was once the venue of the Paris Peace Conference in France in history, which is no stranger to the Chinese people. “The Chinese representative refused to sign the agreement on the transfer of German interests in China to Japan drawn up by the Paris Peace Conference”. His commemoration was also controversial internationally, and the French conference also rehabilitated him.

      [editor’s note: at the UN General Assembly on September 25, 2018, macron made a tit for tat speech against Trump’s far right line. It is worth noting that the political background is that in 2016, the French parliament passed the proposal to rehabilitate the Paris Commune in 2013. Capitalist industrialization and urbanization brought unprecedented population concentration and polarization between the rich and the poor. The Franco Prussian War in 1871 The battle of Bonaparte was defeated miserably. The Prussian army besieged the city and the people armed to defend the capital for 131 days. The army and people ate horses, donkeys, cats, dogs and mice. “Marseille” resounded through the sky. The teyers regime surrendered to the general army in Versailles, commanded Paris, disarmed the people’s armed forces, and broke out the Paris Commune. In the pool of blood of cruel repression, the Paris commune member Oren baudier wrote the international song and sang it all over the world. In the twinkling of an eye, 30 years after the end of the cold war, 30 years after the end of history, 40 years after China’s reform and opening up, China and the world have entered a new era.] The National Assembly rehabilitated the suppressed Paris Commune, translated by Liang Xiao and reformed by Chen Qixu [1] [in the people’s uprising in 1871, 10000 to 20000 people were executed by forces loyal to Adolf Tyrell’s government.] On the evening of Tuesday, November 29, 2016, at the initiative of the socialist party and the opposition of the right, the National Assembly adopted a resolution declaring the rehabilitation of all victims of the Paris Commune. As the last revolution in the 19th century and the first attempt of the leaders of the working class, the popular Paris Commune Movement was a response to the disastrous defeat of France in the French Prussian War in 1870. From March 18 to May 27, 1871, the people of Paris launched a 72 day uprising against the interim government led by Adolf tier after the collapse of King III. During the commune movement, especially in the “bloody week”, 10000 to 20000 people were executed. Since then, thousands more have been sentenced to death, deportation, forced labour or imprisonment. In March 1879, the National Assembly passed a “partial amnesty” bill for members of the Paris Commune, followed by a “comprehensive amnesty” bill for those convicted after the failure of the people’s uprising in July 1880. Patrick bloche, chairman of the Cultural Affairs Committee of the national assembly (socialist) and a member of Parliament in Paris, said: “now is the time” and that all “victims of ruthless repression” in the Paris Commune Movement should be treated fairly, noting that, This is a “solemn action” for both “historical responsibility” and “justice”. Jean mariele Guen, the State Secretary in charge of the relationship between the government and Parliament and a former member of Parliament in Paris, supported a bill aimed at promoting the “memory inheritance” of “patriots” and “insurgents” with the values of “inspiring the Republic”. Those who signed the resolution on rehabilitation included brunole Roux, chairman of the parliamentary group of the socialist party, an environmentalist and reformist, and several elected members of the Paris Commune. They especially hoped to restore “honor and dignity” to those members of the Paris Commune who “were summarily executed and unjustly sentenced” for fighting for freedom. Proposal for the resolution to rehabilitate the victims of the suppression of the Paris Commune in 1871, contributed by Cui Zhiyuan of Tsinghua University and translated by Zhou Jiaxing of Shenzhen University [2] reason statement ladies and gentlemen: sometimes the writing of history is unfair to its victims. This is true of the innocent victims of the suppression of the Paris Commune Movement in 1871. So how can we pay tribute to them and how can we clear up the grievances of the victims who were unjustly convicted and executed at that time? The crackdown can be roughly divided into two stages – the first stage, that is, the stage of execution during the Paris Commune, especially the “bloody week”; And the second stage, the subsequent stage of trial and conviction – these two stages point to the same purpose: according to the wording used by Adolf tier, then chief executive of the French Republic, in his speech to the National Assembly on May 22, 1871, this is a “total atonement” of the Paris Commune. In the first stage, the army of the provisional government of Versailles led by Adolf tier invaded the city of Paris on May 21, 1871, opening the prelude to the “bloody week”, and the Paris Commune was eliminated. The bloody week ended at sunset on May 28 in the last fierce battles at father La Chez cemetery. The gendarmerie, especially the gendarmerie stationed outside the territory of the Republic and responsible for handling misdemeanors, and the special court [3] were quickly placed in railway stations and military barracks, monseau Park, Clichy square, Temple Station, [4] St. Jacques Tower Park, Paris Polytechnic University and even Luxembourg park. The supporters of the Paris Commune were brutally suppressed. Witnesses mentioned numerous executions, and people who appeared to have traces of gunpowder on their hands could be targeted because the traces of gunpowder meant that guns had been used recently. There is no precise conclusion on the death toll during the bleeding week. It is estimated that the death toll is between 10000 and 20000. The uncertainty of the death toll also shows the brutality and blindness of the crackdown. In the second stage, after the failure of the Paris Commune in 1871, more than 43500 people were detained, mainly in the sadoli military camp. [6] They are imprisoned in military barracks, old ships or cells in Versailles. Seine province was besieged and detainees were tried by military courts. 24 war committees have been in operation for more than four years. The members of the committee are required to review and decide on cases involving 34952 men, 819 women and 538 children. The war Commission pronounced 93 death sentences, of which 23 were actually executed. The Commission also sentenced 251 cases of life-long reform through labour or fixed-term reform through labour sentences (sentenced to forced hard labour or deportation to sinca in the Pacific)Caledonia), 1169 cases of exile, 3147 cases of deportation, 1247 cases of life imprisonment and 3359 cases of imprisonment. 22727 detainees benefited from immunity from prosecution and 2445 were acquitted. In addition, it is well known that nearly 10000 Paris Commune supporters fled to Britain, Belgium and Switzerland. The victims executed during the first phase were charged with additional charges after their death. In March 1879, the National Assembly voted for a partial amnesty. On July 11, 1880, an amnesty law was promulgated on victims convicted after the end of the Paris Commune. In the new French Republic, the surviving event participants disappeared. So, what methods can help these victims recover their rights and reputation and get redress? Amnesty? no First, amnesties apply only to hard decisions. However, the hasty judgment made in the “slaughterhouse” during the bloody week is at least unreliable, and the judgment has not been drafted under any circumstances. Secondly, the amnesty itself does not have the characteristics of effectively restoring the reputation of the relevant personnel, because the amnesty does not eliminate the penalty, the relevant illegal trials and sentences are still valid, and the fact that the relevant personnel are partially or completely prohibited from exercising their rights or deprived of their rights still exists. These judgments are not only still registered in the criminal record archives, but also make relevant personnel enter the evaluation consideration of recidivism and hinder the extension of probation. Thirdly, Amnesty only helps to exempt the punishment that has not been executed, but does not apply to the punishment that has been executed. Amnesties, in particular, do not benefit the deceased – the children of deceased offenders can only apply for exemption by paying fines to repay inherited debts. Finally, the amnesty no longer applies to individuals (Article 17 of the Constitution), and it does not seem to be able to effectively correct the mistakes made by the Versailles army in suppressing the Paris Commune against many victims, let alone those whose names are unfamiliar to most of us. Enact a new amnesty law? More not! Amnesty law is a legislative measure under a special political, social or economic background. The amnesty law retroactively eliminates the criminal character of related criminal acts. Articles 133-9 of the criminal code refer to the amnesty law “to eliminate the pronounced judgment”. In view of the amnesty laws voted in 1879 and 1880, a new amnesty law is used to “exempt all penalties” (articles 133-9 of the above-mentioned criminal law), which has no practical help for the living. For today, the amnesty law is also not an ideal way to pay tribute to the victims of the repression of the Paris Commune. Judicial restoration? Neither! According to articles 133-12 of the criminal code, “Any person sentenced to criminal punishment, reform through labor or misdemeanor can enjoy the treatment of restoration of rights as long as he meets the specified conditions in the current field, or as long as he meets the conditions specified in the criminal procedure law. Therefore, restoration of rights may be legal restoration of rights, which can be implemented without special conditions; restoration of rights may also be judicial restoration Restoration of rights, which means the decision of the criminal procedure court of the court of appeal. The effect of these two cases is the same. Restoration of rights is no more appropriate than the above two measures. Just like Amnesty and Amnesty laws, the audience of rehabilitation is also living people. In short, the restoration of rights can only roughly uphold justice for the people concerned. Because its purpose is to reclassify relevant personnel more conveniently by eliminating punishment. In this name, rehabilitation usually means the execution of punishment, which needs to be carried out without new punishment, or during punishment or reform through labor. Review? More not! It is a special relief measure, which is applicable to civil and criminal proceedings. In very limited exceptional cases, the emergence of new elements may lead to the re examination of cases in which decisions have entered into force. It is unreliable to take the proof of the existence of “new acts” or “unknown factors” on the day of trial as the best way for those who have been illegally sentenced in the series of events of the Paris Commune to seek justice. Later time also confirmed the fact that the gendarmerie and the special court were not tempted to make mistakes. They were informed at the time of their decision. Moreover, the application for review is an individual act, which excludes collective acts based on the common interests of tens of thousands of relevant personnel. Enact a commemorative decree representing the official conclusion of the French government? no Nowadays, there seems to be a consensus that the above-mentioned “commemorative” law is not an appropriate way to recall important historical events, let alone maintain the common memory of participants in historical events. In its report of 18 November 2008, the fact finding mission of the National Assembly highlighted that this was the final confirmation of the findings on commemorative issues. The mission formally objected, “Any excessive legislative measure hides dangers. It identifies historical facts in some way: the risk of violating the constitution, the risk of affecting the freedom of opinion and expression, the risk of damaging the freedom of teachers, the risk of questioning the scientific nature of history, and the political risk of weakening national cohesion and diplomatic influence.” The mission added: “from this assessment, it is necessary to believe that parliament should not move forward to a path that will be regretted sooner or later.” It is true that no one questions the historical fact that the members of the Paris Commune were slaughtered bloody in the suppression of the Paris Commune. But there is clearly a more appropriate way to bring justice to the victims of repression: that is the goal of our proposal to you for the adoption of the current resolution. In this context, the method of voting on resolutions has won the support of the public, including Professor Pierre evere, who believes that parliamentary approval is one of the important ways: this method can give the General Assembly the ability to clearly express its legislative response. Historians Pierre Nora, mark Filo and Jean Favier have also argued about commemoration before the fact finding mission. From this point of view, the French authorities can still see the influence and impartiality. For the international community, there are different opinions on all this.