在野党记者缪青报道
编辑：Gloria Wang 校对：王滨 翻译：吕峰
集会活动现场照片
【旧金山讯】2026年4月18日，中国民主党旧金山党部成员及多位海外民运人士在中国驻旧金山总领事馆前举行公开集会，呼吁中国当局立即释放所有因言论、信仰与和平表达而被拘押的“良心犯”，并停止持续性的政治打压与人权迫害。
本次集会亦发生于中国民主党旧金山党部新一届领导架构调整期间，具有一定组织重组与政治动员的延续意义。
与会者认为，在当前中国政治环境下，公共表达空间持续收缩，而海外行动空间则成为维系基本政治表达的重要场域。
二、良心犯的界定与基本权利问题
集会由中国民主党旧金山党部文宣部部长缪青主持并发表主旨讲话。他指出：“良知不应成为犯罪的理由。”
所谓“良心犯”，依据国际特赦组织的界定，是指仅因言论、信仰或和平表达而被剥夺自由的人，其核心内涵与《世界人权宣言》所确立的思想自由与表达自由原则一致。
缪青强调，在现实政治中，仍有大量人士因坚持事实表达或独立信念而被长期监禁，包括刘晓波、张展、王怡等个案。这些事件表明，在中国的政治语境中，言论边界已被高度政治化与刑事化。
他指出，将思想与表达纳入刑事惩罚体系，不仅违背现代法治基本原则，也使社会失去基本的理性纠错机制。“一个社会如果不能容纳不同意见，其制度本身就缺乏自我修正能力。”
缪青呼吁，应立即无条件释放所有良心犯，停止以模糊罪名打压公民权利，使法律回归对人的基本保护功能。
中国民主党旧金山党部文宣部部长缪青（摄影李树青）
三、制度性压制与个案结构
多位发言者在集会中提及当前仍被拘押或服刑的维权人士与政治人物，包括高智晟、黎智英、许志永、王炳章等。
与会者普遍认为，这些个案并非孤立事件，而是制度性运作的结果。在现行政治结构下，任何具有独立表达能力或社会动员潜力的个体，都可能被纳入风险治理体系之中。
因此，“良心犯”现象并非异常，而是权力结构逻辑的外在呈现。
四、制度筛选与权力逻辑：逆向选拔现象
新任中国民主党旧金山党部副秘书长张小驹在发言中指出，其在文章《极权体制中的逆向选拔》中所讨论的现象，在现实中仍在持续强化。
他认为，中共政治体制通过特定筛选机制，将具有独立思考能力与道德坚持的人排除于权力结构之外，而使高度服从与政治适应性强的个体进入核心体系。
张小驹表示：“中共用这套筛选机制，将最有良知的人送进监狱，而让最邪恶的人坐在庙堂之上。”
他进一步指出，这一机制不仅决定个体命运，也深刻塑造整个社会的价值结构与政治生态。
中国民主党旧金山党部副秘书长张小驹（摄影李树青）
五、组织者发言：崔允星的政治立场
作为本次活动组织者之一、中国民主党旧金山党部外联部部长崔允星在发言中指出：
共产党依靠欺骗、谎言和压迫维持其政治统治，它们关押并囚禁了大量记者、律师、政治犯、良心犯以及民主人士。这些人是他心中的英雄，不应被遗忘，也不应被历史沉默所覆盖。
他表示：“我们永远不会忘记他们的付出和贡献。我们会加倍努力，继承他们的事业，为了推翻共产党、审判习近平而不懈努力。”
该发言在现场引发强烈共鸣，并被多次呼应。
中国民主党旧金山党部外联部部长崔允星（摄影李树青）
六、法治与表达权利：制度性问题的持续性
多位与会者指出，在当前制度环境下，“寻衅滋事”等弹性罪名被广泛用于限制言论与公共表达，使法律功能发生结构性转变。
法律原本应当作为约束权力的工具，但在现实运行中，逐渐呈现出治理工具化趋势，使公民权利处于高度不确定状态。这一现象被认为是良心犯问题持续存在的制度基础之一。
七、国际视野与比较经验
部分发言者指出，在历史上多个国家的民主转型过程中，国际环境与外部压力均在不同阶段发挥作用。
然而，与此同时，民主制度的最终稳定仍依赖本土社会结构、公民参与与制度重建能力。
因此，中国未来的政治转型问题，仍需置于内外互动的复杂框架中加以理解，而非单一变量解释。
八、结语：从个体命运到制度结构
集会在“释放良心犯”“自由万岁”“正义必胜”等口号中结束，现场秩序整体平稳。
与会者认为，一个社会的政治成熟度，不在于经济发展水平或物质建设规模，而在于是否允许不同声音存在，是否建立可持续的制度性对话机制。良心犯问题因此不仅关乎个体命运，更关乎制度结构本身的正当性。
旧金山中领馆前的这场集会，既是对现实个案的回应，也是对制度问题的持续性追问。
参加本次活动的民运人士名单：缪青，崔允星，张小驹，庄帆，李树青，高志彬，何聪，郭鉴鑫，康嘉铭，郝剑平，高俊影，刘忱忱，郭超，张善城（排名不分先后）
Rally in Front of the San Francisco Chinese Consulate: Calling for the Release of Prisoners of Conscience and an End to Political Persecution
Reported by Miao Qing, Reporter for The Opposition Editor: Gloria Wang | Proofreader: Wang Bin | Translator: Lyu Feng
Abstract: On April 18, 2026, the San Francisco Branch of the China Democracy Party (CDP), along with several overseas pro-democracy activists, held a rally in front of the Consulate General of the People’s Republic of China in San Francisco. They called for the release of “prisoners of conscience” detained for their speech and beliefs and demanded an end to political crackdowns. Participants noted that as the space for free speech shrinks within China, overseas regions have become vital platforms for expression, emphasizing that freedom of thought and speech should never be criminalized.
I. Event Overview
[San Francisco] On April 18, 2026, members of the CDP San Francisco Branch and various overseas activists gathered for a public rally in front of the Chinese Consulate. They urged Chinese authorities to immediately release all “prisoners of conscience” detained for their speech, faith, and peaceful expression, and to cease ongoing political suppression and human rights abuses.
This rally also coincided with the recent leadership restructuring of the CDP San Francisco Branch, carrying significance for organizational renewal and the continuity of political mobilization. Participants argued that given the current political climate in China, where public space is continuously contracting, overseas activism serves as a critical domain for maintaining fundamental political expression.
II. Defining Prisoners of Conscience and Fundamental Rights
The rally was hosted by Miao Qing, Director of the Propaganda Department of the CDP San Francisco Branch, who delivered the keynote speech. He stated: “Conscience should never be a reason for crime.”
As defined by Amnesty International, “prisoners of conscience” refers to individuals deprived of their liberty solely for their speech, beliefs, or peaceful expression—a core concept aligned with the principles of freedom of thought and expression established in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Miao Qing emphasized that in current politics, many individuals remain imprisoned long-term for adhering to factual reporting or independent convictions, citing cases such as Liu Xiaobo, Zhang Zhan, and Wang Yi. He pointed out that incorporating thought and expression into the criminal punishment system not only violates the basic principles of the modern rule of law but also strips society of its rational self-correction mechanisms. “If a society cannot accommodate dissenting opinions, its system lacks the capacity for self-reform.”
III. Institutional Suppression and Structural Case Studies
Multiple speakers mentioned human rights defenders and political figures currently detained or serving sentences, including Gao Zhisheng, Jimmy Lai, Xu Zhiyong, and Wang Bingzhang. Participants generally agreed that these are not isolated incidents but the result of institutional operations. Under the current political structure, any individual with independent expressive capacity or social mobilization potential is likely to be incorporated into the “risk governance” system.
IV. Institutional Filtering and Power Logic: The Phenomenon of “Reverse Selection”
Zhang Xiaoju, the new Deputy Secretary-General of the CDP San Francisco Branch, pointed out that the phenomenon discussed in his article, Reverse Selection in Totalitarian Systems, continues to intensify. He argued that the political system of the CCP excludes individuals with independent thinking and moral integrity from the power structure, while allowing those with high obedience and political adaptability to enter the core system.
“The CCP uses this filtering mechanism to send those with the most conscience to prison while allowing the most malevolent to sit in the halls of power,” Zhang stated. He further noted that this mechanism not only decides individual fates but also profoundly shapes the value structure and political ecology of the entire society.
V. Organizer’s Remarks: Cui Yunxing’s Political Stance
Cui Yunxing, Director of the Outreach Department and one of the organizers, stated: “The Communist Party relies on deception, lies, and oppression to maintain its rule. They have imprisoned countless journalists, lawyers, political prisoners, and pro-democracy activists. These people are heroes who should not be forgotten or silenced by history.”
He added, “We will never forget their contributions. We will redouble our efforts to inherit their cause and work tirelessly toward the goal of overthrowing the Communist Party and bringing Xi Jinping to justice.”
VI. Rule of Law and Expression Rights: Persistence of Institutional Issues
Participants noted that under the current environment, elastic charges such as “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” are widely used to restrict speech. While the law should serve as a tool to restrain power, it has increasingly become instrumentalized for governance, leaving citizen rights in a state of high uncertainty.
VII. International Perspectives and Comparative Experience
Some speakers noted that in the democratic transitions of various countries throughout history, the international environment and external pressure played roles at different stages. However, the ultimate stability of a democratic system still depends on domestic social structures, civic participation, and institutional rebuilding capacity.
VIII. Conclusion: From Individual Fate to Institutional Structure
The rally concluded with chants of “Release Prisoners of Conscience,” “Long Live Freedom,” and “Justice Will Prevail.” Participants concluded that the political maturity of a society lies not in its economic scale, but in whether it permits different voices to exist. The issue of prisoners of conscience, therefore, concerns not only individual fates but the very legitimacy of the institutional structure itself.
List of Pro-democracy Activists in Attendance: Miao Qing, Cui Yunxing, Zhang Xiaoju, Zhuang Fan, Li Shuqing, Gao Zhibin, He Cong, Guo Jianxin, Kang Jiaming, Hao Jianping, Gao Junying, Liu Chenchen, Guo Chao, Zhang Shancheng (in no particular order).
