【新唐人2014年03月13日訊】中共正在召開的「兩會」上，官員財產公示又成為輿論的熱點。人大代表、廣州市長陳建華說，官員財產公示怎麼搞？希望中共高層給個說法。而民間從2012年底不斷有公民公開舉牌，呼籲官員公示財產。其中一大批參與者已經被抓，甚至獲刑。那麼，現在其他參與者們和支持者們，如何看待中共內部的這種所謂財產公示呢？請看詳細報導。
據大陸媒體報導，廣州市長陳建華在「兩會」上說，在試點地區搞官員財產申報後，效果很明顯。下一步怎麼搞，希望中共高層給個說法。大陸官方媒體對此的回應是：官員財產公示不必總等中央的說法。
從去年開始，廣州南沙新區和韶關始興縣的三個基層縣區，成為中共內部官員財產申報的試點地區。
大陸維權律師黎雄兵：「內部監督當然不能達到財產公示的目標。公示的基本意義那就是對社會公開，權力者對他的權力對像公開，這是一個財產公開的本來的涵義。內部公示那就無異於財產所有者對自己公開一樣，自己有多少錢，自己本身就很清楚，那無需要公開了。」
當大陸媒體詢問陳建華「有沒有官員虛報財產」時，他表示，不分管這項工作，不了解情況。
去年，大陸網上曝光了大量「房叔」、「房嬸」、「房姐」等官員。其中坐擁22套房產的廣州「房叔」蔡彬，獲刑11年半，並被沒收財產60萬元。
大陸維權律師黎雄兵介紹，在國際上，官員財產公示對於民主國家，已經形成了一種制度，是政治常識或者叫普世價值。官員上任之前，就要公布自己的財產情況﹔離任後，對財產的變化也要公布。如果公眾對他的財產質疑，他就要允許公共的獨立機構對他進行調查。
黎雄兵：「在這個問題上，如果還要存在著爭論，還有甚麼試點，還要存在著甚麼條件不純熟，那我覺得這都是無稽之談，這都是荒唐的。這種思維本身，就比腐敗本身更加可怕。它保護腐敗，它掩護腐敗，它把腐敗包裝出來，使它合法化了。」
大陸網友歐彪峰是「南方街頭運動」的積極參與者。他認為，西方官員的財產可以被公眾監督，與西方社會制度有關。
大陸網友歐彪峰：「起碼首先這個官員他是經過民眾自由選舉產生的，第二，他們的媒體是自由的，新聞是自由的，司法是獨立的，他們就已經有很好的機制在這裡，但是我們中國完全是沒有民主的。」
2012年底，大陸各階層民眾自發聯名，發出《公民建議書》，呼籲中共205位高官公示財產。參與者包括北京律師丁家喜、廣州維權推動者郭飛雄、北京「理工大學」教授胡星斗等人。
今年1月，當局抓捕「公盟」組織創始人，法律學者許志永，和丁家喜、及江西獨立參選人劉萍等參與《公民建議書》者，並開庭審理。許志永獲刑4年。
黎雄兵認為，中國公民輕信了當局將要實行官員財產公開的承諾，就非常真誠的去推動財產公示運動，結果付出了慘痛的代價。
黎雄兵：「他們低估了目前這種保守的、專制的政治體制，在反對和阻撓財產公開方面的巨大的阻力。在目前中國的基本政治制度之下，誰要要求官員真的實施財產公開，那麼誰就必然遭到打壓，這是毫無疑問的。在這個問題上，不能抱有半點僥倖。」
歐彪峰：「民間要求官員財產公示，其實也是對專制體制的一個切入口，希望對中國的政治體制有所突破。但是非常遺憾，這種非常理性的，非常柔和的訴求，也是被當局殘酷的打壓，這個也證明了當局的虛弱與害怕。」
黎雄兵表示，這些遭受打壓仍在堅持的中國公民們，是出自對國家、民族和自身權利的責任感、正義感和使命感。他期待，他們能儘早獲得自由。
採訪編輯/唐音 後製/周天
Commentary On Chinese Communist Party Officials Disclosing Assets
During a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) congress meeting,
disclosure of officials assets has again become a hot topic.
A representative, Guangzhou Mayor Chen Jianhua
raised questions about how to disclose officials assets?
He hoped the high level officials could give an explanation.
Civil campaigns urging officials to disclose their
assets have repeatedly taken place since 2012.
Subsequently, most of the campaigners
have been arrested and sentenced.
What do the other participants and supporters
of these campaigns think about the CCP’s internal
discussion about disclosure of officials’assets?
Chinese media cited Chen Jianhua
speaking in the congress meeting.
In pilot areas, officials have disclosed their
assets, and it has brought good results.
Chen wanted to know what to do next, hoping
the high-level officials could give guidance.
The media responded that, “to disclose officials
assets doesn’t need the central regime’s guidance.”
In 2013, a pilot project was launched in three areas in
Guangzhou Province, for officials to declare their assets.
Li Xiongbing, China-based activist lawyer:
“Internal monitoring certainly cannot
achieve the goal of disclosure of assets.
The meaning of the declaration is to be open
to the public. This is the primary purpose.
Internal disclosure of officials private
assets is like declaring to themselves.
How much money do they have, they know it
clearly already, so it is not necessary to declare.”
A journalist asked Chen Jianhua whether
there were any false declarations.
Chen responded that he doesn’t work
on this area, so he wasn't clear about it.
In 2013, many officials, including house uncles,
house aunties, house sisters were exposed online.
Amongst them was Cai Bin, who owned 22 properties.
Cai was given an eleven and a half year prison
sentence, and 600,000 yuan assets were confiscated.
Li Xiongbing said that in a democratic country,
officials disclosing private assets is the system.
It is political common sense, and also a universal value.
Before an official is appointed, the official
must declare his property information.
When the official leaves, the changes of his
private assets also need to be publicized.
If the public question anything, the official must
allow an independent agency to investigate.
Li Xiongbing: “If there is an argument existing over
this issue, of whether to launch a pilot project, or
thinking the time is not right, then I think it is nonsense.
This way of thinking is even worse than corruption.
It protects and hides corruption,
wraps up corruption, and legalizes it.”
Netizen Ou Biaofeng actively
participates in “Southern Street Action”.
He commented that in Western countries, officials
private assets can be supervised by the public.
This is the democratic system.
Ou Biaofeng: “This official has
been elected freely by the public.
Their media and news are free to express,
and their legal system is independent.
They have a good system, but in China
we don’t have a democratic system.”
At the end of 2012, people from all walks of life
initiated a signatory campaign, and issued a letter.
The letter urged 205 CCP officials to disclose their assets.
The campaigners included Beijing lawyer Ding Jiaxi,
Guangdong activist lawyer Guo Feixion, as well as
Professor Hu Xingdou of Beijing Institute of Technology.
In January 2014, the regime arrested Xu Zhiyong,
a legal scholar and founder of New Citizens’ Movement.
It also arrested and tried more people who participated
in the letter, including activists Ding Jiaxi and Liu Ping.
Xu Zhiyong was sentenced to four years in prison.
Li Xiongbing believes that Chinese people
easily trust that the regime would keep
their promise to disclose officials assets.
Thus, the citizens sincerely pushed forward
the movement for declaration of assets.
But in the end, these citizens learned a hard lesson.
Li Xiongbing: “Citizens underestimated the
current closed and authoritarian political system.
They faced huge resistance and obstacles
from publicizing the regime officials wealth.
Under the current system, whoever requests officials
to disclose private assets will be suppressed.
There is no doubt. In this regard,
one cannot hold this sort of hope.”
Ou Biaofeng: “Citizens requested
the officials to publicize their wealth.
Actually, this is an entry point to fight the dictatorship,
and they hope to break through the CCP political system.
Unfortunately, the rational and soft
requests were brutally suppressed.
It proves that the regime is weak and scared of it.”
Li Xiongbing believes that these Chinese citizens who
were suppressed by the regime are still campaigning.
They have a sense of responsibility, justice
and a mission for the country and the nation.
Li hopes they can be free soon.
Interview & Edit/Tangying Post-Production/Zhoutian
據大陸媒體報導，廣州市長陳建華在「兩會」上說，在試點地區搞官員財產申報後，效果很明顯。下一步怎麼搞，希望中共高層給個說法。大陸官方媒體對此的回應是：官員財產公示不必總等中央的說法。
從去年開始，廣州南沙新區和韶關始興縣的三個基層縣區，成為中共內部官員財產申報的試點地區。
大陸維權律師黎雄兵：「內部監督當然不能達到財產公示的目標。公示的基本意義那就是對社會公開，權力者對他的權力對像公開，這是一個財產公開的本來的涵義。內部公示那就無異於財產所有者對自己公開一樣，自己有多少錢，自己本身就很清楚，那無需要公開了。」
當大陸媒體詢問陳建華「有沒有官員虛報財產」時，他表示，不分管這項工作，不了解情況。
去年，大陸網上曝光了大量「房叔」、「房嬸」、「房姐」等官員。其中坐擁22套房產的廣州「房叔」蔡彬，獲刑11年半，並被沒收財產60萬元。
大陸維權律師黎雄兵介紹，在國際上，官員財產公示對於民主國家，已經形成了一種制度，是政治常識或者叫普世價值。官員上任之前，就要公布自己的財產情況﹔離任後，對財產的變化也要公布。如果公眾對他的財產質疑，他就要允許公共的獨立機構對他進行調查。
黎雄兵：「在這個問題上，如果還要存在著爭論，還有甚麼試點，還要存在著甚麼條件不純熟，那我覺得這都是無稽之談，這都是荒唐的。這種思維本身，就比腐敗本身更加可怕。它保護腐敗，它掩護腐敗，它把腐敗包裝出來，使它合法化了。」
大陸網友歐彪峰是「南方街頭運動」的積極參與者。他認為，西方官員的財產可以被公眾監督，與西方社會制度有關。
大陸網友歐彪峰：「起碼首先這個官員他是經過民眾自由選舉產生的，第二，他們的媒體是自由的，新聞是自由的，司法是獨立的，他們就已經有很好的機制在這裡，但是我們中國完全是沒有民主的。」
2012年底，大陸各階層民眾自發聯名，發出《公民建議書》，呼籲中共205位高官公示財產。參與者包括北京律師丁家喜、廣州維權推動者郭飛雄、北京「理工大學」教授胡星斗等人。
今年1月，當局抓捕「公盟」組織創始人，法律學者許志永，和丁家喜、及江西獨立參選人劉萍等參與《公民建議書》者，並開庭審理。許志永獲刑4年。
黎雄兵認為，中國公民輕信了當局將要實行官員財產公開的承諾，就非常真誠的去推動財產公示運動，結果付出了慘痛的代價。
黎雄兵：「他們低估了目前這種保守的、專制的政治體制，在反對和阻撓財產公開方面的巨大的阻力。在目前中國的基本政治制度之下，誰要要求官員真的實施財產公開，那麼誰就必然遭到打壓，這是毫無疑問的。在這個問題上，不能抱有半點僥倖。」
歐彪峰：「民間要求官員財產公示，其實也是對專制體制的一個切入口，希望對中國的政治體制有所突破。但是非常遺憾，這種非常理性的，非常柔和的訴求，也是被當局殘酷的打壓，這個也證明了當局的虛弱與害怕。」
黎雄兵表示，這些遭受打壓仍在堅持的中國公民們，是出自對國家、民族和自身權利的責任感、正義感和使命感。他期待，他們能儘早獲得自由。
採訪編輯/唐音 後製/周天
Commentary On Chinese Communist Party Officials Disclosing Assets
During a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) congress meeting,
disclosure of officials assets has again become a hot topic.
A representative, Guangzhou Mayor Chen Jianhua
raised questions about how to disclose officials assets?
He hoped the high level officials could give an explanation.
Civil campaigns urging officials to disclose their
assets have repeatedly taken place since 2012.
Subsequently, most of the campaigners
have been arrested and sentenced.
What do the other participants and supporters
of these campaigns think about the CCP’s internal
discussion about disclosure of officials’assets?
Chinese media cited Chen Jianhua
speaking in the congress meeting.
In pilot areas, officials have disclosed their
assets, and it has brought good results.
Chen wanted to know what to do next, hoping
the high-level officials could give guidance.
The media responded that, “to disclose officials
assets doesn’t need the central regime’s guidance.”
In 2013, a pilot project was launched in three areas in
Guangzhou Province, for officials to declare their assets.
Li Xiongbing, China-based activist lawyer:
“Internal monitoring certainly cannot
achieve the goal of disclosure of assets.
The meaning of the declaration is to be open
to the public. This is the primary purpose.
Internal disclosure of officials private
assets is like declaring to themselves.
How much money do they have, they know it
clearly already, so it is not necessary to declare.”
A journalist asked Chen Jianhua whether
there were any false declarations.
Chen responded that he doesn’t work
on this area, so he wasn't clear about it.
In 2013, many officials, including house uncles,
house aunties, house sisters were exposed online.
Amongst them was Cai Bin, who owned 22 properties.
Cai was given an eleven and a half year prison
sentence, and 600,000 yuan assets were confiscated.
Li Xiongbing said that in a democratic country,
officials disclosing private assets is the system.
It is political common sense, and also a universal value.
Before an official is appointed, the official
must declare his property information.
When the official leaves, the changes of his
private assets also need to be publicized.
If the public question anything, the official must
allow an independent agency to investigate.
Li Xiongbing: “If there is an argument existing over
this issue, of whether to launch a pilot project, or
thinking the time is not right, then I think it is nonsense.
This way of thinking is even worse than corruption.
It protects and hides corruption,
wraps up corruption, and legalizes it.”
Netizen Ou Biaofeng actively
participates in “Southern Street Action”.
He commented that in Western countries, officials
private assets can be supervised by the public.
This is the democratic system.
Ou Biaofeng: “This official has
been elected freely by the public.
Their media and news are free to express,
and their legal system is independent.
They have a good system, but in China
we don’t have a democratic system.”
At the end of 2012, people from all walks of life
initiated a signatory campaign, and issued a letter.
The letter urged 205 CCP officials to disclose their assets.
The campaigners included Beijing lawyer Ding Jiaxi,
Guangdong activist lawyer Guo Feixion, as well as
Professor Hu Xingdou of Beijing Institute of Technology.
In January 2014, the regime arrested Xu Zhiyong,
a legal scholar and founder of New Citizens’ Movement.
It also arrested and tried more people who participated
in the letter, including activists Ding Jiaxi and Liu Ping.
Xu Zhiyong was sentenced to four years in prison.
Li Xiongbing believes that Chinese people
easily trust that the regime would keep
their promise to disclose officials assets.
Thus, the citizens sincerely pushed forward
the movement for declaration of assets.
But in the end, these citizens learned a hard lesson.
Li Xiongbing: “Citizens underestimated the
current closed and authoritarian political system.
They faced huge resistance and obstacles
from publicizing the regime officials wealth.
Under the current system, whoever requests officials
to disclose private assets will be suppressed.
There is no doubt. In this regard,
one cannot hold this sort of hope.”
Ou Biaofeng: “Citizens requested
the officials to publicize their wealth.
Actually, this is an entry point to fight the dictatorship,
and they hope to break through the CCP political system.
Unfortunately, the rational and soft
requests were brutally suppressed.
It proves that the regime is weak and scared of it.”
Li Xiongbing believes that these Chinese citizens who
were suppressed by the regime are still campaigning.
They have a sense of responsibility, justice
and a mission for the country and the nation.
Li hopes they can be free soon.
Interview & Edit/Tangying Post-Production/Zhoutian
