2020年1月31日星期五

China Suzhou Judicial Organs Protecting Counterfeiting Boeing Safety Parts



The Parties shall endeavor, as appropriate, to strengthen cooperation to combat counterfeit goods that pose ...safety risks. 


A criminal complaint on the counterfeiting was badly mishandled by Chinese law enforcement, see below 3 minutes video.





向苏州市监察委(局)控告园区分局,检察院,法院对特大假冒波音飞机飞控安全零件案不作为,乱作为,充当保护伞等违法乱纪行为


Request China Suzhou judicial organs to explain on the fake criminal investigation of a massive counterfeiting Boeing safety parts

2020-1-28

Requestee: Suzhou Industrial Park Procuratorate(Procuratorate) 
                   Suzhou Industrial Park Police Bureau(Police)
                   Suzhou Industrial Park Court (Court)

Requester:Charles Shi

On 2019-10-13, Requester filed a request according to Chinese law for you to explain on the fake criminal investigation of a massive counterfeiting Boeing safety parts, no response has been received so far which is overdue by the law.



According to CCP President Xi Jinping’s thought of governing the country by law and relevant Chinese laws, I raise my request hereby again because of the importance and complexity of the criminal case concerning public interest and safety.

I solemnly request you to explain by Procuratorate on behalf of all or by you separately within the law stipulated time on the items below:




1. Procuratorate informed the Requester 2019-10-10 that the case of NHJ suspected counterfeiting Boeing safety parts is a state secret. Based on what laws, procuratorate get to this point?

2. If, as Prosecutor Ms Zhang explained later, the case might not be a state secret, why did Procuratorate refuse an open hearing on such an important and complex criminal case which Suzhou law enforcement lacked the total expertise per the Chinese law.

3. When reviewing my complaint on Police mishandling investigation, based on what laws, Procuratorate knowingly excluded the most critical evidence of exhibit Moog054 which has been accepted by U.S. court, Suzhou police as well as Suzhou court? The Moog054 indicated NHJ falsifying material fact of the SPOF block of 737 spoiler, compromising some 500 B737 now in service. Two crashed Boeing 737 max planes might have NHJ fake safety parts on board.





4. Procuratorate claimed that Police tried to verify evidences pertaining to international aerospace quality requirement but unable doing so because they didn’t have expertise. If this was the case, why, as the law supervising body Procuratorate did not demand Police seek expert advice from CAAC safety office, or supplier quality department of COMAC/AVIC who has been versed in Boeing subcontract business? Is Procuratorate knowingly acting as the protecting umbrella, knowingly covering up NHJ counterfeiting crime?

5. How and what did Procuratorate handle my complaint that the very police department suspected of abuse of duty was handling my Appeal to President Xi to order investigation on them?

向习主席提请责令 Appeal For Order(In Chinese)

6. When finding that conflicting witness testimony before and after, why did Procuratorate refuse a lawful request to hold an open hearing or cross examine the witness to solve the conflicts? Is this a knowing law breaking by a judicial organ?

7. Requester complained to Procuratorate 2019-8-9 on the police law breaking by knowingly disclosing updated criminal case files to the very suspect-NHJ in support of its “defamation” claim before the police criminal investigation is finished, why did procuratorate not give an written answer to the Requester as lawfully requested? Is procuratorate knowingly breaking the law of ”PRC Regulation of Information Disclosure”?

8. Chinese law stipulates that no case files containing private information such as contact and residence information of witness could be leaked to legal participants. Did NHJ or its attorney asked the court to order release of information of privacy which they did get? Did NHJ request a confidential file written by the Requester advising police how to investigate NHJ which NHJ did get?

9. When did Court receive NHJ request for order of police case file? When Court issue the Order to NHJ to release police files? How did Court exercise its discretion? Did Court check with Police if the criminal investigation is finished or not before issuing order? Based on what law did Court issue the order for police paperwork? (NHJ obtained police case files up to date in May,2019 while the police criminal investigation only ended in late July,2019)


”PRC Police Code Of Conduct” stipulates in Part 2, Article 4 Police officers knowing informing suspect shall be dismissed. When did Police receive Court order to give case files to NHJ? When did Police decided to give case filed to suspect NHJ even before the criminal investigation ended? Why did Police not following police code of conduct by refusing to release case files to the very suspect? Did Police know that giving private and confidential information to criminal suspect is a serious law breaking and strictly forbidden by the law?

10. Procuratorate acknowledged receipt of my complaint on Police mishandling the NHJ investigation and violation of laws on 2019-8-14, what probing did Procuratorate carry out to verify my complaint? Did procuratorate start an investigation process according to law for such a case of international attention? If not, why?

11. Why did Suzhou judicial organs not respond to Requester’s complaint up to this date?

Sincerely

Charles Shi

For more:


U.S. And China Must Strengthen Cooperation To Combat Counterfeiting



Beasleyallen:Whistleblower says Boeing aircraft contain bogus, unsafe parts


Who’s Policing Counterfeit Airplane Parts?


Please contact: Charles Shi
ZOOM:915–332–7598
Skype: charles20160318
Email : charlesshi88@outlook.com
Blogger

没有评论:

发表评论