Process of Applying for Public Information (Mass Production Base)

Translated from Official Account: Mass Production Base#

Article has been 404'd#

On April 22nd, I interviewed Yue Xin and other students who applied for public information, hoping to learn more about the results of the information disclosure. Just after the interview ended at 1 am, Yue Xin's mother and counselor came to her dormitory, woke her up, and asked her to delete all the materials related to the information disclosure from her phone and computer. They also asked her to provide a written assurance that she would no longer be involved in this matter. Afterwards, she was taken home by her mother and unable to return to school.

12 hours later, Yue Xin published an open letter on the public account "Deep 约一丈" (Deep 约一丈) to Beijing University students and the School of Foreign Languages, expressing her "fear and anger" due to the school's intervention and hoping for a public explanation from the college.

"I cannot give it a perfect score"

On the morning of April 9th at exactly 10 o'clock, ten students (only eight actually attended) submitted an application for public information regarding the series of meetings discussing "teacher ethics" around July 1998. On April 20th, the students who submitted the application, as well as fifteen other students who applied for information disclosure via email, received a reply from the Office of Information Disclosure at Beijing University.

Yue Xin was one of the ten students who applied for information disclosure. At 11:30 am on April 20th, she, like other students, was invited to the conference room of her department's administrative building. The student affairs teacher showed her the reply from the school and asked, "Can you give this reply a perfect score?"

Yue Xin replied, "I definitely cannot give it a perfect score."

The teacher said, "If our school's students cannot give it a perfect score, how many points do you think people outside the school would give? Would they give negative points?"

Yue Xin said that the reply they received actually did not contain much useful information. The reply stated that the school had proactively disclosed the "Decision on Administering Disciplinary Action of Administrative Warning to Shen Yang" and the "Decision on Administering Disciplinary Action of Warning to Shen Yang in the Department of Chinese Language and Literature" on April 8th, 2018, and provided a link to the website for further inquiry. However, regarding the "party committee's related meeting records," "the investigation results report from the Xicheng District Public Security Bureau on this matter," "the related meeting records of the Department of Chinese Language and Literature," and "the content of Shen Yang's public self-criticism at the conference," which were mentioned in the information request, the reply stated that there were no relevant records in the existing archives. The reply acknowledged that the school and department's management work at that time was not standardized and sound, and ended with the statement of "continuously strengthening the construction of teacher ethics and earnestly implementing the fundamental task of cultivating virtue and nurturing talents."

The reply cited Article 18(3) of the "Regulations on the Disclosure of Information by Higher Education Institutions": "If the information does not fall within the scope of the school's responsibilities or does not exist, the applicant shall be informed."

Yue Xin wanted to take the physical copy of the reply, but the teacher refused, saying, "It will only bring you harm and no benefit. If things go wrong, you may not be able to graduate smoothly." Yue Xin said that because she had been involved in a lot of media work, the school may be worried that she would give the documents to the media. She sensed a lack of trust from this refusal and negotiated with the student affairs teacher again. After considering it, the teacher finally handed over the physical copy to her.

Among the 25 people who received the reply, only Yue Xin and another student kept the physical copy. Zhang Zhenlin was also one of the students who applied for information disclosure, but when he requested to keep the physical copy, the student affairs teacher refused, citing "regulations" that required the physical copy to be kept in the department. Zhang Zhenlin reluctantly agreed. Afterwards, he reviewed the documents and found that there were no specific regulations prohibiting him from keeping the physical copy.

During the process of receiving the reply, the students were prohibited from recording. Yue Xin said that the student affairs teacher had tried to pick up her phone to inspect it, so she "dialled it towards herself." However, due to various concerns, some students still kept the recording at that time. The students' concerns were not unfounded. For Zhang Zhenlin, keeping the recording had become one of the ways to protect himself.

"What is a clear statement?"

On the day Zhang Zhenlin applied for information disclosure on April 9th, the counselor called him and said that the Student Affairs Department had approached her to learn about the students' situation, but she "blocked them." The counselor then contacted Zhang Zhenlin's classmate. The next afternoon, the classmate told Zhang Zhenlin that there might be support from foreign forces behind the information disclosure application and advised him to be cautious with his words. Zhang Zhenlin "felt scared" and took the initiative to contact the counselor. On April 11th at 9 am, Zhang Zhenlin had a meeting with the counselor. He saw two phones placed upside down on the table and suspected that the counselor was secretly recording the conversation. Therefore, he also recorded it.

According to Zhang Zhenlin's recollection, the counselor first talked to him about his studies and career planning, and asked if he knew the other students who applied for information disclosure. These questions were posed in a way that implied "you obviously have a close relationship with xxx." Zhang Zhenlin believed that these were "leading questions." He admitted that he had a good relationship with a classmate because they were in the same major, but "she always thought we were part of an organization." He denied this. The counselor accused Zhang Zhenlin of "three charges": the students who went to submit the application for information disclosure were dressed uniformly and wore masks, indicating that it was a premeditated and organized action, and Zhang Zhenlin was one of the organizers; this action received financial support from foreign organizations, and Zhang Zhenlin, as one of the organizers, was aware of it; Zhang Zhenlin contacted foreign media on that day.

According to Yue Xin's recollection, the students who went there were not dressed uniformly. "I was wearing a beige windbreaker." Some students wore masks out of fear of being photographed by the media, but not everyone. On the morning of submitting the application for information disclosure, more than ten media outlets tried to enter the school gate under the pretext of "taking pictures of flowers and birds." Among them, there were indeed foreign media. However, Zhang Zhenlin claimed to be unaware of this incident. He only learned about it later from the counselor.

Zhang Zhenlin considered himself not active and only went to submit the application for information disclosure. During the questioning by the counselor, he even found it unbelievable and "laughed happily" - he later denied the accusations. There was another student present at the meeting who he did not know, and this student clearly sided with the counselor. This made him feel very strange.

The counselor did not believe Zhang Zhenlin and finally said, "How much I protect you depends on how much you tell me." Afterwards, she contacted Zhang Zhenlin's classmate again, hoping that the classmate could persuade Zhang Zhenlin to confess the truth. Zhang Zhenlin believed that she did not trust him because he "spoke hesitantly and inconsistently" and "acted calm when mentioning foreign media, as if he already knew." He also learned that the counselor told his classmate that she would report the materials about him to the school, and if his classmate "performed well," the materials would not involve the classmate who the counselor brought in to persuade Zhang Zhenlin.

Zhang Zhenlin asked the counselor to tell him the teacher's phone number during their conversation. In the conversation, he mentioned that he had a recording of the meeting and hoped that the college would publicly apologize and eliminate the negative impact. After some negotiation, the teacher apologized to him in person and clarified the matter with his father and classmates. The next day, Zhang Zhenlin talked to his father, who did not believe the counselor's accusations, but still worried about him. "He wanted to mediate." Zhang Zhenlin believed that his father was "intimidated."

Zhang Zhenlin asked the counselor for the teacher's phone number and called her. During the call, he mentioned that he had a recording of the meeting that day and hoped that the college would publicly apologize and eliminate the negative impact. After some negotiation, the teacher apologized to him in person and clarified the matter with his father and classmates. The next day, Zhang Zhenlin talked to his father, who did not believe the counselor's accusations, but still worried about him. "He wanted to mediate." Zhang Zhenlin believed that his father was "intimidated."

Zhang Zhenlin asked the counselor for the teacher's phone number and called her. During the call, he mentioned that he had a recording of the meeting that day and hoped that the college would publicly apologize and eliminate the negative impact. After some negotiation, the teacher apologized to him in person and clarified the matter with his father and classmates. The next day, Zhang Zhenlin met his father, who did not believe the counselor's accusations, but still worried about him. "He wanted to mediate." Zhang Zhenlin believed that his father was "intimidated."