哈维尔 著/倪烨 译

（布拉格）1977年1月，一群捷克斯洛伐克公民（我有幸是其中一员）发布了77宪章。宪章里我们呼吁国家更好地保护公民的基本权利和政治权利。通过宪章，我们还阐明了我们的信念，即，作为公民，我们有责任与捷克斯洛伐克政府一道工作，通过我们夙夜匪懈的努力，确保公民的基本权利得到保护。

我们发表77宪章，并不是希望创立一个组织，而是为了——正如我当时所写的——创造 “一个自由的、非正式的开放社区，具有不同信念，不同信仰，不同职业的人们团结在一起。达成这种团结的是我们共同的意愿——即通过个人和集体的努力，使我国乃至世界各国的公民权利和人权得到尊重。”

三十多年后，2008年12月，我们当年那不足道的工作模式得到了一群中国公民的效仿。他们提出了类似的呼吁——保护人权、建立善政、尊重公民的监政权利——以确保他们的政府能够按照现代开放社会的准则来治理国家。

他们签发的文件给人很深的印象。08宪章的作者呼吁保护基本人权，提高司法独立性，促进立法民主。不过他们的要求并没有停留在这个水平。随着时间的推移，我们逐渐认识到，一个自由开放的社会并不仅仅意味着保护人的基本权利。为此，08宪章签署者也明智地要求更好地保护环境，缩小城乡差距，更好地提供社会保障，并为调解几十年来因侵害人权造成的社会矛盾，实现和解，做出了真诚努力。

08宪章的首批签署者超过了300人，来自全中国的社会各阶层——这表明宪章所持的理念产生了广泛的吸引力。签署者中有中国的法学、政治学、经济学、以及文化、艺术巨擘。他们决定签署这样一个文件，肯定是经过深思熟虑的，因此，对他们的话不假思索地置之不理是不应该的。宪章发表以来，又有5000多人签上了他们的名字。

2008年的中国和1977年的捷克斯洛伐克是不同的。与30多年前我的国家相比，中国在许多方面更为自由，更为开放。然而，中国当局对08宪章的回应在许多方面和捷克斯洛伐克政府当年对77宪章的回应十分相似。

当年的捷克斯洛伐克政府对于我们提出的对话与辩论不是积极回应，而是选择镇压。一些签署者被逮捕，一些遭到审问和骚扰，此外，政府方面还针对我们的运动及其目标散布了不实信息。

中国政府也拒绝了08宪章签署者请求他们商讨宪章的优点的建议。而且，政府方面已经拘留了两名签署人——刘晓波和张祖桦。他们两人被政府认定为宪章的主要起草者。张先生已被释放，但著名作家和知识分子刘晓波先生仍被隔离拘留候审。

迄今为止，已经有数十人被审讯，被国安监视的人不计其数。他们为救援被监禁的朋友打电话、发邮件都会受到监视。77宪章发表不久，我就遭到逮捕。他们指控我“严重危害了共和国的基本原则。 ”人们担心，刘晓波先生将被控以“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”，这同样也是一个任意性很强的控罪。

事态发展到这样的地步，我感到十分伤心。我很挂念刘晓波的妻子刘霞，自从丈夫被拘押，至今他们没有让她和丈夫见过一面。中国政府应该好好学习77宪章运动的教训：即恐吓、宣传和镇压无法取代理性的对话。中国政府应该立即无条件释放刘晓波，只有这样才能表明北京已经接受了历史的教训。

英文原载《华尔街日报》：

China's Human-Rights Activists Need Support
The signatories of Charter 08 face the wrath of the state.

By VACLAV HAVEL
Prague

In January 1977, a group of Czechoslovak citizens, of which I was privileged to be one, released Charter 77. That document was our call for the better protection of basic civil and political rights by the state. It was also the articulation of our belief that, as citizens, we had a certain responsibility to work with the Czechoslovak government to ensure through our vigilance that basic rights would be protected.

With the release of Charter 77, we wanted to create not a membership organization, but instead, as I wrote then, "a free, informal open community of people of different convictions, different faiths, and different professions united by the will to strive, individually and collectively, for the respect of civic and human rights in our own country and throughout the world."

More than three decades later, in December 2008, a group of Chinese citizens has taken our modest effort as their model. They have made a similar call -- for human rights, good governance and respect for the responsibility of citizens to keep watch over their government -- to ensure that their state plays by the rules of a modern open society.

The document they have issued is an impressive one. In it, the authors of Charter 08 call for protection of basic rights, increased judicial independence, and legislative democracy. But they do not stop there. With the passage of time, we have come to realize that a free and open society means more than the protection of basic rights. To that end, the signatories of Charter 08 also wisely call for better environmental protection, a bridging of the rural-urban divide, better provision of social security, and a serious effort to reconcile with human-rights abuses committed in decades past.

The original signatories, who number more than 300, come from all walks of life, and from across China -- a testament to the broad appeal of the ideas put forward in Charter 08. Among the signatories are China's top minds from law, political science, economics, the arts and culture. Their decision to sign onto such a document was surely not taken lightly, and their words should not be so brusquely brushed aside. Since the Charter was released, more than 5,000 men and women have added their names to it.

China in 2008 is not Czechoslovakia in 1977. In many ways, China today is freer and more open than my own country of 30 years ago. And yet, the response of the Chinese authorities to Charter 08 in many ways parallels the Czechoslovak government's response to Charter 77.

Rather than respond to our offer of engagement with dialogue and debate, the Czechoslovak government instead chose repression. It arrested some of the signatories, interrogated and harassed others, and spread disinformation about our movement and its aims.

So too has the Chinese government declined the invitation to discuss with the signatories of Charter 08 the merits of their proposal. Instead, it has detained two signatories, Liu Xiaobo and Zhang Zuhua, both of whom the government has identified as lead actors in its creation. Mr. Zhang has been released, but Mr. Liu, a prominent writer and intellectual, is still being held incommunicado without charge.

Dozens of others have been interrogated, and an unknowable number are being watched by state security agents as they make phone calls and type email messages on behalf of their jailed comrades. Soon after Charter 77 was issued, I was arrested for the commission of "serious crimes against the basic principles of the Republic." It is feared that Mr. Liu will be charged with "incitement to subvert state power," a similarly arbitrary crime.

I am saddened by this turn of events, and my thoughts are with Liu Xiaobo's wife, Liu Xia, who has yet to be given the opportunity to speak with her husband. The Chinese government should learn well the lesson of the Charter 77 movement: that intimidation, propaganda campaigns, and repression are no substitute for reasoned dialogue. Only the immediate and unconditional release of Liu Xiaobo will demonstrate that, for Beijing, that lesson has been learned.

Mr. Havel is the former president of the Czech Republic.

□ 《观察》