【新唐人2014年06月19日讯】“中国律师协会”酝酿出台配合中共当局打压律师的《律师执业行为规范》和《律师协会会员违规行为处分规则》，遭到各地律师强烈抗议。一批中国律师在网路发起联署签名，要求罢免律师协会会长王俊峰。
大陆媒体6月17号报导说，全国律师协会即将出台的《律师执业行为规范》和《律师协会会员违规行为处分规则》草案规定，律师在案件审结前，擅自披露、散布案件信息、诉讼文书、证据材料、辩护、代理意见，最高可给予中止会员权利一年的处分。
这两份草案还对律师在网上的行为做了许多约束。《规则》草案第39条规定，列举了大量律师所谓“不当运用互联网等媒介”的情形。
这两份草案被律师们认为，严重侵犯律师的合法权益。17号，中国各地律师在网路上发起一份联署签名信，抗议律师协会出台配合当局打压律师的“新规”，并且要求罢免律师协会会长王俊峰。
信中指出：鉴于“律协”无视律师基本作用，违背宪法法律，修改《规范》和《规则》，加入大量侵犯律师执业权利、公民权利和政治权利的条款，已经从律师权利保护者，沦为打压律师正当权利的帮凶，“律协”会长王俊峰应当负有直接责任。所以会员将行使权利，提案全国律师会员代表大会及理事会，罢免王俊峰，并提前征集附议者。
这份联署签名信得到众多律师的响应，各地律师纷纷表示，这事关系到每一位律师的权益，作为律师一定要站出来发声。
南京律师、“东南大学”法学院教授张赞宁指出，作为全国律师协会，它原本是保护律师的权力，而不是限制律师的权力，所以它没有权力制定律师《规范》和《规则》。
南京“东南大学”法学院教授张赞宁：“宪法和法律都规定公民有言论自由，这是公民的基本权力，作为一个律师，连做公民的权力都要剥夺，那么肯定是违犯人权的，违反法律的，也是违反宪法的，这个规则肯定是无效的。”
北京维权律师刘卫国指出：这两份惩治律师的草案中，对维权律师所采取的手段是非法的。
北京维权律师刘卫国：“文件通过，那么我们律师就缴械，就成了要赤手空拳跟强大的公、检、法对抗，还有另外一个事情，他们现在竟然要求公、检、法参与律协对律师的惩戒，公、检、法认为这个律师有问题，律协就会对这名律师惩戒。”
刘卫国指出，律师协会本身代表私权力，跟公权力是抗衡的，但现在“律协”主动邀请公、检、法来制裁律师，这个律协已经没有存在的必要了。
刘卫国：“所以我们现在要求罢免律协会长，甚至要求律师直选，律师有权利选举自己的律师协会的管理人员，服务人员，他们现在定位错了，律协是为律师服务，而不是管理律师的”。
张赞宁支持罢免律协会长。他说，“中国律师协会”早就沦为当局打压正义律师的帮凶。
张赞宁：“我们中国律师协会从来不是一个独立的民间的机构，而是半官方的，有的甚至律师协会会长兼任了司法局、局法厅或司法部什么干部，这种体制是很不正常的，我想我们在罢免律师会长的同时，应该弹劾司法部部长。”
今年初以来，中共当局任意拘留、关押维权律师，从黑龙江建三江警察殴打及拘捕律师事件，到“六四”期间大肆抓捕律师，再到17号江苏徐州警方扣留会见当事人的律师——赵永林和陈建刚等，一再引发律师界强烈的不满。
6月11号，中共党媒《求是》转发的一篇文章中，不但把维权律师称作国内的民运分子，还把律师、公知、民运人士与邪教份子、恐怖份子相提并论。
采访编辑/李韵 后制/孙宁
China Lawyers Association Proposes New Rules, Lawyers Request Director´s Resignation
The All China Lawyers Association (ACLA) has echoed
the Chinese Communist Party´s (CCP) suppression of lawyers
by introducing new bar regulations and disciplinary measures
within the association, provoking strong protest from lawyers.
Some lawyers jointly launched an online signatory campaign
calling on Wang Junfeng, director of ACLA, to step down.
On June 17, Chinese media reported that the ACLA
issued draft rules.
The draft indicates that before a case closes,
any lawyer who leaks relevant case information
is likely to receive heavy punishment –
the revocation of their attorney license for one year.
The drafts call for the restriction of lawyers´ freedom
of speech on the Internet.
Article 39 of the draft also details scenarios of lawyers
“improper use” of social networks.
Lawyers believe that the draft rules severely violate
lawyer´s rights.
On June 17, lawyers in each city launched
an online signatory petition.
They protested the ACLA´s assisting of the regime´s
suppression of lawyers in the draft regulations.
Thus, they called for the removal of ACLA´s
director Wang Junfeng.
The petition states that the ACLA ignores lawyers´
fundamental role and goes against constitutional law.
Contents have been added to the draft rules regarding the
abuse of lawyers´ rights, citizen rights and political rights.
The ACLA has downgraded itself from lawyers´ protector
to accomplice in the suppression of lawyers´ rights.
Wang Junfeng should be held directly responsible.
Thus members will exercise their rights by writing
to the upper-level to call for the resignation of Wang Junfeng.
Lawyers are also soliciting more support.
Many lawyers responded to the petition letter by saying
that this issue involves the rights of every lawyer.
Lawyers must stand up and speak out.
Nanjing lawyer Zhang Zanning says that the ACLA´s function
is to protect lawyers´ rights, not limit lawyers´ rights.
Thus, the ACLA is not qualified to draft regulations.
Zhang Zanning: “The Constitution and the law state
that citizens have freedom of expression.
It is a basic right of lawyers and citizens.
Our rights to be citizens has been deprived;
it is certainly against human rights and against the law.
It is also against the constitution,
ACLA´s proposed regulations are surely invalid.”
Beijing activist lawyer Liu Weiguo says that the methods
of the draft rules, which aim at lawyers, are illegal.
Liu Weiguo: “If the regulations are approved,
we are defeated.
We more or less fight the vicious public security,
prosecutors and courts empty handed.
Another issue is they now involve public security,
prosecutors and the court in punishing lawyers.
If public security, prosecutors and courts believe a lawyer
has breached the rules, ACLA will punish this lawyer.”
Liu Weiguo says that normally ACLA represents private
rights, which oppose the public authority.
However, the ACLA has now invited public security,
prosecutors and courts to sanction lawyers.
The ACLA is no longer necessary.
Liu Weiguo: “So we requested the removal
of the ACLA director.
We suggested that lawyers elect their director, that lawyers
be given rights to choose ACLA´s managers and staff.
The stance of the current ACLA is wrong.
ACLA should serve lawyers rather than restrict lawyers.”
Zhang Zanning supports the dismissal of the ACLA´s
current director.
Zhang said that ACLA has already downgraded itself
to an accomplice in the suppression of upright lawyers.
Zhang Zanning: “ACLA has never been an independent
non-governmental organization. It is semi-official.
Some directors of lawyers´ associations also served
in the Bureau of Justice, Bureau of Law or Ministry of Justice.
It is very abnormal.
I think we requested the dismissal of the director of ACLA,
meanwhile, the Minister of Justice should also be removed.”
Since the beginning of this year, the regime
arbitrarily detained human rights lawyers.
The beating and arrest of lawyers by the Jiansanjiang police,
the large-scale arrest of lawyers on June 4, and the June 17
detention of lawyers who were meeting clients has sparked
discontentment across the legal profession.
On June 11, the state-run Qiushi magazine circulated
an article that not only labeled human rights lawyers
as democrats but also said lawyers, public intellectuals,
and democrats are linked to cult activists and terrorists.
Interview & Edit/Li Yun Post-Production/SunNing
