Lin Qilei: Series of Reports on Citizen Li Xiangyang’s Second-Instance Case for Obstructing Official Duties — Complaint Filed Because Linyi Intermediate Court Does Not Recognize Lin Qilei as Defense Counsel

Pursuant to Article 33 of the Criminal Procedure Law, during the second-instance proceedings in Li Xiangyang’s case for obstructing official duties, Lin Qilei, in his capacity as a friend or relative of Li Xiangyang, submitted the authorization documents to the second-instance court, the Linyi Intermediate People’s Court, and applied to serve as defense counsel.

After the second-instance court orally informed him that it did not recognize Lin Qilei’s qualifications as defense counsel and refused to issue written legal documents, Li Xiangyang and Lin Qilei, as joint complainants, filed complaints in accordance with the law against the presiding judge and the collegial panel with the Linyi People’s Procuratorate, the discipline inspection and supervision department of the Linyi Intermediate People’s Court, and the court’s president.

[Attachment One]

Profile of Li Xiangyang

Li Xiangyang, a native of Yishui County, Shandong Province, has for many years continued to report problems and struggle against corrupt forces, volunteering to fight for the rights and interests of ordinary people. In recent years, because he promoted the investigation of the toxic fertilizer case, he became even more of a thorn in the side of those with vested interests behind the toxic fertilizer.

On September 9, 2025, while the Shandong provincial inspection team was stationed at a hotel in Yishui, plainclothes petition-interception personnel who claimed they were “holding a wedding banquet at a grand hotel” surrounded and beat him; corrupt forces used the incident to frame him for “obstructing official duties.” After being detained for 148 days, Li Xiangyang received a first-instance judgment finding that “the crime was established, but criminal punishment was exempted.”

Li Xiangyang, dissatisfied with the guilty verdict, appealed to the Linyi Intermediate People’s Court.

[Attachment Two]

Complaint Requesting Supervision of Trial Activities

Complainant 1: Li Xiangyang, male, Han ethnicity, ID number: 37282719620919371X, address: No. 62, Yanshi Road, Cuijiayu Town, Yishui County, Linyi City, Shandong Province, telephone: 13655494031, defendant in the second-instance proceedings of Li Xiangyang’s case for obstructing official duties.

Complainant 2: Lin Qilei, male, Han ethnicity, ID number: 410621197011171570, place of origin: Jun County, Henan Province, telephone: 13366227598, a friend or relative appointed by Li Xiangyang as defense counsel for the second-instance proceedings.

Respondents: Wu Honglin, the presiding judge handling the case in the Criminal Division of the Linyi Intermediate People’s Court of Shandong Province, and the other members of the collegial panel

Requests

We respectfully request that the Linyi People’s Procuratorate, the Discipline Inspection Commission of the Linyi People’s Court, and the president of the Linyi Intermediate People’s Court perform their statutory duties of supervising trial activities in accordance with the law:

1. Supervise and correct, in accordance with the law, the unlawful conduct of the Linyi Intermediate People’s Court of Shandong Province in orally prohibiting defense counsel Lin Qilei from appearing in court and refusing to issue a written decision;

2. Order the Linyi Intermediate People’s Court to issue a formal written response on whether Lin Qilei is permitted to serve as defense counsel in the second-instance proceedings of this case, and state the statutory grounds;

3. Urge the court to protect Li Xiangyang’s lawful right to appoint defense counsel and his right to litigation remedies during the second-instance proceedings in accordance with the law, and ensure that the case is heard fairly.

Facts and Grounds

I. Basic Facts of the Case

Complainant Li Xiangyang was surrounded and beaten by plainclothes personnel who claimed they had “booked the hotel to hold a wedding banquet” after he attempted to submit materials to the provincial Party committee inspection team stationed at the Yishui Grand Hotel. Video footage from the scene throughout the incident can completely restore the sequence of events and prove that Li Xiangyang did not commit any illegal or criminal act of obstructing official duties.

However, Wu Yuanping, Geng Shunda, and other case-handling personnel from the public security, procuratorate, and court authorities in Yishui County ignored the objective video evidence and issued a guilty judgment against Li Xiangyang. Dissatisfied with the first-instance judgment that violated the law, Li Xiangyang appealed to the Linyi Intermediate People’s Court in accordance with the law. The judge handling the second-instance proceedings was Wu Honglin.

II. The Appointment of Defense Counsel Was Lawful

Article 33 of the Criminal Procedure Law expressly provides that a defendant’s relatives or friends may, in accordance with the law, be appointed as defense counsel in a criminal case.

At the same time, Article 37 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China expressly provides that when a defendant appoints a guardian, relative, or friend to serve as defense counsel, the people’s court is only obligated to verify the defense counsel’s identity documents and authorization letter; it has no right to arbitrarily refuse or without cause deny a relative or friend the qualification to appear in court as defense counsel.

In this case, defendant Li Xiangyang voluntarily appointed his friend or relative Lin Qilei to serve as his defense counsel during the second-instance proceedings. Lin Qilei is in good health, has not been deprived of or restricted in his personal freedom, and is not subject to any statutory circumstance prohibiting him from serving as defense counsel, such as dismissal from public office or revocation of a professional certificate. His qualifications are lawful and the appointment procedures comply with the regulations; he should therefore be recognized by the people’s court in accordance with the law.

III. The Linyi Intermediate Court and the Presiding Judge Unlawfully Deprived the Parties of Their Right to Defense

On August 17, 2026, defendant Li Xiangyang received a telephone call from the Linyi Intermediate People’s Court of Shandong Province and was orally informed that the court did not recognize or permit Lin Qilei to appear in court and participate in the proceedings as defense counsel in the second-instance proceedings of this case.

The oral notification involved two serious violations of the law:

1. No statutory grounds whatsoever: The court merely orally refused to allow the defense counsel to appear in court, without explaining any statutory grounds for refusal, such as Lin Qilei’s identity being incompatible, the number of defense counsel exceeding the limit, a conflict of interest, or the defense counsel being otherwise unqualified. This constituted an unlawful restriction of the right to defense without any basis;

2. Refusal to issue written documents, depriving the complainant of the right to seek a remedy. Defendant Li Xiangyang expressly requested on the spot that the court issue a written ruling or formal notice refusing to permit the defense counsel to appear in court, so that he could seek judicial relief in accordance with the law. However, the Linyi Intermediate Court and its case-handling personnel have ignored the request to this day and refused to issue any written document.

IV. Performing the Duty of Supervising Trials in Accordance with the Law

The relevant provisions of the Rules of the People’s Procuratorate on Criminal Procedure provide that the People’s Procuratorate shall, in accordance with the law, exercise legal supervision over all trial activities of the people’s courts. Where violations of statutory procedures or infringements of the parties’ litigation rights occur during a court’s adjudication of a case, it has the authority to put forward corrective opinions and urge rectification in accordance with the law, safeguarding the fairness of criminal procedure and the parties’ lawful litigation rights and interests.

Articles 30 and 43 of the Law on Judges, the Organic Law of the People’s Courts, and Articles 16 and 17 of the Provisions on Procedures for the Disciplinary Action of Judges (Trial) provide that, with respect to violations of law and discipline by judges, the discipline inspection commissions and other supervisory departments of the courts, as well as the presidents of the courts, should identify violations occurring in trial activities and have the authority to initiate internal investigation, verification, correction, and rectification procedures.

In conclusion, in order to uphold the dignity of the law, correct unlawful judicial conduct, and protect the complainants’ lawful litigation rights, this complaint is hereby filed. We respectfully request that you perform your duties of supervising trials in accordance with the law, ascertain the facts, correct the violations, issue a written disposition, and uphold judicial fairness.

Respectfully submitted to:

Linyi People’s Procuratorate

Linyi People’s Court

Zhu Haijian, Secretary of the Party Leadership Group and President of the Linyi People’s Court,

Complainant: Li Xiangyang

Complainant: Lin Qilei

August 25, 2026