On the last day of 2004, Gao Zhisheng, an outstanding attorney in China, addressed the People's Congress of China and Wu Bangguo, chairman of the Standing Committee of the People's Congress of China in his open letter. Gao, in his letter, brought to the attention of the People's Congress the violations of law with China's judiciary system and deprivation of Falun Gong practitioners' civil rights, which has caused an enthusiastic response in China and overseas. GMWQ, a rights advocacy website based in China, launched a sign-up campaign in support of Gao, who's been praised as "the conscience of Chinese lawyers" and "a great hero."
The following is the transcript of an interview of Gao by The Epoch Times on Zhao's death.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reporter: How are you, Mr. Gao? Have you heard that Zhao Ziyang died this morning?
Gao: Yes, I know it. My friends told me about it through short messages on the cell phone.
Reporter: Zhao Ziyang died while under house arrest. How do you feel about that?
Gao: I feel sad, very sad. Zhao's fate proves one point, and that is, it's extremely dangerous for anyone to ask the central regime for democracy or propose a democratic reform. What happened to Zhao proved that point. Zhao's death is a heart-breaking event, even though he died naturally. In Zhao's late years, the leaders in Beijing told the public a few times that they were still investigating Zhao. In other words, they were hinting to the public that Zhao's life wouldn't be peaceful in his late years. As far as I can remember, Jiang Zemin said it twice on two occasions. He told the public clearly that Zhao was treated well in his daily life, but the probing of his case would continue, which means, they would not allow Zhao to leave peacefully. Of course, the quest for democracy by Chinese people won't evaporate as Zhao passed away. Zhao's quiet death, however, is bound to cast a psychological shadow over many, because a voice of democracy within the system ended so tragically.
Reporter: We all know that the deaths of both Zhou Enlai and Hu Yaobang brought about turbulence to China's political situation. What do you think the death of Zhao will cause to China?
Gao: I can tell you this: after the bloody crackdown of the student democracy movement in 1989, most, if not all, Chinese have chosen to be cynical or numb. Surely, people are heart-broken by Zhao's death. But I don't believe it will bring any turmoil to the overall or local situations. That is because those who share Zhao's values realized that the authorities would not hesitate to use force when they (the authorities) feel such values should be restrained. In this regard, people have painful memories and lessons, and they've paid a heavy price. Naturally, none of us want instability, and that undoubtedly is also Zhao's wish—China must maintain its social stability. With that precondition insured, people should be given hope for democracy. The authorities should let people see a way out and hope, rather than treating people the way they did Zhao—everything remains unchanged and under constant review.
Reporter: Some Japanese scholars held the view that China missed an opportunity to change for the better because of Zhao's indecisiveness and hesitancy. How would you view the way Zhao acted?
Gao: Zhao had his weaknesses. As a matter of fact, he held a good will and good wish to the central regime he worked for. He inclined to treat the regime he worked for as a group of humans. In that respect, he was off track and wrong. There is another aspect, and to put it more bluntly, he was so different from Deng Xiaoping and the like in terms of brutality. He never thought that Deng could be so brutal to the people. Probably he wouldn't believe it right before he died. It's something that wouldn't make sense to anyone who has a sound personality. And yet it happened. A situation happened that, even to this day, still causes pain for the whole nation when it's mentioned. It does have to do with his hesitancy and mindset.
Reporter: Now Zhao has passed away. When do you think China will give him a just assessment, and of course one for the democracy movement in 1989? Do you think it possible? Or when do you think it's possible?
Gao: Well, a reassessment of the democracy movement of 1989 and Falun Gong is not a matter of possibility—possibility is not on the agenda for discussion—it is a matter of inevitability. A reassessment for both is a must in history. What's most disappointing, though, is that no such hope is in sight right now. But I think all Chinese, including myself, will continue to work for that to happen. As far as the democracy movement of 1989 is concerned, assessment is only a matter of symbol and form. The whole world, including the people in China, have a different assessment of the democracy movement of 1989 from that of the rulers in China. So this is only a matter of symbol. Even for such a symbol, a superficial assessment that is approved by the authorities, it's bound to undergo a process of reassessment in a not-too-distant future. This is something no one can stop from happening, since those who are on the wrong side of history have few supporters.
Reporter: Very good and thank you very much. Do you have any more comments?
Gao: I naturally hope that China will have fewer tragic cases as Zhao's. Such tragedies abound in Chinese history. Why does our power structure operate basically the same way as before. It's even worse in terms of its totalitarianism and brutality, which merits our reflection. I think this is an undertaking for all Chinese, including those who are in power, because such concepts are dangerous to the Chinese nation, especially to the rulers. That is why we should care about issues of common concern, such as democracy and civilization in China. We should work together in this direction through peaceful means rather than resorting to violence. Meanwhile, we appeal to the public not to seek democracy through means that may cause social unrest.
Reporter: Do you think there are specific methods for meeting such demand for democracy through peaceful means?
Gao: Such methods are common heritages of human civilization, and they include an independent judiciary that's not under the control of those in the government. They also include insuring the legitimacy of the mandate of power through holding referendum, lifting restrictions by the party, and giving freedom to the press. So everyone knows what methods there are, and the only question is how they are going to implement them.
Reporter: Very good. Thank you for talking to us and take care.
Gao: Thank you. Good bye.
Feeds