Useful Links
News-English
cheng kun cheng kun News-Chinese
Human Rights
US Government
International NGO
US-Sino Organizations
Religious/Spiritual
Labor
Minority Nationalities
Tibet
Uyghur
Law Reform
Media Studies
Legal Resources
Academic
|
|
|
|
Human Rights and Rule of Law - News and
Analysis
Mongolian Rights Advocate Released From Detention, Placed Under House Arrest
Authorities in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region (IMAR) have placed Mongolian rights activist and journalist Naranbilig under house arrest after detaining him for 20 days in March and April, according to reports from the U.S.-based Southern Mongolian Human Rights Information Center (SMHRIC). Naranbilig had planned to attend the United Nations (UN) Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in New York when authorities intercepted his invitation letter and detained him on March 23, according to an April 28 report from SMHRIC. Authorities prevented Naranbilig from consulting with a lawyer while he was detained, and his family members were not informed of the grounds for his detention or of his whereabouts. Authorities released Naranbilig on bail on April 23 and placed him under house arrest for one year, according to the report. They also confiscated his passport.
The SMHRIC connected Naranbilig's detention not only to his plan to attend the Permanent Forum but also to his attendance in 2007 at other international forums promoting the rights of pastoralists and mobile indigenous people, according to a statement delivered by the SMHRIC at the Permanent Forum. The Chinese government does not recognize any populations within its borders as "indigenous peoples" as defined under international law. (For an example of Chinese policy on this matter, see. e.g., a 1997 statement by the Chinese delegation to the 53rd session of the UN Commission on Human Rights, via the Web site of the Embassy of the People's Republic of China in Switzerland.) Naranbilig's detention also stemmed from his broader activities writing articles advocating ethnic minority rights and criticizing Chinese policies toward ethnic Mongols, according to the SMHRIC statement. (For more information on government policy toward Mongols, see Christopher P. Atwood's statement at the 2005 CECC roundtable on China's Ethnic Regional Autonomy Law: Does it Protect Minority Rights?, as well as the Special Focus section on ethnic minorities in the Congressional-Executive Commission on China 2005 Annual Report.) Authorities also have detained and imprisoned other ethnic Mongols who have promoted ethnic minority rights. In March, authorities detained, and later placed under house arrest, activist Tsebegjab for his interaction with overseas Mongolian activists, according to the April 28 report. Bookstore owner Hada continues to serve a 15-year sentence for "splittism" and "espionage" after he organized peaceful protests for ethnic rights in the IMAR capital of Hohhot.
Naranbilig's detention came at a period of increased government repression of citizen activism, especially by ethnic minorities, in the run-up to the Olympic Games and amid protests in Tibetan and Uighur areas of China. His detention also came amid the recent detention and imprisonment of several other fellow writers. (See, for example, CECC analyses on Lu Gengsong and Wang Dejia (1,2).) For more information on conditions in the IMAR, see Section II--Ethnic Minority Rights, in the CECC 2007 Annual Report (via the Government Printing Office Web site). For more information on restrictions against writers, see Section II--Freedom of Expression in the 2007 Annual Report.
| Source: -See Summary (2008-06-03 / English) |
Posted on: 2008-06-28 |
 |
|
| Link directly to this item with: http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/index.phpd?showsingle=106800 |
China's Earthquake Coverage More Open But Not Uncensored
Numerous reports in foreign media of China's initial response to the May 12 Sichuan earthquake described unusual media openness and government candor when compared to previous disasters. From the beginning, however, Communist Party and government officials directed Chinese media to emphasize the government's proactive response to the disaster and to focus on positive stories that promoted national unity and stability. Furthermore, China has quickly sought to rein in press coverage of topics that could taint the public's view of China's response, including allegations of official malfeasance leading to the collapse of a large number of schools. After parents of some of the thousands of children killed in the collapses began protests, officials reportedly ordered Chinese media to curb reporting on the issue, forcibly removed parents from protest sites, and briefly held foreign reporters trying to cover the protests in custody.
In the days following the quake, the New York Times (NYT) (May 14), Wall Street Journal (WSJ) (May 14), Associated Press (AP) (May 14, May 26), and Los Angeles Times (LAT) (May 23), among other media outlets, reported that Chinese television aired extensive and graphic live coverage from disaster areas, foreign reporters had largely unfettered access to disaster areas, and Xinhua, the central government's news agency, initially issued updates by the minute. The May 14 NYT article said "the rescue effort playing nonstop on Chinese television is remarkable for a country that has a history of concealing the scope of natural calamities," and according to the May 26 AP article, "[n]ever before have the nation's leaders allowed foreign reporters so much freedom to cover a major disaster." The reports noted that China's response following the Sichuan earthquake compared favorably to the devastating 1976 Tangshan earthquake, the 2003 SARS outbreak, Tibetan protests that began in March, and a major train collision in April - instances where officials sought to conceal casualty totals or severely limit media coverage.
Nevertheless, both Chinese and foreign media reports have indicated that since the disaster struck, Chinese officials have used their control over the media to shape post-quake coverage to their advantage. Hours after the quake, the Party's Central Propaganda Department issued a directive prohibiting media from sending reporters to the disaster areas and ordering them to only run reports from the central television station and news agency, according to a May 18 NYT article and the May 23 LAT article. Li Changchun, a high-ranking member of the Politburo, called on China's press to propagandize the government's rescue efforts and emphasize positive propaganda, unity, and stability, according to May 14 and May 17 Xinhua articles. As a result, China's domestic media have largely shied away from "negative reports," according to a May 24 article in The Age (Australia). There are indications, however, that Chinese journalists are testing the boundaries. So many journalists ignored the original order not to travel to the quake zones that it was later rescinded, according to the May 18 NYT article. And progressive Chinese media have reported on protests by angry parents seeking official accountability for poorly constructed schools (Southern Metropolitan Daily, May 26), and called for better earthquake-resistance standards for schools and enhanced supervision in the construction process (Caijing, May 22).
It is unclear why China has allowed this limited openness and more recent signs indicate that China has already begun to pull back. China has sought to play up what it calls "unprecedented transparency" following the earthquake as being the result of reforms that have taken place gradually in recent years, culminating most recently in open government regulations that went into effect on May 1, according to a May 26 Xinhua special report. Other observers have argued, however, that factors outside of China's control may have played a more important role. One media observer noted in a May 23 Washington Times (WT) article that censors may have been hampered because "news was spreading too quickly through online channels and the impact of the tragedy ran too deep." Others have noted that the nature of the event made it easier for China to respond with openness. "It is important to note that this was a natural disaster. People are united behind the government rescue effort so allowing a freer flow of information is politically beneficial for the censors," said Xiao Qiang, director of the China Internet Project and professor of journalism at the University of California at Berkeley, according to the WT article. China's rapid and extensive lockdown on information following the recent Tibetan protests (see previous CECC analyses: 1, 2, 3), for example, suggests that the Party's willingness to allow "openness" will depend heavily on context. The Financial Times (June 1) and AP (June 3, via NYT) reported that officials recently ordered media to rein in coverage of the school collapses and prevented foreign journalists from reporting as officials forcibly broke up a protest by grieving parents.
For a timeline highlighting major events affecting media coverage and the free flow of information in the aftermath of the earthquake, click on "more" below.
Timeline of Major Events Affecting Media Coverage and Free Flow of Information MAY 12 - A then-reported 7.8 magnitude earthquake (later revised to 8.0) strikes Wenchuan County, Sichuan province at 2:28 p.m., according to a May 12 Xinhua article. Premier Wen Jiabao immediately flies to the disaster zone.
- Within 20 minutes of the quake, officials announce its location and magnitude, and within hours death counts begin, and are frequently updated, according to a May 15 Xinhua article. Information about the quake, some in the form of rumors, spreads quickly over the Internet and cell phones, according to a May 13 WSJ article.
- Just hours after the quake, the Central Propaganda Department (CPD) issues an order barring media from sending reporters to the disaster areas, according to a May 18 NYT article. So many journalists ignore the order that by May 14 the CPD changes tack, saying reporters can go but must travel with rescue teams, even though many journalists have already been reporting live from the disaster areas.
- Li Changchun, a member of the Politburo Standing Committee, convenes a "special meeting" of propaganda officials, and calls on news media to "consciously implement the spirit of the central authorities," "firmly grasp the correct direction of public opinion," and "persist in giving priority to unity, stability, encouragement, and positive propaganda," according to a May 14 Xinhua article.
MAY 13 - Xinhua reports that the Ministry of Public Security (MPS) has issued an urgent circular strengthening monitoring of cell phones and the Internet to ensure "correct guidance of public opinion."
MAY 14-15 - Foreign media reports note the unusual candor of Chinese media coverage. China's central television station, CCTV, issues 24-hour coverage of the quake, and newspapers devote at least half their pages to the disaster, according to a May 15 AP article. Coverage is unusually candid, showing buried bodies, wounded victims, and grief-stricken family members. Despite openness, foreign media note heavy emphasis on coverage of Premier Wen's presence in the disaster areas. Foreign reporters appear to enjoy unfettered access, according to the May 14 NYT article. A few journalists later report blocked access or harassment in quake areas, according to a May 19 Foreign Correspondents Club of China statement.
- In a May 14 commentary, the official China Daily questions whether the central government had spent enough to ensure the safety of school buildings, noting that in some areas deaths in schools constituted the majority of reported fatalities.
- On May 15, the MPS announces that 17 citizens were punished, including detentions in two cases, for circulating "malicious rumors" about the quake on the Internet, according to a May 15 Xinhua article.
MAY 16 - Li Changchun visits the offices of Xinhua and CCTV, and outlines how reporters should be covering the earthquake, according to a May 17 Xinhua article. He said they should propagandize the important policies being implemented by the Party and central government as well as the positive actions of officials at all levels and the People's Liberation Army, and "show the great spiritual strength of the Chinese nation in uniting as one."
MAY 18 MAY 20 - Agence France-Presse reports that the Chinese press' relatively positive coverage of the government's response to the disaster stood in contrast to greater criticism circulating on the Internet.
- Foreign media observe that Chinese media coverage turns less aggressive. Newspapers begin to publish more official Xinhua stories, according to a May 20 WSJ article.
MAY 22 - The Communist Party's People's Daily reports the investigation and handling of 55 cases of "starting rumors" on the Internet about the earthquake.
MAY 24 - An examination of Chinese media reporting following the quake by The Age (Australia) finds that most stories focused on "non-threatening storylines - extraordinary rescues, miraculous survivals...and the laudable efforts of Premier Wen Jiabao...." The article notes that Chinese analysts and journalists interviewed said "there has been little analysis of earthquake prevention measures or apparently substandard construction of schools and other buildings, and few negative reports."
JUNE 1 - The Financial Times reports that sometime late in the week of May 25, Chinese journalists received a directive telling them to avoid coverage of the school collapses.
JUNE 3 - AP reports (via NYT) that Chinese police forcibly disperse a protest of more than 100 parents of children killed in a school collapse in the Sichuan city of Dujiangyan and briefly hold an AP reporter and two photographers in custody to prevent them from reporting the event.
For more information on freedom of expression in China, see Section II - Freedom of Expression, in the CECC's 2007 Annual Report.
| Source: -See Summary (2008-06-05 / English / Free) |
Posted on: 2008-06-27 |
|
more ... |
| Link directly to this item with: http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/index.phpd?showsingle=106280 |
Harassment of Beijing-based Activists During the U.S.-China Human Rights Dialogue
According to a May 26 Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) article and a May 28 Associated Press (AP) article, Beijing activists reported they were harassed, subjected to surveillance, and warned not to meet with the U.S. officials present in Beijing for the U.S.-China bilateral human rights dialogue. - On May 24, AIDS activist Wan Yanhai was contacted by the Beijing Public Security Bureau's National Security Unit and was told that he would be subjected to heightened surveillance over the next several days, according to the CHRD article. On May 25, Wan reported, in an essay circulated online (a Chinese version has been reprinted on the U.S.-based Secret China Web site; a blogger in Canada also posted an English version), that a police car was parked in front of his door and followed him wherever he went. Wan wrote: "If it were not for the police visit, I would not have known there was going to be a Sino-U.S. human rights dialogue. My neighbors heard from police that some international VIPs are coming."
- On May 23 and 24, Zeng Jinyan, human rights activist and wife of Hu Jia, was reportedly told by the National Security police that they were watching her more closely and would prevent her from leaving her home because "a U.S. delegation wants to meet you," according to the CHRD article.
- Human rights lawyer Zhang Xingshui declined an invitation to a May 27 working lunch with Assistant Secretary of State David Kramer after police visited his home on May 25 as reported in a May 27 USA Today article. According to the article, Zhang said: "They persuaded me not to meet the U.S. visitors. They did not say what would happen, but maybe they will give pressure to my work. . . . I am afraid, so I have to give up this opportunity."
- Well-known rights defense lawyer Mo Shaoping was also warned not to accept an invitation to the May 27 lunch. According to the AP report, Mo said he went anyway.
- Many other Beijing activists were also placed under surveillance in connection with the U.S.-China human rights dialogue, including a member of the China Democracy Party, religious rights activists, and veterans of the 1989 Tiananmen protests, as reported by the CHRD article.
| Source: -See Summary (2008-06-25 / English / Free) |
Posted on: 2008-06-25 |
|
|
| Link directly to this item with: http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/index.phpd?showsingle=107159 |
Family Questions Hu Jia's Medical Treatment; CECC Translation of Criminal Judgment
According to a June 13 Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) article, authorities are reportedly denying imprisoned rights activist Hu Jia access to adequate medical care. Hu suffers from cirrhosis of the liver and his family has expressed concern over his poor health. Authorities allegedly told Hu's family that his health has improved and he is not eligible for medical parole, according to the CHRD article. Under the Measures on Implementing Medical Parole for Prisoners, issued in 1990 by the Ministry of Justice, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the Public Security Bureau, a prisoner is not eligible for medical parole unless "there is risk of death in the short term" or until he has served one-third of a fixed-term sentence (the full Chinese text is posted on the Ministry of Justice Web site, relevant English excerpts are available on the Duihua Foundation Web site). The CHRD article states that without access to Hu's medical records, Hu's family has no way to ascertain if his current condition is life-threatening or if he has regular access to a liver specialist.
On April 3, 2008, the Beijing Municipal First Intermediate People's Court sentenced Hu Jia to three-and-one-half years's imprisonment and one year deprivation of political rights for inciting subversion of state power, a crime under Article 105 of China's Criminal Law. CHRD posted a copy of the court's decision, and the Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC) has translated the decision into English. Upon leaving the courtroom on April 3, defense lawyer Li Fangping indicated that Hu had 10 days to appeal the decision, but did not plan to do so, according to an April 3 Boxun.com article (in Chinese). As reported on April 22 by Agence France-Presse (AFP), Hu Jia told his other lawyer, Li Jinsong, on April 4 that it would be futile to appeal. However, the AFP article also reported that Hu's lawyers were denied access to Hu on April 13, the last day to file an appeal. According to an April 23 CHRD article (in Chinese via CHRD), Li Fangping contacted the court, which notified him that it had not received a petition for appeal from Hu Jia during the 10-day appeal period.
| Source: -See Summary (2008-06-19 / English / Free) |
Posted on: 2008-06-25 |
|
|
| Link directly to this item with: http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/index.phpd?showsingle=107330 |
China Continues to Crack Down on HIV/AIDS Web Sites and Activists
Chinese authorities have made significant progress in their efforts to combat the spread of HIV/AIDS since 2003, but at the same time continue to harass HIV/AIDS advocates. Authorities reportedly ordered the closure of the "AIDS Museum" Web site, www.aidsmuseum.cn, according its founder, Chang Kun, in a May 7 Radio Free Asia interview. Chang, an HIV/AIDS activist, said he received a phone call on May 6 from the site's Internet Service Provider (ISP) saying that the local public security bureau's Internet surveillance division reportedly ordered the site closed because it contained information about "firearms and ammunition."
Shaanxi province officials reportedly shut down another Web site, AIDS Wikipedia, also founded by Chang from February 20 to March 12, according to a Radio Free Asia interview on February 22 reported in The Epoch Times and Chang's personal Web page. In the interview, Chang said the closure by the local public security bureau's Internet surveillance division was due to his article about farmland confiscation in Anhui province.
The closure of Chang's Web sites follows other instances over the past year where officials harassed HIV/AIDS activists and curbed their online activities. These include:
- Police reportedly harassed HIV/AIDS activist Wan Yanhai according to a May 27 USA Today report. Wan said he was put under 24-hour police surveillance for four days and the police followed his every move. Several other human rights activists reportedly had similar experience during the same time according to an Associated Press (AP) report (via International Herald Tribune). The crackdown took place during the weekend before the latest round of the Sino-U.S. human rights dialogue according to a May 27 press release by Human Rights in China.
- Public security officials sentenced HIV/AIDS activist Hu Jia to three years and six months in prison for "inciting subversion of state power" on April 3. See CECC's news and analysis about Hu Jia's detention, formal arrest, trial, and sentence.
- On March 5, Boxun reported that Beijing public security bureau's Internet surveillance division informed Beijing Aizhixing Institute (via Aizhixing's ISP) to remove illegal information, specifically sensitive information about HIV/AIDS. The illegal information was an Aizhixing statement on HIV/AIDS advocate Hu Jia's disappearance two years ago. Officials subsequently closed the Web site, with people in the Beijing area unable to access the site.
- Officials banned a conference scheduled for early August 2007 in Guangzhou on the legal rights of those infected with HIV. The conference would have brought together fifty Chinese and international HIV/AIDS activists and experts. In a July 29, 2007, Radio Free Asia article, one of the conference organizers, the New York-based Asia Catalyst, suggested that authorities cancelled the conference because the subject matter and the involvement of foreigners were "too sensitive."
- Leading HIV/AIDS experts and advocates from around the world submitted an open letter dated September 27, 2007, to the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) expressing concern over Chinese government actions against the AIDS work of Chinese NGOs and advocates, including Li Dan. State security officials held Li, founder of the China Orchid AIDS Project and winner of the 2005 Reebok Human Rights Award, in custody in Beijing for 24 hours on July 27, 2007. The China Orchid AIDS Project was the co-organizer of the cancelled conference in August.
For more information on HIV/AIDS in China, see pages 117-118 and 127-129 of the CECC's 2007 Annual Report.
| Source: -See Summary (2008-05-27 / English / Free) |
Posted on: 2008-06-25 |
|
|
| Link directly to this item with: http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/index.phpd?showsingle=106348 |
Officials To Watch for "Negative Content" in Supplements About Earthquake
Publishing regulators should ensure that magazine or periodical supplements related to the May 12 earthquake do not contain "negative content," according to a May 22 circular issued by the General Administration of Press and Publication (GAPP), a government agency with the power to screen, censor, and ban any print, electronic, or Internet publication in China. The Circular Regarding Supporting Periodicals in Publishing Anti-Quake Disaster Relief Supplements does not define the term "negative content." The GAPP exercises tight control over the publishing industry in China and magazines generally may publish only two supplements a year with the approval of the relevant press and publication administration of the province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the central government (see Article 34 of the Provisions on the Administration of Periodical Publishing). Article 1 of the May 22 circular allows press and publication officials to approve an additional one or two supplements related to "anti-quake disaster relief" for magazines that have reached the two-supplement limit. Article 2 calls on officials reviewing applications to publish these supplements to "take strict precautions against negative content appearing in supplements" and to "attach great importance to the supplement's public opinion guidance function."
Despite the outward appearance of some initial openness in Chinese media coverage of the earthquake, Chinese officials have continued to use their control over the media to shape post-quake coverage and public opinion to their advantage. In addition to the GAPP circular, the Communist Party's Central Propaganda Department and a top official of the Politburo have instructed reporters to emphasize stories showcasing the government's rescue efforts and the unity of the Chinese nation, while avoiding or downplaying controversial topics such as parents protesting over schools that collapsed in the quake.
Such state-enforced manipulation of the media to promote the Party's political agenda violates international standards for freedom of expression. Article 19 of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which China signed and has committed to ratify, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), guarantees the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas. The ICCPR and UDHR permit states to restrict this freedom under a limited number of circumstances, but furthering a political agenda is not one of the permitted exceptions. In addition to the ICCPR and UDHR protections, Article 35 of China's Constitution provides that Chinese citizens enjoy freedom of the press.
For more information on how the Party uses the Chinese media to serve its own interests, see "Roles the Media Is Expected to Play" in Section II--Freedom of Expression of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China's 2007 Annual Report. For more information on the various agencies responsible for censorship in China, click here.
| Source: -See Summary (2008-06-11 / English / Free) |
Posted on: 2008-06-25 |
|
|
| Link directly to this item with: http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/index.phpd?showsingle=106733 |
North Korea Executes 15 Attempting Escape, China Arrests 40 Refugees
On February 20, North Korean security agents publicly executed 13 women and 2 men in the town of Juwongu in the county of Onseong in North Hamyung province near the border with China, according to unnamed sources cited in a March 10 North Korea Today report (a newsletter published by Good Friends, a Buddhist NGO based in South Korea). The executions reportedly were carried out on a bridge, as local residents were forced to observe. Local authorities notified all public institutions, enterprises, and neighborhood units that attendance was mandatory and verified attendance on the day of the executions, according to the report.
The report said that the authorities accused the people who were executed of planning to cross the border to seek economic assistance from relatives in China, or of assisting others wishing to cross the border. The report does not mention allegations common in reports of previous executions that the people executed had engaged in espionage or had worked with outside Christian groups. The report implies that authorities may have targeted individuals crossing the border in search of food. Local residents reportedly were "deeply shocked" by the executions and stressed that those who were executed were only trying to survive amid conditions of starvation.
North Korean authorities have said recent executions such as the one on February 20 were carried out in response to a rise in unauthorized crossings, according to the Good Friends' account. Good Friends quoted a North Korean official as saying, "[w]e see people moving [across the border] more busily these days....This is why we carried out the executions. We wanted the people to have the right frame of mind on this issue." On March 5, the BBC also reported on the executions, but noted that "[t]here has been no official word from North Korea on the executions and South Korea's Unification Ministry said it could not confirm the report."
Good Friends also pointed out that last year North Korea increased the sentences for refugees caught crossing the river to China or who are repatriated from China. Beginning in March 2007, the penalty for crossing the river for economic reasons, which North Korea considers a crime, increased from a maximum of three years to five to seven years in prison. According to a March 2008 report from the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, penalties imposed by North Korea for refugees believed to have had contact with South Korean Christian groups are more severe, including execution in some cases. An unnamed Christian activist working along the border who was cited in a March 6 Time
|
