信中说，依据美国宗教自由委员会于2005年11月9日致美国布什总统的信中表示：中国于上周对著名维权律师高智晟之律师事务做出停业处分，即使中国方面声称该事务所之所以遭到停业处分系因其迁移事务所后并未向当局注册所致，但该函向布什总统说明：该律师事务所是因为高律师拒绝退出对法轮功及新教地下教会律师的辩护而被当局要求关闭。

来自11个国家的律师说，“我们相信北京司法局对于高智晟之律师事务所所做出的停业处分不只是危及事务所内十个律师、危及中国其他的维权律师、独立的法官及律师和中国的司法单位，更是对于中国今天真正走向法治的斫伤。

这是一件系关中国在全球的地位及声誉的事件，我们希望你能立即恢复高先生律师事务所法律业务的执照。”

截止发稿为止，已经在这封信函上签名的11国律师、学者包括：

William Aceves (美国)
Clive Ansley (加拿大)
Andrea Bianchi (意大利)
Theresa Chu (台湾)
OWEN DAKA (南非)
Carlos Iglesias Jimenez (西班牙)
Wolfgang Kalic (德国)
Perry Link (美国)
DAVID MATAS (加拿大)
Naomi Roht-Arriaza (美国)
TOKUNAGA, Shinichi (日本)
Morton Sklar (美国)
Stravos Tsakyrakis (希腊)
Erping Zhang (美国)
YOSHIDA Akira (日本)
Chris Lawrence (新西兰)
Alfred Dodwall (新加坡)
Frederick Rhine (美国)
Karen Chen Shi-Yuan Hong Donna Chen (台湾)

附信件中文译本

二○○五年十一月十一日

中国司法部部长 吴爱英女士钧鉴：

我们谨以从事人权工作的法律系教授和律师，以及联合国特别报告员之身分就中国政府违犯数项国际法律规定，表达我们的关注。中国政府所违犯的，包括但不限于正当程序权利，法律救济及被告应有律师代表的权利；这些所提到的原则及规定都明确揭诸于“世界人权宣言”、“公民权利与政治权利国际公约”以及联合国“律师角色之基本原则”及其他与人权相关的法律文件之中。

依据美国宗教自由委员会于2005年11月9日致美国布什总统的信中表示：中国于上周对著名维权律师高智晟之律师事务做出停业处分，即使中国方面声称该事务所之所以遭到停业处分系因其迁移事务所后并未向当局注册所致，但该函向布什总统说明：该律师事务所是因为高律师拒绝退出对法轮功及新教地下教会律师的辩护而被当局要求关闭。除此之外有几份客观报告，包括“大赦国际”在其2005年11月7日文刊中指出，这个停业的处分是在事务所主持律师给中国胡锦涛主席和温家宝总理的公开信，促请他们停止迫害中国法轮功团体之后旋即发生。

然而这并非中国第一次枉顾宗教自由以及公民应有之正当程序权利。在联合国的特别报告员之报告、美国国务院之国家人权报告、国际宗教自由报告和大赦国际等其他几个非政府组织都纪录并且评论中国政府藐视和枉顾公民权利及人权的事实，其中不仅包括其削减宗教自由，还包括枉顾正当程序权利中不得任意逮捕及拘禁，公民应享有司法救济及被告应有律师代表的权利。以联合国人权高级委员办公室报告（大会第五十九期，文件编号为A/59/402，2004年10月1日）为例，举出中国法律体制下许多严重的缺陷；美国国务院国际宗教自由之“中国的政策焦点”（访中代表团，2005年8月14-28日）中亦有同样论述。

我们相信北京司法局对于高智晟之律师事务所所做出的停业处分不只是危及事务所内十个律师、危及中国其他的维权律师、独立的法官及律师和中国的司法单位，更是对于中国今天真正走向法治的斫伤。

这是一件系关中国在全球的地位及声誉的事件，我们希望你能立即恢复高先生律师事务所法律业务的执照。

（联署之律师谨启）

副本
吴爱英
范方平
段正坤
张苏军
等副部长

信件原文:

November 11, 2005

Wu Aiying
Ministry of Justice, People’ s Republic of China
10 Nan Da Jie, Chaoyang Men
Zip 100020

Dear Minister Wu Aiying:

We the undersigned write as human rights advocates, including law professors, attorneys and barristers, as well as UN special rapporteurs regarding the Chinese government’s violation of several international legal principles and norms that include but are not limited to religious freedom, and to such due process rights as the right to a legal remedy and to legal counsel. These principles and norms are affirmed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and other relevant human rights instruments.

As the US Commission on International Religious Freedom notes in its November 9, 2005 letter to President Bush, Chinese authorities shut down the law firm of prominent civil rights lawyer, GAO Zhisheng last week. While the Chinese government said the firm was suspended because it had failed to register with the authorities after moving into a new office, the U.S. Commission explains in its letter to President Bush that the firm was closed because GAO refused to curtail his defense of Falun Gong practitioners and an unregistered Protestant pastor. Thus, as several other third parties reports, including the November 7, 2005 Amnesty International Release, this move came shortly after the firm’s director sent an open letter to Chinese President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabo urging them to end the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in China.

This is not the first time that China has curtailed the religious liberty and due process rights of its citizens. The United Nations through its Special Rapporteur reports, the United States Department of State through its human rights country reports and International Religious Freedom reports, Amnesty International and several other NGO’s have documented and commented upon the Chinese government’s abridgement of such civil and human rights as the right not only to religious freedom, but to such due process rights that include the right to be free from arbitrary arrest and detention, the right to a legal remedy and to legal counsel. See for example, the Report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (General Assembly, 59th Session, document number A/59/402, 1 October 2004), which references many serious shortcomings in the Chinese legal system. See also, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom’s “Policy Focus on China,” Delegation to China, August 14-28, 2005.

The Bureau’s decision to shut down the law firm of GAO Zhisheng places at risk not only the ten lawyers in his firm, all other human rights lawyers in China, the independence of lawyers, judges and the judicial branch, but also the emergence of a genuine rule of law in China today.

This is a matter that concerns China’s standing and reputation around the world. We urge you to reinstate Mr. GAO’s law firm’s license to practice law forthwith.

Sincerely,

_______________
Terri E. Marsh
Executive Director
Human Rights Law Project

_______________
Lana Han
Executive Director
International Advocates for Justice

Copies to:
Wu Aiying
Fan Fangping
Duan Zhengkun
Zhang Sujun
Vice Ministers