糜崇标: 被殴打，任意羁押持续
据报道，2016年7月23日，人权捍卫者糜崇标先生（78岁）和妻子李克珍女士（68岁）受到贵州省贵阳市国家安全局官员的殴打。这对夫妇被任意羁押的时间已经超过三年，羁押地点数次变更，受到贵阳市警察、公安局和雇佣保安的控制和监视。
糜崇标是贵州人权研讨会的成员，贵州人权研讨会是当地人权捍卫者的非正式网络，宣传国际人权标准，披露当局侵犯人权的行为。糜崇标曾经向联合国人权机制提交投诉，撰写有关政治迫害的文章，呼吁为天安门大屠杀的受害者寻求正义，抗议要求释放被监禁的人权捍卫者。
至少从2011年以来，糜崇标及其家人因为他的人权活动而受到各种形式的虐待。2011年10月，值1911年辛亥革命百年纪念之日，糜崇标站在贵阳一个公园的门口，散发有关辛亥革命的信息和《世界人权宣言》。当时，他被警方拘留，带到当地警察局，受到毒打。据报道，警察对他发出死亡威胁。
据报道，2016年7月23日，人权捍卫者糜崇标先生（78岁）和妻子李克珍女士（68岁）受到贵州省贵阳市国家安全局官员的殴打。这对夫妇被任意羁押的时间已经超过三年，羁押地点数次变更，受到贵阳市警察、公安局和雇佣保安的控制和监视。
前线卫士曾于2014年11月17日和2016年7月11日，针对他们受到的任意羁押发出紧急呼吁。糜崇标是贵州人权研讨会的成员，贵州人权研讨会是当地人权捍卫者的非正式网络，宣传国际人权标准，披露当局侵犯人权的行为。糜崇标曾经向联合国人权机制提交投诉，撰写有关政治迫害的文章，呼吁为天安门大屠杀的受害者寻求正义，要求释放被监禁的人权捍卫者。
2016年7月23日，因为贵州国际马拉松赛的比赛路线接近糜崇标和李克珍的关押地，李克珍试图吸引国际参赛者和媒体的关注，使他们了解自己和丈夫持续受到非法囚禁的处境。她受到四名国安便衣的阻止，他们殴打她，把她拖回关押的公寓。据报道，回到公寓后，国安官员走到熟睡的糜崇标身旁，不断猛击他的头部，踢他的背部。尽管糜崇标和李克珍处于明显的疼痛之中，两天后，即7月25日，他们才获准前往医院。X光透视后，医生告诉糜崇标，他的脊椎因殴打受到损伤，需要住院治疗。
押送糜崇标的官员作出干预后，医生改变了诊断，对糜崇标说，他的伤势不严重，无需住院。据报道，糜崇标的X光片也被没收。这次损伤导致糜崇标目前站立和坐着都有困难。李克珍的手腕骨折，背部、头部、面部、肋骨、腰部和腿部都有瘀青。国安不许她看有关自己受伤情况的X光片。
羁押三年以来，糜崇标和李克珍受到了一系列的殴打，这是最近的一次。看守人员曾多次试图强迫糜崇标签署保证书，承诺如果获释，不会接触记者或其他人权捍卫者，不再在网上发表文章。这对夫妇自2013年6月19日起，被非法关押在若干地点。6月19日那一天，数十名警察搜查了他们在贵阳市的住所，夫妇二人随即受到软禁。据信，搜家的原因与一周前糜崇标在网上发表的两篇文章有关，其中一篇批评了中国目前已经废除的劳教制度。
2012年，糜崇标在城市公园举行了纪念1989年天安门屠杀的活动后，夫妇二人也曾受到数周的关押。前线卫士深切关注糜崇标和李克珍的健康和平安，尤其是他们年事已高，又受到如此频繁的殴打和虐待。同时，前线卫士也极为关注糜崇标和李克珍所持续遭受的非法且任意的羁押；前线卫士认为，对他们的羁押完全是因为糜崇标以和平且合法的方式为天安门大屠杀的受难者寻求正义以及要求释放监禁的人权捍卫者。
78岁的人权捍卫者糜崇标先生和他68岁的妻子李克珍女士，从2013年6月19日被拘留以来，在贵州省贵阳市一直受到任意拘押。既没有对他们起诉，也不准他们会见律师。这对夫妇的两个儿子，糜祖恒先生和糜一鸣先生，由于为父母呼吁，一直受到骚扰和恐吓。
下载紧急呼吁 (PDF)
2013年6月19日，数十名警察搜查了糜崇标和李克珍在贵阳市的住所，两位老人家也即刻受到软禁。据信，这次搜查的原因与一周前糜崇标在网上发表的两篇文章有关，其中一篇批评了中国目前已经废除的劳教制度。2012年，糜崇标在城市公园举行了纪念1989年天安门屠杀的活动后，夫妇二人也曾被拘留数周。
自2013年6月19日糜崇标和李克珍被拘留以来，他们被关押在不同的地点，由贵阳市警察、公安局和雇佣的保安控制和监视。软禁数月之后，2013年9月夫妇二人被带往几处秘密地点，关押至2014年1月。那时，公安人员在李克珍中风后，联系了他们的儿子。李克珍在医院度过一周后，夫妇二人再次受到任意拘押，关在一个秘密的地点。此后，糜祖恒和糜一鸣获准每隔两周探望父母一次，探视是在监视下在指定的餐馆进行。政治敏感时期，不许他们探望父母，老人家的关押地点不时变更，以确保地点不为外界所知。
据报道，糜崇标和李克珍多次受到殴打，在长达三年的羁押期间，不允许他们外出。他们的儿子表示担心父亲的健康状况，老人家已经78岁，多年来饱受当局的虐待，他们也担心母亲中风之后的健康状况。看守人员曾多次试图强迫糜崇标签署保证书，承诺如果获释，将不会接触记者、其他人权捍卫者，或在网上发表文章。由于糜祖恒和糜一鸣要求地方当局承担责任，并试图为父母聘请律师，他们一直受到监视、骚扰、恐吓和报复威胁，2016年5月以来这样的事情越来越多。
前线卫士敦促中国当局：
1.立即无条件释放糜崇标和李克珍，前线卫士认为，对他们的监禁完全是由于糜崇标以合法且和平的方式捍卫了人权;
2.确保糜崇标和李克珍在羁押期间的待遇，符合联合国大会1988年12月9日第43/173号决议通过的《保护所有遭受任何形式羁押或监禁者的原则》；
3.通知糜崇标和李克珍家人他们被羁押的地点，并允许他们可以立即且不受限制地与自己选择的律师见面;
4. 保障在任何情况下，中国所有人权捍卫者能够从事其合法的人权活动，免于报复的恐惧，也不受任何限制。
On 19 November 2014, the arbitrary detention of human rights defender Mr Mi Chongbiao and his wife, Ms Li Kezhen, will enter its eighteenth month. The couple have been held against their will in a series of locations by the authorities in Guiyang city, Guizhou province since 19 June 2013. Mi Chongbiao, who turned 75 years old this year, has been promoting the greater protection of human rights in Guiyang city since 2007. Li Kezhen has also assisted in a number of these activities.
Mi Chongbiao and Li Kezhen are currently being held in an undisclosed location in Guiyang city by members of the Guiyang city police force, the Public Security Bureau and hired security guards. They are regularly moved to different locations to ensure that their whereabouts remain unknown. Their two sons are permitted to see them once every two weeks, where they are brought to meet them, under surveillance, for three hours at a restaurant designated by police. The couple are reportedly kept under watch by three teams of ten guards, who work eight hour shifts.
From September 2013 to January 2014 Mi Chongbiao and Li Kezhen were subjected to incommunicado detention. During this time the couple's sons repeatedly sought information on their parents' whereabouts from various levels of the district and municipal government but on each occasion were denied. In January 2014, authorities finally contacted the elder son to sign medical forms after Li Kezhen suffered a stroke while in incommunicado detention. Li Kezhen was permitted to stay in hospital for a single week before being removed and placed once again in arbitrary detention with her husband at an unknown location. Guards reportedly told Mi Chongbiao's sons that if they did not persuade their father to sign a document pledging to stop his human rights activities, the couple would remain in arbitrary detention for an unlimited period of time.
On 19 June 2013 dozens of police officers arrived at the home of Mi Chongbiao and Li Kezhen, forced their two sons to leave, and placed the couple under a very strict form of house arrest, during which they were forbidden from setting foot outside of their home. Their house was searched and two computers were confiscated, along with four mobile phones, a dictaphone and a camera. It is believed that the immediate cause of the raid was two articles posted online by Mi Chongbiao on 10 June 2013, one of which was critical of the re-education through labour system in China.
On 28 and 29 May 2012 Mi CHongbiao held protests in a public square and park in Guiyang calling for justice for the victims of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, the release of fellow human rights defender Mr Chen Xi and for a stop to all political persecution. On the evening of 29 May 2012, more than one hundred police along with public and national security bureau officers carried out a raid on his home. Mi Chongbiao and Li Kezhen were taken to Yuyun local police station for interrogation. For 38 hours they were not permitted to sleep, not provided with any food and Mi Chongbiao, who has diabetes, was not given any medication. On the evening of 30 May 2012 Mi Chongbiao's two sons were also detained by police. Their home was raided a further four times and a number of items were confiscated. Following their release two weeks later, Mi Chongbiao and Li Kezhen were relocated to a residence outside of Guiyang city and kept under 24 hour surveillance.
Front Line Defenders expresses its concern regarding the ongoing and lengthy arbitrary detention of Mi Chongbiao and Li Kezhen and the fact that their exact whereabouts are still unknown. Furthermore, Front Line Defenders believes that these actions are solely related to Mi Chongbiao's peaceful and legitimate work in defence of human rights.
