Defendant Violated the Law, Yet Court Asked Plaintiff Yin Hang to Withdraw Lawsuit; Request Rejected by Plaintiff’s Legal Representative Zheng Jianhui

（(Rights Defense Network Information Center report)）On October 14, 2026, this outlet learned that on the afternoon of October 13, 2026, plaintiff’s representative Zheng Jianhui received a call from Tianjin Heping District Court. The court asked the plaintiff to withdraw the lawsuit in case （2026）Jin 0101 Xing Chu No. 316, but Zheng refused.。

The case originated in June 2004, when the Tianjin Municipal Judicial Psychiatric Appraisal Committee assessed the plaintiff’s “capacity to act.” The conclusion was “no signs of psychosis… capable of bearing responsibility.” During the assessment, the plaintiff was beaten、locked in a small dark room、and had his head shaved. The appraisal institution also gave the plaintiff large quantities of antipsychotic medication. A blood test report from the Tianjin Medical University Forensic Medical Appraisal Center provides evidence. The assessment was later corrected by Appraisal No. 272 [2004] Jing Jian Zi（Q）of the Ministry of Justice Judicial Appraisal Center. The conclusion was “the person being assessed, Yin Hang, has schizophrenia，and lacked the capacity to be punished for his actions.” But by then, the plaintiff had already been persecuted into a person with a severe mental disability.。

The plaintiff applied to the Tianjin Municipal Public Security Bureau to disclose the legal representative of its subordinate institution, the appraisal body. The response was, “There was no legal representative in 2004.” Article 38 of the 《General Principles of the Civil Law of the People’s Republic of China》 contains an explicit provision. Article 61 of the 《Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China》 also makes explicit provisions regarding legal representatives. How, then, could the Tianjin Municipal Judicial Psychiatric Appraisal Committee have no legal representative？Could the Judicial Psychiatric Appraisal Committee subordinate to the Tianjin Municipal Public Security Bureau be beyond the law？That is far too “distinctive,” isn’t it？

Confronted with the law-defying Tianjin Municipal Public Security Bureau and its subordinate institution——the Tianjin Municipal Judicial Psychiatric Appraisal Committee，this victim of campus bullying has shouldered the weight of the law and is standing up to the powerful state apparatus.。

In May 2026, the plaintiff filed an administrative lawsuit with Heping District Court. While waiting for the case to be heard，Heping District Court repeatedly called the lawyer for the plaintiff’s legal representative, Zheng Jianhui, asking them to withdraw the lawsuit. The plaintiff asks Heping District Court: the defendant violated the law，should the plaintiff withdraw the lawsuit？Why？The plaintiff asks Heping District Court to hold an open hearing in accordance with the law and issue a judgment in accordance with the law.。