Liu Shaoqi as a “renegade, traitor and scab”

Where in the source: Abstract; Journal of Asian Studies 40(3), May 1981, pp. 455–479

The peer-reviewed article independently identifies Liu as the highest-ranking Chinese Communist leader to fall victim to the Cultural Revolution and records his posthumous rehabilitation in spring 1980. It is used for scale and correction chronology, not for the Party's detailed factual claims.

Where in the source: Heading and paragraphs beginning “中国共产党第八届扩大的第十二次中央委员会全会” and “全会批准中央专案审查小组”

The communiqué names the enlarged Central Committee plenum as the adopting body and the Central Case Examination Group as author of the report, supporting both institutional carriers without relying on later attribution.

Where in the source: Page 3, paragraphs beginning “Now it has been proved” through “On the basis of the theory”

The political report shows that the CCP's Ninth National Congress repeated and celebrated the case after the 1968 plenum, establishing continued endorsement at the Party's national congress rather than a one-day resolution alone.

Where in the source: Paragraphs beginning “The so-called ‘investigation report’” and “All the false confessions”; Peking Review no. 12, 24 March 1980

The official review describes fabricated materials, forged evidence, compelled confessions, suppressed testimony and a recanted statement withheld by the investigation group. It supports the stated evidentiary mechanism as the correcting Party presented it.

Where in the source: Chapter 9, printed pp. 229–230

Walder's academic synthesis describes the Central Case Examination Group's place in the Cultural Revolution purges, its nationwide case-group network and the use of coercive interrogation. It corroborates the institutional setting, while the Liu-specific findings come from the cited case review.

Where in the source: Paragraph beginning “全会批准中央专案审查小组”

The communiqué directly supports the expulsion and dismissal consequence. Its call to continue criticism also documents intended enforcement, but is not used here to infer an unsourced number of additional victims.

Where in the source: Paragraph beginning “1966年‘文化大革命’开始后”

The official retrospective account supports confinement, physical persecution, the Kaifeng transfer and the date and place of death. The entry does not make a more specific claim about the immediate medical cause.

Where in the source: Page 5, paragraphs beginning “Seizing upon this” and “This plenary session, after serious and earnest discussion”

The communiqué says many leading party, government and army cadres were overthrown as alleged agents and directs responsible departments to redress the related framed-up, false and wrongful cases. It does not quantify them or extend that finding to every social group affected by the wider Cultural Revolution.

Where in the source: Paragraphs beginning “为刘少奇同志平反昭雪” and “五中全会庄严地向全党和全国人民宣告”

The adopted communiqué records the Fifth Plenum's unanimous resolution, the precise measures cancelled and the instruction to correct cases arising from Liu's case.

Where in the source: Single summary paragraph beginning “1980年2月23～29日在北京举行”

The Party historical database independently summarizes the plenum dates, removal of the three labels, cancellation of the 1968 resolution and report, restoration of Liu's reputation and redress of connected cases.

Where in the source: Sections 19–20, page 8

The 1981 resolution says Mao initiated and led the Cultural Revolution, rejects the alleged headquarters and also attributes the frame-up to Lin Biao, Jiang Qing and followers. This preserves the later Party account's allocation of responsibility without treating it as an independent judicial finding.