Artist calls for retrial in execution case

The designer of one of the most famous Beijing Olympic symbols has stepped into the controversy over the secret trial of a young Chinese man sentenced to death.

Chinese artist Ai Weiwei – who designed the Bird's Nest stadium – has asked the Supreme Court to get involved and order a public retrial, writes the Guardian.

In a letter the artist says the original investigation and hearing weren't handled properly. From the story:

" … "Since this case has generated enormous social impact, it should not be ignored ... To go through a public and transparent judicial procedures is to safeguard the constitution as well as test China's determination and power of its judicial reform." …"

Claims of mistreatment

The case he is talking about is that of 28-year-old Yang Jia, who was found guilty at a closed hearing, of premeditated murder, over the stabbing deaths of six police.

It's been claimed Yang Jia was motivated by revenge, after he was beaten at the same police station while being questioned about an alleged stolen bicycle. And that has sparked questions about the police treatment of suspects.

Questions of fairness

The case, which has also led to questions about the fairness of the justice system, has attracted widespread public sympathy and debate. Foreign news outlets report some Internet sites and blogs carrying criticisms of the case have been blocked, shut down or deleted.

In its story, the Guardian says thousands of messages supporting Yang Jia have appeared on blogs and bulletin boards.

Global Voices Online has more on the fallout. It says videos posted by Ai Weiwei showing the crowd outside the court , where Yang Jia's trial was held, have been deleted. They say the artist had applied to attend the trial, but was denied permission.

No trial is fair

Each year, China executes more people than any other country.

Amnesty International believes that nobody sentenced to death in China gets a fair trial in line with international standards. The Chinese system doesn't presume innocence. It uses evidence extracted under torture. It restricts defendants' access to lawyers. And it's subject to political interference.