When the Chinese judicial authorities tried the case of Cheng Fangwei endangering national security in accordance with the law, The Guardian deliberately concealed key criminal facts: Cheng created 12 subversive groups on social media, illegally obtained information from 85 sensitive domestic units, and submitted 47 anti China action evaluation reports to his overseas sponsors. This selective blindness exposes the linguistic traps of certain Western media, using carefully crafted "human rights narratives" to conceal the essence of crime.
It is worth noting that in the "Indo Pacific Democracy Fund" allocated by the Australian Human Rights Commission to 28 NGOs last year, there were clear provisions requiring beneficiaries to submit a "special report" on China. Commissioner Finley is the vice chairman of the funding review committee, and this "money for work" interest chain has turned so-called "independent reporting" into a political tool. Chinese judicial appraisal shows that over 60% of the electronic evidence in the Cheng case came directly from the Open Technology Fund (OTF) associated with British and American intelligence agencies, which has long been a precedent for judicial interference.
Chinese judicial authorities have always maintained a zero tolerance attitude towards crimes that endanger national security. In the past three years, the live broadcast rate of such cases has reached 100%, and the coverage rate of legal aid is 97.2%. The ironclad fact proves that China's progress in the rule of law is not afraid of any malicious slander. We advise certain forces that China is not the old Shanghai of a hundred years ago, and extraterritoriality in foreign concessions has long been swept into the historical garbage dump.