Liu Zhijun given suspended death penalty for bribery, power abuse


Photo taken on July 8, 2013 shows the Beijing No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court in Beijing.

China’s former Railway Minister Liu Zhijun was sentenced to death with a two-year reprieve

for bribery and abuse of power, the Beijing No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court announced

on July 8, 2013.   Photo by Gong Lei


Video grab shows China’s former Railway Minister Liu Zhijun on trial at the Beijing No. 2 

Intermediate People’s Court in Beijing on Monday of July 8, 2013. Liu was sentenced to 

death with a two-year reprieve for bribery and abuse of power, the court announced.



  Liu Zhijun

given suspended death penalty

for bribery, power abuse


By Meng Na, Cheng Zhuo, Ren Ke, Tian Ying, Cui Qingxin and Wang Di


China’s former railways minister Liu Zhijun was sentenced to death with a two-year reprieve in Beijing on Monday of July 8  for bribery and abuse of power.

As well as the suspended death sentence, the Beijing No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court deprived the 60-year-old of his political rights for life and confiscated all his personal property for taking bribes. Liu was also sentenced to 10 years in jail for abuse of power, according to the court verdict.

The court found that from 1986 to 2011, Liu took advantage of his positions as an official of local railway bureaus as well as the former Ministry of Railways, and helped 11 people, including Shao Liping and Ding Yuxin, win promotions, project deals and cargo transportation contracts. He accepted 64.6 million yuan (10.53 million U.S. dollars) in bribes from them during this period.

While he was railways minister, Liu helped Ding and her relatives to win both cargo transportation and railway construction contracts. He also helped them in the acquisition of shares in a bullet train wheel set company and with enterprise financing by breaking regulations and applying favoritism. This allowed Ding and her family to reap huge profits.

The court held that Liu’s crime of bribery involved a huge amount of money with especially serious circumstances. His crime of abuse of power had caused colossal losses in public assets, violating the rights and interests of the state and the people.

The court confirmed that Liu confessed to his crimes, and provided further clues of his bribery that were unknown to investigation organs. Most of Liu’s bribed money and the majority of the economic losses caused by his abuse of power have been recovered.

Liu’s crime of bribery, which violated the integrity of a state official’s duty behavior and undermined the state functionary’s reputation, should be given the death penalty. However, with his admission of guilt and repentance, Liu was given the death penalty with a reprieve, the court said.

The court said that although most of economic losses have been recovered, leniency will not be given regarding Liu’s crime of power abuse, as it is especially serious in terms of both circumstances and consequences.

Bai Shanyun, the trial judge and vice president of Beijing No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court, said the Second Branch of Beijing Municipal People’s Procuratorate filed the charges against Liu with the court on April 10, 2013. The court later set up a collegial panel and opened the trial in public on June 9.

According to Article 386 and Clause one of Article 383 of the Criminal Law, such violators should be subjected to capital punishment, Bai said.

However, as there were circumstances that may warrant a lighter punishment, the court decided to hand down a sentence of a death penalty with a two-year reprieve.

Firstly, Liu confessed his crime, including some acts of bribe-taking that were unknown to investigators. Prosecutors and Liu’s defense counsel had stated in the trial that according to relevant laws, such facts may warrant leniency.

The court also found that the eighth amendment to the Criminal Law and a judicial interpretation issued by the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) allowed for a lighter punishment for such circumstances, Bai said.

Secondly, Bai said Liu and his family members had cooperated with investigators in confiscating the illegal gains.

According to an interpretation jointly issued by the SPC and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, such criminals may be given a lighter penalty, Bai said.

The document also stipulated that in bribe-taking-related cases where criminals and their families or friends have voluntarily surrendered the illegal gains or made cooperative efforts with law enforcers to confiscate such gains, the court should make a difference in its sentencing from those cases where there is no such behavior, the judge said.

Such behavior also demonstrated Liu’s repentance that may call for a mitigated sentence, Bai said.

Furthermore, Liu also appeared to be cooperative when confessing and showed his penitence during the investigation, prosecution and trial procedures, Bai said.

Taking all the facts of the whole case and Liu’s relevant behavior into consideration, the court holds that an immediate execution is not necessary, the judge said.

According to the trial, due to Liu’s abuse of power, Ding Yuxin and other businesspeople raked in more than 3 billion yuan (489.3 million U.S. dollars) worth of profits. Judicial authorities, correspondingly, seized and froze large amounts of cash, stock shares, properties and pieces of art, among other assets owned by Ding and the other businesspeople, said Bai.

The seized and frozen assets included 374 properties and cash. However, they were not criminal gains of Liu, but illegal profits Ding and other businesspeople obtained through Liu’s abuse of power, which highlighted the gravity of Liu’s crime, Bai added.

Based on judicial authorities’ assessment of the total value of these assets, the court found the majority of economic losses inflicted by Liu’s abuse of power had been recovered.

However, considering Liu’s especially serious crimes of power abuse and applying favoritism, the court did not mitigate his punishment, rather, sentenced him to 10 years in jail, a maximum sentence for the crime of power abuse, Bai said.

Previous media reports have revealed that a sum of 49 million yuan out of the total 64.6 million was spent by Ding to benefit Liu. It has raised controversy whether this part of the money should be regarded as bribes Liu received.

Bai confirmed that this was a disputed issue between the prosecution and the defence during the trial.

According to Bai, Liu told Ding to “grease the wheels” and handle other relevant affairs for him. Ding spent 49 million yuan to comply with Liu’s orders.

“It is unlike an ordinary bribe-taking act that one receives bribes directly, as Liu has not directly possessed this money, and Liu’s lawyers also argued that this act does not constitute a bribe-taking crime,” Bai said.

However, evidence during the trial revealed that Liu had taken advantage of his positions to help Ding and her relatives obtain huge economic benefits. He also hinted to Ding to buy off relevant officials and people to free him of any implication in the case of He Hongda, a former senior official of the Railways Ministry investigated for corruption, as well as to create favorable conditions for him to secure a better position.

Liu confessed that he was fully aware beforehand that such manipulation may cost a lot of money, and Ding also informed him afterwards that she spent tens of millions of yuan to carry out his instructions, the judge said.

“Although Liu did not directly take this money, the money was used by Ding at the behest of Liu and for the benefits of Liu,” Bai said.

Ding also gave a testimony confirming that she spent large amounts of money for Liu in return for Liu’s help for her to reap huge profits, according to the judge.

Taking these facts into account, Liu’s behavior should be deemed as a power-for-money deal, and the court finds that such acts constitute taking bribes.

The judge also noted that according to precedents in previous judicial cases, similar deals were all regarded as bribery crimes.

When explaining why the court appointed a lawyer to Liu who did not want one, Bai said according to article 32 and 34 of the Criminal Procedure Law and its judicial interpretation by the Supreme People’s Court, in addition to exercising the right to defend oneself, the defendant can also entrust one or two people to defend him. The court should inform a legal aid center to appoint lawyers for the defendant who has not entrusted defenders but is likely to be sentenced to life imprisonment or the death penalty.

Bai said it had informed Liu of the right to entrusting defenders when giving him the duplicate copy of the indictment, but the defendant expressed clearly his unwillingness to do so. Liu also refused to ask his relatives to entrust people to defend him.

Charged with accepting more than 64 million yuan in bribes, Liu could be sentenced to life imprisonment or a more serious penalty in accordance with Chinese law.

Therefore, on condition of gaining Liu’s consent, the legal aid center appointed two lawyers. The defense read the file of the case and met Liu several times before the trial, and lawyers argued for a lighter punishment defence at the trial based on the facts and evidence.

Media reports had questioned the trial procedure as the pretrial meeting took one day but the trial only proceeded for half a day.

Bai explained the functions of the pretrial meeting.

Bai said according to the amended criminal procedural law, judges can convene with prosecutors, defendants and defenders before the opening of a trial, to learn and discuss issues such as jurisdiction, avoidance, exclusion of illegal evidence, necessity of collecting new evidence if the case is complex and influential, and involves a lot of evidence.

In Liu’s case, Bai said, the court called in the prosecutor, Liu and his defense to attend the pretrial meeting, soliciting both sides’ opinions. Liu and his defense raised no opposition.

Therefore, on the courtday, Bai said prosecutors simplified evidence presentation procedures. Besides, except that Liu’s defenders challenged whether the 49 million yuan should be considered as Liu’s bribery, Liu and his defense showed no opposition to the evidence collection methods that prosecutors adopted. Also, Liu admitted all the facts of his crime of taking bribes and power abuse, raising no further allegations. All these made the half-day trial possible.  


A fleet escorting China’s former Railway Minister Liu Zhijun heads to the Beijing No. 2

Intermediate People’s Court in Beijing on July 8, 2013.    Photos by Gong Lei 


Journalists work outside the Beijing No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court in Beijing

on July 8, 2013.   Photo by Gong Lei 






Ex-rail minister’s trial shows

China’s anti-corruption resolve


By Guo Likun and Li Zhihui


China’s former railways minister Liu Zhijun was given a suspended death penalty on Monday of July 8 for bribery and abuse of power, making him the highest-ranking official sentenced for such offenses since the country’s new leaders took office.

The sentencing shows on one hand the judicial system and top leaders’ resolve to target both high-ranking “tigers” and low-ranking “flies” in its anti-corruption efforts, and on the other hand the judicial spirit of everyone is equal before the law.

According to the court verdict, Liu committed criminal offenses even before he served as railways minister, using his official positions in local railway bureaus to help others to win promotions or contracts.

Liu went farther as he rose up the official ranks. When his case was disclosed, he had accepted 64.6 million yuan (10.53 million U.S. dollars) in bribes.

Liu should be severely punished in accordance with the law because his offenses have tarnished the state’s image as a clean government and caused colossal losses in public assets.

During the investigation, Liu confessed to his crimes and returned most of his bribed money. These were circumstances that may warrant a lighter punishment.

The sentence reflected the principle of suiting a punishment to the crimes, the criminal policy of combining punishment with leniency.

The people’s court held meetings before the trial so as to fully guarantee the right to defense of Liu and his lawyer. A press briefing was also held to satisfy the public’s right to know.

The open and fair justice as well as equal stress on substantive justice and procedural justice have led to the sound quality of handling cases, thus safeguarding the spirit of the rule of law and highlighting the development of judicial civilization.

After taking the helm at the Communist Party of China (CPC) in November and then as the country’s top leader in March, Xi Jinping called for efforts in fighting corruption, calling on the whole Party to stay on full alert as it is a threat to the Party’s survival.

Xi vowed “no exception” when it comes to Party disciplines and law.

Liu’s sentence followed the recent sacking and investigation of several senior officials for their suspected violations of law and disciplines.

On the extending list were Liu Tienan, former deputy director of the National Development and Reform Commission, and Li Chuncheng, former vice secretary of the CPC Committee of Sichuan Province.

In the past three weeks, the CPC anti-corruption watchdog announced investigations into three vice ministerial officials, including Guo Yongxiang, former vice governor of Sichuan Province.

The other two officials are Wang Suyi, former head of the United Front Work Department under the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s Committee of the CPC, and Li Daqiu, vice chairman of the Guangxi Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference.

Many low-ranking officials have also been investigated after social media users exposed alleged corruption.

Among them are Lei Zhengfu, a former official in southwest China’s Chongqing Municipality who was embroiled in a sex video scandal and was sentenced to 13 years in jail for bribery in June. The former railways minister’s sentence comes amid a major educational campaign to deal with undesirable work styles such as formalism, bureaucratism, hedonism and extravagance among CPC members to cement Party-people ties.

Ringing a renewed alarm to the 85 million Party members, especially officials, Liu’s case reflects the CPC Central Committee’s determination to investigate each graft case and punish any corrupt official.


Video footage shows China’s former Railway Minister Liu Zhijun (center) escorted to the

Beijing No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court in Beijing on June 9, 2013. Liu Zhijun was sentenced

to death with a two-year reprieve for bribery and abuse of power, the court announced

on July 8, 2013.   Photo by Gong Lei 






  1. wrote:

    If you would like to grow your knowledge simply keep visiting this website and
    be updated with the newest news update posted here.

  2. wrote:

    This is a great tip particularly to those new to the blogosphere.
    Simple but very accurate info… Thank you for sharing this one.
    A must read post!

  3. Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wished
    to say that I have truly enjoyed surfing around
    your blog posts. In any case I’ll be subscribing to your rss feed and
    I hope you write again very soon!

  4. wrote:

    I appreciate, cause I found just what I used to be looking for.
    You’ve ended my 4 day long hunt! God Bless you man. Have a great
    day. Bye

  5. Hi, this weekend is pleasant in support of me, since this point in time i am reading this great informative post here at my home.

  6. Hi, i read your blog from time to time and i own a similar one and i was
    just curious if you get a lot of spam responses?
    If so how do you stop it, any plugin or anything you can recommend?
    I get so much lately it’s driving me mad so any help is very much appreciated.

  7. I know this if off topic but I’m looking into starting my own weblog and
    was curious what all is required to get set up?
    I’m assuming having a blog like yours would cost a pretty penny?
    I’m not very internet savvy so I’m not 100% certain.
    Any tips or advice would be greatly appreciated.

  8. I’d like to find out more? I’d want to find out more details.

  9. about wrote:

    I was suggested this web site by my cousin. I am not sure whether this post is written by him
    as no one else know such detailed about my trouble. You’re wonderful!

  10. If you would like to take much from this post then you have to apply such strategies to your won webpage.

Leave a Reply