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 disclosure, 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, and requested 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 to Peking University students and the School of Foreign Languages on the public account "Deep 约一丈" (Deep 约一丈), expressing her "fear and anger" due to the school's intervention and hoping that the college would provide a public explanation.

"I can't give it a perfect score"

At 10 am on April 9th, ten students (eight actually present) submitted an application for public information disclosure to Peking University regarding the "teacher ethics" issue discussed 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, all received a reply from the Peking University Office of Information Disclosure.

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 meeting room of her department's administrative building. The student affairs teacher showed her the school's reply letter and asked, "Can you give this reply a perfect score?"

Yue Xin replied, "I definitely can't give it a perfect score."

The teacher said, "If our school's students can't 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 didn't contain much useful information. The reply letter stated that the school had proactively disclosed the "Decision on Administering Administrative Warning to Shen Yang" and the "Decision on Administering Warning to Shen Yang in the Chinese Department" to the public on April 8th, 2018, and provided a link to the website for inquiries. However, regarding the "party committee's related meeting records," "the investigation results report from the Xicheng District Public Security Bureau on this matter," "the Chinese Department's related meeting records," and "the content of Shen Yang's public self-criticism at the conference" mentioned in the information request, the existing archives stated that there was no relevant information. The reply letter acknowledged that the school and department's management work at the time was not standardized and sound, and concluded with "continuously strengthening teacher ethics construction and earnestly implementing the fundamental task of cultivating virtue and nurturing talents."

The reply letter 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 letter, but was refused by the teacher: "Giving it to you would do more harm than good. You might not graduate smoothly." Yue Xin said that because she had been involved in a lot of media work, the school may have been worried that she would give the documents to the media. She read distrust from this refusal and negotiated with the student affairs teacher again. After considering it, the teacher finally handed her the physical copy of the document.

Among the 25 people who received a reply, only Yue Xin and another student kept the physical copies. Zhang Zhenlin was also one of the students who applied for information disclosure, and when he requested to keep the physical copy of the document, the student affairs teacher refused, citing "regulations" that required the physical copies to be kept in the department, and stated that students could come to the department to view them if needed. 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 letter, the students were prohibited from recording. Yue Xin said that the student affairs teacher had tried to pick up her phone for inspection, so she "dialled it towards herself." However, due to various concerns, some students still kept the recordings from that time. The students' concerns were not unfounded - for Zhang Zhenlin, keeping the recordings had become one of the ways to protect himself.

"What is a clear statement?"

On April 9th, the day Zhang Zhenlin applied for information disclosure, the department counselor called him, saying that the school's student affairs department had approached her to learn about the students' situation, but she "blocked them." The counselor then contacted Zhang Zhenlin's classmates. The next afternoon, the classmate told Zhang Zhenlin that there might be support from foreign forces behind the application for information disclosure, and advised him to be cautious with his words. Zhang Zhenlin "felt afraid," so he took the initiative to contact the counselor, and at 9 am on April 11th, he met with the counselor. Seeing two phones upside down on the table, he suspected that the counselor was secretly recording the conversation. Therefore, he also made a recording.

According to Zhang Zhenlin's recollection, the counselor first talked to him about his studies and career plans, 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 things: the students who went to submit the application for information disclosure were dressed uniformly and wore masks, indicating that it was an organized and premeditated 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 this; 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 "filming flowers and birds," and there were indeed foreign media among them. However, Zhang Zhenlin claimed to have no knowledge of this. It was the counselor who told him later.

Zhang Zhenlin considered himself not active, but just went to submit the application for information disclosure with the others. When questioned by the counselor, he even found it unbelievable and "laughed happily" - he later denied the accusations. Another student he didn't know was present during the meeting, and "clearly sided with the counselor." This made him feel very strange.

The counselor didn't believe Zhang Zhenlin and finally said, "How much I protect you depends on how much you say." Afterwards, she contacted Zhang Zhenlin's classmate again, hoping that the classmate would persuade Zhang Zhenlin to confess the truth. Zhang Zhenlin believed that she didn't trust him because he "spoke hesitantly and inconsistently" and "when it came to foreign media, he remained calm, as if he had known about it a long time ago." 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 him.

Zhang Zhenlin asked the counselor to give him the teacher's phone number. During the call, he mentioned that he had a recording of the conversation that day and hoped that the college would publicly apologize for it 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 didn't believe the counselor's accusations, but still worried about him. "He wanted to mediate." Zhang Zhenlin believed that his father was "intimidated."

Zhang Zhenlin obtained the teacher's phone number from the counselor and called her. During the call, he mentioned that he had a recording of the conversation that day and hoped that the college would publicly apologize for it 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 didn't believe the counselor's accusations, but still worried about him. "He wanted to mediate." Zhang Zhenlin believed that his father was "intimidated."

Zhang Zhenlin obtained the teacher's phone number from the counselor and called her. During the call, he mentioned that he had a recording of