Wang Xiaoqin: Application for Accountability Regarding the Xianyang Weicheng District Procuratorate’s Circumvention of Inspection Supervision and Improper Handling of Complaint Leads

Applicant: Wang Xiaoqin, female, ID number: 610404198105226020, address: Family Compound of the No. 4 Thermal Power Company, No. 66 Jinxu Road, Xixian New Area, Xi’an, Shaanxi Province, telephone: 18064379278, younger sister of the victim Wang Xiaogang.

I. Grounds

The applicant hereby applies, in accordance with the law, for the Central Inspection Group to initiate an accountability investigation into the serious violations of discipline and regulations exposed during a telephone call on June 17, 2026, with staff members of the Complaint and Petition Division of the Weicheng District People’s Procuratorate. She also requests that the improper jurisdiction be immediately corrected, that the matter be placed under special supervision, and that the complaints filed by the applicant and her family against several procurators of the Weicheng District Procuratorate in the “Xianyang 9·28 Case” and the “Case of Wang Xiaogang’s Unnatural Death at the Weicheng District Detention Center” be handled at a higher level or by a procuratorate in another locality.

II. Basic Background (Brief)

The applicant’s family members Wang Yingqiang and Wang Xiaogang are residents within the jurisdiction of Weicheng Subdistrict Office, Weicheng District. On September 28, 2022, the murderer Ma Jianjun drove an off-road vehicle into the courtyard of Wang Yingqiang’s home, running over and killing his father Ma Yongkui and injuring Wang Yingqiang. Wang Xiaogang exercised legitimate self-defense when he was unlawfully attacked in the courtyard. The Xixian New Area Public Security Sub-Bureau detained Wang Xiaogang, who suffers from mental illness, at the Weicheng District Detention Center on suspicion of intentional injury, while the real culprit Ma Jianjun was not held legally accountable for a prolonged period. Wang Xiaogang died an unnatural death at the Weicheng District Detention Center on July 23, 2024, while in custody (the admission medical examination form indicated that he was healthy; the cause of death was hemorrhagic shock caused by massive gastrointestinal bleeding; and his lawyer was repeatedly prevented from meeting him).

The applicant has previously sent complaint and reporting materials under her real name by mail several times to the Supreme People’s Procuratorate and the Shaanxi Provincial People’s Procuratorate. The subjects of the complaints included former and current heads of the Weicheng District Procuratorate Shang Feng and Yang Weitao, Deputy Procurator Meng Xinquan, case-handling procurator Bai Yufeng, in-house detention-center procurator Wang Qian, and three others, seven people in total. The core allegations concern shielding the real culprit, unlawfully accepting flawed appraisal conclusions, obstructing reappraisal, supervisory negligence at the detention center resulting in death, and the circular handling of petition channels.

III. Facts Triggering This Accountability Request — Transcript of the June 17, 2026, Telephone Call with the Complaint and Petition Division of the Weicheng District Procuratorate

At 12:51 p.m. on June 17, 2026, a staff member of the Complaint and Petition Division of the Weicheng District People’s Procuratorate proactively called the applicant Wang Xiaoqin. The key points of the call are as follows (the applicant has retained a recording):

1. Statement by the Complaint and Petition Division: You wrote a letter to the Central Inspection Group’s seventh round of inspections. The inspection group’s letter was transferred down through successive levels, and now it has been transferred to our Weicheng Procuratorate.

Problems exposed: A matter transferred by the Central Inspection Group was “transferred down through successive levels” and ultimately sent back to the institution where the persons complained against work for self-investigation, which is seriously improper procedure.

2. Statement by the Complaint and Petition Division: Technically speaking, jurisdiction does not lie with us… Yet they transferred it to us…

The recusal principle was deliberately rendered ineffective: Staff members of the Complaint and Petition Division admitted that “technically speaking, jurisdiction does not lie with us,” yet they still accepted and processed the matter. This amounted to allowing the institution complained against to investigate itself and constituted a knowing violation of jurisdiction and recusal requirements.

Problems exposed: They knew they lacked jurisdiction and should have recused themselves, yet they still accepted and processed the matter, constituting a knowing violation.

3. Statement by the Complaint and Petition Division: We will definitely uphold our previous result. Do you acknowledge our previous result?… The several of them are ordinary people, and there was no embezzlement or bribery… They do not know you. What was their motive?… The procuratorate has also conducted many investigations, and there were no problems.

Predetermined position: “We will definitely uphold the previous result” and “the procuratorate investigated it and found no problem” show that the conclusion had already been fixed before any review of missing appraisal materials, the supervisory chain relating to the detention-center death, or the performance of the in-house procurator’s duties.

Problems exposed: ① A predetermined position and conclusion-first approach: openly stating that they would “uphold the previous result” amounted to an admission that no substantive review would be conducted; ② using “not acquainted with [the complainant] / no motive / no embezzlement or bribery” to substitute for the statutory review requirements of whether there had been unlawful performance of duties, dereliction of duty, shielding, obstruction of reappraisal, or concealment of a detention-center death; ③ “the procuratorate investigated it → no problem” meant investigating itself, in violation of recusal requirements.

4. Statement by the Complaint and Petition Division: Can you stop pursuing the complaint and stop petitioning, and sign a commitment letter? Can you?… Could we issue you some kind of report, or whatever—would you sign it, or how should we handle this?

Using “stopping the complaint and petitioning” in place of substantive review: The core of the call was not to inform the applicant of a plan to inspect files, obtain evidence, or conduct a review, but to use “signing a commitment to stop pursuing the complaint and petitioning” and “issuing you some kind of report” to promote closure. In substance, the matter transferred by the inspection group was treated as a stability-maintenance task to be closed out.

Problems exposed: By making the issuance of a “report” a condition and implicitly urging the applicant to sign, they treated stopping the complaint and petitioning as the objective, rather than investigating the facts, pursuing accountability, and correcting errors.

5. Statement by the Complaint and Petition Division: There is a limit of “one supervision.” The procuratorial authority issues a result only once; it is impossible to issue it repeatedly.

Problems exposed: This confused the legal concepts of review of complaints and petitions and disciplinary case-filing review with the rule that “litigation supervision is limited to one instance,” and used procedural terminology to suppress the complainant’s statutory right to legal remedy.

IV. Disciplinary and Legal Violations by the Weicheng District Procuratorate in Handling This Transferred Matter (Basis for the Accountability Request)

(1) Violation of organizational discipline — refusal to implement recusal requirements and self-assumption of jurisdiction over a case involving persons complained against

The Criminal Procedure Rules of the People’s Procuratorates, the Measures of the People’s Procuratorates for Closing Cases of Complaints and Petitions, and the procuratorial system’s basic requirements concerning recusal in cases involving conflicts of interest provide that complaints concerning disciplinary or legal violations by the procurator general, deputy procurator general, case-handling procurators, and in-house procurators of the procuratorate should not legally be investigated and decided by that same procuratorate. A staff member of the Complaint and Petition Division of the procuratorate admitted that “technically speaking, jurisdiction does not lie with us,” yet continued to process the matter, constituting a deliberate circumvention of the recusal system and an improper exercise of jurisdiction.

(2) Violation of work discipline — substituting “stopping the complaint and petitioning” for “clarifying the facts,” adopting a predetermined position, and going through the motions

During the call, the staff member expressly stated, “We will definitely uphold our previous result.” Without obtaining the files or conducting any review of appraisal defects (the missing autopsy appraisal materials concerning Ma Yongkui, whether 16 broken ribs constituted serious injury, and whether the degree of involvement in the run-over incident had been reversed), the supervisory chain concerning the detention-center death, the deletion or reduction of surveillance footage, or other issues, the conclusion had already been fixed in advance. This indicates that the purported “handling” was in fact a procedural close-out.

Using a “commitment letter” and “issuing you some kind of report” to exert disguised pressure and urge the applicant to stop pursuing the complaint violates the provisions of the Regulations on Petition Work prohibiting retaliation and improper inducement to stop petitioning, and also violates the “mass-discipline” requirements applicable to procuratorial organs.

(3) Violation of mass discipline — treating a matter transferred by the Central Inspection Group casually and continuing to circulate the applicant’s lawful demands without resolution

Circular handling of public demands: The Supreme Procuratorate / provincial procuratorate transferred the matter to the next level → “the system cannot find it”; the inspection group transferred the matter → it was sent back to the institution complained against → a call was made urging the applicant to sign, forming a closed loop of circular handling.

For years, the applicant had mailed materials to the Supreme Procuratorate and the provincial procuratorate, whose replies consistently stated that the materials had been “transferred to the next level.” Once they reached the next level, the response was that “the system cannot find them.” Now, the matter transferred by the inspection group has again returned to the hands of the institution complained against. The purpose of the call from the Complaint and Petition Division was not to inform the applicant of a review plan, file-inspection arrangements, or a recusal decision, but to urge her to stop pursuing the complaint. In substance, the matter transferred by the Central Inspection Group was handled as a “stability-maintenance task” rather than as a “problem lead.”

V. Applicant’s Specific Requests (Please provide a written response to each item, ensuring that every matter is addressed and every case receives a reply.)

1. In accordance with the law, open an accountability investigation into the disciplinary and regulatory violations by the respondents (the Complaint and Petition Division of the Weicheng District Procuratorate and the relevant approving leaders), including violations of recusal requirements, improper jurisdiction, and using pressure to sign a request to stop pursuing the complaint to close out the matter. Determine who assigned the matter transferred by the Central Inspection Group to the institution where the persons complained against work for self-investigation, and who instructed that it be handled by having the applicant “sign a commitment letter.”

2. Immediately revoke the Weicheng District Procuratorate’s jurisdiction to “self-investigate” this complaint, and have the Supreme People’s Procuratorate handle it at a higher level or designate a procuratorate outside Shaanxi Province to exercise jurisdiction, thereby ensuring implementation of the recusal principle.

3. Transfer the six disciplinary issues and suspected violations of official duties involving the seven persons previously named by the applicant in her real-name complaint (Shang Feng, Yang Weitao, Meng Xinquan, Bai Yufeng, Wang Qian, and others) to the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection and the Shaanxi Provincial Commission for Discipline Inspection for case-filing review. The matter must not again be self-investigated and decided by the Weicheng District Procuratorate.

4. Protect the applicant’s right to know regarding Wang Xiaogang’s death at the detention center in accordance with the law: seal and obtain all custody records, medical records, surveillance footage (if any), and records of obstruction of lawyers’ meetings concerning Wang Xiaogang at the Weicheng District Detention Center from October 2022 through July 2024, and allow the applicant to inspect and copy them.

5. Initiate procuratorial supervision in accordance with the law regarding procedural violations and missing materials relating to the appraisal opinions issued by the social appraisal institutions commissioned by the Xixian New Area Public Security Sub-Bureau, including the degree of involvement in Ma Yongkui’s cause of death, Wang Yingqiang’s injuries, and Wang Xiaogang’s psychiatric appraisal.

6. Promptly correct, in accordance with the law, the Shaanxi Xianyang 9/28 intentional-injury case and the case of Wang Xiaogang’s unnatural death at the Weicheng District Detention Center in Xianyang City; pursue lifelong accountability for the public-security, procuratorial, and judicial officials and personnel, as well as the criminals and others involved in these wrongful convictions and cases; and provide financial compensation to the victims, Wang Yingqiang and Wang Xiaogang, father and son, in accordance with the law.

Strictly protect the information of the applicant and her immediate family members, and prohibit case-handling personnel of the Weicheng District Procuratorate, Weicheng District Detention Center, Xixian New Area Public Security Bureau, Weicheng District Public Security Bureau, and other public-security organs from contacting or harassing the applicant’s family members in any form.

June 19, 2026

Attachment: At 12:51 p.m. on June 17, 2026, a staff member of the Complaint and Petition Division of the Weicheng District People’s Procuratorate proactively called the applicant Wang Xiaoqin. The contents of the call are as follows (the applicant has retained a recording):

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: Hello! May I ask if this is Wang Xiaoqin?

Wang: Oh, yes.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: I’m calling from the Weicheng District People’s Procuratorate.

Wang: Mm, hello!

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: Yes, you wrote a letter to the Central Inspection Group’s seventh round of inspections. The inspection group’s letter was transferred down through successive levels, and now it has been transferred to our Weicheng Procuratorate.

Wang: Then why was it transferred to you?

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: That’s the thing. Technically speaking, jurisdiction does not lie with us. So our leader asked me to call you today and ask you about two things. First, do you object to this jurisdiction? In other words, do you acknowledge that Weicheng has jurisdiction? Because your case has gone through a second trial, and all of that has already gone to the intermediate court.

Wang: It’s not just a matter of the second trial going to the intermediate court. Bai Yufeng and Wang Qian at your Weicheng District Procuratorate are themselves the defendants, aren’t they?

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: That’s why it has to be investigated by the higher-level procuratorate or whatever, but they transferred it to us instead. And then we… Well, we will definitely uphold our previous result. Do you acknowledge our previous result? The several of them are just ordinary people. They were performing their duties normally. Do you acknowledge that?

Wang: I do not.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: You do not acknowledge it?

Wang: They absolutely handled the case unlawfully.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: But they don’t know you. What do you say their motive was? There was no embezzlement or bribery either.

Wang: Their unlawful handling of the case is an objective fact. It has nothing to do with whether they know me.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: Oh, you mean that, in any event, your lawful rights and interests were infringed.

Wang: Yes. Wang Xiaogang is already dead, right? That he died is a fact, right?

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: Oh, yes, yes. So now our leader is asking whether, since you do not fall within our procuratorate’s jurisdiction, you can stop pursuing the complaint and stop petitioning and sign a commitment letter. Can you?

Wang: I can’t sign it.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: You can’t sign it, right? You can’t sign it. If you were to sign it, what conditions would you have? Could we issue you some kind of report, or whatever—would you sign it, or how should we handle this?

Wang: No matter what you issue, I can’t sign it. I will definitely continue filing complaints. As long as nobody pursues accountability for Bai Yufeng and Wang Qian’s criminal and unlawful conduct, I will continue pursuing it.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: They are ordinary employees. The procuratorate has also conducted many investigations, and there were no problems.

Wang: You are all in the same boat. You are shielding them. Don’t say there was no problem.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: All right, then. How about this? I’ll report the matter to the higher authorities again, because you do not acknowledge this result—you do not acknowledge the result of our procuratorate.

Wang: You just said that you would definitely uphold the original result.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: Uh, that’s not what we said. We have already issued a result. The procuratorial authority issues a result only once; it is impossible to issue it repeatedly. There is a limit of one—one instance of supervision.

Wang: Even if you issue it repeatedly, I will not acknowledge it.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: Oh, all right, all right. In any case, you also refuse to stop pursuing the complaint and petitioning, right?

Wang: That is impossible. I will not stop pursuing the complaint and petitioning.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: Haven’t we called you in several times before to talk about this matter and explained the law and reasoned with you very clearly?

Wang: You are all violating laws and discipline. You are all talking nonsense.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: And who else was there? Did Procurator Meng, the procurator general, come and explain it to you? Wasn’t it all explained?

Wang: He said it last December. What did he say? He guaranteed that Bai Yufeng and Wang Qian had not committed any crimes. But I have evidence. Did they really not commit any crimes? We have to rely on Party discipline and national law, don’t we? We can’t just shield them without evidence, can we?

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: Oh, all right, all right. Fine. I’ll report the circumstances to the leader again. Since this is your position, all I can do is report it.

Wang: They will absolutely be held accountable for life. As long as the errors are not corrected, I will pursue accountability for life.

Weicheng District Procuratorate Complaint and Petition Division: All right, all right. Fine, fine. Oh, okay.