【1.3】 Do the troubles start from the competition of academician candidate in Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) ?

It seemed that Chuan-Guo Xiao could have taken great advantages in the competition of the academician candidates in CAS. But on September 14, 2005, Sohu Corporation and the Publishing Press of Peking Union Medical College invited Fang Zhou-zi addressing a forum in the Sohu news channels about “Academic Regulations in Biology and Medicine”, in which the position of “Xiao’s Reflex Arc” is questioned at an academic level. On September 21, 2005, Zhou-Zi Fang published one of his articles “A Foot in Two Camps: the Chaos of Academician Election” in the Sohu news channels. In this article, Zhou-Zi Fang pointed out the theory from Chuan-Guo Xiao had no international reputation at all, and had not been confirmed by the Chinese medical communications either.

Chuan-Guo Xiao believed the above reports were untrue slanders, especially, these accusations deviated totally from the facts of his academic works and their international confirmation. He believed these damaged his reputation and thus sued this case to court.

Since October 8, 2006, when Chuan-Guo Xiao submitted his first lawsuit formally to the Court of Jianghan Disctrict in Wuhan, he had suited Zhou-Zi Fang for more than ten times at different locations, as in Wuhan, Beijing and even in the United States. Until November 30, 2007, the Beijing High People's Court pronounced a final adjudication.

On July 25, 2006, the Court of Jianghan District in Wuhan announced the first sentence, in which Zhou-Zi Fang lost this lawsuit. Soon afterwards, more than 600 people have signed on the “Open Letter by Scholars in China and Abroad on the Lawsuit of Chuan-Guo Xiao vs. Zhou-Zi Fang”, and against the unfair judgment of the court. The letter says, the comment of the academician election of Chuan-Guo Xiao from Zhou-Zi Fang is a legitimate academic criticism and supervision of public, which is totally consistent with the purpose of CAS to make an open academician election and to be supervised by the pubic as a legitimate civil right.

“I don’t think lawsuit interesting either,” said Ju Gong, “Others could criticize you whatever they like. The criticized one should always be sincere. It is unnecessary to look for lawsuit. Probably nobody can afford to accompany him with the lawsuit. It is expensive after all, if it lasts to long.”

On November 30, 2007, the judgment by the Beijing High People's Court illustrated that there are obvious disputation on the academic status of Chuan-Guo Xiao himself and the international influence of “Xiao’s Reflex Arc”. And the Curt considered, “The above disputation is in a pure academics level, and thus should be solved by academic autonomy. The Court ought not, and is not able to make a judgment by the law.”