Copilot

核心前提 Core premises

  • 中文：自由主义将个人自由（尤其言论自由）、法治与程序正义置于政治正当性的中心；限制自由必须符合法律明确性、必要性与比例性原则。

  • English: Liberalism centers individual liberty (notably freedom of speech), rule of law and procedural justice; any restriction must satisfy clarity, necessity and proportionality.

对案件的要点评析 Key points of evaluation

1. 言论类型与保护范围／Type of speech and scope of protection

  • 中文：多数被指“虚假”的内容属观点、艺术或情感表达，不属可证伪的事实命题。自由主义对观点与艺术持高度保护态度，应优先排除刑罚适用。

  • English: Much of the alleged “false” material is opinion, art or emotional expression—not falsifiable factual claims. Liberalism affords strong protection to opinion and art and requires criminal law to be a last resort.

2. 主观要件（明知）的举证标准／Mens rea (knowledge) and burden of proof

  • 中文：刑事定罪须由控方证明被告具有法律规定的主观故意或“明知”。以学历或“应能辨别”为据推定“明知”，违反无罪推定与举证责任。

  • English: Criminal conviction requires the prosecution to prove statutory mens rea. Inferring “knowledge” from education or a vague “should have known” breaches the presumption of innocence and burden‑of‑proof rules.

3. 客观后果（严重混乱）的实证要求／Proof of harmful consequences

  • 中文：自由主义允许为防止他人受害限制言论，但必须有确凿、即时且可量化的危害证据。案卷中未见明确证据证明存在“公共秩序严重混乱”。

  • English: Liberalism permits speech restrictions only to prevent demonstrable, imminent harm. The record lacks clear, quantifiable evidence of “serious public‑order disruption.”

4. 程序正义／Procedural justice

  • 中文：公开审判、充分辩护与上诉审理是法治基石。本案不公开审理、二审简单书面裁定与狱中申诉被阻，严重侵蚀程序正当性。

  • English: Public trial, effective defense and meaningful appeals underpin rule of law. Closed trial, cursory written appeal and blocked prison complaints severely undermine procedural legitimacy.

5. 比例性与替代措施／Proportionality and less‑restrictive means

  • 中文：即便某些言论被认定不当，自由主义优先主张非刑事手段（澄清、纠错、行政处罚、民事救济）。以重刑惩罚边缘转发者违反比例原则并造成寒蝉效应。

  • English: Even if speech is improper, liberalism favors non‑criminal remedies (corrections, admin measures, civil remedies). Heavy imprisonment of a marginal re‑sharer violates proportionality and chills discourse.

结论（短评） Conclusion (brief)

  • 中文：依自由主义核心，现有指控与判决在事实证据、主观故意证明、程序正当性与比例性方面均存在重大缺陷。以此情形维持刑罚既不合法也不正当，应予纠正或重审。

  • English: Under liberal standards, the prosecution and verdict exhibit serious defects in empirical proof, mens rea demonstration, procedural fairness and proportionality. Upholding punishment on this basis is neither lawful nor legitimate and should be remedied or retried.

建议措施 Practical recommendations

  • 中文：1) 立即恢复公开、全面的审理并保障有效辩护；2) 要求控方提交可验证的证据证明“明知”与“严重混乱”；3) 若仅为不当言论，优先采用非刑罚处置并设透明纠错机制；4) 建立独立监督以防选择性执法。

  • English: 1) Reinstate a public, full hearing with effective defense; 2) Require prosecution to produce verifiable proof of “knowledge” and “serious disorder”; 3) If speech is improper, prefer non‑criminal responses and transparent correction mechanisms; 4) Create independent oversight to deter selective enforcement.