“《刑事诉讼法》第16条规定：‘对于外国人犯罪应当追究刑事责任的，适用本法规定。......’”
“我国是一个主权独立的社会主义国家，在我国司法权管辖范围内，一切外国人都必须遵守我国的法律，对于外国人犯罪应当追究刑事责任的，应当适用我国刑事诉讼法，不  允  许  他们享有任何非法特权。”
（姚莉主编《刑事诉讼法学》 P.57,P.58 中国法制出版社 2006年 北京 ）

（如果您上www.google.com网站搜索，复制“美国杜邦化学公司”  8  个汉字或“杜邦化学公司”  6  个汉字的全名粘贴在“搜索框”中，就可在从第1网页开始的10多个网页内搜索到我已经发表过的10多封英文或/及中文公开信。）
  
尊敬的同志们 ，各位好!
 
 黄**强烈呼吁将美国杜邦涉嫌犯严重经济合同诈骗罪的问题按照《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百二十四条的规定严加制裁，敬请您给予宝贵的帮助！
 美国杜邦化学公司和黄**在1995年签订了完全由杜邦公司单方面制订、未与**生作任何协商的《生物效应鉴定协议（BIOLOGICAL  EVALUATION  AGREEMENT）》（以下简称《1995年协议》）。在《1995年协议》中，杜邦主动承诺在独占了黄**的专利技术后，将向黄**支付专利费和许可证费。然而杜邦根据《1995年协议》完全独占了黄**的这项高效、无毒农业杀虫剂专利技术后，杜邦在毫无任何正当理由的情况下7年多来一直拒绝向黄先生支付专费和许可证费，这是利用经济合同的诈骗; 杜邦从黄**手中获得的这一技术的价格与世界市场上类似的杀虫菊酯（Natural Pyrethrins）类技术价格相比“数额特别巨大”（不是“较大”或“巨大”而是“特别巨大”）；并伴有美国杜邦总裁贺利得（Holliday）多次诬蔑中国（P.R.China）是无赖国家、黄**是无赖分子，杜邦在2005.06.02.签署信件对黄**进行威胁-恫吓 ；在2005年10月中旬到中国公安机关对黄**进行诬告陷害未遂这些“特别严重情节”。因此，美国杜邦涉嫌严重经济合同诈骗犯罪，必须依照《刑法》严加制裁！
 综上所述，美国杜邦远远不是赖帐的跨国流氓，而是跨国诈骗犯罪的嫌犯。“赖帐”是指债务人在承认债权人债权的前提下，无正当理由、无明确偿还期限的拖延偿还债务的行为。杜邦却是7年多来一直在毫无任何正当理由的情况下拒绝向黄**支付专费和许可证费。因此，美国杜邦化学公司及其负责人应该是涉嫌犯经济合同诈骗罪，而不是“赖帐”，应该按照下列法规严加制裁。
《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百二十四条和《最高人民法院关于审理诈骗案件具体应用法律的若干问题的解释（1）》（1996年12月16日法发[1996]32号）第二条第（六）款  “合同签订后，以支付部分货款，开始履行合同为诱饵，骗取全部货物后，在合同规定的期限内或者双方另行约定的付款期限内，无正当理由拒不支付其余货款的。”“应认定其行为属于以非法占有为目的，利用经济合同进行诈骗”;
[合同诈骗案的追诉标准]

《最高人民检察院公安部关于经济犯罪案件追诉标准的规定》（2001年4月18日）

六十九、合同诈骗案（刑法第224条）

以非法占有为目的，在签订、履行合同过程中，骗取对方当事人财物，涉嫌下列情形之一的，应予追诉：

1、个人诈骗公私财物，数额在5000元至2万元以上的；

2、单位直接负责的主管人员和其他直接责任人员以单位名义实施诈骗，诈骗所得归单位所有的，数额在5万元至20万元以上的。
对盗版者都已处罚，对杜邦更应该按照《刑法》制裁！任何主权完全独立的国家，都绝对不允许任何外国人（自然人和法人）在自己的国家享有任何非法特权，中国当然也不例外。
在此，我们公开通知美国杜邦立即停止涉嫌犯严重经济合同诈骗罪的活动，按照《1995年协议》向黄先生支付专利费和许可证费！
此致
最崇高的敬礼！
 
                                        全责代理人：湖北  SXF

DuPont in U.S., suspect of severe crime of contract fraud, must be sanctioned in accordance with the Criminal Law!

(If you log onwww.google.com, copy and paste the 8-Chinese character full name of Du Pont “美国杜邦化学公司”or 6-Chinese character full name of Du Pont “杜邦化学公司”, you could see more than 10 published English or/and Chinese open letters by me on more than 10 pages from the first one.)

Honorable ladies and gentlemen:

Mr. Huang strongly appeals to strictly sanction DuPont, the suspect of the severe crime of contract fraud, in accordance with the regulation of Article 224, Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, please be generous to lend your precious support! DuPont Chemical Co. Ltd and Mr. Huang signed Biological Evaluation Agreement which was unilaterally established by DuPont without discussions in advance with Mr. Huang in 1995 (abbreviated for “1995 Agreement” as below). In 1995 Agreement, DuPont forwardly promised to pay for the patent fee and license fee to Mr. Huang after exclusively possessing his patented technology. After DuPont exclusively possessed Mr. Huang’s effective and nontoxic agricultural pesticide patent technology according to 1995 Agreement, it has been refusing to pay for the patent fee and license fee to Mr. Huang without any warrant for 7 years or more. This is crime of contract fraud. The gap between the price DuPont paid for the technology to Mr. Huang and those of similar Natural Pyrethrins-type technologies in world markets was “extremely enormous” (not “considerably big” or “enormous”, but “extremely enormous”); many “especially severe situations” accompanied: Holliday, President of DuPont, slandered China “a raffish country” and Mr. Huang “a rascal” for several times; DuPont signed a letter to threaten and intimidate Mr. Huang on June 2 2005; they also brought false charge against him before Chinese police in October 2005 but failed. Therefore, DuPont was a suspect of severe crime of contract fraud and must be sanctioned and punished in accordance with the Criminal Law! To summarize, DuPont is far from a transnational hoodlum for debt repudiation, but a transnational suspect of crime of fraud. Debt repudiation means under the premises of acknowledging the creditor’s rights, the debtor postpones to repay the debt without warrant and specific repayment period. Under the circumstance without any warrant, DuPont has been refusing to pay for the patent fee and license fee to Mr. Huang for the past 7 years or more. Therefore, DuPont and its person in charge should be suspect of crime of contract fraud, but not “debt repudiation”, and should be strictly sanctioned in accordance with Article 224, Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China.
Since pirates were punished, DuPont should also be sanctioned according to the Criminal Law! Any independent and sovereign country will not allow any foreigner (natural person and legal representative) to be entitled to any illegal privilege in its own country, and China will certainly not be exempted. 

Best regards!

Yours sincerely
                                          Universal Agent: SXF