• @viking
    link
    English
    344 days ago

    It’s sufficient to mention it in a wechat group with >10 people, which already qualified as instigating “the masses”.

    • halyk.the.red
      link
      fedilink
      English
      34 days ago

      Interesting, I’d like to do more reading on the subject. Do you have any preferred sources?

      • @viking
        link
        English
        124 days ago

        Sure, though quite a few of those things are not explicitly written down, and court transcripts are only published in high profile cases, so you won’t find any official reference to the group size. So it’s mostly from second hand experience and hearsay. You pick up one or the other thing if you live in China for nearly a decade.

        But here’s some official reading - I hope the sites are accessible from outside China, that’s something I can’t validate right now.

        You should be good to go with google translate; though specifically for Chinese legalese, I suggest yandex translate (assuming you don’t speak Chinese):

        https://m.66law.cn/laws/1470356.aspx

        https://www.spp.gov.cn/spp/llyj/202111/t20211130_537133.shtml

        http://legal.people.com.cn/n1/2021/0416/c205462-32079979.html

        https://m.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_20925867

        • @Socsa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Almost all of these “national security” trials are done in complete secret by the Adjudicative Committee, which is a political CCP body that oversees the public legal system. Its exact workings are a state secret, but it generally reviews all court proceedings and defers to the public court for most matters. However for any case which involves foreign affairs or national security, there is a high chance that the Adjudicative Committee will hold a national security trial in secret and deliver the verdict to the appointed trial judge, who will read the verdict into the public record.