Li Qiaochu: A Small Episode in the Marriage Application Process 01
On the afternoon of May 20, 2026, I was busy dealing with an appeal concerning an article on the Meipian app when I suddenly received a call from the Donggang District People's Court of Rizhao City. The caller said they had received materials I had sent by post for filing an administrative lawsuit, and told me that my administrative lawsuit did not fall under their jurisdiction and that, if I wanted to protect my rights, I should use the legally prescribed channels. They proposed returning the documents I had sent.
I actually could not quite remember. I thought it might have been materials I had sent to the district court for filing in an administrative procedure concerning prisoners' right to communicate that had taken place sometime last year. I said, “Okay,” and the caller hung up.
That evening, I looked at the documents from that time and remembered:
On January 24 this year, I had brought an administrative lawsuit before the basic-level court against the Lunan Prison's administrative fraud (retaining a letter after I had revised it as required, on the grounds that it had not been revised). Later, the online system directly displayed “review unsuccessful.” The review opinion directly cited Article 1, Paragraph 1 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Administrative Litigation Law, determining that my lawsuit did not fall within the scope of cases accepted for administrative litigation.
Generally, when “review unsuccessful” appears at the online filing stage, it is usually due to simple formal problems with the materials. But the review opinion I received was already a substantive rejection by the court—that is, a decision not to accept the case for filing. The court merely deliberately used the platform wording “review unsuccessful” in place of a Ruling on Not Accepting the Case for Filing, which was tantamount to depriving me of my right to seek relief.
I felt that this violation of the law was too obvious, so on February 9 I mailed an Application for Issuance of a Ruling on Not Accepting the Case for Filing, requesting that a written ruling be issued within seven days of receipt. After that, there was no further news, and I did not continue pursuing the matter.
More than half a lifetime has passed, hasn't it? Only now have they called to say they received the materials, without mentioning the written ruling, and only clearly stating that the matter did not fall under their jurisdiction. But the application materials I mailed were not about whether the case should be accepted for filing; I was only asking for a written ruling. Whether they had jurisdiction would only become an issue after a written ruling had been issued and an appeal was pursued.
I also don't know why they are contacting me persistently at this point. Did they also see my article about the marriage application process? “Oh, was this the woman who sent the written application back then? Then quickly return her materials.” In the evening, I refused to accept the documents and materials returned by the court.
Actually, if the court had not proactively and insistently called me and returned the materials, I would have completely forgotten about this matter. For now, I will retain my right to seek legal remedies for this violation. What kind of human suffering is all this!
Related Reporting
Aug 29, 2026
Li Qiaochu: Update on Xu Zhiyong’s Situation in Prison (August 29, 2026)
The writer received a letter from Xu Zhiyong dated August 21, 2026, saying his outdoor time had improved to 10 a.m. daily for 30 minutes. Correspondence had also become smoother than during the previous two months. The writer considers the matter closed for now but plans to continue asking about Xu’s basic living conditions. Xu reportedly liked hand-drawn pictures sent with a letter in late July.
Aug 29, 2026
Chow Hang-tung: Statement of Plea
The author rejects a 206-page judgment that, they argue, treats belief in ending one-party dictatorship as unconstitutional and criminal. They say law cannot control thoughts, condemn obedience to authoritarian power, and describe ending one-party dictatorship as a responsibility of Hong Kong and Chinese people. The author refuses to apologize for these beliefs, accepts possible imprisonment, and vows to continue pursuing democracy, accountability for the 1989 massacre and a democratic Hong Kong and China.
Aug 29, 2026
Kunming Shijixincheng Christian Church Case to Hold Pretrial Conference on September 2, 2026, Trial to Begin on September 16
The Kunming Shijixincheng Christian Church case will hold a pretrial conference on September 2, 2026, with trial scheduled to begin September 16. Authorities raided a church gathering on April 12, taking preacher Yu Shaolin, Li Qun and Luo Ping into custody. The three were formally arrested on May 20 on suspicion of “organizing an illegal gathering” and are held at Guandu District Detention Center.
Aug 28, 2026
Zion Church’s Open Prayer Letter Urging the Beihai Yinhai District Court to Immediately Release Wang Zhong and Wu Qiuyu
Zion Church said the Beihai Yinhai District Procuratorate indicted its “10·9” case on July 17, 2026, but a planned August pretrial conference and trial were postponed after lawyers protested. Eight pastors and co-workers remain detained on fraud and/or illegal business operations charges. The church said Wang Zhong’s bail requests were denied despite severe heart disease and his father’s death, while Wu Qiuyu remains separated from her two young children.

