Wuxi human rights defender Shen Aibin’s lawsuit over a 10-day detention by Liangxi Public Security Bureau receives an unlawful judgment from Binhu Court

(Rights Defense Network Information Center report) On October 28, 2026, this outlet learned that Wuxi human rights defender Shen Aibin’s lawsuit over a 10-day detention by Liangxi Public Security Bureau had received an unlawful judgment from Binhu Court.

On October 14, 2026, the People’s Court of Binhu District, Wuxi, issued Administrative Judgment No. (2026) Su 0211 Xing Chu 186, dismissing plaintiff Shen Aibin’s claims and ordering him to pay 50 yuan in litigation costs.

On September 23, 2025, Shen Aibin went to the Jingxi Hotel in Nanjing to report to the Central Fifth Inspection Team the inhuman, mafia-style atrocities committed against him by Wuxi’s corrupt criminal justice officials. As soon as he reached the corridor entrance, a police officer from Nanjing’s Gulou District stopped him and demanded to inspect his phone. The officer’s reason was that Shen Aibin was holding a phone and, under the “No Photography” rule posted on the corridor wall, the officer suspected he was taking pictures. Shen handed the phone to the officer for inspection. The officer browsed the phone’s photo album and found that there were indeed no photos taken that day, but the officer continued scrolling through the contents of the photo album. Shen Aibin immediately stopped him, telling the officer, “Your authority is to check whether I am taking pictures here and now today. You have no right to inspect the contents of my phone from before, because that is my personal privacy.” The officer ignored him and continued scrolling. Shen Aibin took back his phone. This act offended the officer’s imperial authority, and he immediately called over a group of police officers, who forcibly escorted Shen Aibin to a small room across the road. In the room, Shen Aibin argued with the group of officers. He was later handed over to officers from the Guangyi Police Station of Wuxi’s Liangxi Public Security Bureau, who had been waiting in Nanjing, and taken back to Wuxi. Upon arrival in Wuxi, he was taken directly to the case-handling center of the Liangxi Branch.

On September 24, 2025, the Liangxi Branch imposed a 10-day detention on Shen Aibin on the grounds that he had obstructed the performance of official duties in Nanjing. He was sent to the Wuxi Detention Center to serve the term and released on October 4.

Shen Aibin disagreed with the penalty decision. After the Liangxi District Government upheld it on review, he filed suit in the People’s Court of Binhu District, Wuxi. A three-member panel consisting of presiding judge Wu Qian and people’s assessors Fan Guangxiu and Zhu Muyang heard the case, but issued a brazenly unlawful judgment, acting as a protective umbrella for Liangxi’s unlawful penalty.

Shen Aibin believes that the Binhu Court judgment contains the following unlawful errors:

1. It made errors in determining the basic facts; deliberately failed to review the legality of the Nanjing Gulou police officer’s “performance of official duties”; and unlawfully refused to accept the facts and reasons he presented in court exposing the officer’s unlawful conduct.

2. It failed to review the legality of the Nanjing Gulou police officer’s inspection of a citizen’s phone.

3. It abused its power to alter the content of evidence examination in court. During the first-instance trial, when examining Liangxi Branch’s evidence items 5, 6, 8 and 9, which were “submitted only for the court’s review,” Shen Aibin explicitly said: “The defendant did not provide this evidence to the plaintiff, nor did it present it at today’s hearing, so the plaintiff cannot examine it in court ... Evidence that has not been examined in court may not serve as the basis for a ruling.” Yet the judgment stated that Shen Aibin’s examination of those four items was that they “were unlawful and could not serve as the basis for a ruling.” The plaintiff never said “they were unlawful” at the time.

4. It accepted evidence that had not been examined in court. Liangxi Branch’s evidence items 5, 6, 8 and 9, and Liangxi District Government’s evidence item 7, were not presented in court or examined by the plaintiff, yet the first-instance judgment accepted them in full, a blatant abuse of power and miscarriage of justice.

5. It turned a blind eye to the Liangxi Branch’s unlawful handling of the case without lawfully obtaining the case transfer documents from Nanjing police.

6. During the first-instance hearing, the defendant did not present any evidence, examined by the plaintiff, that could prove the plaintiff had “obstructed the performance of official duties.” The hearing was entirely contrary to the fundamental purpose of administrative litigation.

7. It refused to consider new evidence obtained and submitted by the plaintiff after the hearing that could establish the defendant’s administrative conduct was unlawful, seriously violating trial procedures and conducting an unlawful trial.

Shen Aibin said he would appeal the case.