(Minghui.org) A 68-year-old woman in Shenyang City, Liaoning Province, was indicted on September 26, 2025, because she practices Falun Gong, a spiritual discipline that has been persecuted by the Chinese Communist Party since July 1999.
Ms. Wang Shuhua
Ms. Wang Shuhua, an award-winning former teacher and later vice principal at Daxing Township Middle School in Changtu County, Liaoning Province, was arrested on August 23, 2025, and admitted to the Shenyang City First Detention Center around 4 a.m. the next day despite her dangerously high blood pressure.
Prosecutor Zong Shan of the Dadong District Procuratorate issued a formal arrest warrant for Ms. Wang on September 3 and indicted her on September 26. Judge Zhang Jutao of the Dadong District Court will preside over the trial (date noted as yet scheduled).
While held at the detention center, Ms. Wang was subjected to involuntary drug administration, force-feeding, and gang beatings. The guards often kept the feeding tube inserted for long periods of time, causing her respiratory tract, esophagus, and stomach to become inflamed and infected.
During a force-feeding session on September 25, the tube became loose and fell out. The guards tried again at noon and in the evening, and were unable to insert the tube as it kept being pushed out by the mucus in Ms. Wang’s stomach. She bled as a result of these two attempts. She has now ended her hunger strike but continues to suffer from low potassium levels, general weakness, dizziness, difficulty standing, extreme weight loss, and significant memory loss. The guards still force her to take hypertension medication every day to control her blood pressure and keep her in custody.
Prosecutor Zong Deprives Defender’s Right and Indicts Ms. Wang Without Legal Basis
On September 1 or 2, 2025, prosecutor Zong and her assistant deposed Ms. Wang at the detention center. She accused Ms. Wang of breaking the law and boasted that she could decide how long a prison sentence to mete out. She threatened to give Ms. Wang a longer sentence if she refused to sign a statement to admit her guilt.
Ms. Wang did not sign the statement and was issued a formal arrest warrant on September 3. The officer in charge of the case went to the detention center and ordered her to sign the warrant. Ms. Wang refused.
Ms. Wang’s son, who served as her non-lawyer defender, picked up her indictment on September 4. He then called the officer in charge to inquire about when exactly the decision to issue a formal arrest warrant for his mother was made. He was referred to prosecutor Zong. When he called her on September 11, she said that she could not disclose case details as the case was still with the police and in the investigation phase. She asked him to talk to the police instead and claimed that the arrest warrant was issued in compliance with the law. She said she could discuss the case with him after she received the case from the police.
Ms. Wang’s son mailed several requests to Zong on the same day, including “Request for Explanation of the Law Based on the Case,” “Request for Revocation of Arrest Warrant,” “Request for Retrieving Exculpatory Evidence,” “Request for Review of the Necessity of Detention,” and “Criminal Complaint Against Police.” He also attached two official documents showing that no law in China criminalizes Falun Gong or bans Falun Gong publications.
Zong signed the receipt of these documents but never issued a response. She deposed Ms. Wang at the detention center again on September 16 and said the police had from September 15 to October 14 to investigate the case.
Ms. Wang’s son went to the procuratorate on September 22 and submitted the power of attorney to represent her and a request to review the case file and meet her at the detention center. Zong had a phone conversation with him the next day and said that he was not allowed to review the case file or meet with his mother. The reason given was that this was a sensitive case. She added that Ms. Wang had been appointed a lawyer.
Ms. Wang’s son demanded to know which law stipulated that non-lawyer defenders were barred from reviewing case files and meeting with their clients. Zong then said that Ms. Wang was given forced labor more than two decades ago and that her old case file mentioned his name. Zong claimed that the fact was sufficient to deprive him of his right to review his mother’s case file.
Zong also reiterated that she was “All for protecting Ms. Wang and her son’s rights.” She added that she was working hard to get the case forwarded to the Dadong District Court “for the benefits of the mother and son” because they could then see each other during the trial.
“Once I indict your mother and move the case to the court, you can still request to review her case file and meet with her then,” Zong told Ms. Wang’s son.
Ms. Wang’s son and a relative went to the procuratorate on the morning of September 25 to submit the relative’s application to represent Ms. Wang as a second non-lawyer defender. Zong was not in, but called Ms. Wang’s son in the afternoon. She said, “I’ve finally gotten the case done, and I’ll indict your mother tomorrow. Don’t you want to represent her? Once the court receives the case, they’ll notify you.”
Ms. Wang’s son asked Zong why she did not respond to the materials submitted that morning and reminded her that she should have reviewed those materials before making any indictment decision. She claimed that the procuratorate had his own timetable as to when to make such decisions. “You can submit additional materials when we meet in court,” she added.
Ms. Wang’s son reminded Zong that she had not responded to his relative’s request to represent his mother. She replied that he must produce proof showing his relative having no criminal record and possessing a blood relationship with his mother. When reminded that the relative’s info was all in the submitted materials, Zong said she was responding to the relative by talking to Ms. Wang’s son. He reminded her that he could not represent his relative and that she should talk directly to his relative.
Zong never contacted the relative or picked up the phone when the relative called.
Ms. Wang’s husband and son texted Zong, urging her to follow the law and uphold justice for their loved one. Zong ignored them and indicted Ms. Wang on September 26.
Ms. Wang received the indictment on September 28 and refused to sign the document.
Judge Zhang Violates Legal Procedure
Ms. Wang’s husband and son visited the Dadong District Court on September 29 and learned that judge Zhang Jutao had been assigned to the case. Zhang refused to give the father and son a copy of the indictment because they only had their household registration with them and were missing the required government documents, which proved their family relationship with Ms. Wang.
Zhang claimed that the government documents were also needed for Ms. Wang’s son to represent her. Such a requirement was “to prevent fraudsters from abusing the system,” Zhang added. By law, anyone can represent a suspect as a non-lawyer defender.
Zhang is the president of the second court of the Dadong District Court. He has been the presiding judge overseeing the trials of local Falun Gong practitioners for many years. Zhang sentenced many practitioners for their faith.
Related Report:
Copyright © 1999-2025 Minghui.org. All rights reserved.
Category: Torture of Women
