of similar administrative penalties collected in the case, the fact that the fine for the unapproved construction of a certain residential area was reduced did exist. Regarding whether it was Ai Moujun who greeted it, although the witnesses Li Moumou and Yang Moumou denied it, their testimonies about how the amount of the fine was decided were mutually evasive, and the authenticity of the testimonies was not high. It cannot be completely ruled out that Ai Moujun was involved just because the two simply said that Ai Moujun did not greet the unapproved construction. In the case of Zhang Mouhui and Zhang Mouquan’s one-on-one inconsistent statements about whether Ai Moujun greeted it, rational judgment cannot completely rule out that Zhang Mouquan’s confession was false.
In summary, in view of the fact that the discipline inspection organs have not issued a conclusive opinion on the nature of the 1.9 million yuan, the premise for determining that Zhang Mouquan and others are suspected of the crime of false accusation and framing is temporarily unsupported by evidence, and the existing evidence also fails to achieve the consistency of subjective and objective aspects. In determining whether the suspect is guilty, in addition to requiring that the facts of the crime are clear and the evidence is sufficient, it is also necessary to completely rule out all reasonable doubts.
The reported person and the fallen vice governor are in a “supporting” relationship
According to public reports, at the end of 2021, the Hebi police discovered that Ai Moujun’s wife, Liu Mou, a public official (both of whom are local departmental-level cadres), and others were suspected of having a large amount of unexplained property, and it is suspected that they did not hand it over to the Discipline Inspection and Supervision Commission for more than two years. Fan Chen, the lawyer representing the case, submitted the illegal clues to the Hebi Municipal Discipline Inspection Commission, but nearly two years have passed, and no investigation results have been received from the relevant departments.
In addition, according to Chiyan News, Ai Moujun, one of the reported persons, and Xu Guang, the fallen vice governor of Henan Province, are in a “supporting” relationship (Ai’s wife and Xu Guang’s wife are sisters).
Edited by Li Ying, Program Editor Zhao Yaqi
Chiyan News
Thank you for your attention to the Chizi Magazine & Chiyan News! Welcome to provide news clues, and the editor hereby expresses his sincere thanks. We will select and investigate the submissions or news clues, and publish them on the official website of Chizi Magazine and various media matrix platforms. If necessary, please call the hotline 010-56921888, or send the materials to the email [email protected]
Discover more from 自由档案馆
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.