BIZCHINA> BizMove Upclose
|
BIZCHINA> BizMove Upclose
|
|
Reporter charged with taking bribes
By Zhu Zhe (China Daily)
Updated: 2009-05-14 07:37 A Beijing reporter faces up to seven years jail after he accepted money from two whistleblowers with a tipoff on airport construction quality. Fu Hua, a former China Business News reporter, has been charged with accepting 30,000 yuan ($4,400) from two employees of Changchun Longjiapu Airport in 2005.
It's understood Zhang had personal issues with the director of airport construction, Zhang Jun, and believed his boss would be held accountable for faults. Fu followed the tip and later wrote two critical articles about construction quality at the airport, in the capital of Jilin province.
Speaking with China Daily yesterday, Fu said he only accepted 15,000 yuan and insisted the money was not a bribe. Fu said he did not know why he had been charged with accepting a 30,000 yuan bribe. He alleged police had tortured him until he said he accepted 40,000 yuan - a confession he later withdrew. "I did violate journalism ethics, but I didn't violate the law," he said. "My reports are true and objective. Even today, I'm still proud of my stories and I'll never regret doing them." "It's a mistake that I didn't firmly refuse the money but if I had refused, I wouldn't have gained Li's trust and there was no way for me to get so much inside information and contacts." Fu, who is currently on bail, was put on trial in the People's Procuratorate of Beijing on Tuesday. Typically suspects granted bail during trial are given a suspended sentence. He is not the first journalist to be charged with accepting a bribe, but his case is unique because he wrote critical stories. Fu's lawyer Zhou Ze said that if his client is found guilty it could further hinder the ability of journalists to conduct their work. "Fu did make a mistake, but it's wrong to punish him by abusing State power," he said. "If Fu's found guilty, local governments will have a new way to retaliate against reporters who write negative stories." Li Yong, a well-known online writer and previous reporter with Legal Daily, said it is not unusual for Chinese reporters to take money to write or not write a story. "How many reporters dare step ahead and say they haven't taken a penny during their work?" he said. Fu said that he first received the tip from Zhang, a former schoolmate, in April 2005. He told his editor about the information and was directed to investigate further. One month later, Zhang sent Li to Beijing with contacts for Fu. He said he was given 5,000 yuan from Li to "build trust and prepay effort". In June, Fu and a China Business News colleague went to Changchun to investigate the information. Two stories critical of the airport were published the next month and they were picked up by several news websites. Fu said the websites were asked to remove the stories because they tarred the image of the province. Li Shen then contacted Fu and asked if he could help make the stories be re-posted online. Fu was given 10,000 yuan as a "public relations" fee. The airport passed a construction quality audit one month after the reports were published, however the audit report also identified some "safety issues" which it said needed to be addressed. Fu was later arrested by Jilin police in Beijing and taken to Changchun where he was detained for 28 days. During detention, Fu was allegedly tortured until he admitted he took 40,000 yuan - a figure that Li had given police. Fu said he was released after his family "paid back" 40,000 yuan. Back in Beijing, the reporter received hospital treatment for a broken rib. Fu said he withdrew his confession in April 2008. He said he was too frightened to withdraw it before that because Jilin police had made threats against his wife and son. Fu's lawyer Zhou said it was wrong to charge reporters with accepting bribes because only public servants and company staff can be charged with that offence. But Wei Yongzheng, a professor with Communication University of China, said reporters should be charged with that offence because they release information and shape public opinions, a power that common people don't have. Police and prosecutors did not return calls for comment.
(For more biz stories, please visit Industries)
|
|||||
久久久无码人妻精品无码_6080YYY午夜理论片中无码_性无码专区_无码人妻品一区二区三区精99
