In 1955, Pan Hannian, the former revolutionary hero, was expelled from the party and sentenced to 15 years in prison, which caused *** anger: "This person can not be trusted from now on!."The three major "crimes" became the root cause of his unjust imprisonment.
In the Pan Hannian case, allegations of his surrender in the 1936 KMT-CCP negotiations, his secret meeting with Wang Ching-wei during the Anti-Japanese War, and his provision of intelligence to Taiwan after the liberation of Shanghai have been the focus of much controversy. However, with the passage of time, the re-establishment of the Commission for Discipline Inspection in December 1978 became a key step in reversing unjust, false and wrongful cases.
* During the ** Special Branch period, he worked with Pan Hannian, and the two participated in the Long March of the **Red Army and returned to Shanghai to work underground. This gave ** a deep understanding of Pan Hannian's situation. Regarding Pan Hannian's "crimes", * made it clear: these three charges are untenable.
First of all, as for Pan Hannian's surrender in the 1936 Kuomintang-Communist negotiations, ** believes that this was not Pan Hannian's personal decision, but an instruction of the Comintern. Kang Sheng personally carved a chapter for Pan Hannian, representing the Chinese Soviet*** and asking him to negotiate with the Kuomintang in this capacity. ** It was pointed out that if Pan Hannian really surrendered to the Kuomintang, the work of our party in the white areas would inevitably be hit hard, but in fact this was not the case.
Secondly, on the issue of Pan Hannian's secret meeting with Wang Jingwei during the Anti-Japanese War, ** accused him of violating organizational discipline. However, Liao Chengzhi's analysis believes that Pan Hannian's intelligence against the Japanese puppets in Shanghai will inevitably have contact with the Japanese puppet personnel. Liao Chengzhi questioned that if Pan Hannian was really a traitor, why did he not betray the organizations in Shanghai and Hong Kong before and after the outbreak of the Pacific War?He believes that this is an unfounded crime, and also suggests that Pan Hannian may be on an "undercover" mission.
Finally, with regard to the accusation that providing intelligence to Taiwan caused the bombing of public facilities in Shanghai, ** bluntly said that this is absurd. After the liberation of Shanghai, the situation of the war between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party was clear, how could Pan Hannian continue to provide intelligence to the Kuomintang?** pointed out that the KMT was far more familiar with Shanghai than Pan Hannian, and they did not need to rely on Pan Hannian for a position.
* After the re-establishment of the Commission for Discipline Inspection in December 1978, he actively advocated for the review of Pan Hannian's case. However, just as ** was preparing for a full investigation into Pan Hannian's case, he was found to have colon adenocarcinoma and urgently needed surgery. Before the operation, ** shook hands with the doctor and emphasized: "I want to live for three years, if Pan Hannian's case is not solved, I will not die blindly!."After the successful operation, ** personally promoted the truth investigation of Pan Hannian's unjust case, and finally corrected this historical grievance.
On August 23, 1982, ** issued a document officially announcing: "It is wrong to designate Comrade Pan Hannian as a 'traitor' and arrest, sentence, and expel him from the party. This is a major unjust case since the founding of the People's Republic of China, and it should be thoroughly corrected. ”
The truth of Pan Hannian's grievances has finally been revealed, and the huge mistakes of the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection have also been faced. This historical lesson profoundly enlightens us that we must be extremely cautious in examining comrades within the party, so as not to turn into a serious unjust prison, damage the party's reputation, and harm the lives of millions of innocent people.
The review of Pan's case is thought-provoking, revealing the profound problems that can arise from intra-party censorship in the context of political struggle. This article details the three major "crimes" faced by Pan Hannian, and emphasizes the role of **, as well as the necessity for the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection to review Pan Hannian's grievances in the torrent of history.
First of all, the article highlights the authoritative position of ** when describing Pan Hannian's three "crimes", and his testimony is crucial to the verification of Pan Hannian's case. ** The understanding of Pan Hannian's historical background and the interpretation of the decisions of the Comintern at that time make the analysis of Pan Hannian's "surrender" in the 1936 Kuomintang-Communist negotiations more objective. This kind of censorship, which is not confined to superficiality, underscores the rigorous approach to historical details.
Secondly, the article makes a dialectical analysis of the issue of Pan Hannian's secret meeting with Wang Jingwei during the Anti-Japanese War. Liao's argument emphasizes that Pan Hannian may be on an "undercover" mission, rather than a real traitor. This dialectical way of thinking makes the reader more objective when thinking about Pan Hannian's behavior, and also reminds people of the complexity of judging personal loyalty in the context of complex history.
Finally, the article raises reasonable doubts about Pan Hannian's accusation of providing intelligence to Taiwan. **'s point of view clearly points out that after the liberation of Shanghai, the situation of the Kuomintang-Communist war has become clear, and the claim that Pan Hannian provided intelligence to Taiwan is difficult to establish. This comprehensive analysis of the historical background and the current situation presents readers with a more realistic historical picture.
The article concludes with an emphasis on persistence and effort throughout the review process. ** He almost missed the investigation of the Pan Hannian case due to his own health problems, but his firm stance before the operation and his active commitment after the operation laid the foundation for unraveling this historical mystery. This kind of responsibility for history undoubtedly makes people admire the character of the best.
Overall, the review process in Pan's case presents an example of an in-depth analysis of historical events. Through the revelation and analysis of details, the article enables readers to have a more comprehensive understanding of Pan Hannian's three "crimes". This has also led to thinking about the intra-party censorship, and how to maintain fairness in the political struggle and ensure that the innocent are not wronged is a question worthy of in-depth consideration. By restoring the historical truth, this article gives justice to a wronged person in that period, and also reminds us that we should maintain a prudent and objective attitude towards history.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!