China Human Rights Report 2008

臺灣民主基金會 Taiwan Foundation for Democracy

本出版品係由財團法人臺灣民主基金會負責出版。臺灣民主基金會是一個獨立、非營利的機構，其宗旨在促進臺灣以及全球民主、人權的研究與發展。臺灣民主基金會成立於二○○三年，是亞洲第一個國家級民主基金會，未來基金會志在與其他民主國家合作，促進全球新一波的民主化。

This is a publication of the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD). The TFD is an independent, non-profit foundation dedicated to the study and promotion of democracy and human rights in Taiwan and abroad. Founded in 2003, the TFD is the first democracy assistance foundation established in Asia. The Foundation is committed to the vision of working together with other democracies, to advance a new wave of democratization worldwide.

This report is published by the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy. Statements of fact or opinion appearing in this report do not imply endorsement by the publisher. All rights reserved. No portion of the contents may be reproduced in any form or by any means without prior written permission of the publisher.

Taiwan Foundation for Democracy

China Human Rights Report 2008

CONTENTS

Foreword...... i

Chapter I: Preface...... 1

Chapter II: Social Rights...... 27

Chapter III: Political Rights...... 43

Chapter IV: Judicial Rights...... 81

Chapter V: Economics and Environmental Rights...... 111

Chapter VI: Education and Cultural Rights...... 139

China Human Rights Report 2008

Foreword

On December 10, 1948, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, declaring the right to life, freedom, security, and economic, social and cultural rights as fundamental human rights. The pursuit of these fundamental human rights is not only a recognition of human dignity, but also a promotion of the foundations for world freedom, justice and peace. The development and protection of human rights are not only a government’s duty, but also the reason for a government’s existence. Democracy has become a universal value, as it possesses various supervisory abilities to prevent governments from infringing on their subjects’ human rights. Therefore, it can be said that democracy and human rights complement each other and are inseparable. Democratic development enhances the protection of human rights, which in turn deepens and consolidates democracy. Taiwan’s historical developments have provided one of the most successful examples in this regard.

Taiwan’s democratization has been hailed as a political miracle. As a fully democratic country, Taiwan’s achievements in human rights protection and promotion are widely recognized, but we are not complacent about this. In addition to further strengthening these achievements, we hope to expand our horizons and go one step further by caring about human rights and democratic developments in neighboring countries. This is the raison d’être for the establishment of the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy and its goals.

The United Nations has already affirmed fundamental human rights, and human rights protection has become a universal value. To the Taiwanese people, human rights are a given, yet to people from other countries, human rights remains to be a luxury, a prime example being our neighbor China. China’s failure in improving its human rights has affected Burma and North Korea. These two countries follow China’s model, resisting democratic and human rights reforms. Therefore, China’s human rights record is not only an issue concerning China but also an issue that affects Asia and even the whole world.

China’s human rights situation has long been a major concern of the international community, which has always sternly criticized its abuse by the Chinese government. From Taiwan’s point of view, China’s management of human rights issues not only determines whether China is able to abide by universal norms of the international community, whether its people can enjoy fundamental human rights, or whether their human dignity can be protected, but also affects regional stability and the development of cross-strait ties.

To those concerned about China’s human rights, 2008 is a very critical year because it is the 60th anniversary of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That the Chinese government has failed to respect human rights gives the Declaration a heavy blow. Moreover, the Chinese government promised to improve China’s human rights in its bid to host the 2008 Olympic Games. One of the main reasons for the support given by many countries and human rights groups was the hope that the Olympic Games would encourage China to improve its human rights to meet international standards. That is why international human rights organizations and democratic countries closely watched and examined whether China would keep its promise during the past seven years. In other words, 2008 is the year to make the last examination on whether China fulfilled its promise seven years ago.

Based on the concerns regarding China’s development and the hope to encourage the Chinese government to make real efforts in improving China’s human rights so as to allow the Chinese people to live with dignity, the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy invites leading scholars again to study China’s 2008 human rights from six different aspects. The study culminated in a report that was published as China Human Rights Report 2008. Through this annual report, the Foundation hopes to make a contribution to the arduous task of promoting human rights in China.

Wen-cheng Lin President Taiwan Foundation for Democracy February 2009

Preface

China’s 2008 Human Rights: The Year to Examine Beijing’s Commitment

Wen-cheng Lin*

I. Introduction

The year 2008 holds great importance for both China and those who care about China’s human rights situation. To China, it symbolizes China’s power and international influence reaching new heights, as China hosted the 2008 Summer Olympic Games in Beijing. The Chinese government has used all of its steam to strengthen its soft power by upgrading its infrastructure and educating its people on proper behavior. It hoped to improve China’s international image through coverage by the international media that flocked to Beijing during the Games.

The Chinese government made many promises in order to win the bid to host the 2008 Olympic Summer Games, notably that it would improve China’s human rights situation. For example, Wang Wei, Secretary-General of the Beijing Olympics Bid Committee, said in 2001 that “the Games coming to China not only promote our economy, but also enhance all social conditions, including education, health, and human rights.”① In the documents that China prepared for its 2008 Olympics bid, the Chinese government promised to respect press freedom, clearly stating that “there will be no restrictions on journalists and reporting of the Olympic Games” and that “there will be no restrictions concerning the use of media material produced in China and intended primarily for broadcast outside.” Beijing promised that China “will be open in every aspect to the rest of the country and the whole world.”②

Many countries and those concerned about China’s human rights situation supported Beijing to host the 2008 Olympic Games, believing that it to be a golden opportunity

* Wen-cheng Lin is professor of the Institute of China and Asia-Pacific Studies, National Sun Yat-sen University.

to promote China’s human rights. They hoped to use the 2008 Summer Games as leverage to influence China in tolerating press freedom, increasing decision-making transparency, and improving the human rights situation. For instance, International Olympic Committee Chairman Jacques Rogge suggested that the Beijing Olympic Games would have the impact on improving China’s freedom and its relationship with society. He also believed that to let 25,000 reporters report the Beijing Olympic Games would make China more open to the outside world.③

Therefore, to those concerned about China’s human rights, the year 2008 was the time to exam whether China would keep its promise. Meanwhile, the Chinese government wanted to assure the success of the Beijing Olympic Games and maintain its international image, coming across as a stable and harmonious society regardless of its real situation.

II. Beijing Olympic Games and China’s 2008 human rights

Although China has made promises and the Chinese officials boasted that “the preparation of the 2008 Olympic Games has promoted the development of China’s human rights,”④ the Human Rights Watch pointed out that the Chinese government did not stay true to its word. Ironically, hosting the 2008 Olympic Games saw the worsening of China’s human rights situation in many areas due to the government using various forceful means to suppress every likely voice of resistance in order to maintain the image of a harmonious society during the Game.⑤ The European Union (EU) Annual Report on Human Rights 2008 expresses their lost hope that the Beijing Olympic Games would have improved China’s human rights condition, pointing out that the Chinese government tightened up the security measures, sacrificed civil liberties, and in some areas violated human rights.⑥

The following eight points are the evaluations of observing countries and international human rights organizations on China’s human rights situation. The first of these is that the Chinese government intensified its control over the Internet and its manipulation of the press.⑦ The countdown to the Beijing Olympic Games has seen the threshold lowered for Internet content considered “sensitive” by China’s censors, thus promoting the closure of access to thousands of websites. The Chinese government estimates that more than 18,000 individual blogs and websites have been shut down since April 2007.⑧ Second of all, China is the world’s largest jailer of journalists. The

Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) points out that there are at least twenty-five journalists behind bars in China. The difficulties that the Chinese media encountered in 2008 were no different from what it faced in 2001.⑨ In other words, China’s press freedom made no progress during the past seven years. Amnesty International Report 2008 also points out that preparations for the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing were marked by the repression of human rights activists and the intensification of Internet censorship and that of other media.⑩

Third, the Chinese government increased its suppression of Falun Gong, issuing a nationwide directive requesting local governments to take greater measures to prevent Falun Gong from “interfering with or harming” the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. Beijing and Shanghai public security bureaus also issued directives providing rewards for informants who report potentially harmful activities of the Falun Gong to the police. It was reported that the Shanghai Public Security Bureau ordered Falun Gong practitioners and other dissidents in April 2008 to report to the security office once every week until the end of October 2008 and threatened to detain or punish anyone who violated this order.⑪

Fourth, the Chinese government more severely implemented its household registration (hukou) policy in order to secure the preparations for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. Migrants with legal residency status were detained and sent back to their hometowns.⑫ Fifth, the Chinese government fastened the repatriation of North Korean refugees before the Beijing Olympic Games, strengthening border surveillance and increasing arrests. In addition, it intensified the crackdowns against ethnic Korean citizens who would harbor refugees by increasing the penalties and searching the homes of ethnic Koreans living in areas near the border.⑬ Although there are some North Korean refugees in China under the protection of the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR), “the Chinese government has refused to issue them an exit visa unless the UNHCR agrees not to process any more asylum seekers until after the Beijing Olympics are over.”⑭

Sixth, the Chinese government increased its control over civil society and non- governmental organizations (NGOs). It suppressed dissident voices and harassed non- communist leaders and unregistered religious groups in the name of national security and social stability.⑮ Seventh, the Chinese government tightened the repression of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) amid preparations for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. Using the excuse of “counterterrorism” to defend the enforcement

of repressive security measures, it cracked down on Uyghur demonstrations and implemented policies to dilute Uyghur identity.⑯ Eighth, the abuse of Tibetan human rights by the Chinese authorities reached new heights, being the worst in several decades. There will be a more detailed analysis on the Tibetan riots of March 10, 2008, and China’s human rights abuses in the Tibetan areas in another section of this article.

In fact, China’s human rights situation has disappointed the international community every year for the past seven years, and the year of the Beijing Olympic Games is certainly no exception. In his testimony to the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, Mr. Robin Munro, research director of the Hong Kong-based China Labor Bulletin, expressed that he “was surprised at the flagrant and unrestrained way in which the authorities have dealt with dissent and potential dissent in the run-up to the Games.”⑰

III. Beijing’s defense of its human rights situation

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) conducted the Universal Periodic Review on China for the first time on February 9, 2009. Shortly before on December 5, 2008, the Chinese government submitted a human rights report to the UNHRC, defending China’s human rights situation. A summary of its key points are as follows:⑱

1. It is natural for countries to have different views on human rights issues because there are differences among countries in their political systems, levels of development, and historical and cultural backgrounds. Therefore, all countries will adopt measures to promote human rights in accordance with the United Nations Charter and the international human rights treaties in the light of their national realities.

2. According to the report, the human rights situation for Chinese citizens has greatly improved since China launched its open door policy in 1978.

3. The Chinese Constitution contains detailed regulations on the basic rights and obligations of China’s citizens. It also contains specific provisions on the protection of basic economic, social and cultural rights, including the rights for ethnic minorities and other underprivileged groups. China has enacted nearly

250 laws to protect human rights and joined 25 international human rights conventions.⑲

4. The report promotes the electoral system of the National People’s Congress, the adoption of a multiparty cooperation system under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), the implementation of the policy for regional ethnic autonomy, the launching of human rights education, and the independent judicial system. The democratic and human rights system established is based on China’s special conditions.

5. The report points out that the Chinese government attaches top priority to the people’s rights to subsistence and to development. It emphasizes that China has made great achievements on reducing poverty, creating jobs, establishing social security mechanisms, completing the reconstruction of the Sichuan Province earthquake within very short period of time, and improving the healthcare system and people’s right to health.

6. With regard to civil and political rights, the report emphasizes that China has strictly controlled the death penalty; guaranteed the right of freedom of the person; prohibited torture; stipulated freedoms of religion, speech and assembly in the Chinese Constitution, and established mechanisms to guarantee fair trials.

7. The report emphasizes its efforts and achievements on the protection of women, children, persons with disabilities, and ethnic minorities.

To experts and organizations concerned about China’s human rights, the theories and reasons used by the Chinese government to defend its poor human rights record, such as China’s outstanding legal system to protect human rights, the significant progress of China’s human rights condition during the past three decades, and China’s special characteristics as the largest developing country with 56 ethnic groups and a total of 1.32 billion people, are all old stories. Beijing emphasizes that other countries’ views on human rights are not necessarily suitable to China because it has a unique national condition. However, human rights have become universal values and have developed a common criterion. The Chinese government’s arguments are simply excuses to suppress all opposition forces in order to maintain the CCP’s autocratic rule.

IV. International community’s observations of China’s 2008 human rights record

Beijing knows the real criterion for human rights and democracy because the Chinese Constitution and laws contain articles regarding the people’s basic political rights, civil rights, and economic rights. But every article in the constitution and law has an appendix, such as not to “endanger national security” or to “harm national unity and integrity.” Otherwise, those rights protected by the constitution and laws will be overruled. The problem is that the Chinese government does not clearly define what is to endanger national security or to harm national unity and integrity. In fact, it vaguely and broadly defines those terms to suppress human rights activists, ethnic minorities, civil society, and journalists. Although China has joined twenty-five international human rights conventions, it makes reservations on key articles in those conventions. For instance, the Chinese government ratified theInternational Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on March 27, 2001. However, it made reservations on article 8.1 (a) which states: “The right of everyone to form trade unions and join the trade union of his choice, subject only to the rules of the organization concerned, for the promotion and protection of his economic and social interests. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.” China’s workers still do not enjoy the freedom to form or join unions. Although China has signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, it did not ratify it. Therefore, Western governments and many international non-governmental organizations request China to join core international human rights treaties, especially the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and to cancel its reservation on the articles in those treaties it has already joined.

In fact, human rights reports released by Western countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, and international organizations make no exception in strongly criticizing China’s human rights record. First of all, the Annual Report 2008 prepared by the Congressional-Executive Commission on China makes four general observations about China’s human rights situation:⑳

1. The intolerance toward civil activism and the censorship on the information of public concern by the Chinese government and the CCP are increasing. The fact is that the Chinese government has increased illegally detaining or harassing

dissidents and petitioners, tightened its control over political organizations, strengthened the suppression of the peaceful demonstrations in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region; and cracked down on the Tibetan riots in March 2008, thus leading to many Tibetan deaths. China’s control over Tibet has reached its highest in two decades.

2. The Chinese government continues to use the law as a tool to pursue political ends. China’s manipulation of the law to prohibit speeches or publications which were regarded as harmful to the so-called national reputation and interests has worsened in some areas last year. In addition, the provisions in the criminal law regarding crimes of endangering national security, subverting the political power of the state, and overthrowing the socialist system remain to be the main tools for China to punish those who peacefully criticize the government and promote human rights over the Internet. The Chinese government passed laws concerning national unity, internal security, social order, and the promotion of a harmonious society in 2006 and 2007, which have become the legal basis for the government in detaining and imprisoning the people.

3. When the failure of national policy brings disaster, the Chinese government tends to take measures to control the damage and avoid backfire that may hurt the central leadership, thereby affecting the ruling status of the CCP regime. One of the purposes that the Chinese government began to enforce the Law on Emergency Response on November 1, 2007, was to prevent small incidents from expanding into public crises. For example, the Chinese government ordered the media to report positive stories during the May 2008 earthquake in Sichuan Province, to water down the scale of the Tibetan riots in the spring of 2008, and to refrain from covering negative news about air quality and food security. The fact is that a corrupt government that ignores the value of life is an important reason why the disasters occur or the casualties are expanded.

4. The Tibetan riots, the earthquake in Sichuan, Beijing’s 2008 Olympic Games, and food security show that whether China can improve its capability of governance will not only affect the life of the Chinese citizen but will also impact security in other countries. The lack of transparency, a weak legal system, and the impotence of the government to enforce food security laws have endangered China’s neighbors and trading partners. In addition, China increased its alert on foreign influence in 2008. It detained those Chinese who

are active in the international community and the ethnic minorities who have contacts with foreign governments, closed the churches that have connections with foreign countries, harassed and detained believers who have contacts with foreign believers of the same religion, and restricted the development of non- governmental organizations. However, China did pass some laws to prevent monopoly, to open governmental information, to promote employment, and to regulate the legal business and the intellectual property rights. If the government can sincerely enforce those laws, then there is potential to create some positive impact.㉑ But it remains to be seen whether the Chinese government will enforce those laws that promote China’s human rights.

Second, the Amnesty International 2008 Report pointed out many serious violations of human rights by the Chinese government in 2008.㉒ For instance, the Chinese government continued to suppress ethnic minorities such as the Tibetans and Mongolians; Falun Gong practitioners were tortured or illegally treated in jail, the Christians were still prosecuted if they practiced their religious activities outside the channel approved by the government, and death penalties remained to be widely sentenced and concealed even though China’s National People’s Court restated that it would review all capital sentences. Chinese law includes sixty-eight capital offenses, including corruption and drug-related offences. Amnesty International estimates that there were at least 470 persons executed and 1,860 persons sentenced to death in 2007. Unfortunately, the real figure is likely to be higher. Torture is very common in jail. Millions of people do not have channels for legal assistance. They are forced to use approaches outside the legal system. Women still suffer discrimination in employment, education, and access to health care. The trafficking of women and girls remains to be a serious problem in China. Domestic violence continues to be prevalent and is the main cause for suicide by women in rural areas.

Human rights defenders and their relatives are frequently subjected to harassment, detention, house arrest and beatings by both government officials and unidentified assailants. Furthermore, an increasing number of defense lawyers have had their license renewal application rejected. Moreover, the Chinese government continues to use the US-led global war on terror to justify its harsh repression of ethnic Uyghur people in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. It has succeeded in using the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) to pressure neighboring countries, including Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, to repatriate the so-called Uyghur terrorists back to China. The Chinese government also harshly restricts freedom of religion,

speech and assembly in Tibet.

Third, the EU Report on Human Rights 2008 points out that the preparations of the Olympic Games has led to a strengthening of security measures at the expense of human rights in China. These include the silencing of critical voices “through intimidation, harassment and arrest ahead of the Games; Internet control; forced evictions of people from their homes to make room for Olympic construction works and a general clean-up operation in Beijing involving the rounding up of petitioners, activists and others.”㉓ The Report suggests that overall, China’s human rights in 2008 “showed no progress on some of the main areas of concern for the EU, which include the ratification of the ICCPR, freedom of expression and association with particular emphasis on human rights defenders, reform of the criminal justice system and abolition of re-education through labor system, prisoners’ rights, freedom of religion and rights of persons belonging to minorities.”㉔

Fourth, the Human Rights Annual Report released by the United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office in March 2008 points out that “despite the Chinese government’s stated commitment to protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, the situation in China remains poor.” Although China has emerged as a global player and brought considerable economic and social benefits to many of its citizens, “the Chinese authorities have been slow to make its progress elsewhere, particularly in civil and political rights.”㉕

Fifth, the International Religious Freedom Report 2008 released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor of the US State Department points out that the Chinese government has strengthened the repression of religious freedom in some areas, in particular Tibet and the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.㉖ The Bureau’s 2008 Country Report on Human Rights Practices also points out that the Chinese government’s human rights record “remained poor and worsened in some areas.” For instance, “During the year, the government increased its severe cultural and religious repression of ethnic minorities in Tibetan areas and the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, increased detention and harassment of dissidents and petitioners, and maintained tight controls on freedom of speech and the Internet. The government continues to monitor, harass, detain, arrest, and imprison journalists, writers, activists, and defense lawyers and their families.”㉗ The progress in the rule of law remains limited.

But some international human rights reports point out the progress in some

areas in China’s human rights in 2008: first of all, room for civil society continues to expand.㉘ Second, the EU’s 2008 human rights report suggests that “there were positive developments in the area of economic, social and cultural rights, such as the adoption of a new Labor Contract Law, which has increased the protection of workers, as well as laws requiring review on death penalty cases.㉙ Third, the Chinese government has begun to pay attention to the issue of sexual harassment to women. In June 2008, a district people’s court in Chengdu City sentenced a manager in a high- tech company to five months for sexual harassment. This is the first time in China that sexual harassment was punished through criminal law. But the protection of women against sexual harassment is only the action of few courts or individual judges. It is still not a nationwide practice. Fourth, China’s State Council launched the 2008-2012 action plan to combat the trafficking of women and children on December 3, 2007. It shows that China has begun to take this issue seriously. Fifth, China’s Regulation on Open Government Information began to take force in May 2008, giving people the right of access. This is apparent in that the Chinese authorities did provide more information to the media during the CCP’s 17th party congress in October 2007 and the meetings of the National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultation conference in March 2008.

V. Taiwan Foundation for Democracy’s observation of China’s 2008 human rights record

1. The Tibetan riots in March

The most serious human rights issue in China during 2008 was the violent crackdown of the Tibetan riots in March. Tibetan unrest has a long history. It started in October 1950 when the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) marched into Tibet and forced the Tibetan authorities to come to the negotiating table on the 19th under the PLA’s threat.㉚

On January 28, 1951, the 14th Dalai Lama who came to power earlier than the scheduled time,㉛ sent a letter to the Chinese government asking for negotiations and sent his representatives to Beijing. The two sides reached the Agreement on Measures for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet” (the 17-Point Agreement).㉜ The Dalai Lama stated in his autobiography that the Tibetan representatives were forced to sign this agreement under Chinese threat and with a fake Tibetan state seal.㉝ According to this

agreement, Beijing is the central government and Lhasa a local government of China. Tibet’s international legal status was downgraded from an independent sovereign state to a region of China.㉞ The first point of the agreement states that “the Tibetan people shall return to the big family of the motherland-the People’s Republic of China.”

Since the PLA took control of Tibet in 1951, the Tibetans have never stopped their fight against Chinese occupation. The armed riot of March 10, 1959, was the most critical one. China cracked down on the riot with armed forces and forced the Dalai Lama and his followers to flee Lhasa and establish the Tibetan Government in Exile in Dharamsala in Northern India on March 26, 1959, thus beginning the long march against China. The Chinese-Tibetan rift widened during the Cultural Revolution because Chinese authorities and the Red Guard destroyed Tibetan temples, restricted religious freedom, and adopted a high-handed policy in Tibet. In recent years, the Chinese government has encouraged Han Chinese to migrate to Tibet, further increasing resentment among ethnic Tibetans.

On March 10, 2008, the 49th anniversary of the riot, about 300 monks gathered to request the government to release the lamas arrested last fall, call out the slogan of Tibetan independence, support the Dalai Lama’s return to Tibet, and ask the Chinese authorities to free the Panchen Lama.㉟ The Chinese government used armed forces to crack down on the demonstration, but such stimulated even more radical action by the Tibetans. The Tibetan demonstrations spread into Sichuan Province, Gansu Province, and Qinghai Province.㊱ There were 125 recorded riots from March 10 to June 22, 2008.㊲ According to the New China Agency, 18 civilians and one policeman died, 382 civilians and 241 policemen injured, 120 houses and 84 vehicles were burnt, and 1,367 shops were robbed.㊳ More than one thousand Tibetans were arrested.㊴ The Dalai Lama has estimated that more than 80 Tibetans were killed by March 17. Based on data from the Tibetan Government in Exile, at least 218 Tibetans were shot or tortured to death by Chinese public security forces by June 2008,㊵ while ��China’s�� official information showed that 4,434 Tibetans were arrested, of which only 3,027 of them were released before June 21. At least more than one thousand are still being jailed. On April 29, 2008, the People’s Intermediate Court of Lhasa sentenced 30 Tibetans from three months to life in prison.㊶ The EU’s annual report condemned the Chinese government for severe violation of human rights, while issuing a public statement on March 17 requesting the Chinese government to respond to Tibetan concerns on human rights issues and encouraging the Chinese authorities and the Tibetan people to conduct substantial and constructive dialogue in order to reach mutually acceptable

resolutions regarding the respect of Tibetan culture, religion, and identity.㊷

The Tibetan riots are not only about religious freedom but also the human rights of ethnic minorities. In order to fight against the Tibetan secessionism, the Chinese government has imposed greater restrictions on the Tibetan religious freedom, and strengthened the patriot education on Tibetan monks and nuns, asking requiring them to sign the a statement condemning the Dalai Lama. Those monks and nuns who disobeyed were expelled from the temples. It was the leading cause as to why the Tibetan monks launched a peaceful demonstration on March 10, 2008, and which escalated into violent protests on March 14-15. After the riots, the Chinese authorities closed the temples, detained and tortured the Tibetan monks and nuns, and launched another propaganda campaign to defame the Dalai Lama. The repression of Tibetan freedoms of speech, religion, and association by the Chinese authorities has reached its highest since 1983 when the Tibetan Buddhist temples were allowed to resume religious activities.㊸ The Internet websites frequently used by Tibetan students were closed; and foreign journalists were not allowed to enter Tibet during the riots. According to the report of the Reporters San Frontiers International, at least 25 journalists were expelled from the Tibetan Autonomy Region from March 14 to 20, 2008.㊹ But the Chinese crackdown of the Tibetans did not solve the problem. On the contrary, it has sown the seeds for more problems, forcing the Tibetan Government in Exile and the Tibetans in China to take radical action against China.

2. An overall evaluation of the 2008 human rights situation in China

This report follows the model set last year. It is based on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, dividing China’s human rights into five categories for observation: social rights, political rights, judicial rights, economic and environmental rights, and education and cultural rights. The freedom of speech and freedom of the press are merged into the category of political rights for the purpose of evaluation. Among these five categories of human rights, the analysis of China’s social rights is written by Dr. Li-wen Tung, Vice President of the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy; political social rights are evaluated by Dr. Chun-ju Chen, Assistant Research Fellow of the Institute of International Relations, National Chengchi University; judicial rights are observed by Dr. Fort Fu-te Liao, Associate Research Fellow, Institute of Law, Academia Sinica; economic and environmental rights are studied by Professor Jou-zung Li, Assistant

Professor, Department of Public Affairs and Management, Kainan University; and education and cultural rights are analyzed by Professor Chang-yen Tsai, Chair of the Department of East Asian Culture and Development, National Taiwan Normal University. This report covers China’s human rights record from July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008.

In fact, China’s 2008 human rights record is quite similar to its 2007 record, the problems remaining the same as before. As mentioned above, in order to assure the success of the Beijing Olympic Games, the Chinese government took more measures than ever violating human rights. The following are the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy’s observations of China’s 2008 human rights in five categories.

(1) Social rights

Professor Li-wen Tung’s evaluation of China’s social rights in 2008 focuses on the social guarantees scheme, the right to work, the gap between the rich and the poor, and food safety. He points out that “China failed to fulfill its promise to improve human rights conditions” when it bid to host the 2008 Olympic Games. On the contrary, “This year China saw major incidents of rights violations similar to last year.” First of all, hundreds of millions of Chinese workers earn very little wages barely to support their families and with no social security program such as health insurance. If they become ill or injured in incidents, their life will become hopeless because they will not be able to pay for medical care. Second, a large-scale illegal child labor ring similar to that of last year was uncovered this year. Although the Chinese government prohibited the employment of child laborers, child labor trafficking occurred again and again due to China’s poor legal system, ineffective law enforcement, lack of corporate social responsibility, and general indifference from the government and society. Third, China faces serious food safety problems. The Shijiazhuang-based Sanlu Company’s contaminated milk, which resulted in the illness and death of many infants, is merely the tip of the iceberg of China’s many fake and unsafe food and products. Fourth, China’s workplace safety worsened because “major workplace accidents in China resulted in numerous deaths and injuries in 2008.” The reasons are extortionate profits encouraging illegal mines, corruption of governmental officials, poor government oversight, and wavering government policies. Fifth, the gap between the rich and the poor continues to widen.

In addition to Professor Tung’s observations, there are at least three more issues concerning China’s social rights. First, the Chinese people still lack freedom of migration. The Chinese government has kept in force a strict hukou system for several decades, restricting farmers from moving into urban areas. After China began its economic reform in 1978, the over supply of manpower in rural areas and the increasing urban-rural gap forced people living in rural areas and the hinterlands to migrate to urban and coastal areas. They are called the floating population in China because they are illegal migrants. These people face discrimination in the cities. Some policies even discriminate against students from other provinces and cities. For example, a high school girl student in Beijing attempted to commit suicide in January 2008 after she had found that she was not allowed to take the entrance exam for universities in Beijing because she did not have the Beijing hukou.㊺ The Chinese government has carried out some reforms on the household registration system in recent years. For instance, local governments in Jiangsu Province, Yunnan Province, and Shenzhen City have relaxed the policies for rural migrants to acquire that region’s hukuo. But they still need to meet certain criteria, such as to having a stable job or income and a regular place to live for a certain period of time. Some cities even request college degrees as a condition. Most of the rural migrants can not meet these conditions.

Second, the Chinese government still violates the international human rights standard in its enforcement of the one-child policy. It executes severe measures, such as heavy fines and other penalties, to punish the couples who violate the one-child policy. The one-child policy has resulted in a seriously unequal gender distribution in newborn babies. The ratio of newborn boys to girls on average is 118 to 100. This unusual phenomenon encourages human trafficking.㊻ Although some governmental officials have suggested adjusting the one-child policy in order to deal with the problem of the unequal ratio of newborn boys to girls, the Chinese government has announced that it would continue the policy for another decade.

Third, Chinese women are still widely discriminated against. Domestic violence remains to be a very serious problem. According to statistics, violence occurs in 29.7% to 35.5% families. Ninety percent of the victims are female.㊼ Widows, remarried women, or the women who are married to men in other villages and whose hukou cannot be reregistered with marriage, are more likely to be discriminated against. The power structure in China is also evidence of discrimination against woman. For instance, all of the nine members in China’s most powerful decision-making organ- the Standing Committee of the CCP Politburo-are men. Only one out of the twenty-

five members in the Politburo is woman. Less than eight percent of the CCP Central Committee members are women.㊽

Although the Chinese government has taken the problem of the trafficking of women and children more seriously, the situation is still very severe. More than ninety percent of trafficking cases involve women and children.㊾ The Public Security Ministry estimates that on average ten thousand women and children are sold every year. Many Chinese women and children are sold to the sex business or become slaves in other countries. But some women from Burma, North Korea, Vietnam, and Russia are sold to China.

(2) Economic and environmental rights

According to Professor Yu-Jung Lee’s studies, China’s economic and environmental rights face three major challenges: the ambiguity of power, the lack of effective supervision, and the postponement of enacting the laws and regulations required. She points out that the increasing inflation, in particular the whirlwind on the prices of real estate in 2008, the widening gap of income, and rampant corruption in the government as the three most serious problems which will likely result in greater social problems in the future. She also suggests that the emergence of China’s serious environmental problems is due to natural factors and manmade mistakes. Land and water in China are seriously polluted. The Chinese government did pay great attention toward environmental protection issues due to the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games, but the data provided by the Chinese government is dubious at best. The Chinese government uses false statistics to hide its domestic problems.

In addition to Professor Lee’s observations, the following issues deserve more attention. First of all, many people in China, especially those who live in the hinterlands and rural areas, are still struggling along the poverty line. Second, economic reform has widened the gap between the rich and the poor. Many people who lack proper food, clothing and shelter do not enjoy the freedom from hunger. This did not improve in 2008, but on the contrary, it deteriorated. Third, most farmers work very hard, but can make barely enough to survive. When their land is confiscated by the authorities without proper compensation, their survival becomes jeopardized. If the legal system cannot help them, they take their cause to the streets. Protests or demonstrations due to land confiscation have become one of the main reasons for social unrest in China.

Fourth, unemployment is a serious problem in China. The unemployment rate in urban areas is eight percent and even much higher in rural areas, with the global financial crisis increasing the number of people out of work. According to the Chinese Ministry of Education, there were 5.59 million college graduates in 2008 and about 0.8 million graduates from 2007 still jobless. Therefore, China needs create more than 6 million jobs for college graduates in 2008.㊿ But according to a study by the Institute of China Social Survey, only 35.6% of college graduates from the class of 2008 have found jobs. It revealed a very serious unemployment problem faced by Chinese college graduates. The Chinese government is always proud that it has made great contributions to human rights and world peace by improving its people’s livelihood, creating jobs, and feeding 1.3 billion people. But the achievement it has exhibited will face new challenges as unemployment increases in China.

As far as the issue of environmental protection is concerned, China raised the slogan of “Green Olympic Games” in order to bid for the 2008 Olympic Games. Beijing did take some temporary measures to deal with traffic and pollution problems. For example, it used the plate numbers to control the number of cars entering Beijing City and beautified the areas. Those temporary measures were discontinued after the end of the Olympic Games in August. They did not really improve China’s environment. There are still only a quarter of Chinese people with clean drinking water, while one- third of China’s cities face serious air pollution problems. More than seventy percent of cancer-related deaths are due to pollution. The Chinese government’s propaganda mechanism and temporary measures for the Olympic Games have awoken the Chinese people’s consciousness of environmental protection. According to statistics, the number of mass protests due to environmental pollution increases on average two percent annually. It has become another major challenge, other than the riots due to land confiscation, to the stability of society and the ruling status of the CCP. It is also an important factor in evaluating China’s future human rights situation.

(3) Education and cultural rights

According to Professor Chang-yen Tsai’s studies, China’s 2008 education and cultural rights still face many problems. First, he points out that schools at every level charge many extra fees beyond the capability of many families, making the Chinese policy of free compulsory education nothing more than empty words. In addition, the Chinese government’s spending on education is far from sufficient and educational

resources are unevenly allocated. The rural areas and hinterlands face even greater serious problems of insufficient educational resources. Second, as mentioned above, many college graduates cannot find a job. Affected by the global financial crisis, more college graduates remain unemployed. Third, the Chinese government has not loosened its tight control over all forms of media. Publications, news reports, and television programs that touch on sensitive political issues or national image are confiscated or suspended. The Chinese government even tightened control over media and television stations amid the preparations for the Olympic Games in order to prevent negative reports. Fourth, although the Chinese government did relax some of its control over religions in the past year, only those religious groups which have formally registered with the government are allowed to have certain religious activities. The ones that are not registered with the government continue to be harassed and prohibited and its workers frequently detained or arrested. Fifth, China has not softened its control over the Internet. Websites that provide video services must apply for approval. After a check in March 2008, twenty-five video sharing websites were closed. The Shanghai Daily reported in September 2007 that the government had closed 9,593 unregistered websites. In order to avoid being fined or closed by the government, many Internet companies conduct self-censorship. For instance, a company uses 400 to 500 keywords to screen the contents of its Internet.

Nevertheless, the increasing use of Internet and mobile phones has imposed a great challenge to China’s control over the freedom of speech. By June 2008, there were 253 million Internet users and 601 million mobile phone users in China, an increase of 56% and 20% respectively from 2007. Although, as mentioned above, the Chinese government continues to punish people who use the Internet and mobile phones to organize protests or to share sensitive political information, the number of people use these two tools to protest against government policy continues to increase.

(4) Judicial rights

According to Professor Fort Fu-te Liao’s observations, the problems concerning China’s 2008 judicial rights remain the same as those of 2007. In other words, there was not much progress in China’s judicial rights situation. China’s protection of the rights to personal liberty and dignity is still far from satisfactory. First of all, the use of violence, torture, and illegal arrest against human rights defenders remain rampant. Second, the Chinese government uses its unique mechanism-reeducation through

labor-to suppress dissidents, though actually this “reeducation” is more akin to slavery and forced labor. Third, the Chinese government’s protection of personal security is far from sufficient. In fact, nearly no one in China enjoys personal security. Human rights defenders, petitioners, people of religion, writers and reporters, lawyers, the Tibetan people, and the Uyghur people are especially endangered. Fourth, the fairness of the judicial trials is still a serious problem. The Chinese government controls the judicial system and intervenes in the trials. It uses those vague charges such as “subverting national regime,” “endangering national security,” or “illegally holding national secrets” to arrest and detain dissidents and sentence them to prison. There are still numerous problems in China’s implementation of law. China remains to be the country that carries out the death penalty more than any other nation. Furthermore, the conditions of prisons remain very poor and attract criticism.

In addition to Professor Liao’s observations, China’s other major violations of judicial rights include (1) many defendants go through the trial process without assistance from a lawyer. Those defendants, and especially those charged on political grounds, do not enjoy the freedom to choose their own lawyers. In fact, many lawyers refuse to defend political prisoners. The lawyers who dare to defend political prisoners may face intimidation from the authorities themselves. In the past year, Chinese governmental officials increased their threat to human rights defense lawyers in the attempt to dissuade them from sensitive cases. The relatives of political prisoners were also threatened and harassed by the Chinese authorities. Second, China lacks an effective judicial petition system. China is not a democratic country, and there is no mechanism to supervise the government effectively. The judicial system is unfair and the Chinese governmental officials are corrupt. People who are unfairly treated and cannot get any help from within the system use the letters and visits approach in the hope of attracting the attention of the central government. But local governmental officials try to stop those petitioners from reaching Beijing. Even if some petitioners do overcome all the obstacles in reaching Beijing, there are often sent back to their hometowns. When they cannot get help from within the system, they take their cause to the street.

(5) Political rights

Professor Chun-ju Chen’s studies suggest that (1) China made great effort to maintain a harmonious society during the preparations of the Olympic Games, such as the

repression of democratic talks, monitoring speeches and intimidating human rights defenders. Many political prisoners, human rights defenders and lawyers were illegally detained and jailed. For example, Hu Jia was formally arrested on December 2007 and had been put under house arrest for more than 100 days. On April 3, 2008, the First Intermediate People’s Court for Beijing City sentenced Hu Jia to three years and six months in prison for attempting to subvert the state. But the real reason is that Hu Jia promoted human rights on the Internet and testified to the EU, criticizing China’s human rights and the Beijing Olympic Games Preparation Committee. Yang Chunlin was sentenced five years in prison by the Jiamusi Intermediate People’s Court on March 24, 2008, for agitating to subvert the national regime because he collected ten thousand signatures and used the slogan “Human Rights, not the Olympic Games” as catchwords for a petition requesting the Chinese government to make amends with those people whose land was confiscated by the government. Third, the Chinese government launched Internet terrorism, screening and monitoring the websites and closing several hundred websites and web pages. Fourth, the Chinese government continued its suppression on ethnic minorities, especially in Tibet and Xinjiang. Fifth, China continued its suppression of the freedom of the press. Sixth, the conflicts between the people and the government increased. Most of the conflicts were related to land enclosure. Peasants tried to reclaim the land taken by local governments by means of grassroots democracy. But as their efforts were doomed, they were forced to go to Beijing for petition. The Chinese government stepped up the suppression of petitions before and during the Olympic Games.

In addition to Professor Chen’s observations, the Chinese government continued its control over “non-governmental organizations.” By the end of 2007, China had 387,000 formally registered non-governmental organizations, including 3,259 legal aid organizations. Most of the NGOs were not allowed to do fundraising. The Chinese still could not directly elect their leaders. The National People’s Congress is still a rubber stamp because the elections of its representatives are still controlled by the CCP. It is still far from a real congress that can supervise the government. There was no sign that the CCP would consider letting go of its one-party dominant rule. In fact, the Chinese communist regime has continued to resist democratic reform. It still insisted that China should be ruled by the CCP and opposed the establishment of real opposition parties.

Indeed, there are elections every three years for the village committees and more than half of the 620,000 village committees held elections in 2008. Some local

governmental officials did reform the electoral system to allow the voters more rights to participate directly in the elections. For instance, a town’s party secretary in Guizhou Province was elected by party members in April 2008 and seven towns in Yunnan Province held elections to elect their town people’s governments in September 2007. But those relatively democratic elections only exist in village committees or a few towns. The central government still does not allow real democratic reform.

VI. Conclusion

Overall, China’s 2008 human rights record remains poor. The Chinese government did not keep its promise made during its bid for hosting the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. The Chinese people still do not have the freedom of election, speech, assembly, and association. The Chinese government continues to control the media, detain and harass human rights defenders, suppress the cultural and religious freedom of the Tibetans and the Uyghur people, intimidate Falun Gong, and harass other religious groups. The Chinese legal system still lacks independence, the Chinese people’s personal security is not guaranteed and the rights and the dignity of the suspects are not protected. Women still suffer from discrimination and domestic violence, the human rights of North Korean refugees are ignored, and the people cannot find a way within the system to address their grievances. Problems in the rural areas remain very severe. Social problems due to the increasing gap between the rich and the poor continue to emerge. The scope of demonstrations has increased. The Tibetan riots and crackdowns taken by the Chinese government were the focus of China’s violation of human rights in 2008. It indicates the absurdity of the hope that the Olympic Games would promote human rights in China.

China did make progress in some areas of its human rights. But compared to its generally notorious human rights record, this small and slow progress is quite trivial. Freedom House cooperated with the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy to release the Freedom in the World 2009 in January 2009 in Taipei. It evaluated 193 countries in the world based on 2008 data. China remains to be one of the “not free” countries in the world, while Taiwan is rated as the freest country in Asia. This rating comes as little surprise.

As the Bush Administration pointed out in its 2006 National Security Strategic Report, “China’s leaders must see that they cannot let their population increasingly

experience the freedoms to buy, sell, and produce, while denying them the rights to assemble, speak, and worship. Only by allowing the Chinese people to enjoy these basic freedoms and universal rights can China honor its own constitution and international commitments and reach its full potential.” China’s economic gains due to the policy of reform have been widely acclaimed by the international community. This economic success has increased China’s wealth, power and diplomatic influence. But unless the fundamental human rights of the Chinese people can be guaranteed, what the Chinese government acquired is only an image of nouveau riche. Not only China’s development has its limit, but also its soft power cannot truly be increased.

Notes

① China Daily, July 12, 2001, quoted in “The Impact of the 2008 Olympic Games on Human Rights And the Rule of Law in China,” Hearing before the Congressional- Executive Commission on China, 110th Congress, second Session, February 27, 2008 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2008), 2. ② Ibid. ③ “Jacques Rogge Hopes Beijing Olympic Games to improve China’s Human Rights Situation,” BBC CHINESE.com, November 18, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/ chinese/trad/hi/newsid_4870000/newsid_4879100/4879194.stm. ④ For instance, “Beijing’s Vice Mayor: Olympic Games Promotes the Development of China’s Human Rights,” BBC CHINESE.com, October 19, 2007, http://news. bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7050000/newsid_7052000/7052056.stm. ⑤ Supra note 1, 17. ⑥ The Presidency of the European Union, the European Commission and the General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union, European Union Annual Report on Human Right 2008 (Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008), 78. ⑦ Congressional-Executive Commission on China, Annual Report 2008 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2008), 10. ⑧ Supra note 1, 46. ⑨ Ibid., 15. ⑩ Amnesty International, “People’s Republic of China,” Amnesty International Report 2008, February 6, 2009, http://thereport.amnesty.org/eng/regions/asia-pacific/ china. ⑪ Supra note 7, 12. ⑫ Ibid., 14. ⑬ Ibid., 17. ⑭ Supra note 1, 9. ⑮ Supra note 7, 20. ⑯ Ibid., 23. ⑰ Ibid., 19.

⑱ Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, Human Rights Council, “National Report Submitted in Accordance with Paragraph 15 (A) of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 5/1: China,” A/HrC/WG.6/4/CHN/1, November 10, 2008, 5-27. ⑲ China has joined the following core human rights conventions: International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights; Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; Convention against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; Convention on the Rights of the Child; Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict; Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography; and Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It also has ratified the following human rights treaties: Convention on the Prevention and Punishment on the Crime of Genocide, Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, 1954 Convention relating to the status of Stateless Persons, Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and Additional Protocols thereto, and International Labor Convention. The core international human rights treaties which China has not joined includes the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; Optional Protocol to Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families; Optional Protocol to Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. China also has not joined the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the Palermo Protocol, and the UNESCO Convention against Discrimination in Education. Human Rights Council Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, “Compilation Prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Accordance with Paragraph 15(B) of the Annex to Human Rights Resolution 5/1: China (including Hong Kong and Macao Special Administrative Regions (HKSAR and MSAR),” A/HRC/WG.6/4/CHN/2, January 6, 2009, 2-3

⑳ Supra note 7, 3-7. ㉑ Ibid., 6-7. ㉒ Supra note 10. ㉓ Supra note 6. ㉔ Ibid. ㉕ Foreign and Commonwealth Office, United Kingdom, Human Rights Annual Report 2007-DRC (London: United Kingdom Foreign & Commonwealth Office, March 2008), 134. ㉖ Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, U.S. Department of State, International Religious Freedom Report 2008: China (Includes Tibet, Hong Kong, Macau), http://2001-2009.state.gov/drl/rls/irf/2008/108404.htm. ㉗ Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, U.S. Department of State, 2008 Human Rights Report: China (Includes Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau), February 25, 2009, http://www.state.gov/drl/rls/harrpt/2008/eap/119037. ㉘ Supra note 10. ㉙ Supra note 6. ㉚ Dalai Lama, translated by Kang Ting, Freedom in Exile: The Autobiography of the Dalai Lama (Taipei: Lien Ching Publications, 1990), 61. ㉛ The Dalai Lama was determined by incarnation. According to the Tibetan tradition, the Dalai Lama begins to rule when he is 18 years old. Before the Dalai Lama reaches his maturity to rule, Tibet is ruled by the regents. Throughout history, many Dalai Lamas died before they reached their maturity. Therefore, during about 77% of the time between 1751 to 1960, Tibet was ruled by the regents. When the PLA marched into Tibet in 1950, the 14th Dalai Lama was only 16 years old. Tibet faced a live-or-die situation and the regents and the Tibetan government were in panic. The 14th Dalai Lama began to rule on November 17, 1950, after the government prayed to the god via an agent. A. Tom Grunfeld, The Making of Modern Tibet, revised edition (Armonk, New York: M.E. Sharpe, 1996), 12. ㉜ For a copy of the “17-Point Agreement,” see Chao-chen Lin, The Last Dalai Lama (Taipei: The China Times Publications, 2000), pp. 326-28. ㉝ Supra note 30, 77.

㉞ The CCP insists that Tibet is a part of China. But the Tibetan Government in Exile argues that before the PRC’s invasion of Tibet in 1950, Tibet had been an independent sovereign state. For the legal arguments of the two sides, see Wang Gui et al., A Study of Tibet’s Historical Status (Beijing: Min-tsu Publications, 2003); The Tibetan Government in Exile, Tibet’s Legal Status-Dharamsala and Beijing: Three Research Reports by Authoritative Law Scholars (Taipei: Tibet Religious Foundation of H.H. The Dalai Lama, 2001); and Tsering Shakya, The Dragon in the Land of Snows: A History of Modern Tibet since 1947 (New York: Penguin Compass, 1999), 90. ㉟ “The Tibetan unrest,” Wikipedia, December 7, 2008, http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/2008_Tibetan_unrest. 2008/12/07; Supra note 7, 184. ㊱ Tibet Watch, Uprising in Tibet, 10 March-30 April 2008 (London: Tibet Watch, April 22, 2008); Supra note 7, 190. ㊲ The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, the Department of State, International Religious Freedom Report 2008-China (Includes Tibet, Hong Kong, Macau), December 9, 2008, http://2001-2009.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2008/108404. htm. ㊳ Edward Wong, “China Has Sentenced 55 over Tibet Riot in March,” International Herald Tribune, November 6, 2008, 6. ㊴ The New York Times, November 6, 2008, A18. ㊵ Supra note 7, 194. ㊶ Ibid., 195-98. ㊷ Supra note 6, 78. ㊸ Supra note 7, 183. ㊹ Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, Human Rights Council, “National Report Submitted in Accordance with Paragraph 15 (C) of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 5/1: China,” January 5, 2009, A/HRC/WG.6/4/ CHN/3. ㊺ Supra note 7, 104. ㊻ Ibid., 19. ㊼ Ibid., 115.

㊽ Ibid., 116. ㊾ Ibid., 118. ㊿ http://www.zj.xinhuanet.com/talk/2007-03/07/content_9447598.htm; “Unemployment of Chinese College Students is getting worse,” BBC CHINESE.com, July 10, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/lw/newsid_ 7490000/newsid_7499900/7499957.stm. http://news.sina.com.tw/article/20090224/1410999.html. http://www.greenpeace.org/china/ch/news/green-beijing-olympics-report/full- report. Ibid. Supra note 7, 61-62. Ibid., 57. Ibid., 66. Ibid., 20. Freedom House, “Freedom in the World 2009 Survey Release,” http://www. freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=445. George W. Bush, The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (Washington, DC: the White House, March 2006), 42.

Social Rights Report

Li-wen Tung*

1. Forward

This China Social Rights Report provides a synthesis of this year’s daily press releases on social rights from Human Rights Watch’s China database. As a continuation of last year’s report, this report focuses on four main topics: social guarantees, worker’s rights, wealth gap, and hazardous consumer goods.

This report seeks to assess China’s progress in social rights protection by using two benchmarks. The first benchmark is the universal standards for human rights, especially the wide range of social indices developed by the international community and sociologists. The reasons why universal instead of China-specific benchmarks are used in this study have been discussed in previous reports. This report supports the use of universal benchmarks in assessing China’s social rights conditions. The second benchmark is the consideration of China’s history in order to take into account China’s social development history and time sequence as we assess its social rights conditions.

Social guarantees are sets of mechanisms that ensure fulfilment of people’s basic needs and protection from harms and losses caused by ageing, illness, unemployment, death, and disasters. Article 45 of China’s Constitution provides that, “Citizens of the People’s Republic of China have the right to material assistance from the state and society when they are old, ill or disabled. The state develops the social insurance, social relief and medical and health services that are required to enable citizens to enjoy this right.” A comprehensive social guarantee scheme is therefore indispensable in protecting citizen’s right to survival, health, and development, an obligation and legal responsibility of the government. As far as China is concerned, its vision of a harmonious society can not be realized without truly fulfilling its social guarantees.

* Li-wen Tung is Vice President of the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy.

Despite being the host country for the 2008 summer Olympic Games, China failed to fulfil its promise to improve human rights conditions. This year China saw major incidents of rights violations similar to last year, including cruel maltreatment of child labour, coal mine accidents and serious food safety issues. The recurrence and severity of social rights violations showed no sign of abating in spite of new policies and legislation by the Chinese government. Authors of this report believe that the key to solving China’s social rights problems lies in government officials’ willingness to address the issue and ability enforce relevant laws.

2. China’s Troubled Social Guarantee Scheme

In January 2008, wife of a part-time labour worker Liangyu Guo died of postpartum hemorrhage in Beijing Hospital and left Guo with a large medical bill beyond his means. The hospital suggested that Guo donate his wife’s body for anatomical research, and in exchange the hospital would waive the RMB530,000 bills. Guo refused to donate the body for reasons of conscience; as a result, the unsettled bills have kept him from accessing and burying his wife’s body. The body of Guo’s wife has been kept in the hospital morgue for over half a year as of today. Guo’s story is not a sporadic incident. China’s media earlier this year ran a story about Zhijun Xiao, an immigrant worker, who refused to sign a surgery informed consent fearing that the treatment would bankrupt him.

Hundreds of millions of labor workers in China earn minimal wages barely enough to support the family. Without any social security programs, the number of people driven into poverty because of illness is especially high in China. Most labor workers dread going to the hospital when they are ill because the treatment may bankrupt them. They would choose death over debt because, for them, having a staggering medical bill is more dreadful than death itself.

According to a report entitled “Opinions on Improving China’s Medical and Health System” released by the Chinese government in September 2008, development of China’s medical and health system “is consistent with neither China’s economic and social development nor people’s real medical needs. There is large urban-rural disparity in the development of medical care system and allocation of resources. People have long voiced their strong discontent over inadequate public health scheme, poor rural and community-based health care, insufficiently comprehensive medical

insurance coverage, lack of government oversight of pharmaceutical production and distribution, poor hospital administration and operation, insufficient government funding for public health programs, and fast growing medical costs.” The Chinese government, according to the report, claims that “By 2020, all urban and rural residents will be included in the health insurance scheme; coverage of basic labor medial insurance, basic urban residents insurance, and rural residents cooperative insurance will reach 90%.”

To the surprise of many, the number of provinces, municipalities, and counties in China with medical insurance coverage over 90% has reached an all-time high in 2008, according to official statistics. The numbers were obviously “consistent” with the goals set by China’s central authority for 2020. The Chinese term for “coverage” is a coined phrase created in recent years to refer to an expanded scope of medical insurance protection afforded by social mechanisms; the term also implies a wider inclusion in the protective plan. Nonetheless, coverage of social guarantee schemes does not directly correlate with the number of people who actually benefit from them. For example, statistics from China’s financial institutions show that 60% of farmer households are covered by preferential loan programs, but only 5% of farmer households succeeded in obtaining one.

Medical insurance, the most important item of all social guarantees, is a rare luxury enjoyed by only the privileged few in China. People in China are well aware that official statistics never truly represent the reality. The truth is that most people do not have access to medical insurance except for elite party cadres. There is little wonder that the official report “Opinions on Improving China’s Medical and Health System” was neither met with kind reception nor trusted by the people.

Sina.com and the Social Research Center of China Youth Daily recently conducted a survey on people’s perception of the government’s health care reform. Of the 2106 respondents, 23.7% of them were “somewhat satisfied” with the reform and 1.3% were “very satisfied.” In other words, only 25% of respondents were satisfied with the long overdue health care reform. As many as 49.8% of respondents said they were “somewhat” or “very dissatisfied” with the reform; 40.8% of respondents even said they were not optimistic about the reform outcome. None of the above findings came as a surprise.

3. Recurrence of Maltreatment of Child Labor

A child labor ring was uncovered in DongGuan this year, less than a year after China was rocked by the exposure of a similar problem in Shanxi Province. Labor officials earlier this year broke up a child labor ring that sent hundreds of children from an impoverished part of western Sichuan Province called Liangshan to DongGuan, a manufacturing center in GuanDong Province to work as cheap child labor. Mostly between the age 13 and 15, some of these children were then sold to other factory towns such as ShenZhen, GuangZhou, and HuiZhou in southern China where they were forced to work in slave labor conditions. Child labor trafficking practices in China are often handled by highly organized crime rings involving recruitment and placement teams as well as and labor employment agencies.

The recurrence of labor trafficking practices in China underlines five major challenges in social rights protection:

1. Child labor trafficking: Last year’s human trafficking incident involving children sold into brick kiln workforces represented some of China’s most serious human rights violations- cruel maltreatment of child labor and common human trafficking practices. In the case of Liangshan child labor ring, the children were sold by their parents to human traffickers then to manufacturing factories. When rescued by the labor officials, some children even said, “My parents sold me to the factory. I do not want to go home.” After selling a child to a recruiter, parents get an RMB$500-1,000 lump sum as the child’s overall salary payment. It is no surprise that a child’s per diem allowance is only as low as RMB$10.

2. Document Forgery and Alteration: Human traffickers admitted that they had been able to evade labor department inspection by forging or altering birth registration documents of the many children sold to factories. Oftentimes human traffickers alter the child’s date of birth and photocopy the forgery which states that the child is over 18 before submitting it to the authority for inspection. As a matter of fact, a reporter who covered the child labor ring story discovered that the youngest child rescued from the labor ring was only 9 years old. Apparently the inspection by the Labor Department is often systematic with no actual contact between the official and the children involved.

3. Inhuman treatment of child labor: Children rescued from the abusive child labor ring said, “I haven’t had anything to eat today and it’s already two o’clock in the

afternoon. I am starting.” “I did not want to come here. I had been raped twice.” “I am tired and want to go home. We all want to go home but have no money to buy bus tickets.” “They threatened to kill us if we disobey or try to run away.” Under the watchful eyes of taskmasters, these children worked 12 to 15 hours a day for a minimal wage of RMB$10. Everyday RMB$5 was withheld as the children’s dormitory rental fee, so the children in fact only had RMB$5 a day to purchase food. Experience of good looking girls was even more appalling. A taskmaster said during an interview with a reporter, “I raped many of the pretty girls who work here. They are all as young as 15, 16 years old.” To thank the reporter for buying him dinner, the taskmaster even offered the reporter a chance to sleep with several girls from his factory.

4. Lack of corporate social responsibility: Mr. Luo, a child labor agent, boasted that “our ‘employees’ can be found in Dongguan, Shenzhen, Guanzhou, Huizhou, and Xiamen.” “We have sent 50 children to an electronic plant in Dongguan, dozens of them to a toy factory in Dongguan, 500 children to an electronic plant in HuiZhou. The work contracts of the 200 children we sent to an electronic plant in Huizhou will be renewed soon.” In general, the child labor agents seem to be as heartless and shameless as the factories who hire them.

5. Indifference of the government and society in general: In China, the MaHaiBu neighborhood of Tunde Village exemplifies the practice of indenturing children into servitude. From ordinary villagers, civil servants, to police, teachers and NGOs volunteers, everyone is aware of the typical slave labor conditions the children work in; it was the silence and indifference among these people that enabled the practice to continue.

After the crusading newspaper exposed the abusive child labor ring, the local police department underwent a wide range of investigation into the incident. The police latter announced that 1. the investigators did not discover any child labor at the four implicated corporations; 2. no cases of indentured servitude or sexual abuse related to these corporations have been reported . The reasons for such surprising findings can be explained as follows. First, the local Labor Department discovered that one company signed temporary labor supply contracts with three labor agencies in Sichuan Province in order to meet the growing labor needs with increased factory work in the first season. The temporary workers’ personal registration data were in the hands of the labor agencies, not the company, so the investigators were not able to verify the workers’ actual age. Moreover, “on the book”, the workers were paid RMB$3.8 to 4

per hour, or over RMB$1,000 a month- which is compliant to government regulations. The investigators also discovered that many corporations and organizations work with “black labor agencies” like the ones mentioned above to meet fluctuating labor needs and evade inspection.

The findings of the investigation also showed that a great number of small and medium size companies in the city of Dongguan are able to slip out of government oversight because they are unregistered with the Labor Department. Furthermore, the “black labor agents” and “black taskmasters” are known for being very mobile; they can quickly gather the workers and leave the factory in case of a police raid, making them extremely difficult to trace. Moreover, violators of labor laws are subject only to administrative penalties enforced by the Labor Department. As a result, for many companies the fines for hiring illegal labor workers are negligible compared to the company’s profits.

In recent years, China has been rocked by the exposure of massive child labor scandals and serious worker’s right violations. From the slavery child labor kiln factory in 2007 to the abusive child labor ring in Liangshang this year, China has a well-documented history of serious human rights abuses and shows no substantive progress in addressing long-standing human rights concerns.

Labor Act in China clearly outlaws child labor, but hiring and maltreatment of child labor remain a common practice. Employers persist in flouting child labor laws because of lax law enforcement, loopholes in the law, and general lack of understanding of and respect for the law.

In an effort to perfect labor laws and close law loopholes, China has in recent years introduced new laws such as the Law on the Protection of Minors, and Labor and Contract Law in order to crack down on child labor abuses and protect worker’s rights. But due to conflict of interest and lax law enforcement, the local labor officials continue to keep their eyes shut on child labor abuses. Trading of child workers remain a common and public practice known to all local officials in many areas throughout China. Moreover, some officials even collude with child labor agents in facilitating the illegal employment of minors. The Dongguan child labor incident is believed by many to be just the tip of an iceberg in China.

On July 16, 2007, the ethics department of ShangXi Province govenment announced penalties for 25 officials in HongDong County implicated in the child labor

scandal. LinYi City government also announced penalties for a cadre of 50 officials in Hongdong, XiangNing, and XiangFen Area. Ms. Chunxia Duan, a 46-year-old local official who assisted child labor employers of the brick kiln, was dismissed from office of deputy director of YaoDu District last July. But in March this year, Duan was reinstated in her former office by YaoDu District Administration Office without public notice. In other words, many officials implicated in the child labor scandal were removed from office but reinstated in the following year.

4. Food Safety Concerns

Last year, “Made in China” had come to represent unsafe consumer goods. Products manufactured in China have attracted further global scrutiny this year due to a string of food safety incidents in which injuries or deaths in other countries were linked to harmful or hazardous substances in Chinese imports. This year, the General Administration Office of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine published a list of unsafe products and selected cases (excluding non-food products). Its content can be summarized as follows.

* Sausage: several illegal sausage manufacturing plants were found to have no registration license, manufacturing license, or sanitation license. In one case, the police found over 150kg of sausages unsafe for human consumption and seized two meat grinders, one freezer, two meat cookers, and three air tanks.

* Wine and liquor: several illegal wine makers were found to make fake and counterfeit wine. Many Chinese wines have been revealed to contain only water, coloring, and alcohol.

* Pickled vegetables: the police uncovered two illegal pickle makers in a remote rural area in China. Over 60,000 bottles of illegally made pickle were seized and many of the bottles boasted fake trade marks and counterfeit food safety logos. The manufacturing sites failed to meet any sanitation standards and had no quality assurance or testing equipment or procedures. Apart from having no business or sanitation license, the employees had no health certificate indicating their health condition.

* Toothpaste: the police raided an illegal toothpaste manufacturing plant located within a company that claims to import toothpaste. Located in a residential area,

the site had been converted into an assembly plant for making counterfeit Colgate toothpaste. The police seized boxes of fake toothpaste, packaging materials, and toothpaste tubes.

* Soybean products: the police raided four illegal soy products manufacturing bases in a residential area of ZheJiang Province. Run by non local residents, the unregistered factories failed to meet any sanitation standards and had no food safety or quality assurance procedures. The products were made with poor quality ingredients in settings that had puddles of standing water amid indistinguishable clutter. None of the factories had any insect repelling or dust collecting device; besides, the employees had no health certificates indicating their health condition.

* Food Seasoning: Police seized 1331kg of fake vinegar and 150kg of soy sauce after uncovering an illegal manufacturing plant in Wudi County. The food seasoning manufacturing plant was found to make soy sauce and vinegar using sub quality ingredients without any food processing license or quality management measures. The police found sixty huge fermentation barrels and four fermentation ponds that had trash floating on the surface. Bottles of seasoning labeled as “vinegar”, “aged vinegar”, “premium aged vinegar”, “rice vinegar”, “jujube Vinegar”, “premium soy sauce”, and “natural soy sauce” were confiscated for lab examination.

* Cigarettes: Chinese authorities cracked down on a counterfeit cigarette production base in Guangdong Province earlier this year, detaining at least 15 suspects. Jointly organized by 50 officials from the State Tobacco Monopoly Administration, the Ministry of Public Security and their local counterparts, the operations took place in Guangzhou, capital of Guangdong. The police seized 20 boxes of counterfeit cigarettes and 1000kg of tobacco worth more than RMB$10,000 and shut down the production lines.

* Dried seafood products: In one police operation this year, investigators seized 10,000 counterfeit food safety labels (“QS”) ready to be sold to illegal food manufacturers. It is believed that many Chinese manufacturers repackage their products with plastic bags printed with food safety labels before selling them to retail stores or supermarkets at a much higher price.

The recent revelation of melamine contamination in milk supplies in China has rocked the food and health industries not only in China but also throughout many countries in the world. In China, the contaminated milk had caused the death of twelve

babies, and more than two thousand infants have become ill. According to a product recall announcement by the Shijiazhuang-based Sanlu Company, the company at the heart of the melamine contamination scandal, only those Sanlu products produced before August 6, 2008 were found to contain melamine and the company planed to recall 700 tons of tainted milk. In HeBei Province where Sanlu Company is based, the company’s milk products resulted in one infant death and caused 59 babies to become ill, according to the company. The Chinese government issued blanket recall of milk products for melamine testing to 2 million and 497 thousand retail stores and has successfully recalled 3215.1 tons of milk powder.

Though some Chinese officials faced punishment or prosecution for the deadly baby milk powder scandal, many speculated that China’s desire for a perfect summer Olympic Games and its tight grip on media contributed to the delayed recall of the baby milk. UNICEF, World Trade Organization, and the European Union had all demanded China for an explanation but to no avail. China did announce that almost all famous Chinese milk brands carry contaminated products but failed to provide details on product lines or overseas distribution channels, all of which are information crucial for countries to control damage from tainted milk. The Chinese authority undoubtedly needs to introduce a better legal environment, such as a sound “Food Safety Law” in order to address serious food safety issues in China.

5. Lack of Workplace Safety Protection

Major workplace accidents in China resulted in numerous deaths and injuries in 2008, ringing alarm over China’s labor rights and workplace safety. The string of workplace accidents have increased the safety awareness of the Chinese authority and society at large. Safety officials have called for tough prevention measures to curb workplace accidents, including introduction of labor-related laws such as Law on Work-related Injuries, Law on Coal Mine Production Safety, and the Labor Contract Law. In an effort to reduce coal mining accidents and casualties, China introduced new coal mine safety supervision laws and increased penalties for corporations and individuals that violate them. But coal mining accidents in China showed little sign of abating due to poor compliance and weak enforcement by local authorities and private corporations.

Coal mining accidents in China claimed the lives of 2,801 people in 2007. Yi Lee, Director of China’s State Administration of Work Safety noted in a press conference

that, “We have designated 2008 as the ‘Potential workplace Risks Management Year’ ”. Ironically, on the Administration’s official website, monthly and annual workplace accident statistics were last updated in November 2007. In other words, Chinese authority had stopped releasing accumulative deaths and injuries related to coal mining accidents since the end of 2007. Only weekly reports on minor, major, and exceptionally major work-related accidents are available from the State Administration Office. Official statistics indicated that at least 1,456 workers had gone missing or died due to workplace accidents from January to September 2008. The number of work- related deaths and injuries can be summarized as follows:

Month No. of injuries No. of deaths or missing workers January 2 33 February 1 24 March 7 80 April 10 67 May 8 42 June 40 366 July 13 99 August 5 47 September 16 698 Total 102 1,456

Data made available by the State Administration of Work Safety provide fragmented information on work-related accidents, suggesting that the real truth is still being covered up. This raises doubts about the reliability of the numbers in this year’s published statistics. China’s media often criticize authorities for releasing inaccurate statistics and covering up truth. The Oriental Outlook noted in one story that, “Mine owners often pay the victim’s family to silence them. Besides, so many people have died in mining accidents that it is no news anymore. Despite efforts of the government, the number of mining accidents remains alarmingly high in China. Several reasons can explain the recurrence of mining accidents.

1. Extortionate profits and bribery

The Hongdong Coal Mine explosion was one of the China’s most serious mine accidents in 2007. Under the first-instance trial in December 2007, the dependents revealed that the actual investor Donghai Wang of Ruizhiyuan Coal Mining Co. Ltd. pocketed over RMB$ 100 million in a short course of 2 to 3 years. During March 2008, GuoJun Wang, Deputy Director of the JiLin Coal Mine Safety Bureau was sentenced to fourteen years in prison for receiving bribes from coal mining companies. The two cases indicate that the extortionate corporate profits and practice of bribing officials are reasons behind the alarming number and frequency of mining accidents.

2. Poor government oversight

In an interview with the Oriental Outlook, a vice manager of a coal mine revealed that, “some mines were shut down but are still allowed to conduct maintenance routines; so certain mining companies used maintenance as an excuse to continue its operation. But when accidents happen, those companies had no choice but to cover it up for fear of punishment. As a result, the State Administration of Coal Mine Safety has no way of intervening because accidents often go unreported. In fact, it causes ‘inconvenience’ to everyone involved when the Administration intervenes.” Apparently the system’s loopholes that allow companies to evade government regulation contribute to China’s frequent mining accidents.

3. Wavering policies

A news report released in February this year noted that, “The high frequency of mining accidents in China has prompted the government to address underlying safety issues and shut down unsafe small mines. The passive management approach forced a great number of small mines across China to shut down and caused coal supply shortage.” A total of 11,155 small mines deemed as either unsafe or inconsistent with national industrial development policies were closed down in two years as part of the government’s efforts to curb mining accidents. But in face of the recent coal and electricity shortage in China, some of the mines were given the green light to reopen, according to Ju Hongren of the Economic Operation Bureau. The new directive from central authority allowed those mines that met safety requirements to reopen.

Many unsafe mines started operation nonetheless with the aid of local officials who purposefully distorted or misinterpreted the Directive to meet companies’ needs. Several small mines that were destroyed in explosion and later restored succeeded in obtaining mining license from the National Development Committee.

4. Poor workplace safety despite government certification

A string of deadly coal mine accidents this July have once again put mine safety issues atop the government’s agenda. According to local news agencies, many accidents in fact happened in state-run or local/city-run coal mines, which claimed the lives of 34 workers this year (excluding missing workers). Moreover, six accidents happened at licensed mines and caused over 75 deaths this year. This shows that state-certified mines are no guarantee for safe working environment.

5. Illegal and unsafe mines

The Xiangfen dam break accident in Shanxi Province that killed 254 people and injured 34 on 8 September is a tragically familiar testimony to the inability of the Chinese government to regulate its many illegal and unsafe mines. Preliminary analysis showed that Xinta Mining Company’s illegal mining operation and tailings dam burst were major causes for this most deadly workplace accident in 2008.

6. Effect of Labor Contract Law unclear 1. Overall implementation

China’s Contract Law was promulgated on January 1, 2008 to regulate labor relations, protect workers’ rights, and prevent workplace discrimination. After a six-month period of collecting corporations’ feedback on the new Law, the Chinese authority made necessary amendments and promulgated the PRC’s Labor Contract Law Implementation Regulations on September 18, 2008. Among the amendments made to the original law that was believed by many to tilt more in favor of employees, workers’ severance payment and employee dismissal limitations were greatly reduced.

An official survey showed that 90-96% of companies in 26 provinces said they

had begun contract sining in compliance with the new Labor Law. Despite an official compliance rate above 90%, investigations by local media showed that the official statistics had been distorted to suit certain political agenda.

Under China’s new Labor Contract Law, the employer is required to pay social insurance contributions for the employee. Nevertheless most workers in fact prefer not to participate in the social insurance scheme because the insurance payments are non- transferable with change of work locations, so companies that enforced the insurance scheme suffered from high employee turnover. Dongguan’s Sunco Magnet Company had reported several insurance-related disputes since the implementation of the Labor Law this year. More then a few non-urban resident employees upon retirement were told that the number of years for their premium payment is insufficient under the new Law. These employees were instructed to transfer their pension account from the city jurisdiction to their household registry- only to find that they were not permitted to join the program in their hometown. The new law also provides that retiring employees with insufficient years of premium payment must make supplementary payments until the payment requirement is fulfilled. Under such circumstance, many employees upon retirement had to work for another eight to nine years before they can retire with pension benefits; a male worker, for example, must work until 70 years old before he can fulfill the pension premium requirement under the new law.

The new social insurance scheme- non-transferable between different employment locations- puts farmers and service industry workers at particularly high risk because their work location often changes throughout lifetime. Many employers lower employee’s salary due to increased costs from compliance with the Labor Contract Law; this discourages many workers from signing work contracts with employees. Moreover, the Labor Contract Law overlooks rights of non-local or dispatch workers due to lack of details on insurance scheme for these employees. Ms. Chen, a worker from Hubei Province said that, “Employers have found many loopholes in the Labor Contract Law. Many of them reached consensus with workers in avoiding work contract signing. This made the already poor working environment even worse for workers.”

2. Greater impact on Taiwanese than Western companies

China’s New Labor Law had major impact on Taiwanese companies operating in the region. Many Taiwanese manufacturing shoes and furniture plants in Dongguan had

had shut down or relocated since October last year in order to dodge surging labor costs brought on by the new Law. Statistics show that nearly a thousand shoes and accessories manufacturing plants in Goangdong Province had shut down or relocated in the first three seasons of 2007, and many of these factories are owned by Taiwanese businessmen. Staff from the Dongguan Taiwan Businessmen Association said, “To the best of our knowledge, about 500 Taiwanese companies had moved out of Dongguan. Many Taiwanese companies had gone out of business, especially in recent months.” Almost all businesses in Dongguan faced similar challenges brought on by the new Labor Law, traditional manufacturing industry was hit the hardest because comparatively it is less resourceful and flexible in adapting to domestic or global changes.

The enactment of the Labor Contract Law was the last straw that broke the camel’s back for Taiwanese and Hongkongese companies alike. Over a thousand Hongkongese shoes factories in China had shut down admits business failure of thousands of Hongkongese companies; a great number of mabor-intensive small and medium size companies that manufactured in China are planning to move to lower labor cost countries.

A survey by the Federation of Hong Kong Industries showed that among the 80,000 hongkongese companies based in China’s Pearl River Delta, 37.3% of them plan to relocate the entire of part of their production lines out of the River Delta, 63% of them plan to move out of Guangdong Province. As JiaYao Liang, a Hongkongese who runs a shoe manufacturing plant in China, pointed out in an interview, “Shoes manufacturing plants have long been struggling with a narrow profit margin of 8%. The enactment of Labor Contract Law will increase our operating costs by 20% and drive us out of business.”

In comparison, the Labor Contract Law has smaller impact on European or the American companies in China because these companies tend to be less labor intensive or manufacturing-oriented. Western companies in Jiangsu province had signed labor contracts with employees to protect their lawful rights and interests long before the enactment of Labor Contract Law, so the new law did not have adverse effect on them. Bangde Fan, Chairman of China Association of Enterprises with Foreign Investment in Wuxi said during a press conference that “he has not heard of any foreign-invested companies that withdrew from China due to severe impact of Labor Contract Law.”

During a meeting with Guangdong Province Labor and Social Securities

Department, president Harry of American Chamber of Commerce in South Asia said that “China’s Labor Contract Law does not increase companies’ operating costs. South China will attract over seventeen billion US dollars of foreign investment in the next three years.” Harry also pointed out that “instead of labor costs increase, American companies are more concerned with compliance with the new Law to avoid labor disputes arising from misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the Law.” Harry also noted that China has every right to formulate laws to protect the rights and interests of its laborers, so foreign investors should focus on law compliance and address increased labor costs, if there are any. “The question to ask now is not whether the the law tilts more in favor of employees but rather what is the actual labor costs increase. This is a financial, not a labor issue.”

Generally speaking, the enactment of China’s Labor Contract Law underlines China’s ambition to improve and perfect its labor contract system. The old labor law was ineffective not because it was not meant to protect workers’ rights but due to absence of independent labor unions. It is only through allowing Chinese workers to establish independent labor organizations and unions can the new Labor Contract Law be implemented effectively.

7. Widening Wealth Gap

The Chinese government in 2005 stopped releasing the nation’s Gini Coefficient for measuring its inequality of income distribution. Nonetheless, China’s state news agencies had released reports indicating that China’s current Gini Coefficient has reached a record high, surpassing that of all developed countries and most developing countries. The income difference of the top 20% (RMB$25,410.8) and bottom 20% (RMB$4567.1) of urban residents was 5.6 times; The income difference of the top 20% (RMB$8,474.8) and bottom 20% (RMB$1,182.5.) of rural residents was 7.2 times.

According to a report on gradual improvement of farmer’s income presented by China’s State Council at The fourth standing committee meeting of the National People’s Congress, China’s wealth gap was still widening, with the absolute urban- rural income difference reaching RMB$9,646. Chinese farmers’ income saw a 9.5% annual growth in 2007, the highest growth since 1985. Nevertheless, income difference between China’s urban and rural residents during the same period had grown to 3.33 times, resulting in RMB$9,646 net income difference. This represents the widest

wealth gap since China’s economic reform three decades ago.

When the top 10% China’s wealthiest people earn 45% of the nation’s total income, the bottom 10% earn less than 1%. This translates into 150 million Chinese people living below the poverty line, with income less than 1 US dollar a day. In 1985, China set its poverty line at RMB$200 of annual income, which was adjusted annually for purchasing power parities. China also set an absolute poverty line below which individuals are considered to be lacking the resources to meet the basic needs. In 2008 China set its absolute poverty line at RMB$785 as net annual income. This low poverty line means an individual’s income has to go below RMB2 a day for him to be considered living below the absolute poverty line.

The international poverty line set by the World Bank is US$1 a day or RMB$2,555 a year. China’s poverty line, in comparison, is set at a much too low level and only identifies 40 million people living below the poverty line. This enabled the Chinese government to exclude from its social assistance programs the 110 million people living under the poverty line according to world standard. China’s past social assistance programs only focused on helping the underprivileged to meet their basic needs; an individual’s educational and medical needs were often overlooked.

Political Rights

Chun-ju Chen*

I. Introduction

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime continued to suppress dissidents, rights activists, and ethnic minorities in Tibet and Xinjiang because of the Olympic Games, Tibet issue, and earthquake in Sichuan. Before and during the Olympic Games, dissidents, rights activists became missing one by one; news media were under tight control. News reporting was obstructed. Negative news was blocked, inviting criticism from international human rights organizations and international media organizations. On July 29 Amnesty International (AI) released a report entitled “China: The Olympics countdown--broken promises: Update.” In the report, AI pointed out that as the Olympic Games approached, the human rights situation in China deteriorated.①

II. Political Rights in 2008

Suppression of Freedom of Speech Suppression of Dissidents

Because of the Olympic Games, PRC government spent all efforts in maintaining a facade of social harmony. Therefore, it continued to suppress pro-democracy and civil rights speech. Around the time of Olympic Games, dissidents and rights activists became missing one by one. The family members of rights activists were also put under house arrest or their action under restriction.

According to a report in February by Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, PRC government arrested about 300 dissidents within nearly three months, including

* Chun-ju Chen is assistant research fellow of Institute Relations, National Chengchi University.

environmentalists, leaders of peasants whose land was enclosed, laid-off employees of state-owned enterprises, and citizens who exposed government corruption.② According to the investigation of Human Rights Watch, a human rights group, about 130 activists who participated in the pro-democracy movement in 1989 were still in prison.③ According to Pen Association, a writer organization in the United States, around the time of the Olympic Games, at least 45 writers were still locked up in prison.④

At the beginning of this year, the PRC government released three media workers, including former Fuzhou Ribao reporter Li Changqing. Ching Chong of Singapore’s Straits Times was released on parole on February 5. Yu Huafeng, former director of Nanfang Dushih Bao, was released on parole. However, on February 5, Lu Gengsong, a dissident writer in Zhejiang Province was sentenced to four years in prison on the charge of “inciting subversion of the state,” while in reality he was incriminated because of his dissident speech.⑤

On May 3, independent writer Zhou Yuanzhi and his wife were taken away from their home in Hubei Province and were not released until May 18. Zhou Yuanzhi used to be the deputy director of local county taxation bureau. He has been a member of the independent Chinese Pen Association. He was discharged from his position several years ago for submitting his work to overseas magazines. His works include documentary literature that reflected the rights movement by freight industry workers of Zhongxiang city in Hubei.⑥

On July 21, dissident writer Du Daobin in Hubei Province was taken away by police for the reason of “violating the legal provisions related to parole period.” In detention, Du Daobin went on hunger strike to protest against torture. Later, the court issued an order that cancelled Du Daobin’s parole and now Du had to serve the sentence of five months and two years in prison. Du Daobin’s wife also suffered tremendous pressure and cut off communication with foreigners, in particular foreign reporters.⑦ Tsering Woeser, a female Tibetan writer, was briefly detained when she visited her relatives in Tibet.⑧ Liu Shaokun, a teacher of Guanghan middle school in Deyang City, Sichuan Province, was detained in prison without trial or prosecution on June 25 for publishing photos on internet about the collapsed school buildings in the May 12 earthquake. On July 23, he was sentenced to one year of labor re-education for “spreading rumor and disrupting public order.” ⑨

A lot of political prisoners, journalists, rights activists and lawyers were still locked

up illegally in prison, including Wang Bingzhang, Shih Tao, Chen Guangcheng, Kao Zhisheng, Guo Feixiong, and Luo Xiongji.⑩ After Former CCP Secretary of Shanghai Chen Liangyu was sentenced to 18 years in prison, rights lawyer Zheng Enzhong faced stricter surveillance. He was not able to step out of his house, and his communication to the outside world was totally cut off. He was given the warning not to make remark about the Tibet question.⑪ On July 20, Zheng Enzhong was summoned by public security and interrogated for eight hours before he was released. On July 23 Zheng’s house was searched and Zheng was taken away by public security. The house of Zheng’s brother in law was also searched.⑫ On July 1, 8 lawyers from Beijing who were invited to meet with visiting US congressmen to discuss China’s human rights issue were arrested by police.⑬

The treatment of rights activists, including Hu Jia, Yang Chunlin, Teng Biao, and Huang Qi, attracted special attention. These rights activists and lawyers were harassed and persecuted by the CCP regime because they published and transmitted information related to rights movement. Hu Jia, an AIDS activist, was accused of “inciting subversion of the state” and sentenced to three years and six months in prison on April 3 and deprived of political rights for one year.⑭ Because the arrest took place around the violent repression of Tibet and at a time when the Beijing Olympic Games was about to be held shortly, the world paid a high degree of attention to the human rights situation in China. During that time a lot of international leaders, international organizations and Chinese and foreign persons called upon the PRC government to release Hu Jia. It was also heard that Hu Jia was treated inhumanely during detention and his health condition was deteriorating. The final verdict and the prison term showed that the CCP regime will try to maintain the stability of the regime by high-handed measures against rights activists. Hu Jia’s wife Zeng Jinyan was missing during the Olympic Games. According to Zeng Jinyan afterwards, before the Olympic Games, she and her 10 month-old daughter were taken to a prison near Tianjin to visit her husband Hu Jia. Subsequently they were taken to Dalian City. On August 23, the mother and daughter were taken back to home in Beijing.⑮

Yang Chunlin, a labor worker of Jiamusi of Heilongjiang Province, was sentenced to five years in prison on March 24 on the charge of “inciting subversion of the state.” Yang has been assisting peasants who lost their land to protect their rights and urged people to “support human rights and oppose Olympics.” Yang also collected over 10,000 signatures on the internet.⑯

Teng Biao, rights lawyer and lecturer at China University of Political Science and Law, was kidnapped on Mach 6 and released after 41 hours. The kidnappers did not show their identity, but only said they were with Beijing City Government. After Teng Biao was interrogated, he received the warning that he should not make any comment on such questions as the Olympic Games and human rights, etc..⑰

On June 10, Huang Qi, founder of 64Tianwang website advocating rights movement, was illegally arrested in Chengdu, Sichuan.⑱ Reportedly, he was arrested because of his coverage of the shoddy school buildings and the activities by the parents of children who died in those collapsed school buildings in earthquake. Huang Qi requested for medical bail but was not approved. On July 19, he was formally arrested and was not able to meet with his lawyer Mo Shaopin until September 23.⑲

For a long time, the CCP regime has established a blacklist of pro-democracy figures in Hong Kong and refused to issue home return permit to them in order to prevent them from entering the mainland. During the meetings of Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) and National People’s Congress in 2008, Elizabeth Wang Mingquan, a member of the CPPCC from Hong Kong, proposed home return permit for pro-democracy members of Hong Kong’s Legislative Council so that they can return to the mainland.⑳ Religious believers also suffered from more persecution. From January to July in 2008 at least 586 Falun Gong practitioners in Beijing area were arrested illegally, and many of them were tortured to death.㉑

State Internet Terrorism

The control of speech on internet by PRC government remained tight. In March, the Ministry of Public Security demanded the deletion of hundreds webpages and websites, including an article published on the website of “Chinese Ordinary People’s Voice” (www.daixn.com) and an article about Falun Gong. Otherwise websites will be closed down.㉒ In late March, the State Bureau of Radio, Film and Television, ordered the termination of service by 25 internet websites because their audio-visual programs were involved in national security, pornography, and terrorism. Another 32 websites were given a warning. Those websites that were punished were mainly private ones, such as the popular Tudowang. On the other hand, websites run by official propaganda agencies, such as Xinhua Net, CCTV International, Renmin Ribao, and China Radio, were not mentioned at all.

In March during the high time of bloody suppression of Tibet, the PRC government closed down the website YouTube on which clips of the suppression can be seen, which can be regarded an act to suppress freedom of speech on the internet.㉓ At 8 o’clock on the morning of May 28 in Beijing, the website of “Tiananmen mother” formally opened, calling for the truth of Tiananmen incident. However, on the same day the website was blocked.㉔

During the Olympic Games, the CCP regime opened up the websites of some media and international human rights organizations such as the Reporters Without Borders, Amnesty International, BBC, Voice of America (VOA), and some Hong Kong media (Apple Daily excluded). However, that did not mean that the internet was truly opened up. A lot of website and personal blogs were still blocked, in particular those related to Tibetan independence, June 4th incident and Falun Gong. According to Reporters Without Borders, about 30 websites related to human rights and Chinese news media were still blocked.㉕ For example, Wu Hanpin was a reporter of People’s Broadcasting Station of southern Guizhou Province. At the end of June, Wu published on his personal blog materials and photos he collected while covering a riot in Wengan county of Guizhou Province. Yet, his blog was blocked at the beginning of July.㉖ According to “Chinese Human Rights Defenders,” an international human rights organization, during the Olympic Games, Chinese ISP industry issued to each website administrator a memorandum, requiring them to carry out security inspection on all websites.㉗ After the poisonous milk powder was exposed, the word “du” (poison) became a keyword that the PRC internet agents will filter out on the internet.㉘

In addition to “gold shield project,” an internet firewall; special agents on the internet; internet army, the CCP regime also used the means of intimidation and bribery to cajole network companies to help the regime to engage in internet control. Following Yahoo, Microsoft, and Google, who helped the PRC government to clamp down on the freedom of speech of the internet, after the Olympic Games it was found that the text message system used by TOM-Skype, a joint venture by Skype and TOM on-line, a mobile telecommunication company in China, has been revised to enable the CCP regime to monitor the message and information of its users.㉙ It has greatly violated the privacy of the users.

Suppression of Ethnic Minority

Tibet

Since March 10, at the 49th anniversary of fighting against violent repression in Tibet, 500 Buddhist monks of Drepung Monastery in Lhasa carried out a peaceful demonstration. However, they were beaten up and suppressed by army and police, leading to bloody conflict between the police and Tibetans and conflict between the Han people and Tibetan people.㉚ Subsequently, the CCP regime sealed off three major monasteries, including Sera Monastery, Gaden Monastery and Drepung Monastery, and forbid the Buddhist monks to go in and out, seriously violating the right for the Buddhist monks to assembly and their physical liberty. As usual, the CCP regime ignored the demand by the Tibet ethnic minority about political rights, including the freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and religious freedom. On the contrary, the regime continued to arrest political prisoners and prisoners of conscience. The regime blackened the name of those Tibetans who requested for political rights and vilified them as mobs that looted the shops of Han people in an attempt to shift the attention about the Tibet’s demand for independence and accusation of persecution by the CCP regime.㉛

According to reports, lamas went on hunger strike and attempted to kill themselves in the above-mentioned three major temples. In the conflicts, because of the blockade of news, the precise figure of the causalities has not been known to the outside world. The spokesman of PRC’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs slightly mentioned about the incident at a press conference on March 11. However, he only stated that it was an illegal incident by some lamas and a small group of people in Lhasa that hampered social stability.㉜ Afterwards the PRC government claimed that the mob murdered 13 people, but it denied suppression by force.㉝ The Tibetan government in exile said that there were about 140 Tibetans that died in the violent suppression, thousands of people were injured and many other people arrested.㉞ And the PRC government continued to arrest and even murder Tibetans who carried on protest in other areas, such as Sichuan and Gansu.㉟ On March 28 the armed police detained over one hundred Buddhist monks demonstrating in Aba County of Sichuan Province.㊱ On March 29, security force sealed off part of Lhasa again when protests took place.㊲

Since May 12, monks and nuns in Ganzi County of Sichuan had carried out protest, demanding the termination of suppression of Tibetans and welcoming Dalai Lama to return to Tibet. Some nuns were arrested.㊳ The atmosphere in Tibetan Autonomous Region in south of Gansu Province remained tense. Armed police were stationed in

each major temple. At the same time, monks in Longwu Temple in Tungren County, Qinghai Province also engaged in demonstration. The temple was surrounded by army and armed police. Over 100 demonstrators were arrested.㊴

According to Amnesty International, more than 1,000 Tibetans arrested by the government during March were still missing.㊵ The PRC government detained more than 2,000 people at the beginning, but only released several hundreds people in one month. The lama’s family must pay the fine of more than 5,000 renminbi (US$725) to get the lama out of prison.㊶

Since the protest in March, the CCP regime made a lot of regulations and restriction of action on the monasteries. For example, during Olympic torch relay, monks can not go on street in a group of two or more people. At the end of June, the Olympic torch relay was about to reach Tibet. Since the Olympic torch relay in other countries, like the United States, France, and South Korea, encountered protest by Tibetan expatriates and caused conflicts between the Chinese and Tibetans, the CCP regime regarded the Olympic torch relay in Tibet as a major issue. First of all, it was not willing to announce the precise date that the Olympic torch will reach Tibet, and then it changed the scheduled three-day relay into one day, which took place on June 21 eventually. Communication in Tibet was entirely cut off. There was no phone communication between Ganzi, Sichuan and the external world.㊷ Some foreign reporters received permission to go to Lhasa to cover the Olympic torch relay. However, their original schedule to visit Jokhang Temple was suddenly cancelled. The reporters were taken to Sera temple. At the monastery, a lot of police could be seen to closely monitor monks. The monks were still forbidden to get into touch with the outside world. Some foreign reporters complained to retinue officers that they were not able to interview local people freely.㊸

In August when the Olympic Games was about to be held, the CCP regime stipulated that Buddhist monks in the temples of all parts of Tibet must all stay in the temples and were forbidden to go on street. At some places, door must be closed after seven o’clock in the evening.㊹ Before the Olympic Games were closed, Tibet was still under news blockade, media that were allowed to enter Tibet can only visit designated places. Soldiers were everywhere. Curfew was still being implemented in some places. The Tibetans were concerned that after the Olympic Games is closed and most media leave, the CCP suppression to Tibet will elevate.㊺ In the past years, the PRC government has engaged in the construction of “sky net” project, a monitoring system

which was said to combat crime. And the “sky net” projects in areas Tibetans dwell, such as Ganzi, Sichuan and Tibet, have been completed successively.㊻ However, Tibet government in exile said this project was meant to control Tibetans more tightly. During the Olympic Games, if the Tibetan wanted to go into town, they must apply to township government for passes.㊼

Tourist groups were allowed to enter Tibet again on June 25. However, tourism to Tibet was tightened up again before the Olympic Games. The number of visitors and open hours of Potala Palace in Lhasa were limited once again and will not return to normal until after September.㊽

In addition, the CCP tried to obstruct lamas from pledging loyalty to their spiritual leader Dalai Lama by engaging lamas in patriotic education and brain-wash. The lamas said they were forced to participate in the patriotic test, and the result will determine whether they can continue to serve as lama.㊾ The CCP regime also attributed the turmoil to Dalai Lama. At the end of April, the CCP regime held a large-scale exhibition in Beijing, with a theme emphasizing the development of politics, economy, society, and culture of Tibet under the CCP rule and the CCP regime’s sovereignty over Tibet. The purpose of the exhibition was to dilute the independence movement in Tibet.㊿ At the end of July a documentary film about Tibet was filmed, yet in the film performers dressed like Buddhist monks or wore Tibetan clothing and threw stones to armed police or attacked shops and destroyed buildings. The CCP regime also forced Tibetans to perform traditional Tibetan song and dance program in Nangqian County of Yushu state of Qinghai Province to celebrate the opening of the Olympic Games, which however was refused by local Tibetans. Four people shouted protesting slogan and were arrested by public security.

Xinjiang

When the Tibet situation became tense, large scale protests also took place in Xinjiang. According to Dilshat Rishit, World Uyghur Congress (WUC) spokesman, in March a protest by nearly one thousand people took place in Hotian (Khotan) city of Xinjiang, leading to large-scale crackdown by the CCP regime. Nearly 500 people were detained, all news were blocked. According to Dilshat Rishit, a lot of unmarried Uyghur girls were sent by the CCP regime to work in factories all over China as cheap labor in the name of technology cooperation and poverty alleviation. Those young girls were

taken away by force, but have not been settled properly. Some were even forced into prostitution. Thus 80% of the protestors were women. According to Dilshat Rishit, the protesters raised several demands, including: stop exerting the torture on detained Uygur people; release political prisoners; request the CCP regime to return those unmarried women who were taken away by force to engage in cheap labor.

Rebiya Kadeer, the leader of Uyghur American Association and President of WUC, said in order to facilitate the smooth transmission of Olympic torch in Xinjiang, the CCP regime engaged in strict suppression of the Uyghur people. Those Uyghur people who engaged in peaceful demonstration to the Olympic torch relay were arrested and detained. The CCP regime tortured those who were arrested, causing a large group of youth to attack local police station with stone and gasoline products. Several dozen people were arrested, related news were blocked. The Olympic torch relay in the capital of Xinjiang, Urumchi, was accompanied by tight security and large quantities of armed police on the way in a tense atmosphere. According to Dilshat Rishit, the CCP regime expelled ten thousands Uyghur people in Urumchi and Kashgar who did not have household registry in order to guarantee smooth transmission of the Olympic torch. Some Uyghur people who were arrested and sentenced, but released upon completion of sentence or labor reeducation were classified by the CCP regime as “criminal in danger to public security,” including political prisoners, prisoners of conscience, and religious people who were sentenced because of defying official religious policy. An inside document by the CCP required the monitoring of all people who were released upon completion of sentence or labor reeducation from 1990 to 2007. Those people were restrained from leaving their residence until the end of Olympic Games. Rebiya Kadeer criticized the CCP regime of secretly rounding up and trialing the Uyghur people. After the Olympic Games, the CCP regime arrested nearly 10,000 people in Xinjiang.

Shortly before the Olympic Games opened, a bomb attack happened in Kashgar, Xinjiang on August 4, causing 16 people dead and 16 wounded. The PRC government was highly low-key about the incident. Except for the report of bomb attack by CCTV and Beijing Wanbao (Beijing evening post) on the same day, no other media reported the incident, obviously not wanting to cause negative impact on the Olympic Games that will open soon. In the report on the next day, this incident was identified as a “violent attack of police” by the Uyghur youth. However the CCP regime interfered with the reporter’s coverage of the incident. A photographer of Agence France-Presse (AFP) took photos about the incident in the hotel room but was found out by the

police. The police entered the hotel room and demanded the images be deleted. The plainclothes police followed news reporters closely. Two Japanese reporters were beaten by security personnel. Chinese and foreign correspondents were stopped by several policeman and public security personnel while interviewing the people at the scene. The police and public security also took away a Hong Kong reporter’s camera by force. However, the local government apologized to reporters rapidly. The PRC official newspaper in English released a story saying that the officers of Foreign Affairs Department of Kashgar and border police met with two Japanese reporters, and both sides expressed understanding. However, the CCP regime still blocked information and did not clarify the truth of the incident. According to New York Times, judging from the photos taken by American tourists, the incident seemed to be internal conflict between the armed police, and no sound of explosion at the scene was heard. Suppression of the Freedom of the Press

Although the CCP regime promised to improve freedom for the press by the opening of the Olympic Games, the regime’s tight control and blockade of news flow during the Tibet incident, Sichuan earthquake, and the Olympic Games, were clearly seen by the whole world.

Tibet incident

After bloody suppression took place in Tibet in March, the CCP regime ordered all tourists and media to leave Tibet. The external world can only learn about related news from PRC’s official media. Hong Kong’s electronic media originally were few of the foreign media that can enter Lhasa to cover news, yet they were driven out eventually. Hong Kong TVB reported that prior to leaving Lhasa public security officers searched and confiscated their tapes and computer memory card. Video images and photos in the computer about public security on duty were deleted, seriously infringing upon the freedom of the press. Hong Kong Journalists Association protested that such action by the authorities violated the “Rules for Hong Kong and Macao reporters to cover news in the mainland during Beijing Olympic Games and the preparation period” that went into force in 2007. AFP also reported that since video clips about the turmoil in Lhasa were uploaded unto YouTube, internet users in China were unable to connect to that website. Yahoo news net in China can not be connected because of it carried reports by foreign media about the demonstration in Lhasa. The reports of official

media, such as Xinhua News Agency and CCTV, referred the demonstrators as mobs and accused Dalai Lama of being the mastermind behind the scene.

The CCP regime later arranged a truth-finding tour by the press to Lhasa. However, this did not mean real freedom of the press, because the CCP regime designated the news agency or medium that can take part and only 26 reporters were allow on the three-day-two-night journey. The itinerary was designated by the CCP regime and the press corps was accompanied by officers. This arrangement caused the protest by a lot of media that were not allowed to participate. International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) issued a protest on March 27, criticizing that all this was for propaganda purpose and violated the promise to more media freedom for the Olympic Games. When the press corps reached Jokhang Temple of Lhasa, nearly 30 monks suddenly complained in tears to the reporters that they had been imprisoned for quite some time and that the government arranged for cadres to disguise as believers to worship in the temple. The monks denied the accusation of arson and looting, claiming that the turmoil had nothing to do with Dalai Lama and shouted that there was no freedom in Tibet.

Earthquake in Sichuan

The earthquake in Sichuan in May 12 attracted the attention of a lot of Chinese and foreign media. However after the appearance of a large amount of reports about the collapse of school buildings and resultant death of thousands of students, Chinese media received government’s notice instructing them to control the report about collapsed school buildings. Former reporter of Shaanxi TV station Ma Xiaoming said that after the earthquake, China media’s coverage was quite good initially. However, it soon returned to the overall control by propaganda department. Party organ newspapers such as Guangdong Province’s Nanfang Ribao also tightened its supervision of the editorial pages of Nanfang Dushibao and Nanfang Zhoumou. Foreign media reporters found themselves being followed by public security while covering news. Many foreign reporters were detained, including AFP reporters. When a lot of parents demanded the government to reveal the true cause of the collapse of school buildings, the government did not want any media to be present. For example, on June 20, parents of 150 students of Fuxing Second elementary school in Mianzhu City, Deyang demanded the officials to deliver their promise and make public the investigation result of the collapse of school buildings. The local government dispatched 1,200 policemen to prevent the media from covering the news. Associated Press (AP) reporter said they were detained

by public security officers while interviewing parents at the elementary school.

Olympic Games

Although the CCP regime promised to relax the restrictions on news reporting for the Olympic Games, IFJ protested many times about the CCP regime’s violation of its promise to press freedom, its attack on reporters and restriction on the report of poisonous milk powder. According to Reporters Without Borders, at least 22 foreign reporters were attacked, arrested or interfered during the Olympic Games. Foreign Correspondent in China Club reported at least 63 incidents of obstructing news coverage during the Olympic Games.

Foreign reporters complained they were restricted by the PRC government to approach the Tiananmen Square or landmarks in Beijing to engage in interview. Some television networks criticized the PRC Customs of detaining their recording and video-taping equipment and interfering with their reporting schedule. The Olympic torch relay in Paris, London and San Francisco and other places encountered protests by Tibetans. This scared the PRC government, and it did not want the same kind of protest to takes place in Beijing and during the Olympic Games. Nor did the PRC government want the foreign media to capture the images of possible unexpected protest. Thus it restrained the entrance of recording and video-taping equipment and did not want to see a sudden influx of large number of mobile television broadcast trucks and satellite antenna moving around in Beijing and all over China. A lot of news agencies wished to send more reporters but could not be granted visa. On July 1, while Norman Choy, a reporter with Apple Daily in Hong Kong, wanted to enter Beijing to interview the Olympic Games, he was intercepted at the airport in Beijing by public security with the charge of violating “National Security Law.” He was sent back to Hong Kong, and his home return permit taken away. This incident immediately caused a high degree of concern in Hong Kong. It was regarded as a violation of its promise made in “rules for Hong Kong and Macao reporters to cover news in the mainland during Beijing Olympic Games and the preparation period.” Earlier, Norman Choy had already obtained official qualification to cover the news with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and paid the fee and got official press pass by IOC which will allow him to cover the Olympic Games. The action by PRC government will cause conflict with the IOC’s decision and violate the freedom of the press. Because of Apple Daily’s report of Tiananmen incident, it has not on good term with the CCP. For

a long time, the newspaper was often rejected to enter the Chinese mainland to carry out news reporting.

Foreign media also encountered a great deal of interference while covering the Olympic torch relay. In the section of relay in Mount Qomolangma, nine foreign reporters were invited, yet the PRC government shortened the time for media coverage into half. The media had to complete the coverage from Beijing to the camp base of Mount Qomolangma of 5,100 meters in elevation, in three days. Most media were worried about the compression of coverage time.

Reporters of NOW TV station of Hong Kong said they were obstructed and detained by public security officers while covering the story of people buying tickets at the box office of the Olympic Games. The public security not only requested the reporters to delete video clips, but their attitude was mean. Although the IOC had been comparatively more tolerant to China’s human rights situation, the IOC condemned PRC public security’s brutal action to and detention of John Ray, a reporter with Great Britain’s independent TV station (ITV) on August 13. Ray was arrested on his way to cover a demonstration in support of Tibet near an Olympic Games site.

After the close of Beijing Olympic Games, the suppression of the freedom of the press worsened. Several news websites that were opened before the Olympic Games were blocked again. For example, internet users have not been able to connect to the website of Radio of Free Asia (RFA) since August 26. On September17, public security searched the house of a Tibetan TV reporter in Ganzi and took away his notebook and arrested the reporter. In October, the “Rules governing foreign reporters in China during Beijing Olympic Games and its preparation period” will be repealed.

Information blockade

The CCP regime’s control of domestic media has never stopped. For example, starting January Yazhou Zhoukan can not receive subscription in China. Yazhou Zhoukan has discussed topics that were regarded as taboo by the CCP regime, such as democracy, the Tiananmen incident, and religious freedom. Originally in the mainland, only foreign residents and company can subscribe to the magazine. It was not sold at bookstands. On July 24, Xinjingbao in Beijing ran a photo of people with bullet wound by martial troops during the June 4 movement in 1989. Soon the newspaper was pulled from the market. During the Olympic Games, the CCP regime designated 8 Olympic

news-stands to sell foreign newspapers and periodicals as well as magazines. However because the news-stands were all located in the athletes village, ordinary people were unable to enter, let alone to purchase foreign magazines there.

The blockade of information during the Olympic Games by the CCP regime was exceptionally tight. All negative news were blocked, including the follow-up of the earthquake in Sichuan, bomb attacks in Kunming, Beijing and other places, and poisonous milk powder incident that had caused great commotion in September, incidents in Xinjiang. All were forbidden to be reported. One hundred days after the earthquake in Sichuan, the number of casualties and deaths were still undisclosed. On September 23, Xinhua Net reported that Lanzhou University Second Medical College first reported Sanlu milk powder issue to the Ministry of Public Health on July 16. A reporter of Nanfang Zhoumou already learned about the information about the “kidney sonte baby” in July and carried out investigation. The reporter found that Wuhan Tongji hospital in Hubei had already found more than 20 babies with kidney stone and the doctors highly suspected that Sanlu milk powder was problematic. However, because of a 21-point directive related to news coverage issued by Propaganda Department of the CCP Central Committee, the report of poisonous milk powder that was related to food security was not able to see the daylight before the Olympic Games was closed. This was just like the cover-up by the CCP regime of the SARS epidemic during 2003, causing great harm to people’s right to know as well as people’s life. Even after the poisonous milk powder was exposed, the CCP regime still exercised strict control of media report. For example the media can not use the story about poisonous milk as the headline news; media must show unity in news coverage related to poisonous milk; media must use wire story by Xinhua News Agency; and no follow-up report was allowed.

Grassroots Democracy

The rights movement in China has become more and more flourishing, yet it still was severely suppressed by the CCP regime. The CCP regime continued to limit the people’s rights to protect their right with institution, law, and action. For example human rights lawyer Teng Biao and Jiang Tianyung said that the CCP regime repeatedly rejected the renewal of their lawyer license because the two openly criticized the government’s suppression in Tibet. On May 1, “regulations governing the disclosure of government information” was put into force in PRC, yet in practice, the implementation was full of

difficulties. The main difficulty included how to define whether a piece of information can be disclosed. On May 6 Beijing’s Fazhi Ribao reported that five people of Ruzheng County in Hunan Province applied to the county government for the disclosure of materials of the government department but was rejected. Subsequently, the five persons filed a lawsuit against the county government to the court. This was the first administrative lawsuit in which people charged the government of not disclosing government information.

The CCP regime admitted that in the increasing number of conflicts between the people and the government, 90% were related to land enclosure. In the rural area, land is still owned by peasants collectively, creating an incentive for the village committee officers to seek personal profits. The CCP regime has undertaken several investigation of national land to check the state of basic farmland and cultivated land. However, the effect of the investigation on cracking down on illegal land enclosure was not apparent. PRC Minister of Land and Natural Resources admitted that illegal occupation of land and mining persisted despite of prohibition. According to the official investigation, in the survey of national land from October of 2005 to October of 2006, 14,000 illegal cases were discovered, involving 33333 plus hectares of land. Since mid-September of 2007, the PRC Ministry of Land and Natural Resources had undertaken a 100-day enforcement action targeting cases of “substituting enclosure with lease” and “use and enclosure of land before approval.” The investigation checked up 32,000 illegal cases that involved tens thousands hectares of land. There were 20,000 cases illegal land enclosure in which land was taken away by means of “substituting enclosure with lease,” involving 24666 plus hectares of land.

Peasants have taken action to organize and engage in rights activities by means of grassroots democracy in order to reclaim the land taken away by local government. Since December 2007, peasants in Fujin of Heilongjiang Province, Sanmenxia and other places, have recalled village officers and divided up the land by themselves and issued statement to protect their land. However, later the land was taken back by local government by force and rights representatives arrested. On December 9, 2007, about 40,000 peasants from 72 villages in Dongnangang village, Fujin City, Heilongjiang Province claimed to obtain land ownership and released an announcement to the whole country stating that villagers had held villager assembly and recalled the village head who colluded with local officers and infringed upon peasants’ collective interests. The villagers conducted a measurement of the land and re-distributed the land to peasants on December 3. However, subsequently, village representative Yu Changwu

and rights activist Wang Guilin were arrested by the government, even though they conducted the recall of the village head in accordance with “village organization law” implemented by the PRC government. Sydney Morning Herald reporter John Garnaut was detained and interrogated by the public security of Fujin City after he conducted an interview with peasants of Fujin City. As a result, Yu Changwu and Wang Guilin were sentenced to reeducation through labor. Yang Chunlin, a rights activist that assisted the peasants, was sentenced to five years in prison on the charge of subverting the state. In Shaanxi Province around 70,000 peasants in the old Sanmenxia reservoir area of the Yellow River issued a statement of protecting their land, announcing to the whole country that they took back the ownership of their land. However, three peasant representatives were charged with inciting subversion of the state and were detained for criminal charge. Other representatives of peasants were summoned for interrogation successively. In other places, including Matai town, Wuqing district of Tianjin City; Leqing City, Zhejiang Province; Yixing City, Jiangsu Province, there were conflicts between peasants and local governments because of the protection of land.

In the earthquake of Sichuan, a large quantity of school buildings collapsed and caused the death of about more than 9000 students and teachers, which infuriated the family of the victims and shocked the people. The government at first promised to carry out a comprehensive, thorough investigation of the quality of school buildings and punish people who were responsible. However, the government did not allow the parents to petition to higher level government. For example in Dujiangyan City, several incidents took place in which parents were prevented from engaging in rights activities. Similar thing happened in Xianger County. Foreign reporters were not allowed to enter area where school buildings collapsed nor were they allowed to talk to parents. More than 150 parents of students died in the school of Zhuyuan middle school of Dujiangyan City gathered in front of the local court and planned to file a lawsuit against the school and headmaster and asked for compensation on the ground that the school buildings collapsed because of its shoddy construction. However, they were obstructed by the police and can only assemble in front of the court house. All roads near the Zhuyuan middle school were blocked by hundreds of police who engaged in “traffic control.” Over one hundred parents who planned to go to the school to hold a memorial for their children were stopped on half way. People in Sichuan who wanted to engage in petition also said their activity was suppressed by local governments. The authorities told the petitioners that they had no time to deal with petition the ground that they were dealing with the earthquake relief and told them to

return after the close of the Olympic Games. Victims of the earthquake were sent to “study session” or arrested while engaging in petition or rights activities.

Before and after the Olympic Games, the PRC government stepped up the suppression of petition activities, in particular those in Beijing. The police in Beijing Municipality cleaned up the “petition village” once again at the end of June. 100 to 200 petitioners were rounded up and moved to Ma Jia Lou (a shelter for petitioners from outside Beijing). Many petitioners from Shanghai were intercepted and detained because they approached the adjacent area of Tiananmen Square. According to petitioners, if they were caught three times, they will be sent to labor re-education. Because of the Olympic Games, the PRC government designated three parks as the demonstrating zone in Beijing. However, any demonstration activity should be approved by the government first, and according to official source, since August 1, the government had received 77 applications but approved none of them. The State Petition Center in Beijing implemented a policy of “repatriating petitioners.” Petitioners complained that Beijing public security set up a so-called “pocket” in the Petition Center. Petitioners will be ushered into a special passage way through which the petitioners will be concentrated for repatriation.

Petitioners received more harsh treatment. According to Human Rights in China, a human rights organization, two senior citizens, 77-year-old Wu Dianyuan and 79-year-old Wang Xiuying, applied for several times from August 5 to August 18 to engage in demonstration in the three designated areas in Beijing but were never approved. However, the two senior citizens were once sentenced to be sent to engage in labor re-education for one year. Lately, many petitioners regarded it meaningless to go to Beijing to engage in petition. Instead, they went to Hong Kong to engage in petition and reflect their grievance to the international community. On July 18, two petitioners from Shanghai went to the Hong Kong government building in which the office United Nations in Hong Kong is located. They held up banners and hoped to get the help of the United Nations. One petitioner was 53-year-old Xi Guochen, whose husband was killed by the authorities in the process of house demolition in Shanghai in 1996. Another one is 76-year-old Lin Jiliang, who said her house was dismantled by force but was intercepted while she engaged in petition in Beijing. Lin Jiliang was missing soon after she returned to Shanghai and was not released until September 13. On August 9, the day after the opening of the Olympics, Shanghai authorities arrested four petitioners who went to Hong Kong to engage in petition in the past two months. In Zhabei district of Shanghai nearly 50 relocated households were put on

the “blacklist” and people continued to be taken away by the police in Shanghai. About 50 petitioners from Shanghai went to Beijing to engage in petition successively during the Paralympics Games, yet they were intercepted by the Shanghai authorities.

Conclusion

The CCP regime has blocked out information because of the Olympic Games, encroached on the people’s right to know and the freedom of the press and caused great harm to people’s life and safety. The following will discuss the issue in more details with the two cases of Sanlu milk powder and the empty promise to greater freedom of the press.

Sanlu Tainted Milk Powder Scandal

In order to maintain the smooth going of the Olympic Games, the PRC government postponed the dealing with the contaminated milk powder produced by Sanlu Group and forbid news reporting, causing great harm to people’s rights to know and life. The incident even escalated into an international incident.

The Exposure

On September 9, Lanzhou Chenbao ran a story about poisonous milk powder but did not identify the brand of the milk, causing strong concern of society. The newspaper said that the urological department of PLA First Hospital found that 14 babies suffered from “multiple kidney stone” or “ureter stone.” The hospital was highly concerned with the cases and discovered that the patients all had taken specific brand milk powder for a long time. On September 11, Xinhua News Agency released a story saying that the Ministry of Public Health highly suspected Sanlu baby formula milk in Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province was contaminated by Melamine. On the same day morning, Sanlu group said that there was no evidence showing that those babies were sick because of Sanlu milk powder. However in the evening of the same day, Sanlu admitted that it did find that some batches of Sanlu baby milk powder have been tainted by Malamine when the group conducted a check by itself and recalled the

products at the same time. The recall caused a big roar suddenly and escalated into national and international incident. Beyond China, a lot of places, including Taiwan, Japan, Singapore, also discovered tainted milk, and many countries forbid the import of Chinese milk.

Information Block; Encroachment of the Freedom of the Press

After the exposure of the scandal, it was found that in fact a lot of departments had already known that Sanlu baby milk powder was tainted by Malamine. On September 23, Xinhua Net reported that Lanzhou University Second Medical College reported about the problem milk power to Ministry of Public Health on July 16. In addition, according to He Feng, a reporter with Nanfang Zhoumou, he already received about the report of “baby with stone” in July and carried out investigation. He discovered that Tongji Hospital in Wuhan, Hubei Province had already found more than 20 case of sick babies, and the doctors highly suspected Sanlu milk powder. However, because of the 21-point prohibition about news reporting issued by Propaganda Department of the CCP Central Committee, the report of poisonous milk powder was unable to be published before the close of Olympic Games. The 21-point prohibition was mostly related to the Olympic Games, including no report of food security issue such as mineral water that will cause cancer. In reality, the prohibition was violation of the freedom of the press.

Even after the poisonous milk powder was exposed, domestic news coverage of the issue was still limited by strict rules. According to the report by Duo Wei Net (Chinese media network), on September 14, the Propaganda Department of the CCP Central Committee issued an order forbidding domestic media to report the news as they wished. Instead, they must stick to the official release or reports by Xinhua News Agency. They must follow several guidelines, including no story about the milk powder on front-page as headline news; stress the attention of the top leader, the concern of the CCP and government and measures of treating and curing. The media must seek unity of coverage and only release the wire news by Xinhua News Agency that has been censored. The report should avoid serious issue and highlight the light side and bright side. No follow-up is allowed. All major newspapers and magazines were not able to publish their coverage. Nanfang Zhoumou can only place its article entitled “the difficult road of pursuing the murderer of baby” on theNanfang Zhoumou website.

Government Did Not React in Time

Various kinds of evidences showed that the manufacturer, public health authority, local government and the CCP high level already learned about the news before the Olympic Games, but they chose to disregard the issue because of the Olympic Games. The total neglect of people’s life was a serious misconduct in office.

Sanlu Group The statement by Sanlu Group showed that this company received complaints in mid-March by consumers that the baby milk powder caused babies to have the symptom of dysuria and kidney stone. However, this company sent the product to government department for a checkup, and the result showed the product was in line with “national standard.” In mid-June, cases increased. Babies with serious condition must be treated in hospital, yet Sanlu did not stop production nor recall products. Until August 1, this company accused some dairy farmers as the culprit because they mixed Melamine into milk in order for water-downed milk to pass quality test. The company also said it already reported this incident to the authority on August 1.

Shijiazhuang government The spokesman of Shijiazhuang government said in an interviewed with Renmin Ribao while Sanlu company first raised the issue of poisonous milk powder on August 2, six days before the Olympic Games opened in Beijing, it requested the city government to help manage the media so that the company can recall problematic products in a more friendly situation. The report of the poisonous milk powder was not submitted to Hebei Government until September 9.

Ministry of Public Health On September 23, Xinhua Net reported Lanzhou University Second Medical College reported to Ministry of Public Health about Sanlu milk powder issue on July 16. Obviously, the public health department did not deal with it immediately.

CCP high level Originally the designated brand of milk for the Olympic Games was Yili. Since the beginning of 2008, Yili Group had used the Olympic Games to promote its brand. However, at the end of June, Sanyuan, a milk producer based in Beijing, became the exclusive provider of milk for the Olympic Village, after “tests by related department.” And the Sanyuan milk has been the supplier of milk for the CCP leaders and the Great Hall of the People for a long time. It was questionable whether this proved the CCP top level already knew that Yili milk had problems and changed the milk supplier at the last moment.

The fact showed that before the Olympic Games, Sanlu Group, the public health department, Shijiazhuang government, and the CCP high level knew about the existence of problematic milk powder. However, because the report of problematic milk powder was not in line with the theme of “peaceful Olympic Games,” related news was blocked. Information about poisonous milk powder that was a matter of life and death was thus “harmonized” by the Olympic Games. According to New Zealand government, Fonterra, the biggest overseas shareholder of Sanlu Group, requested the Sanlu Group and local governments to recall the milk powder when it learned about the problematic milk powder in August. However, local government officers did not respond and on the contrary attempted to cover up the issue and did not recall the powder milk formally. Fonterra had to raise the issue to New Zealand government and then Premier Helen Clark. On September 5 the New Zealand government learned about the news and ordered New Zealand government officers to bypass the local government and directly reported this incident to PRC central government. Until then did the PRC government pay serious attention to it. After the Olympic Games were closed in Beijing and the Paralympics had opened for a week, the scandal was exposed. If not for the persistent pursuit by the Fonterra and then New Zealand Premier Helen Clark, the CCP high level probably still will not take action on the poisonous milk powder. And millions of babies and their families were thus kept in the dark and took poisonous milk powder for another month.

Empty Promise on Press Freedom

The CCP regime promised to relax news reporting around the Olympic Games. However, the promise proved to be empty, which invited criticism by a lot of media and international human rights organizations.

The Promise

In December 2006, the PRC government issued “rules governing news reporting by foreign reporters in China during the Beijing Olympic Games and its preparation period,” “rules governing news reporting by Taiwanese reporters in the mainland during the Beijing Olympic Games and its preparation period,” and “rules governing news reporting by Hong Kong and Macao reporters in the mainland during the Beijing Olympic Games and its preparation period.” The PRC government announced that

it will grant more freedom to foreign media in covering news and interviewing local people. Under the consent of the interviewee or related department, foreign media can engage in interview at will.

According to Reporters Without Borders, the police also announced three sets of measures guiding the treatment about foreign media.

a. “Four rules governing the management of foreign reporters”: (1) no covering up of objects that reporters want to cover; (2) no damage of equipment; (3) no confiscation of memory card; (4) no investigation of less important issue related to foreign reporter;

b. “Eight situations that foreign reporters should not be intervened while interviewing PRC citizen”: (1) special correspondent; (2) non-special correspondent who is not interested in political issue; (3) consensual interview; (4) reporting about other countries; (5) news briefing by foreign organization held with permission; (6) reporter’s interview is related to sensitive issue, but the interviewee will not summon gathering that will disrupt public order; (7) interviewee talks about Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, Falun Gong or makes criticism of the CCP and government, but there is no excessive action; (8) reporter taking picture or tape-recording of police without affecting their work.

c. According to the direction by “Crime Office,” police should conduct thorough investigation of pro-Tibet, pro-Xinjang people, Christian, criminal, and take effective action in order to prevent negative publicity. Foreigners participating in demonstration should be summoned and deported as soon as possible.

Criticism by International Media

In reality, the PRC government has not delivered its promise before and during the Olympic Games, thus inviting criticisms by international media. IFJ protested against the CCP regime’s violation of its promise of more press freedom, attack on reporters and restriction of reports on poisonous powder milk. According to Reporters Without Borders, at least 22 foreign reporters have been attacked, arrested or obstructed during the Olympic Games. According to Foreign Correspondent in China Club, during the Olympic Games, at least 63 incidents related to obstruction of interview had happened.

Restrictions in Practice

In practice, before and during the Olympic Games, the PRC government has adopted the following measures to restrict foreign media’s news reporting: a. Technical interference:

(1) Refuse to issue visa to reporter of specific media. The PRC embassy refused to grant visa to six reporters with Reporters Without Borders as well as a reporter from the Tibet department of Radio Free Asia. Apple Daily reporter Norman Choy was once intercepted at the Beijing International Airport and repatriated to Hong Kong.

(2) The Customs detained recording equipment.

(3) Monitor foreign reporters in China more tightly, harass and arrest PRC citizens who accepted interview with foreign reporters. Zhang Wei, a former resident of Qianmen area in Beijing, was arrested by police on August 9 after he talked to foreign reporters about his new residence. Eddie Romero, a pastor from the United States, turned a hotel room into a torture interrogation room and invited reporters to visit, which was forbidden by the authorities quickly.

(4) Change the Olympic torch relay schedule, which increased the difficulty for media to cover the news. b. Forbid the covering of sensitive issues beyond sports, such as rights activity and disasters. Foreign media were usually obstructed while they tried to interview dissidents or their families, such as Hu Jia’s wife. c. Reporters were stopped while attempting to engage in news reporting in the Tiananmen Square or landmarks in Beijing. d. Reporters were obstructed while covering protests by Tibetans. On August 13, eight foreign members of the “Free Tibet student movement” engaged in demonstration in Minzhu Wenhua Park near an Olympic Game facility. They were soon arrested. John Ray, a reporter with ITV, was stopped by public security officers on his way to cover the demonstration and was pushed to ground and abused. Later, National Security Bureau claimed that Ray was mistaken as a protestor.

e. Reporters were obstructed while covering news in Xinjiang. AFP reporter and photographer, while shooting the incident of Kashgar in hotel room, were discovered by public security personnel. The public security then entered the hotel room and demanded the images be deleted. The plainclothes police followed reporter closely. Two Japanese reporters were beaten by security personnel. According to Ming Bao Daily in Hong Kong, domestic and foreign correspondents were stopped by many policemen and security personnel while interviewing people at the scene. The camera of a Hong Kong reporter was taken away by force. f. Media’s news website was blocked. Internet users have not been able to connect to the website of Radio of Free Asia from August 26; g. Restrain media from entering. Yazhou Zhoukan can not accept subscription in the mainland since January. Eutelsat Communications, under the pressure of CCP regime, cancelled cooperation with New Tang Dynasty TV (NTDTV). Viewers in the mainland were not able to get NTDTV programs. In April 2004, NTDTV signed a contract with Eutelsat for the latter to carry signals on its W5 satellite and began broadcasting to the mainland. Because of PRC government’s criticism and pressure, Eutelsat requested to terminate its contract with NTDTV less than one month after the NTDTV began broadcasting in the mainland. On June 11, 2008, NTDTV’s signals were terminated in China. On June 16, Eutelsat explained that due to technical failure of power supply, the transmission of its four channels was forced to be terminated. In the meantime, Eutelsat resumed the transmission of three of the four programs terminated before by transferring their signals to other transmitter. Only NTDTV’s program was not relocated. On July 11, Reporters Without Borders revealed the real reason why NTDTV’s signals were terminated was because Berretta, chairman and CEO of Eutelsat, voluntarily shut off NTDTV’s signals in order to please the CCP regime. h. Interfere with international radio stations in mandarin, Tibetan and Uighur languages. Before and during the Beijing Olympic Games, BBC, VOA, RFA, Sound of Hope Radio (in close relation with Falun Gong), Sound of Tibet were still interfered in the territory of China. i. Tighten up press freedom after the Olympic Games. Related rules will be repealed on October 17 automatically, including “rules governing news reporting by foreign reporters in China during the Beijing Olympic Games and its preparation period, “rules governing news reporting by Taiwanese reporters in the mainland during the

Notes

① “China: The Olympics countdown-broken promises: Update,” Amnesty International, July 29, 2008, http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ ASA17/090/2008/en/47a6d519-5d77-11dd-a592-c739f9b70de8/asa170902008 eng.html. ② “China arrests more dissidents for safer Olympics,” Central News Agency (Taiwan), February 8, 2008, http://www.cnanews.gov.tw/mnd/mndread.php?id=2008020900 16&Lev=3. (in Chinese) ③ “Tiananmen activists languish in jail 19 years on,” Radio Australia, June 14, 2008, http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/programguide/stories/200806/s2264573.htm. ④ “PEN Gives Voice to Silenced Writers in China on Eve of the Olympics,” PEN America Center, August 8, 2008, http://www.pen.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/ 2745/prmID/172. ⑤ “Li Changqing Released from Prison in China: Number of Jailed Writers Drops to 40,” PEN American Center, February 4, 2008, http://www.pen.org/printmedia.php/ prmMediaID/1891. Li Changquing worked for Fuzhou Ribao and warned about the outbreak of SARS epidemic before the government admitted the epidemic. Li’s support of criticism of corruption in the government by a CCP officer led him to be jailed; “Hong Kong reporter freed early from China jail,” AFP, February 4, 2008, http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hubED1MdysgKS_N5wSNMvaQvT9tw; Edward Cody, “Chinese Editor Freed After 4 Years,” Washington Post, February 10, 2008, A17, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/09/ AR2008020901512_pf.html; “China Frees Journalist Ahead of Lunar New Year, Jails Activist,” Radio Free Asia (RFA), February 6, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ english/news/china_journalist-20080206.html. ⑥ “China: Dissident writer Zhou Yuanzhi detained,” English PEN, May 8, 2008, http://www.englishpen.org/writersinprison/bulletins/chinadissidentwriterzhouyuan zhidetained/. Zhou Yuanzhi had been under surveillance by the government and intimidated after his works were published in Hong Kong last year. ⑦ “Dissident Jailed Ahead of Olympics,” RFA, July 21, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ english/news/china/dissidents-07212008155513.html?searchterm=None. Du was sentenced to three years in prison and suspended for four years, which should have expired in August; “Dissident writer Du Daobin on hunger strike against torture,” RFA, July 29, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/dudaobing-072920 08094707.html (in Chinese); “Beijing Games Update, 02.09 - Police harass jailed

writer’s wife,” Reporters Without Borders, Febuary 9, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/ article.php3?id_article=25234. ⑧ “Tibet: Writer and blogger Woeser briefly detained,” PEN American Center, September 5, 2008, http://www.englishpen.org/writersinprison/bulletins/tibetwriter andbloggerwoeserbrieflydetained. ⑨ “China detains teacher for earthquake photos,” Guardian, July 31, 2008, http:// www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/31/china.chinaearthquake. ⑩ According to people of China Democracy Party (CDP), Luo Xiongji lived in Thailand for a long time but became missing after attending an event in memorial of June 4 incident in 2007 in Thailand. According to CDP people in China, Luo was arrested by Guangdong public security in July, 2007 and now detained in Guangzhou. Luo’s sister received a warning not to give information about his brother to other people. ⑪ “Zeng Enchong under tighter control after the sentence of Chen Liangyu,” Epoch Times, April 18, 2008, http://news.epochtimes.com/b5/8/4/18/n2086306p.htm (in Chinese); “Zeng Enchong asked to be quite on Tibet,” RFA, April 30, 2008, http:// www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/zheng-04302008100445.html?searchterm= None. (in Chinese) ⑫ “Rights Lawyer Zeng Enchong searched and interrogated,” Epoch Times, July 23, 2008, http://tw.epochtimes.com/bt/8/7/23/n2201949.htm. (in Chinese) ⑬ The eight lawyers were Li Boguang, Teng Biao, Li Heping, Jiang Tianyuan, Li Xiongbin, Li Fangping, Fan Yafeng, and Zhang Xingshui, Jill Drew and Edward Cody. “China Blocks Dissident Lawyers From Beijing Dinner Hosted by Congressmen,” Washington Post, July 1, 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/01/AR2008070100749_pf.html. ⑭ In November, 2007, Hu Jia introduced the human right situation in China before the Olympics through internet conference to European Parliament. Hu was arrested at the end of 2007 and trialed in Beijing on March 18. ⑮ “Zeng Jinyan returned to Beijing home after missing before the Olympics,” Radio France International, August 26, 2008, http://www.rfi.fr/actucn/articles/104/article_ 9127.asp. (in Chinese) ⑯ “China Sentences an Advocate of Land Rights to Five Years,” The New York Times, March 25, 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/25/world/asia/25china.html?_r =1&scp=1&sq=Yang+Chunlin&st=nyt&oref=slogin.

⑰ Jim Yardley, “Chinese Lawyer Says He Was Detained and Warned on Activism,” The New York Times, March 9, 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/world/ asia/09china.html. ⑱ “Huang Qi-Chinese Cyber-Dissident Missing-Presumed Arrested,” Canadian Broadcasting Center Radio, June 13, 2008, http://www.cbc.ca/searchengine/blog/ 2008/06/post_21.html. ⑲ “China - Detained cyber-dissident Huang Qi finally allowed to see his lawyer,” Canadian Business Online, September 24, 2008, http://www.canadianbusiness. com/markets/cnw/article.jsp?content=20080924_112502_3_cnw_cnw; “Huang Qi denies charge,” RFA, September 23, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibao dao/huangqi-09232008111639.html. (in Chinese) ⑳ Those democrats included Martin Lee, Szeto Wah, Alberto Ho. “Wang in big step on home permits,” The Standard (Hong Kong), March 10, 2008, http://www. thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=21&art_id=62808&sid=17985905& con_type=1&d_str=20080310&fc=2. ㉑ “Hundreds of Practitioners Arrested This Year in Beijing,” Clearwisdom.net, August 20, 2008, http://www.clearwisdom.net/emh/articles/2008/8/20/99989.html. ㉒ “Independent Website Closed Without Notification,”China Human Rights Defender, http://crd-net.org/Article/Class9/Class10/200804/20080403213929_8286.html. The article was about corruption of local government. ㉓ “China Orders Video Web Sites to Close,” ABC News, March 21, 2008, http:// abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=4493501. ㉔ “Tiananmen Mother website opens,” VOA (Chinese), May 28, 2008, http://www. voafanti.com/gate/big5/www.voanews.com/chinese/w2008-05-28-voa54.cfm. (in Chinese) ㉕ “How China Censors the Internet and Monitors Your Telecommunications, CHRD’s Alternative Guide to the Olympics (Part II),” CHRD, http://crd-net.org/Article/ Class9/Class10/200808/20080812154644_9981.html. ㉖ Howard W. French, “Chinese less restricted, except for politics,” International Herald Tribute, August 2, 2008, http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/02/asia/ rights.php?page=3. ㉗ Supra note 25.

㉘ “Poison’ becomes keyword for internet censor,” Epoch Times, September 20, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/9/20/n2269859.htm. (in Chinese) ㉙ “China ‘spying on Skype messages,” BBC, October 3, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/ 2/hi/technology/7649761.stm. ㉚ “Tension high, security lockdown in riot-hit Tibet,” Reuters, March 16, 2008, http:// www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSSP10739920080316. ㉛ “The Lhasa Riots Documentary,” CCTV International, March 20, 2008, http:// www.cctv.com/english/20080320/106872.shtml. ㉜ Zhuang Pinghui, Kristine Kwok and Choi Chi-yuk, “Beijing confirms Tibet protest but denies arrest of monks,” South China Morning Post, March 12, 2008. ㉝ “13 killed in ‘brutal’ riots, says Tibet chief,” Shanghai Daily, March 18, 2008. ㉞ Ethan Cole, “Cries Against Injustice Mar Journalists’ Tibet Tour,” Christian Post, March 27, 2008, http://www.christianpost.com/article/print/20080327/cries- against-injustice-mar-journalists-tibet-tour.htm. ㉟ Zhuang Pinghui, “Officials keep silent on reports of dead protesters in Gansu,”South China Morning Post, March 20, 2008, http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP/ menuitem.2af62ecb329d3d7733492d9253a0a0a0/?vgnextoid=bfd0f5713f7c 8110VgnVCM100000360a0a0aRCRD. ㊱ Jill Drew, “China Claims Upper Hand In Restive Tibetan Regions,” Washington Post, April 3, 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/03/ AR2008040302129.html; “Chinese security forces seal off Tibet capital,” Reuters, March 29, 2008, http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSPEK2429742008 0329. ㊲ “Chinese security forces seal off Tibet capital,” Reuters, March 29, 2008, http:// www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSPEK24297420080329. ㊳ “Tibetan Nuns Jailed, Detained,” RFA, May 12, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/english/ news/tibet/tibet_nuns-05122008160846.html?searchterm=None. ㊴ “China detains 140 Tibetans over protests: reports,” Taipei Times, April, 19, 2008, http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2008/04/19/2003409686. ㊵ “Amnesty: More than 1,000 unaccounted for in Tibet,” AP, 18 June, 2008, http:// nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=APAB&p_theme=apab&p_ action=search&p_maxdocs=200&s_dispstring=More%20than%201,000%20u

naccounted%20for%20in%20Tibet&p_field_advanced-0=&p_text_advanced- 0=(“More%20than%201,000%20unaccounted%20for%20in%20Tibet”)&xcal_ numdocs=20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&xcal_useweights=no. ㊶ “Tibetan monks forced to take “patriotic tests,” Reuters, June, 13, 2008, http://www. reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSPEK28885420080613. ㊷ Josephine Ma, “Lhasa in lockdown for Olympic torch relay’s most sensitive leg,” South China Morning Post, June 22, 2008; Jeff Z. Klein, “Q & A: The Olympic Torch in Xinjiang and Tibet,” New York Times, June 17, 2008, http://72.14.235.132/ search?q=cache:bLL9ccGrzNcJ:olympics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/q-a-the- olympic-torch-in-xinjiang-and-tibet/+communication+cut+off+when+Olympic+ torch+reached+Tibet&hl=zh-TW&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=tw. ㊸ “Reporters stopped from seeing sensitive Tibetan temple,” AFP, June 21, 2008, http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5ioetFeDMSc_xuTO8dgU-1QlMsxwg; “Tibetan monks forbid to meet foreigner,” Oriental Daily News (Hong Kong), June 23, 2008, http://orientaldaily.on.cc/ (in Chinese); “Tibetan Monks Confined During Games,” RFA, August 13, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/english/news/tibet/Tibetan- Confined-08132008165849.html. ㊹ “Tibetan Monks Confined During Games,” RFA, August 13, 2008, http://www.rfa. org/english/news/tibet/Tibetan-Confined-08132008165849.html. ㊺ “Tibetans worry post-Olympics clampdown,” Sound of Hope Radio, August 24, 2008, http://big5.soundofhope.org/programs/162/103073-1.asp. (in Chinese) ㊻ “Engineering department affirms skynet project and information construction in rural area of Ganzi,” Ganzi government, September 4, 2008, http://www.gzz.gov.cn/ DocInfo.aspx?docid=21732 (in Chinese); “Tibetans need pass to enter town,” RFA, August 21, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/zang-08212008133 141.html?searchterm=None. (in Chiense) ㊼ “Beijing Controls Tibetans Using Skynet Electronic Surveillance,”AFTERMATH NEWS, August 29, 2008, http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/beijing- controls-tibetans. ㊽ “Ganzi Buddhist students in conflict with armed police,”RFA , July 21, 2008, http:// www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/fo-07212008124259.html?searchterm=None. (in Chinese)

㊾ “Tibetan monks forced to take patriotic tests,” Reuters, June, 13, 2008, http://www. reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSPEK28885420080613. ㊿ “Jian Qinlin, Li Changchun, Zhou Yungkang attend exhibition on Tibet,” Renmin Ribao, May 1, 2008, http://expo.people.com.cn/GB/112721/112825/7191454.html. (in Chinese) “Tibetans arrested for refusing to stage documentary,” RFA, July 31, 2008, http:// www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/zang-07312008125104.html?searchterm= None. (in Chinese) “After Tibet, protests reported in China’s Xinjiang,” Reuters, April 2, 2008, http:// in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-32805320080402. “China clampdown for Olympic torch in Xinjiang: residents, exiles,” AFP, June 14, 2008, http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j-N2wAtAWieASdfrK4wS0IPkb_Qg. “Ten thousands repelled from Xinjiang for Olympics,” The Sun (Hong Kong), June 18, 2008, A25. (in Chinese) “China steps up persecuting Uyghur when Olympics zeroes in,” Radio Taiwan International (RTI), July 7, 2008, http://www.vft.com.tw/news/NewsContentHome. aspx?NewsID=117363&t=1. (in Chinese) “Secret arrest in Xinjiang,” RFA, September 25, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/ yataibaodao/yili-09252008171354.html?searchterm=None. (in Chinese) “China Stresses Safety After Attack,” RFA, August 6, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ english/news/uyghur/kashgar-attack-08042008165213.html?searchterm=None. “Bomb attack in Kashgar Xinjiang this morning,” Bejing Wanbao, August 4, 2008. http://www.beijingdaily.com.cn/nd/200808/t20080804_473348.htm (in Chinese); “China Stresses Safety After Attack,” RFA, August 6, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ english/news/uyghur/kashgar-attack-08042008165213.html. “Kashgar police attacked, 16 dead, 16 wounded,” Chongqing Wanbao, August 5, 2008, http://www.cqwb.com.cn/cqwb/html/2008-08/05/content_97820.htm. (in Chinese) “Kashgar, Xinjiang: Police demand AFP Photographer Delete Photos; Kashgar, Xinjiang Province: Two Japanese Journalists Beaten up by Paramilitaries,” Foreign Correspondent Club of China, August 4, 2008, http://www.fccchina.org/harras. htm; “Authorities sealed off information of attack in Xinjiang,” RFA, August 5,

2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/xinjiang-08052008140147.html? searchterm=None (in Chinese); “Public security took reporter’s camera,” Ming Pao, August 5, 2008, http://www.mingpaony.com/htm/News/20080805/na0103. htm. (in Chinese) “Xinjiang border police apologize to Japanese reporters,” China Daily, August 5, 2008, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-08/05/content_6906167.htm. “Doubt Arises in Account of an Attack in China,” New York Times, August 28, 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/world/asia/29kashgar.html?_r=3&pag ewanted=1&oref=slogin&oref=slogin. “HKJA: Unacceptable ban on reporters covering unrest in Lhasa,” Hong Kong Journalists Association, March 17, 2008, http://www.hkja.org.hk/portal/Site.aspx? id=A1-690&lang=en-US. In December 2006, PRC government announced new rules for more press freedom during the Olympics. Jane Spencer and Kevin J. Delaney, “YouTube Unplugged,” Wall Street Journal Online, March 21, 2008, http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB1206056515 00353307.html. “HKJA: Unacceptable ban on reporters covering unrest in Lhas,” HKJA (Hong Kong), March 17, 2008, http://www.hkja.org.hk/portal/Site.aspx?id=A1-690&lang =en-US. “Dalai Lama Planned ‘Lahsa Incident,” Guangzhou Ribao, March 13, 2008, http:// www.gzrb.com.cn/html/2008-03/19/content_138826.htm (in Chinese); “China media quiet on Tibet,” BBC Chinese, March 14, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/ chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7290000/newsid_7296600/7296686.stm. (in Chinese) The foreign press included AP, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Financial Times, TASS, Kyodo, Singapore’s Lienho Zaobao; KBS of South Korea; Al Jazerra satellite TV; Hong Kong media included Wen Wei Po, Ming Pao, South China Morning Post, Poenix satellite TV and TVB; Taiwan’s media included Lien Ho Pao, Central News Agency, and ET Today TV; domestic media included China Daily, Beijing Zhoubao. Ethan Cole, “Cries Against Injustice Mar Journalists’ Tibet Tour,” Christian Post, March 27, 2008, http://www.christianpost.com/article/print/20080327/cries- against-injustice-mar-journalists-tibet-tour.htm. James Reynolds, “Shutting us out,” BBC, June 13, 2008, http://www.bbc.co.uk/ blogs/thereporters/jamesreynolds/2008/06/shutting_us_out.html.

“Nanfang news group under pressure,” RFA, June 19, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ mandarin/yataibaodao/nanfangbao-06192008112050.html. (in Chinese) “Foreign media not allowed to Fuxin elementary school,” Epoch Times, June 21, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com.au/b5/8/6/21/n2162974.htm. (in Chinese) “IFJ Condemns Chinese Security for Roughing Up Journalist Filming Protestors,” IFJ Global, August 13, 2008, http://www.ifj.org/en/articles/ifj-condemns-chinese- security-for-roughing-up-journalist-filming-protestors; “IFJ Condemns Restrictions on Reporting China Milk Powder Scandal,” IFJ Global, September 16, 2008, http://www.ifj.org/en/articles/ifj-condemns-restrictions-on-reporting-china-milk- powder-scandal. “Olympic disaster for free expression in China Reporters Without Borders condemns Chinese government cynicism and IOC inability to ensure respect for charter,” Reporters Without Borders, August 22, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/article. php3?id_article=28264; also see Foreign Correspondents Club of China website, http://www.fccchina.org. “Beijing did not deliver promise of more press freedom, ” VOA (Chinese), June 9, 2008, http://www.voafanti.com/gate/big5/www.voanews.com/chinese/w2008-06- 09-voa46.cfm?renderforprint=1&textonly=1&&TEXTMODE=1&CFID=9252385 &CFTOKEN=16337847. (in Chinese) “Paper says HK reporter denied entry to Beijing,” Reuters, July 3, 2008, http:// www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Olympics/idUSHKG35557320080703. In mid-July, the reporter Norman Choy was allowed to enter China. “China shortens torch relay’s Tibet leg,” AFP, May 25, 2008, http://afp.google. com/article/ALeqM5hgKxCECiRuI3COYlRa02mtv2fimA. “Hong Kong TV protest Beijing public security,” Radio France International, July 25, 2008, http://www.rfi.fr/actucn/articles/103/article_8598.asp. (in Chinese) “IFJ Condemns Chinese Security for Roughing Up Journalist Filming Protestors,” IFJ, August 13, 2008, http://www.ifj.org/en/articles/ifj-condemns-chinese-security- for-roughing-up-journalist-filming-protestors. “RFA website blocked after Olympics,” RTI, August 27, 2008, http://www.rti.org. tw/News/NewsContentHome.aspx?NewsID=123560&t=1. (in Chinese) “Tibetan Journalist Detained,” RFA, September 18, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ english/news/tibet/tibetan-09182008080119.html.

“Hong Kong news magazine dropped by Chinese importers,” China Post (Taipei), December 29, 2007, http://www.chinapost.com.tw/china/2007/12/29/136814/Hong %2DKong.htm. “Beijing Games Update, 28.07-Chinese newspaper Xinjingbao (Beijing News) censored for picture dating back to 1989,” Reporters Without Borders, July 28, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=25234. The foreign press included Time, International Heralds Tribune, Asa Shimbun, Yomiuri Shimbun, Daily Telegraph, Thames, New York Times, The Washington Post, Germany’s Sport Bild, Italy’s La Gazzette Dello Sport. They entered China’s newsstand for the first time. “21-point directive to Chinese media proves coverage of games was biased and politicized,” Reporters Without Borders, August 26, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/ article.php3?id_article=28312; Liu Xiaobo, “CPC Propaganda Department is also a culprit of tainted milk powder,” RFA, September 24, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ mandarin/yataibaodao/liu_xiaobo-09242008135913.html. (in Chinese) “Hospital: basic morality to report sick babies,” Xinhua Net, September 23, 2008, http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/xj.xinhuanet.com/2008-09/23/content_ 14469832.htm. (in Chinese) “21-point directive to Chinese media proves coverage of games was biased and politicized,” Reporters Without Borders, August 26, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/ article.php3?id_article=28312. Liu Xiaobo, “CPC Propaganda Department is also a culprit of tainted milk powder; 21-point directive to Chinese media proves coverage of games was biased and politicized,” Reporters Without Borders, August 26, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/ article.php3?id_article=28312. Jim Yardley, “Beijing Suspends Licenses of 2 Lawyers Who Offered to Defend Tibetans in Court,” New York Times, June 4, 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/ 06/04/world/asia/04tibet.html?_r=1&fta=y. “Retired Employees in Hunan Filed the First Lawsuit Against the Government Over Lack of Transparency of Government Information,” Fazhi Ribao (Beijing), May 6, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/local/2008-05/06/content_8114303.htm. “Large amount of occupation of farmland affects social stability,” VOA (Chinese), December 26, 2007, http://voanews.com/chinese/archive/2007-12/w2007-12-26-

voa34.cfm?CFID=226557617&CFTOKEN=79303176 (in Chinese); Wang Ting, “Xu Shaoshih: illegal land appropriation not effectively curbed,” China Securities Journal, December 26, 2008, A8. (in Chinese) Wang Ting, “Xu Shaoshih: illegal land appropriation not effectively curbed”; Chu Xiaobo, “20,000 cases of land occupation in the name of lease,” The First, December 26, 2008, p. 40. (in Chinese) Edward Cody, “Farmers Rise In Challenge To Chinese Land Policy,” Washington Post, January 14, 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/ 2008/01/13/AR2008011302383_pf.html. “Olympics Prisoners,” Reporters Without Borders, http://www.rsf.org/rubrique. php3?id_rubrique=779. John Garnaut, “Unlikely hero takes on China’s feudal land thieves,” The Sydney Morning Herald, January 7, 2008, http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/unlikely- hero-takes-on-chinas-feudal-land-thieves/2008/01/06/1199554485805.html? page=3. Jonathan Watts, “Chinese dissident jailed for five years after human rights petition,” Guardian, March 25, 2008, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/25/china. humanrights; “China dissident faces trial after blasting Olympics,” Reuters, February 13, 2008, http://www.reuters.com/article/newsMaps/idUSPEK26590620080213. “Sanmenxia farmers charge with inciting subversion of state,” RFA, December 21, 2007, http://www.rfa.org/cantonese/news/china_rights_detain-20071221.html. (in Chinese) “Farmland in Yixin, Jiangsu enclosed,” Epoch Times, March 19, 2008, http://www. epochtimes.com/b5/8/3/19/n2050571.htm (in Chinese); “Farmers in Zejiang, Hebei arrested,” RFA, December 20, 2007, http://www.rfa.org/cantonese/xinwen/2007/ 12/20/china_rights_rural/?simple=1 (in Chinese); “Farmers in Wuqing, Tianjin protest land enclosure,” RFA, December 19, 2007, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/ yataibaodao/nongmin-20071219.html. (in Chinese) “China apparently tightens control over media and internet speech,” VOA (Chinese), June 6, 2008, http://www.voafanti.com/gate/big5/www.voanews.com/chinese/w20 08-06-06-voa56.cfm. (in Chinese) “China Stifles Complaints,” Wall Street Journal, June, 18, 2008, http://chinese. wsj.com/gb/20080618/bch115052.asp?source=baidunews. Melissa Block and Rob

Gifford, “Police Stop Grieving Parents’ Protest in China,” NPR (USA), June 3, 2008, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91126257. Melissa Block and Rob Gifford, “Police Stop Grieving Parents’ Protest in China,” NPR (USA), June 3, 2008, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId= 91126257. “Chinese Mourn Earthquake Casualties,” AP, June 12, 2008, http://www.cbsnews. com/stories/2008/06/12/world/printable4175538.shtml. “Local governments block petitions with excuse of Olympics,” RFA, June 26, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/fangmin-06262008083015.html. (in Chinese) “Sichuan Quake Complaints Quashed,” RFA, October 3, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ english/news/china/quake-10032008064346.html. “Public security cracks petition village again,” Ming Pao, June 27, 2008, http:// www.mingpaony.com/htm/News/20080627/nea04.htm. (in Chinese) “Shanghai petitioners detained for going to Tianamen square,” RFA, June 26, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/fangmin-06262008103006.html? searchterm=None. (in Chinese) The three parks are Ritan Park, World Park and Purple Bamboo Park. Purple Bamboo Park was close to some of the Olympics halls. Jim Yardley, “China Sets Zones for Olympics Protests,” New York Times, July 24, 2008, http://www.nytimes. com/2008/07/24/sports/olympics/24china.html; “China Is Pitching A Protester Shutout,” Wall Street Journal, August 19, 2008, http://chinese.wsj.com/big5/2008 0819/bch104404.asp?source=channel. “Beijing rounds up petitioners,” Ming Pao, July 24, 2008, http://www.mingpaovan. com/htm/News/20080724/tcaa1.htm. (in Chinese) The two were neighbors. In 2001, their houses were forced to be demolished. Ariana Eunjung Cha, “Protest Application Brings Labor-Camp Threat, Woman Says,” Washington Post, August 20, 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2008/08/20/AR2008082001095.html. “Shanghai Petitioners Travel to Hong Kong Give Account of Grievances,” RFA, July 1, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/fangmin-07012008153330. html (in Chinese); “Hunan petitioners participate in march in Hong Kong,” RFA, July 2, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/fangmin-07022008090828. html. (in Chinese)

“Shanghai petitioners outside UN office in Kong,” VOA (Chinese), July 18, 2008, http://www.voanews.com/chinese/archive/2008-07/w2008-07-18-voa42.cfm?CF ID=44018502&CFTOKEN=82162122 (in Chinese); “Petitioners detained during Olympics lost speech after release,” VOA (Chinese), September 14, 2008, http:// www.voanews.com/chinese/w2008-09-14-voa33.cfm. (in Chinese) “Shanghai petitioners in Hong Kong returned home to reeducation of labor,” Epoch Times, August 11, 2008, http://news.epochtimes.com.tw/8/8/11/91266.htm. (in Chinese) “Shanghai relocation petitioners put on Olympics blacklist,” China Times (Taipei), July 13, 2008, http://news.chinatimes.com/2007Cti/2007Cti-News/2007Cti-News- Print/0,4634,130505x132008073100950,00.html. (in Chinese) “50 Shanghai petitioners intercepted during Paralympics,” RFA, September 16, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/fang-09162008083416.html. (in Chinese) “14 babies suffer from kidney stone,” Lanzhou Chenbao, September 9, 2008, http:// big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/www.gs.xinhuanet.com/news/2008-09/09/content_ 14353181.htm. (in Chinese) “Health department says Sanlu milk powder likely contaminated,” Ming Pao (Hong Kong), September 11, 2008, http://www.mpinews.com/htm/INews/20080911/ ca42147a.htm. (in Chinese); “No evidence baby sick because of Sanlu milk powder,” Oriental Daily (Hong Kong), September 11, 2008, http://www.mpinews. com/htm/INews/20080911/ca42147a.htm. “Sanlu recall tainted milk powder,” Guangzhou Ribao, September 12, 2008, http:// orientaldaily.on.cc/ (in Chinese) “Hospital: basic moral to report sick babies,” Xinhua Net, September 23, 2008, http:// big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/xj.xinhuanet.com/2008-09/23/content_14469832. htm The 21-point directive included: no report on the opening of overseas websites; no report on religious issue; no report on the seat arrangement for foreign political leaders at the opening or their personal life; no report of Tibetan and Xinjiang independence; no report of the detail of opening rehearsal; only positive report of the viewing rate of Olympic programs; use only the stories of domestic authoritative news source.

“Propaganda department forbid uncensored report of Sanlu milk powder,” Duo Wei News, September 15, 2008, http://www.dwnews.com/gb/MainNews/SinoNews/ Mainland/2008_9_14_16_30_41_992.html. (in Chinese) “The tough road of pursuing cause of sick babies,” NDDaily, September 12, 2008, http://epaper.nddaily.com/A/html/2008-09/12/content_571889.htm. (in Chinese) “China dairy ‘asked for cover-up’ ” BBC, October 1, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/ hi/asia-pacific/7646512.stm. (in Chinese) “Sanyuan to provide milk for athletes in Olympics,” Zhongguo Niangzao (Chinese Brew), June 23, 2008, http://www.niangzao.net/news/842/84206.html.(in Chinese) “China reports second infant death,” TV New Zealand, September 15, 2008, http:// tvnz.co.nz/view/page/425826/2077217. “Internal police documents reveal strategy with foreign journalists,” Reporters Without Borders, August 21, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article= 28246. “IFJ Condemns Restrictions on Reporting China Milk Powder Scandal,” IFJ, September 16, 2008, http://www.ifj.org/en/articles/ifj-condemns-restrictions-on- reporting-china-milk-powder-scandal. Please see Foreign Correspondents Club of China website, http://www.fccchina. org. “Olympic disaster for free expression in China Reporters Without Borders condemns Chinese government cynicism and IOC inability to ensure respect for charter.” Reporters Without Borders, August 22, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/article. php3?id_article=28264. “Beijing did not deliver promise of more press freedom,” VOA (Chinese), June 9, 2008, http://www.voafanti.com/gate/big5/www.voanews.com/chinese/w2008-06- 09-voa46.cfm?renderforprint=1&textonly=1&&TEXTMODE=1&CFID=9252385 &CFTOKEN=16337847. (in Chinese) “Internal police documents reveal strategy with foreign journalists,” Reporters Without Borders, August 21, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article= 28246. “Pastor aims to ‘bother’ China over abuses,” Los Angeles Times, August 23, 2008, http://articles.latimes.com/2008/aug/23/sports/sp-romero23.

Supra note 127. “Tibet protesters held in Beijing,” ITV, 13 August, 2008, http://www.itv.com/News/ Articles/Tibet-protesters-held-in-Beijing-935062927.html. “Kashgar, Xinjiang: Police demand AFP Photographer Delete Photos,” Foreign Correspondent Club of China, August 29, 2008, http://www.fccchina.org/harras. htm; “Authorities sealed off information of attack in Xinjiang,” RFA, August 5, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/xinjiang-08052008140147.html? searchterm=None (in Chinese); “Public security took reporter’s camera,” Ming Pao, August 5, 2008, http://www.mingpaony.com/htm/News/20080805/na0103. htm. (in Chinese) Supra note 79. “Hong Kong news magazine dropped by Chinese importers,” China Post (Taipei), December 29, 2007, http://www.chinapost.com.tw/china/2007/12/29/136814/Hong %2DKong.htm. Eutelsat was established in 1977. It is the largest satellite company in Europe and the third largest one in the world. It owns the management right over 24 satellites. Its headquarters is in Paris. New Tang Dynasty Television (NTDTV) is an independent TV station founded by overseas Chinese in the United States in 2001. It is based in New York and is not under PRC’s control and censor. “Eutelsat Blocks NTDTV in China,” The Epoch Times, http://en.epochtimes.com/ n2/t/ntdtv-eutelsat. According to the materials by Reporters Without Borders on June 23, Eutelsat representative in Beijing said in a conversation that “the main reason (to shut off NTDTV) was because we had continued to receive complaints and warning from the PRC government. ... Two years ago, the Broadcasting and TV department repeated the same words constantly: Shut off (NTDTV) and then we will talk,” please see “European satellite operator Eutelsat suppresses independent Chinese-language TV station NTDTV to satisfy Beijing,” Reporters Without Borders, July 10, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=27818. “China continues to jam international radio stations during Olympic Games,” Reporters Without Borders, August 19, 2008, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_ article=28222.

Judicial Rights

Fort Fu-Te Liao*

Judicial rights include right to personal liberty and dignity, fair judicial trials, and the proper implementation of laws. International human rights treaties offer protection to these rights; national constitutions of many states also guarantee judicial rights.

It is to evaluate the situations of judicial rights in the People’s Republic of China (China). It applies the criteria established in international human rights law, particularly those enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)① and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).② China signed the ICCPR on 5 October 1998, but up till now the PRC has not ratified it. Yet according to Article 18 of the Convention on the Law of Treaties, which obliges states on signing a treaty “to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty,” the PRC has to protect judicial rights without violation of the object and purpose of the ICCPR.

This part therefore examines the situation of judicial rights in China on three issues: personal liberty and dignity, fair judicial trials, and proper implementation of laws. It evaluates issues happened between November 2007 and October 2008.

I. Personal liberty and dignity

Personal liberty and dignity are foundations of judicial rights; minimally it includes prohibition of torture, abolition of slavery and forced labor and guarantee of personal security.

* Fort Fu-Te Liao is associate research fellow of Institute of Law, Academia Sinica, Taiwan.

i. prohibition of torture

In China, no matter cases involve political meanings or not, uncivilized methods such as torture and illegal detention were commonly applied. Cruel violence was often exercised on rights defenders and dissenters. Here were some cases in 2008:

1. Li Shian Yang, a rights defender from Shandong province who was named as “barefoot lawyer,” was cruelly beaten by local judges and judicial polices for four hours.③

2. A Henan farmer, Hao Jin An, was extracted confession by means of torture and resulted in 10-year unjust verdict.④

3. Ms Young Wu Yun petitioned because her house was pulled down, and she was therefore tortured by police.⑤

4. A high school teacher in Guizhou province was caught by police because of disputes with others, and was then beaten to dead in the police office.⑥

5. A famous internet writer, Mr. Du Dao Bin, was continually interrogated for several days without sleep because he did not “cooperate” with police. He went on a hunger strike to protest torture by police.⑦ ii. Oppressed by system of reeducation

Abolition of slavery and forced labor is also an important foundation for personal liberty and dignity. China’s special system of reeducation has been used as a tool to oppress dissenters, squeeze labour, and conduct torture.

(i) Rights defenders

Rights defenders were often forced to be “reeducated,” such as:

1. Wang Gui Lin, a farmer and rights defender in Longjiang province, was sentenced to one-and-half years labour reeducation in the name of “disturbance of social order.”⑧

2. A petitioner, Mr. Tang Zhao Xing, went to Beijing with his wife and daughter to file his petition. He was seized and brought back to Fuzhou, and was sentenced by local

police to one year labour reeducation.⑨

3. Liu Xue Li, a petitioner and rights defender, applied for demonstration in Beijing on 7 August 2008. He was then arrested during Beijing Olympic, and was sentenced to labour reeducation by local police on 23 September 2008.⑩

4. Wu Dian Yuan and Wang Xiu Ying, two senior citizens also applied for demonstration in Beijing during Olympic game. They were sentenced to one year labour reeducation.⑪

(ii) People of religion

China also put labour reeducation to people of religion. Below are some related cases.

1. Among 270 Chinese Christian leaders arrested in December 2007, 21 persons were sentenced to labour reeducation between one-and-half and three years in the name of “heresy.”⑫

2. It was in Nan Hua Temple of Guangdon province police officers and abbots jointly declared that Master Chao Song was sentenced to three-year labour reeducation, and threatened that no statements or hehaviours harm to governmental prestige were allowed. Master Sheng Guan said that Chinese government suppressed freedom of expression during Beijing Olympic, and called on the international community to pay close attention that monks were repressed by labour reeducation.⑬

(iii) Dissenters

Dissenters in China were also targets, such as:

1. A member of Pan-Blue Alliance, which was an internet democratic organization, Li Zhuo Se, was put labour reeducation before Beijing Olympic because of “internet defraud.” It was believed that the so-called “internet defraud” referred to the issue that friends in the internet each sponsored two thousand dollars to print cultural shirts.⑭

2. Wei Tsen Ling, also a member of Pan-Blue Alliance, was sentenced to one year nine months labour reeducation by Hangzhou police in the name of “gambling and

visiting prostitutes.”⑮ iii Personal Security

Personal security is the third important issue. In China people from different aspects all faced personal security dangerous.

(i) Rights defenders

Chinese government has oppressed rights defenders by applying illegal arrest and interrogation. Polices have applied cruel measures including arbitral detention and torture without any idea of rule of law.

1. Zheng Ming Fang, a blind rights defender in Tianjin was arrested by the reason of “drive without license.”⑯

2. Tian Li (whose real name was Chen Qi Tang), an internet writer who assisted farmers fighting for their property rights, was detained in the name of “disguise as policeman.”⑰

3. Lin Bine Chang, who fought for farmers’ rights, was arrested because of “evading tax.” He was warned by police not to fight for farmers and reveal information to the media.⑱

4. A democracy fighter in Hangzhou, Wei Tsen Ling, was taken to police office and interrogated for seven hours. But the officers never showed any legal document.⑲

(ii) Petitioners

Personal liberties of petitioners were also violated in China.

1. A female petitioner from Jiangsu province, Xu Ping, was illegal detained by local authority for nearly two months.⑳

2. Mao Su Chun, a petitioner from Inner Mongolia, was caught on 17 October 2007, and detained since then. Her family said that no legal document was ever presented and there was no opportunity to see her.㉑

3. Zhao Kai Feng, a petitioner from Hubei province who wished to wash away her son’s injustice, went to Beijing for petition. She was therefore detained.㉒

4. A widow of a lecturer of Normal College of Quanzhou, Xin Yu Zen, has been petitioning for her husband for more than 20 years. But she was oppressed and beaten; therefore many parts of her body were injured.㉓

5. During 17th meeting of the People’s Congress 19 persons from Hunan province wished to submit their petitions. However, among them 13 persons were detained for 10 days; 6 persons were detained because of the crime of “disturbing social order.”㉔

(iii) People of religion

People of religion were also often detained without due process of law.

1. Bai Chen, a Christian who came back China from the US, lead people reading the Bible, and was therefore detained because of the crime of “participating heresy organization.” His computers and car were also captured.㉕

2. Beijing authority intruded into residence of Master Miao Jue Ci Ze, who was a rights defender of religion, and arrested him. A quite possible reason was that the Master called for one-day-hunger-strike to support Hu Jia.㉖

3. Chinese government arrested two underground Catholic fathers to prevent them from joining pilgrimage activities on 24 May 2008 in Shanghai. Those who were arrested were Zhang Jian Lin and Zhang Li.㉗

4. Priest Zhang Min Shan, who was leader of family church, was taken away from Beijing before Olympic Games started.㉘ Bishop Jia Zhi Guo of underground Catholic in Hebei province was arrested and compelled to leave Beijing only several hours before the closing ceremony of Beijing Olympic. Nevertheless no clear reason was presented.㉙

(iv) Writers and reporters

Even writers and reporters were arrested. During this year (2008) many independent writers were illegally arrested or detained by Chinese government. Several journalists

were also arrested because of their reports. Reporters without Borders stated that Chinese authority reinforced its oppression before Beijing Olympic. There were 24 journalists, internet dissents or activists were arrested or detained. During this period of time at least 80 reporters were obstructed when they were covering news. Those obstructions mainly happened in Tibet and Sichuan province. Reporters without Borders revealed that 33 journalists and 49 internet writers were detained in Chinese prisons.㉚

Here were some cases:

1. Dissent writer Jing Chu was suddenly called by police and then detained due to reason of suspected committing crime of “instigating to subvert government.”㉛

2. A famous Mongolian writer, Na Ren Bi Li Ge, edited a Mongolian magazine “Guo Lun Te” to reflect Mongolian family and health. This magazine was very much echoed. However, it published only 5 issues before it was sealed up. Na Ren Bi Li Ge was detained for twenty days in March 2008. He was then released on bail and also house arrested.㉜

3. Yan Zheng Xue was a 63-year-old dissenter and also a writer and artist. He has been focusing on people’s rights and fighting for them. He was therefore detained for 13 times.㉝

4. China also oppressed pen organizations through judicial means. For example Li Jian Qiong and Liao Yi Wu, two dissenters from independent Chinese pen organizations, were detained by Chinese police.㉞

5. A reporter of Beijing Fa Zhi Daily, Zhu Wen Na, published an article, “Liao Ning Xi Feng: contest between governmental officers and businessmen,” at the Daily’s “Law People” magazine. She was arrested by police. This was the so-called “Xi Feng police went to Beijing to arrest reporter” event.㉟

6. Sun Lin was a special correspondent of Boxun Net. He, by using Jie Mu as pen name, reported violence forcing removes in Nanjing and Yangzhou at Boxun Net. He was then arrested in the name of “disturbing social order.”㊱

7. A couple in Chongqing signed contracts with advertisement and information companies to print a news magazine, “New Century International Report,” since 2004. They were therefore arrested by Chongqing Prosecution because of the crime of “illegal management.”㊲

(v) Lawyers

Shanghai lawyer Zheng En Chong was beaten by local authority during several days. He was called by police and investigated for 12 hours due to the reason of “tax dodging.” Some believed that Zheng was again oppressed because Shanghai police found that many residents contacted him.㊳

(vi) Tibet

The worst part was arbitral arrests and killings in Tibet. The Chinese Army fired to repress in Lhasa on 14 March. The army went into the city and searched residences; it was believed that several hundreds were arrested.㊴ Tibetans continued to protest, but were all oppressed. During Beijing Olympic China was forced by international pressure to establish demonstration areas. However, no protestor was ever allowed to enter such areas. All dissenters against oppressions in Tibet went to Beijing, but were all expelled or arrested by Chinese authorities.

Even after Olympic Games situations did not become better. A female Tibetan writer, Wei Se, visited her relatives in Lhasa after Olympic Games. She was arrested and investigated for 8 hours because she took photos of armies and polices on the street. “Leaving Lhasa in haste-Lhasa has become a city of terror” was the first sentence of her poem.㊵

(vii) Xinjiang

China controlled situations in Xingjian during Beijing Olympic. Speak person of the World Uyghur Congress, Di Guo Xia Ti, said: “In the name of Olympic China controlled situations in Xingjian. In the name of security China arrested and temporarily detained more than ten thousand people in Uyghur area. In Kese, area more than 150 times checks and arrests were employed. In Kuju, because some conflicts occurred, every one who wished to leave this area should be reviewed by Chinese authorities.” After the Olympic, China still operated a large-scale arrests of dissenters. The World Uyghur Congress expressed that, apart from thousands of Uyghur people were formally arrested, there were more people who were detained by police without any legal procedure. They included families, even infants, of those who participated in assaults and people who were responsible for Mosque. According to witnesses Chinese government set

up temporal detention centers in several towns of Kuju where filled with farmers who were not related to assaults.㊶ Uyghur American Association, whose headquarter is in the US, worried about such situations. It said that in Yili only there were about twenty thousand people were still detained. There were also trials on Uyghur people in public.㊷

II. Fair Trial

Fair trial is a basic need for judicial rights, and shall includes at least five elements: presumption of innocence, crime and punishment according to law and preventing of double jeopardy, right to defense, equal and public trial, right to appeal and compensation. i. Presumption of innocence, crime and punishment according to law and preventing of double jeopardy

In 2007 the Chinese Supreme People’s Court adopted two reform measures. First, presidents of courts of provinces, metropolitans and autonomy areas should move to different areas. Second, in high court of provincial level professional criminal, civil and administrative committees were established to replace original committees that were composed of members from courts, political parties and politicians. According to Chinese official statements movements of judges were adopted to purify the judiciary and to cut connections between judges and local interest nets. New professional committees were established to avoid politics intervening into the judiciary.㊸ These were two positive aspects, but they remain to be implemented in the future.

During this year China still applied uncertain crimes and thereby severely damaged judicial rights. Frequent applied crimes included “subverting national regime,” “illegally holding national secret,” and “blackmail and extort.”

(i) “Subverting national regime” and “endangering national security”

It was not unusual that China applied the crime of “subverting national regime” to oppress dissents.

1. Zeng Hong Lin, a retired staff from South Western University in Mianyoung, was detained and charged of crime of “subverting national regime,” because when she was in Chengduo she published three articles on the internet querying bad construction of schools in the Wenchuan area and asking different levels of governments should investigate those who should bear legal obligations.㊹

2. A Tibetan, Rong Jia Ar Zai, shouted out independent Tibet and let Dalai Lama be back to Tibet during the opening ceremony of “1 August horse race festival.” He was then sentenced on the crime of “subverting national regime.”㊺

3. Lu Geng Song, a dissenter in Hangzhou, was detained on the crime of “subverting national regime” in September 2008.㊻

4. A human rights defender, Zhao Chang Qing, was sentenced to five years imprisonment on the crime of “subverting national regime.”㊼

5. A free lance writer in Sichuan province, Chen Dau Jun, because of his participation of protest in May 2008, was detained by police on the crime of “instigating to divide the state.”㊽

6. Liu Jian Jun, a railroad worker in Shanxi province, was detained on the crime of “instigating to subvert national regime” in July 2008.㊾

7. Jin Ba, who was in charge of a temple in Sichuan Tibetan autonomous area, was sentenced to three years imprisonment because of the crime of “endangering national security.”㊿ Jin Ba distributed leaflets at a festival calling Tibet independence and long life to Dalai Lama.

(ii) “Illegally holding national secret”

Huang Chi published articles in internet and was sentenced to five years imprisonment. After released in 2005 he continued working as a human rights defender. He established a “Sky net center for human rights affairs.” He was caught by some people whose identification was not clear on 10 June 2008. The Sky Net was also closed. He was charged with the crime of “illegally holding national secret,” but the real reason could be that he reported earthquake in Sichuan province and supported human rights activities. His lawyer wished to meet with him, but was rejected by police due to the reason of national security involved. However, the police did not produce any

evidence.

(iii) “Blackmail and extort”

A member of Chinese Pan-Blue Alliance, Zhang Ze Lin, held memorial meetings of Dr. Sun Yi-Sen and some activities concerning protection of human rights. He was then arrested. Chinese local authorities charged him with blackmails, and claimed trial in private as it related to individual privacy. Mr. Chung was sentenced to two years imprisonment.

An environmental activist, Wu Li Hong, was famous for his revealing of pollution in Lake Tai. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment on 10 August 2008 because of the crime of “defraud.” He decided to appeal, but such appeal was declared inadmissible.

The US Congressional Executive Commission on China (CECC) announced on its website that there were about 734 political and religion offends. Two congressmen submitted such list to Chinese government when they visited China, and wished to realize their situations. This list had 214 pages concerning information about 734 political and religion offenders including their terms of imprisonment, where they were detained, why they were charged, and details of their charges and detentions. These political and religion offenders included Uyghur people, Tibetan, believers of Falun Dafa and rights defending attorneys. Those who were reported by the media were all covered, such as Chen Guang Chen, Kuo Fei Xiong, Hu Jiag, Hu Shi Gan, Huang Chi, Huang Wei Zhon, Ar Li Mu, Bu Dong Wei, Rong Jia Ar Zai. The CECC expressed that 734 cases were only part of the list. In fact there were more detained political offenders, especially hundreds detained Tibetan who protested in March were not recorded. ii. Right to Defense

The Chinese new amended “Lawyer Law” was in force on 1 June 2008. In order to implement this new law the Ministry of Justice drew “Law Firm Regulation Rule” and “Lawyer Practicing Regulation Rule” to provide details of permission of establishment of law firms, permission of lawyer practicing and regulation of lawyer practicing.

However, the new “Lawyer Law” had merely literal meaning. For instances, first, the new law did not distinguish cases whether national secret was involved. But Chenduo police did not let Huang Chi meet with his lawyer because this case concerned national secret. Second, although “Law Firm Regulation Rule” and “Lawyer Practicing Regulation Rule” provided more details of establishment and operating capital of a law firm, Chinese government tried to control law firms through different ways. For example Ke Er Chin local government of Inner Mongolia had employed all lawyers under its jurisdiction as legal advisors, so to prevent lawyers from being attorneys of those who wished to sue the government. Third, one of the major breakthroughs of the new “Lawyer Law” was to allow lawyers to meet with suspects or defendants without monitoring. But even after the new law came into force there were several cases in which attorneys were not allowed to see their clients. Fourth, under the old “Lawyer Law” lawyers needed permission from agency that was in charge of the case. The new law abolished such rule. Unfortunately, however, it was not comprehensively implemented.

It was not unusual that Chinese judicial institutions deliberately put obstacles to rights defending lawyers. Below were some cases where right to defend was violated.

1. Yu Chang Wu, a farmer in Heilongjiang province, was arrested for more than one month. His lawyer did not receive any information even until the day when the defendant was going to be tried.

2. Hebei provincial government asked lawyers not to accept any litigation concerning San Lu poisoned milk powder. After several governmental officers reigned because of this incident, Hebei government met with lawyers and asked them not to be attorneys for victims. The result of which was that lawyers refused to ask for compensation for victims.

3. During Beijing Olympic many rights defending lawyers in Beijing were oppressed. Some were monitored through the whole day; some were forced to leave Beijing. They protested to such measures. Attorney Li Ho Pin had conflicts with police. Attorneys Li Ho Pin and Li Bai Guang, both of them were rights defending lawyers, met with the US President, George W. Bush Jr., in Washington D.C. in June 2008. Attorney Li Ho Pin had been followed by governmental agencies, and asked to take police’s car when he went out. Attorney Li Fong Pin was also monitored 24 hours a day from 30 July until Paralympics Games were over.

4. Teng Biao and Jiang Tien Yong were two famous rights defending lawyers. Teng Biao was the attorney of a famous rights defender, Chen Guang Chen. Jiang Tien Yong participated in Hu Jia’s case and thereby interviewed by foreign media. He was also the attorney for HIV-AIDS victims in Hebai province. Beijing judicial authorities postponed their extension of licenses. iii. Right to Appeal and Compensation

The Chinese Supreme People’s Court promulgated the “interpretation of when the second criminal trial changes the crime that the first criminal trial decided, can the second criminal trial impose more severe supplementary penalty.” This judicial interpretation made it clear that the second criminal trial can not impose more severe supplementary penalty, the result of which is that there will be no more severe supplementary penalty in appealed case. iv. Manipulate over the judiciary beyond Young Jia’s case

Young Jia broke into Shanghai police office on 1 July 2008. He killed 6 policemen and caused 4 policemen severely injured. Young was sentenced to the death penalty and deprived political rights permanently by a Shanghai court on 1 September 2008. However, there were some doubts over the guarantees of judicial rights in this case.

1. This was not a trial in public: Due to the case drew grave social concerns the court decided to try it in private. Young was therefore not able to defend himself in public. Several points, such as why he killed so many policemen and whether his mental condition was stable at that time, were not clarified.

2. Attorney had a conflicted role: Young’s attorney was also government’s legal advisor.

3. Hinder the defendant from appealing: After the judgment was rendered Young’s father appointed two lawyers who went to the prison to obtain Young’s consent. However, this was refused by the prison authority who said that this case had not gone to the second trial; unless judgment was presented no permission was allowed.

4. Defendant was not allowed to meet with his family and attorney: The prison in

Shanghai did not allow Young to see his father and attorney, even after the judgment of first trial was rendered.

5. Important witness was not inquired: A key person of this case was Young’s mother whose whereabouts was still unclear. The court insisted that all related documents had bee sent to her. Young’s aunt made a report to police, but got no response. Therefore she doubted that Young’s mother was kidnapped. There were questionable points in the case.

III. Proper implementation of laws

The ICCPR has emphasized that proper implementation of laws shall includes two fields, one relates to the death penalty and the other concerns respect of dignity of criminals. i. Death Penalty

Concerning the death penalty the Chinese Supreme People’s Court took back the power of permitting to impose the death penalty in January 2007. According to official statistics the death penalty turn down rate in high courts was 15%. It was reported by the Xinhua News Agency that it was the first time in 2007 that figures of the death penalty with reprieve was higher than that of execution immediately after verdicts of the death penalty. Higher People’s Court, People’s Prosecution and police office in Jiangxi province jointly issued an “Opinion on evidence of imposing the death penalty onto intention murder” to prevent injustice. It was believed to be China’s first normative rule concerning evidence of imposing the death penalty onto intention murder.

However, China was still the state that killed most. The international community has criticized China’s abusing of the death penalty which was a sign of Chinese judicial institutions’ contempt of human rights. The international community also asked China to reform its judicial system and to abolish the death penalty. Amnesty International’s report was announced on 15 April 2008. It revealed that compared to 2006 there was a slight reduction of number of executions in China in 2007. Nevertheless, China was still the state that killed most. AI said that, based on the figure that could be found, 470 were executed in 2007. This figure was even higher than the total of the rest of the world. However, according to organizations against the death penalty, the number of

executions could be as high as 8,000. ii. Conditions of prisons

Conditions of Chinese prisons were still condemned. Inhuman treatments in Chinese prisons usually included high-tension long term labour, no medical care or even direct torture and beating.

Here were some examples:

1. Ren Zei Yuan, a dissenter, was sentenced to ten years of imprisonment because of the crime of “subverting national regime.” When he was in prison he was asked to do spray paint, and then he got tuberculosis. The prison did not provide any medical care until they knew that he got the disease for twenty days. Immediately after his condition became better he was again required to work.

2. Condition of a dissenter from Inner Mongolia, Ha Da, was becoming worse in the prison. He was quite weak, and was not given injection for one month. After his petition the prison reduced his food standard.

3. A rights defender, Young Chun Lin, expressed “say no to Olympic, say yes to human rights.” He was sentenced to five years imprisonment in the name of “subverting national regime.” This case attracted much domestic and international attention. His son announced that his farther was beaten and shocked by electric stick. He himself stated that he was tortured and bound to bed for nine days. Furthermore, the most inhumane measure was prevention from going to toilet.

IV. Conclusions and two important cases

Viewing from the three dimensions of judicial rights in China there might be some positive developments. These included new amended “Lawyer Law”, movements of judges, establishment of professional committees. First, presidents of courts of provinces, metropolitans and autonomy areas levels should move to different areas. Second, in high court of provincial level professional criminal, civil and administrative committees were established to replace original committees that were composed of members from courts, political parties and politicians. It also included that the second criminal trial could not impose more severe supplementary penalty.

On the other hand there were still many violations of judicial rights in China in 2008. There was no sign to show that this situation would become better. It can be concluded from above analyses that protection of judicial rights in China in 2008 was bad and did not conform to international human rights standards. There were many tortures, forced labors, arbitrarily arrests and administrative detentions. It did not have effective and comprehensive system of judicial defense by lawyers. Executions were broadly applied in China. Prison management was not adequate; neither did proper psychiatry care system exist. Therefore a conclusion that could be reached was that no matter during the stage of investigation, prosecution and trial, protection of judicial rights in China did not conform to international human rights standards.

Because of China’s bad human rights records, international community and states have been urging China to improve its human rights conditions. For example Reporters without Borders wrote an article to call on all European Union states jointly urging Beijing to improve its human rights conditions. This article referred to two points. First, the EU and the US called on China solving Tibetan problem through negotiations. However, China refused and regarded this action as intervention into domestic affairs. China not only prevented foreign media from going into Tibet but also worked on large-scale arrests and thought remolds. This proved that China’s dialogues with representative of Dalai Lama were merely nominal, and there were no substantial developments. Second, earthquake in Sichuan province did not make China waking up to face the reality, but sustained its high-handed policy.

The US Secretary of State, Ms. Condoleezza Rice, also urged China to improve human rights conditions. She said that, when she talked to Chinese President of State, Hu Jiang Tao, and Prime Minister, Wen Jia Bao, she referred to many cases in which dissenters were in jail. When she concluded their discussions on the internet, she said that it is one of coming issues. Internet is becoming everywhere; it should not be used to refrain and limit political speeches.

The European Parliament decided to award Sakharov Prize to Hu Jia, a Chinese dissenter who is still in prison, for his efforts and contributions to Chinese human rights. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China expressed its discontents, stating that the European Parliament’s awarding Sakharov Prize to Hu Jia was an intervention of domestic affairs, which against its original intention. Yet, German Minister of Foreign Affairs, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, welcomed it and urged Chinese government to release Hu Jia as soon as possible. The US State Department spokesman, Gordon

Duguid, also pointed out: we “hope the award to Hu Jia will underline for Chinese authorities the high regard in which the dissident figure is held around the world and help pave the way for his speedy release.” Freedom House also appreciated the decision of the European Parliament. It considered that Hu Jia’s awarded Sakharov Prize sent a strong message to millions Chinese who wish to live in a free expression and free assembly country. Freedom House hoped that this award would encourage activists like Hu Jia continually fighting for human rights.

For Chinese judicial rights at this year, there were two cases that were not ignorable. They indicated that there were still serious problems concerning Chinese judicial rights. i. Sacrificing judicial rights to achieve Beijing Olympic

The 2008 Olympic was held in Beijing. When applied for Olympic in 2001, Chinese government imitatively raised connection between Olympic Games and human rights. This was regarded as important progress. However, China did not keep its promises, and this was a contradiction to the Olympic Charter in which rules of respecting human dignity and universal humanitarian values are enshrined. From the view of judicial rights, China in fact was sacrificing judicial rights to achieve Beijing Olympic.

Before Beijing Olympic Games began Chinese police sent many policemen to arrest and detain petitioners to safeguard torch relay. For example, there were about 100 petitioners arrested at Tiananmen Square on 1 May 2008. Beijing authority also intruded residence of Master Miao Jue Ci Ze and arrested him. A rights defender for HIV-AIDS, Li Xi Ge, was also arrested. Similar events happened in other areas. Before torch relay coming to Guangzhou a democracy fighter, Tao Jun, was taken by police to a mountain resort for 12 hours. In Shen Chun, Guao Yong Feng, a dissenter, was caught by national security men before torch arriving. When torch was relayed in Shanghai local authorities applied different deceive approaches to house arrest petitioners. The man, Young Chun Lin, called for “say no to Olympic, say yes to human rights” was sentenced to five years imprisonment.

During Beijing Olympic Games China continually controlled its society by violating personal liberty. Several Chinese dissenters expressed that, in order to hold Beijing Olympic, China treated citizens as enemies, and enhanced its control over Tibet. All such measures were not only against Olympic spirit but also a human rights

disaster. They believed that “Beijing Olympic was ‘One World One Nightmare’- immeasurable human rights disaster.” Chinese government turned Beijing into an army-controlled city. All people were treated as horrible enemies. This is “the most shameful Olympic ever in history.”

During Beijing Olympic Games China infringed personal liberty through several ways:

1. Take Tibetan and Xingjian people into custody: Although China, constrained by international pressure, set up protesting areas during Beijing Olympic. However China did not allow anyone to enter such areas. Dissenters therefore could protest in other areas only. Dissenters who wished to protest Tibetan accident came to Beijing; but all of them were arrested or expelled. China also controlled Xingjian during Beijing Olympic. Speak person of the World Uyghur Congress, Di Guo Xia Ti, said: “In the name of Olympic China controlled situations in Xingjian. In the name of security China arrested and temporarily detained more than ten thousand people in Uyghur area. In Kese area more than 150 times checks and arrests were employed. In Kuju, because some conflicts occurred, every one who wished to leave this area should be reviewed by Chinese authorities.”

2. Petitions were more strictly limited: Although Beijing Olympic Committee announced that three protest areas were to be set before the opening ceremony no one was allowed to enter such area. Even worse was that some who applied for protest became “disappeared.” In order to maintain “social stability” Chinese government strictly limited petitioners coming to Beijing, which could result to conflicts between people and government.

3. Detaining the opposition: Members of the Chinese Democratic Party, Chinese Pan-Blue Alliance, and Chinese New People Party were detained, taken by police, monitored through the whole day, forced to psychotherapy.

4. Controlling dissenters and rights defending lawyers: For example summoned dissenters or detain rights defending lawyers.

5. Arresting businessmen: For instance Mongolian businessman Bo Li Ge was arrested by people of national security bureau in Er Wen Ke Chi.

6. Arresting people of religion: Two underground Catholic fathers were arrested when they went to Shanghai for holy activities. Many members of family Church

were oppressed. Priest Zhang Min Shan, who was leader of family church, was taken away from Beijing. Bishop Jia Zhi Guo of underground Catholic in Hebei province was arrested and compelled to leave Beijing only several hours before the closing ceremony of Beijing Olympic. The US State Department demanded Chinese government to release Zhang Min Shan.

7. Limiting reporters: Reporters without Borders stated that Chinese authority reinforced its oppression before Beijing Olympic. There were 24 journalists, internet dissents or activists were arrested or detained. During this period of time at least 80 reporters were obstructed when they were covering news. Those obstructions mainly happened in Tibet and Sichuan.

8. Limiting Taiwanese’s participation: For example when Young Huai Ru went to Beijing to encourage Taiwan team she was taken away by Chinese officers and enquired for more than one hour. She was then sent back to Taipei.

Because of its continually violating of human rights during Beijing Olympic China was protested by the whole world. For instance Reporters without Borders said that it held a small scale protesting broadcasting in Beijing 12 hours before Olympic opening ceremony. This was the first ever non-official FM broadcasting in China since 1949. Many people fighting for democracy held a “Citizen Parade” to arouse people’s concern on democracy and human rights in China. Taiwan human rights NGOs initiated a peaceful demonstration named “Watching Tibet, Don’t forget democracy and human rights.” They shouted “Hu Jiang Tao is headman, bringing human rights to Beijing.” They tried to remind the whole world: do not forget China’s oppression on Tibet and Taiwan.

Editorial of Suddeutsche Zeitung pointed out that viewing from series of protests, arrests, cheers, chaos China obviously could not bear expectations from the world. It was also argued at Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung’s editorial that, due to human rights issues in Darfur, Sudan and turmoil in Tibet, China’s peaceful image was broken. Also owning to domestic ethical conflicts and international criticizes China no longer mentioned humane Olympic. Security became the only promise during Beijing Olympic, regardless of the cost of foreign visitors running away and guests feeling uncomfortable.

In recent years many international human rights organizations continually criticized that China did not keep its human rights promises. Chinese official responses were

fighting back by saying that these organizations “had an ulterior motive” or “looked at things through colored spectacles.” Amnesty International said that they monitored on every Olympic host’s human rights conditions to promote a more successful Olympic games. AI was not aim at China but did the same thing to every government in the world as the Olympic Charter enshrined human dignity and universal human rights values. AI’s observations were to help China managing a comprehensive successful Olympic, not only in economic and sport but also in human rights terms that Chinese would feel proud of. ii Tibetan sad melody, human rights lost

China arbitrarily arrested and killed Tibetans by military force. After polices and soldiers fired to oppress on 14 March, more than 200 military vehicles and ten thousands soldiers lead by six tanks went into Lhasa centers on 16 March. Barracks were set and houses of those who suspected participated in protests were searched. About 2000 riot polices intruded into areas that Uyghur lived to search. It was estimated that hundreds people were arrested during the “3.14 accident.”

Tibetans continued their protests, but they were also suffered. For example, in Qinghai province about 15 people were arrested after their parades and demonstrations. In La Pui Zen Temple, which is situated in southern Gansu province, two hundred monks were detained for several days. It also extended to Sichuan province where Tibetans distributed leaflets. Among others two Buddhist nuns were arrested. China also continued its large scale oppressions in Lhasa. Military polices went into Sa La Temple and arrested four hundred monks and detained them in a suburb cave dwelling.

During Beijing Olympic China was forced by international pressure to establish demonstration area. However, no protestor was ever allowed to enter such area. All dissenters who against oppressions in Tibet went to Beijing, but were all expelled or arrested by Chinese authorities. For instance, Beijing polices arrested four foreigners, three men and one woman, who hanged a demonstration scroll at a bridge closed to “Nest Stadium.” Five people who came from the US, Germany and Canada and carried Tibetan independence flags were detained by Beijing police. Another 8 students of “Free Tibet Student Movements” who protested before the main stadium of Beijing Olympic were also detained on 13 August. There were also 5 and 6 people who

carried free Tibet scrolls were arrested on 15 and 20 August respectively. Another 4 demonstrators were detained on 21 August.

Even after Olympic Games situations did not become better. A female Tibetan writer, Wei Se, visited her relatives in Lhasa after Olympic Games. She was arrested and investigated for 8 hours because she took photos of armies and policies on the street. “Leaving Lhasa in haste-Lhasa has become a city of terror” was the first sentence of her poem.

Notes

① Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948. ② Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and roclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948.accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966, entry into force on 23 March 1976, in accordance with Article 49. ③ Fang Yuan, “Shangdong rights defender Li Shian Yang was cruelly beaten by local judges for four hours,” Radio Free Asia, January 18, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/01/18/lixiangyang/. ④ Guo Jian Zen and Niu Hong Lin, “A lie ‘exchanges’ ten years injustice,” Chong Quong News, January 31, 2008, http://fl.cqnews.net/system/2008/01/31/001048595. shtml. ⑤ Gao Shan, “petitioner from Wuzei was illegally beaten by police,” Radio Free Asia, April 5, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/04/05/wu/. ⑥ Xin Yu, “A high school teacher in Guizhou was beaten to dead in the police office; three thousand teachers and students signed for catching assaulters,” Radio Free Asia, April 11, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/04/11/ jiaoshi/. ⑦ Xin Yu, “Dissenting writer Du Dao Bin went on a hunger strike to protest torture by police,” Radio Free Asia, July 29, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/ dudaobing-07292008094707.html. ⑧ Ding Xiao, “Wang Gui Lin was sentenced to one-and-half years labour reeducation,” Radio Free Asia, February 4, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/ shenrubaodao/2008/02/05/wang/. ⑨ Shi Shan, “Fujian petitioner Tang Zhao Xing was sentenced one year reeducation,” Radio Free Asia, February 1, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/ 2008/02/01/fangmin1/. ⑩ Gao Shan, “Henan petitioner Liu Xue Li was reeducated,” Radio Free Asia, September 23, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/liuxueli-09232008 164311.html.

⑪ Xi Wang, “Two Beijing residences applying for protest were reeducated,” Radio Free Asia, August 20, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/shiwei-0820 2008172436.html. ⑫ Xi Wang, “21 home church leaders were sentenced to reeducation,” Radio Free Asia, February 19, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/19/ religion/. ⑬ Tian Yi, “Master Sheng Guan urging international community to concern oppressions on monks,” Radio Free Asia, September 30, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/ yataibaodao/fojiao-09302008152158.html. ⑭ Ding Xiao, “Changsha police severely punish dissenters; cultural shirt maker suspected to be reeducated,” Radio Free Asia, September 3, 2008, http://www.rfa. org/mandarin/yataibaodao/yijian-09032008140140.html. ⑮ Xin Yu, “Pan-blue member Wei Tsen Ling was sentenced to reeducation,” Radio Free Asia, August 26, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/fanlan-0826 2008092751.html. ⑯ Fang Yuan, “Tianjin rights defender Zheng Ming Fang continually oppressed,” Radio Free Asia, November 6, 2007, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/ 2007/11/05/zhengmingfang/. ⑰ Ding Xiao, “Tian Li defending for himself,” Radio Free Asia, November 13, 2007, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2007/11/13/nanhai/. ⑱ Yan Xiu, “representative petitioner Lin Bine Chang was illegally detained,” Radio Free Asia, January 17, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/01/ 17/lin/. ⑲ Ding Xiao, “democracy fighter Wei Tsen Ling was illegally investigated,” Radio Free Asia, January 28, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/01/ 28/wei/. ⑳ Xin Yu, “Female petitioner Xu Ping was illegally detained and tortured,” Radio Free Asia, February 1, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/01/ xuping/. ㉑ Xin Yu, “Inner Mongolia Female petitioner was put into jail and tortured,” Radio Free Asia, February 8, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/ 08/chifeng/.

㉒ Qiao Long, “Female teacher went to Beijing to petite for her son,” Radio Free Asia, February 10, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/10/shen/. ㉓ Xin Yu, “widow of Quanzhou lecturer was beaten,” Radio Free Asia, February 14, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/14/quanzhou/. ㉔ Xin Yu, “6 persons were detained because of the crime of disturbing social order,” Radio Free Asia, September 9, 2007, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/ 2007/11/09/fangmin/. ㉕ Gao Shan, “Henan Christians were criminal detained,” Radio Free Asia, February 1, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/01/henan/. ㉖ Xin Yu, “Master Miao Jue and HIV-AIDS rights defender Li Xi Ge were taken away,” Radio Free Asia, May 7, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/ lixige-05062008092841.html. ㉗ Gao Shan, “Two underground Catholic fathers were arrested,” Radio Free Asia, July 14, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/priest-07142008151300. html. ㉘ Xin Yu, “Zhang Min Shan was allowed to stay in Beijing by governmental authorities,” Radio Free Asia, August 1, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yatai baodao/mushi-08012008100024.html. ㉙ Gao Shan, “Bishop Jia Zhi Guo of underground Catholic in Hebei province was arrested,” Radio Free Asia, August 25, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibao dao/hebei-08252008172445.html. ㉚ Shen Ye, “Three pen organizations urged China to release 40 writers in prisons,” Radio Free Asia, December 11, 2007, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/ 2007/12/11/zuojia/. ㉛ Xin Yu, “Dissent writer Jing Chu was suddenly called by police and then detained,” Radio Free Asia, December 14, 2007, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/ shenrubaodao/2007/12/14/jinchu/. ㉜ Shi Shan, “A famous Inner Mongolian writer, Na Ren Bi Li Ge, was arrested,” Radio Free Asia, May 5, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/writer- 05052008171818.html. ㉝ Fang Yuan, “Yan Zheng Xue was beaten in prison; life was threatened,” Radio Free Asia, December 18, 2007, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2007/ 12/18/yan.

㉞ “Chinese police detained two writers,” BBC Chinese, December 22, 2007, http:// news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7150000/newsid_7157100/7157165.stm. ㉟ “Governor of Liao Ning: Xi Feng police went to Beijing to arrest reporter event ‘has been dealt with’,” Chong Quong News, March 7, 2008, http://fl.cqnews.net/ system/2008/03/07/001100596.shtml. ㊱ An Pei, “Nanjing reporter Sun Lin was tried with a word ‘injustice’ at head,” Radio Free Asia, May 30, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/sunlin-0530 2008173412.html. ㊲ “A couple in Chongqing were arrested for illegally selling 800 thousand newspapers,” Chong Quong News, November 6, 2007, http://fl.cqnews.net/system/ 2007/11/06/000936712.shtml. ㊳ Xin Yu, “Zheng En Chong was beaten by police,” Radio Free Asia, February 17, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/17/zheng/. ㊴ Ding Xiao, “Tibetans were not allowed to leave; rights were violated,” Radio Free Asia, April 3, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/04/03/ tibetan/. ㊵ Yan Xiu, “Wei Se was summoned in Lhasa because of taking photos,” Radio Free Asia, August 27, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/weise-08272008 105728.html. ㊶ Ding Xiao, “Arrests continued after Olympic; Xingjian human rights conditions were in concern,” Radio Free Asia, August 28, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/ yataibaodao/aoyun-08282008134652.html. ㊷ Ding Xiao, “Trials on Uyghur people in the public in Yili,” Radio Free Asia, September 25, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/yili-09252008171354.html. ㊸ Shi Shan, “Chinese courts reformed for anti-corruption,” Radio Free Asia, February 12, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/12/fayuan/. ㊹ Gao Shan, “Staff was caught by national security officers because of inquiring over bad construction of schools,” Radio Free Asia, June 18, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ mandarin/yataibaodao/mianyang-06182008164744.html. ㊺ “A Tibetan was sentenced to subverting by Chinese court,” Voice of America, November 2, 2007, http://www.voanews.com/chinese/w2007-11-02-voa51.cfm.

㊻ Xin Yu, “Disentter Lu Geng Song’s wife appealing foe justice in the internet,” Radio Free Asia, November 19, 2007, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2007/ 11/19/lu/. ㊼ Shen Hua, “Rights defender Zhao Chang Qing was released,” Voice of America, November 27, 2007, http://www.voanews.com/chinese/w2007-11-27-voa29.cfm. ㊽ Xin Yu, “Dissenter Chen Dau Jun was detained by police on the crime of ‘instigating to divide the state’,” Radio Free Asia, September 28, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ mandarin/yataibaodao/chen-09282008172245.html. ㊾ Han Qing, “Railroad worker Liu Jian Jun was criminal detained,” Radio Free Asia, July 16, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/liujianjun-07162008165 219.html. ㊿ An Pei, “A Sichuan Tibetan monk was sentenced because of the crime of ‘endangering national security’,” Radio Free Asia, February 4, 2008, http://www. rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/04/lama/. “Dissenter Huang Chi was proved to be detained,” BBC Chinese, June 16, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7450000/newsid_7456500/7456578. stm. Young Chia Dai, “Chinese rights defenders urged international community to fight for Huang Chi’s release,” Radio Free Asia, June 22, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ mandarin/yataibaodao/huang-06222008162959.html. Fang Yuan, “Huang Chi’s lawyer was not able to meet him because of national secrete,” Radio Free Asia, June 24, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibao dao/huangqi-06242008090503.html. Young Chia Dai, “Chinese authorities tried a member of Chinese Pan-Blue Alliance, Zhang Ze Lin, in private,” Radio Free Asia, February 17, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/ mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/17/zhang/. Yen Min, “A member of Chinese Pan-Blue Alliance, Zhang Ze Lin, was sentenced to two years imprisonment,” Radio Free Asia, February 22, 2008, http://www.rfa. org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/22/zhang/. Shen Hua, “Appeal of a Chinese environment protector, Wu Li Hong, was in vain,” Voice of America, November 7, 2007, http://www.voanews.com/chinese/w2007- 11-07-voa31.cfm.

Central News Agency, “ US Congress announced Chinese political prisoners,” Yam Sky News, July 8, 2008, http://n.yam.com/cna/china/200807/20080708448339.html. “Ministry of Justice drew ‘Law Firm Regulation Rule’ and ‘Lawyer Practicing Regulation Rule’,” Chong Quong News, July 22, 2008, http://fl.cqnews.net/fzdt/ 200807/t20080722_2169978.htm. Yen Xiu, “New amended law was abandoned; lawyer could see Huang Chi,” Radio Free Asia, July 28, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/huangqi-0728 2008133829.html. Young Chia Dai, “Ke Er Chin local government of Inner Mongolia monopolized lawyers,” Radio Free Asia, July 29, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibao dao/lawyer-07292008104341.html. An Pei, “Lawyers were difficult to see their clients under new amended ‘lawyer law’,” Radio Free Asia, June 21, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/ lu-06212008005525.html. Fang Yuan, “No trial on Yu Chang Wu,” Radio Free Asia, January 17, 2008, http:// www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/01/17/trial. Xin Yu, “Hebei government asked lawyers not to accept cases from victims of San Lu poisoned milk powder,” Radio Free Asia, September 23, 2008, http://www.rfa. org/mandarin/yataibaodao/hebei-09232008081926.html. Xin Yu, “Beijing monitored rights defending lawyers,” Radio Free Asia, August 3, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/bei-08032008165746.html. “Chinese authority refused to extend rights defending lawyers’ licenses,” BBC Chinese, May 31, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7420000/ newsid_7427900/7427943.stm. Qiao Long, “Young Jia’s lawyer argued both the court and prison were illegal,” Radio Free Asia, September 30, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/ yang-09302008155213.html. Qiao Long, “Young Jia was sentenced to the death penalty,” Radio Free Asia, September 1, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/yangjia-0901200810 3731.html. Ye Bin, “Young Jia’s case was questioned,” Voice of America, September 5, 2008, http://www.voanews.com/chinese/w2008-09-05-voa63.cfm.

Qiao Long, “Young Jia appealed,” Radio Free Asia, September 10, 2008, http:// www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/yang-09102008155401.html. Qiao Long, “Who is controlling Young Jia’s case,” Radio Free Asia, September 12, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/yangjia-09122008115802.html. “Chinese legal scholars wished to abolish the death penalty; people did not agree,” Deutsche Welle, October 21, 2008, http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/ 0,2144,3181963,00.html. Huang Hua and Li Chin, “The first normative rule of the death penalty onto intention murder,” Chong Quong News, January 14, 2008, http://fl.cqnews.net/system/2008/ 01/14/001027313.shtml. “Amnesty International: China had the most executions in the world,” BBC Chinese, April 14, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7340000/ newsid_7347400/7347437.stm. Fang Yuan, “Ren Zei Yuan, a dissenter, was forced to labour even seriously ill,” Radio Free Asia, April 10, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/ 04/10/ren/. Shen Ye, “Condition of a dissenter from Inner Mongolia, Ha Da, was becoming worse,” Radio Free Asia, April 22, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibao dao/hada-04222008164336.html. Fang Yuan, “Son of Young Chun Lin protested police beating his father,” Radio Free Asia, March 25, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/03/ 26/yang_chunlin/. Ding Xiao, “Young Chun Lin will appeal to protest injustice,” Radio Free Asia, March 28, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/03/28/yang/. Central News Agency, “Reporters without Borders urged the EU to boycott Olympic opening ceremony,” Sino News, June 20, 2008, http://news.sina.com.tw/ article/20080620/477915.html. AFP News, “US Secretary of State urged China to improve human rights records,” Yahoo News, June 30, 2008, http://hk.beta.news.yahoo.com/article/080630/8/5lar. html. European Parliament, “Sakharov Prize 2008 awarded to Hu Jia,” European Parliament, October 23, 2008, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/public/story_ page/015-39965-294-10-43-902-20081020STO39964-2008-20-10-2008/default_ en.htm.

Central News Agency, “Hu Jia obtained human rights award,” Yam Sky News, October 24, 2008, http://n.yam.com/cna/china/200810/20081024783269.html. Lin Yu Li, “German Foreign Minister urged China to release Hu Jia,” China Times, October 24, 2008, http://tech.chinatimes.com/2007Cti/2007Cti-News/2007Cti- News-Content/0,4521,130505+132008102400807,00.html. AFP News, “The US asked China to release dissenter Hu Jia,” Hinet News, October 24, 2008, http://times.hinet.net/times/article.do?newsid=1802211&option =mainland. Liau Kun Yuan, “Freedom House praised EP’s decision of granting human rights award to Hu Jia,” Sino News, October 24, 2008, http://news.sina.com.tw/article/ 20081024/992167.html. Fang Yuan, “Beijing continued to arrest petitioners on 1 May holiday,” Radio Free Asia, May 2, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/51_fangmin- 05022008093230.html. Xin Yu, “Master Miao Jue and HIV-AIDS rights defender Li Xi Ge were taken away,” Radio Free Asia, May 7, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/ lixige-05062008092841.html. Gao Shan, “Rights defenders were detained during torch relay in Guangzhou,” Radio Free Asia, May 8, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/aoyun- 05082008160226.html. Fang Yuan, “More than 20 Shanghai petitioners were house arrested during torch relay,” Radio Free Asia, May 26, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/ fangmin-05262008081645.html. Zhan Jia Chi, “Chinese dissenters: Beijing Olympic was a human rights disaster,” Epoch Times, August 9, 2008, http://news.epochtimes.com/b5/8/8/9/n2222626.htm. Qiao Long, “Beijing detained petitioners; citizens felt dissatisfied,”Radio Free Asia, August 14, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/fangmin-08142008100 132.html. Lin Chieh Yue, “The US condemned Chinese police beat son of priest,” China Times, October 24, 2008, http://news.chinatimes.com/2007Cti/2007Cti-News/2007 Cti-News-Content/0,4521,130505+132008102400809,00.html.

Huang Chon Rong and Xie Wen Hua, “Protesting Chinese human rights extended,” Liberty Times, August 9, 2008, http://iservice.libertytimes.com.tw/IService2/Talk. php?newsNo=233560&talkNo=400670. Lin Yu Li, “German newspaper: China could not bear world’s expectations,” Duo Wei News, August 9, 2008, http://www.dwnews.com/big5/MainNews/Topics/cna_ 2008_08_08_09_03_53_218.html. Ding Xiao, “Report of Amnesty International claimed China violated promise,” Radio Free Asia, July 28, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/human rights-07282008140325.html. Ding Xiao, “Tibetans were not allowed to leave; rights were violated,” Radio Free Asia, April 3, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/04/03/ tibetan/. Shen Ye, “More than ten Tibetans were arrested during 3.25 protest,” Radio Free Asia, April 14, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/04/14/zang/. Qiao Long, “Tibetan female writer was arrested,” Radio Free Asia, April 16, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/04/16/zang/. Qiao Long, “Two Buddhist nuns were detained because of distributing leaflets,” Radio Free Asia, April 25, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/tibet- 04252008170845.html. Qiao Long, “Four hundred monks of Sa La Temple in Lhasa were arrested,” Radio Free Asia, April 20, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/xi-042020081 81129.html. “Supporting Tibet Independence foreign protesters were arrested in Beijing,” BBC Chinese, August 6, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7540000/ newsid_7544400/7544429.stm. Qiao Long, “Protesters outside Nest Stadium were arrest; Beijing closed foreign websites again,” Radio Free Asia, August 13, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/ yataibaodao/wang-08132008090229.html. “Beijing plainclothes policemen detained protesters supporting Tibet independence,” BBC Chinese, August 13, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_755 0000/newsid_7557700/7557774.stm.

“Beijing polices arrested six US pro-Tibet independence people,” BBC Chinese, August 20, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7570000/newsid_ 7571400/7571497.stm. “Protests outside Nest Stadium,” BBC Chinese, August 20, 2008, http://news.bbc. co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7570000/newsid_7573800/7573817.stm. Yen Xiu, “We Se was summoned by police in Lhasa because of taking photos,” Radio Free Asia, August 28, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/ weise-08272008105728.html.

Economics and Environmental Rights

Yu-Jung Lee*

I. Introduction

The contemporary China has three problems-the ambiguity of power, the lack of effective supervision and the postponement of laws and regulations required-in the process of protection and promotion human rights. These are serious challenges to the progress of economics and environmental rights in China. This report will focus on the damages on various rights in the year 2008-apart from natural disasters and their impacts on pollutions-particularly on the economic losses and environmental pollutions caused by man-made reasons.

In terms of economic rights, according to the Social Blueprint, a.k.a. the 2008 Trends and Predictions of the Chinese Society, published by the Chinese Social Academe on 4th Jan 2008, the increase of commodity prices, the gaps between residential incomes, corruption and other economic problems seriously trouble the Chinese economy. In addition, problems caused by Sichuan earthquake and inappropriate land imposition highlight the violation of economic rights in the countryside, which required serious attention from the authorities. Although the Consumer Price Index (henceforward CPI) did not increase as high as it used to be, the increase on Producer Price Index (henceforward PPI) indicates the sensible increase on commodity price is still precarious.

In terms of environmental rights, environmental pollution can be discussed from two dimensions: one is the pollutions caused by natural disasters, such as earthquake and climate changes. The other is man-made environmental problems-whether they are accidentally or on purpose. Thanks to the 2008 Beijing Olympics, environmental rights received much more attention this year compared to economic rights, despite of the fact that the violation on both rights are numerous and equally of importance.

* Yu-Jung Lee is assistant professor, department of public affairs and management, Kainan University, Taiwan.

II. The Whirlwind on the Prices of Real Estate

It is a Chinese tradition that people believe land represents wealth. For this reason, people in mainland China have been keen on purchasing private-owned real estates, especially when it is possible to have house of their own. Since the overhead on the real estate sector, the Chinese authorities started to monitor and intervene real estate markets, claiming that the prices of real estate have been put under control. Nevertheless, the statistics told a different story.

According to official statistics on the housing sales in 70 middle-to-large size Chinese cities published by the Commission of Development and Reform in collusion with the State Statistic Bureau, the sales on brand new, second-hand and non-newly built houses all present the same tendency: the more expensive a house is the higher increase rate on its price. Basically, the Chinese government plans on housing price control did work well on some middle and large size cities. But it is not efficient enough to prevent the increase on housing price as a whole. This tendency is especially crystal in the secondary level and third level cities, such as Urumqi, Haikou, Ningbo, Changchun, Wuxi, Yinchuan,① Huizhou, Nanning, Lanzhou, Yueyang, Chongqing, Changsha, Xian, Sanya, etc.② Moreover, the increase rate of the price is sharper in the small size cities rather than in the big size ones.③ The most examples can be viewed from the case of Urumqi.④ The changes on annual housing price can be thus

Table 1 The changes on housing price in 70 big and medium size Chinese cities from December 2007 to August 2008

Overall Brand new Second-hand Non-newly built Dec ↑10.5% ↑11.4% ↑11.4% ↑7 % Jan ↑11.3% ↑12.2% ↑11.9% ↑7.9% Feb ↑10.9% ↑11.8% ↑11.5% ↑6.9% Mar ↑10.7% ↑11.4% ↑11.1% ↑7.0% Apr ↑10.1% ↑10.8% ↑10.3% ↑6.9% May ↑ 9.2% ↑10.2% ↑ 8.8% ↑6.5% Jun ↑ 8.2% ↑ 9.2% ↑ 7.5% ↑5.6% Jul ↑ 7.0% ↑ 7.9% ↑ 6 % ↑4.9% Aug ↑ 5.3% ↑ 6.2% ↑ 3.9% ↑4.0% Source: monthly data released by National Bureau of Statistic of China.

summarized as ‘the decline in the first level cities, the division in the secondary level cities and the increase in the third level cities’.

Notably, although the housing price in Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Fuzhou and other places has been declined,⑤ for instance, one square meter used to cost 17350 RMB in Shenzhen on Oct 2007, which reduced to 12815 per square meter on May 2008; the rate of decline was as high as 28 per cent.⑥ Moreover, the most low middle income households are living in the secondary and third level cities, indicating that the increase on housing prices in these two level cities will cause more problems at stake.

The increase on building materials, speculation by non-local enterprises, the estate agent fees and interests, the increase on the price of manpower, the decrease on the land supply, the increase on market demand and the revaluation of RMB are considered to be the main reasons for the overheat of housing market.⑦ According to an official investigation done by Ningxia Survey Team of the State Statistics Bureau, the key reason for such increase on the building materials is the key reason for the increase on housing price. For instance, one ton of steel used to cost 4000RMB in 2007, but, it costs 6000 RMB per ton in 2008. Each ton of cement became 60 RMB more expensive in 2008. A worker earned about 60 to 70 RMB per day in 2007, and this price increased to 80 to 90 RMB in 2008.⑧

Apart from the increase of the cost, the overheated of housing market is largely dominated by men-made factors. For instance, in order to boost the housing markets in 2007, many developers kept doing promotion by giving discounts. However, either was the selling price of these houses increased in advance or these houses were ‘left-over’, meaning they had been on the markets for a while. Such behaviour not only disturbed market prices but also created a lot of disputes between buyers and developers.⑨

Moreover, the shortage of land supply caused by the implementation of land auction system is another reason for the increase on housing price in the large and middle size cities.⑩ The advance booking system for commercial housing, presented by some National Congress members during the National Congress General Meeting and Chinese Communist Part General Meeting also block the transparency of information between buyers and sellers.⑪

Due to the high housing price, a new term ‘housing salve’ has been created and failing to pay mortgage becomes a common norm. Using Shanghai as an example, the rate of failure on mortgage payment was only 1 per cent in 2004. However, it increased

to 8.6 per cent on Sept. 2006. It is recorded that in 2006, between May and Sept, the total amount of mortgage failed to be delivered has reached up to 0.2 billion. Three municipalities, Beijing, Tianjin and Shanghai, reached 50 per cent of their violation rates on their mortgage on Oct. 2005, and this figure is close to the official warming line.⑫ Despite various bad news, the land market report of the upper-half year 2008 demonstrated that land price in China did not decline despite the decrease on housing price.

It is noteworthy examining the relationship between higher education system and the housing price while the volatility of housing price has been gradually stabilised. Due to the stress on the importance of education, the price for the second-hand properties nearby good schools has increased dramatically. For instance, residents in Shenyang have increased their expenses on education by 70 per cent, representing the correlation between good school area and the real estate prices.⑬ From bank sector’s point of view, although it is true that the tendency of housing price differs by areas and cities, the general guideline for China’s housing market aim to prevent the housing prices did fail sharply.⑭

III. The Decline of the CPI growth vs. the Increase of the PPI

According to official figures provided by the State Statistics Bureau in early 2008, the CPI has increased 4.8 per cent, which has been increased 3.3 per cent compared to last year. Within this 4.8 per cent of growth, there are 4.5 per cent grown in the urban area and 5.4 per cent in the rural area. The growth rate on food and residency are 12.3 per cent and 4.5 per cent respectively, which are considered to be the key reasons for the increase on all prices.⑮ China Bank also published a CPI paper, indicating that half number of provinces in China have reached 5 per cent of their CPI in 2007. These figures go beyond 6 per cent in Qinghai, Guizhou and Guangxi, which demonstrated that the growth of CPI in the poor West region is higher that the East.⑯ In 2007, the growth rate of CPI reached its newest height since 1997, which exceeded the bottom line of inflation in economics, a.k.a. 3 per cent, and nearly reached up to the status of serious inflation of 5 per cent.⑰

At the beginning of 2008, the State Council planned to maintain the annual CPI under 4.8 per cent,⑱ but it seemed to be a mission impossible. Although the State Information Centre predicted that the CPI in the following half year of 2008 will

be around 5.6 per cent, indicating the release of pressure on inflation. The Chinese authorities, nevertheless, seemed to be extremely conservative on their prediction on commodity price.

The State Statistics Bureau asserts that, because of the high growth on CPI, it is urgent for government to prevent the outbreak of obvious inflation from the constructive increase on price.⑲ The Commission of Development and Reform also stresses on the incoming pressure on the increasing of commodity prices.⑳ Researcher Gu Yuan-yang from the Research Centre of World Economics and Politics believes that ‘even the CPI comes down to 7.1 per cent; it only shows that the standard of commodity price is slightly down, it does not necessarily mean that the trend of commodity price is slippery’.㉑

The main reason why the authorities take such conservative attitude toward the future of CPI growth is because of the continuous growth on PPI. The monthly PPI in 2008 has been continuously increasing, which is the highest compared to the PPI in the same month during the past three years.㉒ According to Cao Yuan-zheng, the economist for China Bank International, the continuously high ratio of PPI reflects the put-up of cost. Apart from reducing enterprise profitability, such high PPI also represents that China has entered the high cost era.

Figure 1 China’s CPI and PPI in 2008

Source: “Enlarged ‘price scissors’ between PPI and CPI,” Xinjingbao, September 11, 2008, http://www.thebeijingnews.com/economy/2008/09-11/[email protected].

What is more, Yao Jing-yuan from the State Statistics Bureau pointed out that the fall of CPI indicated the effectiveness of governmental intervention in inflation; whereas the gap between PPI and CPI demonstrates that enterprise profitability has been reduced as the result of price increase on raw materials and the decrease on product price.㉓ In the other words, although CPI has been lowered on daily basis, due to the increase on commodity price in the international market, the increase on manufacture costs and damages caused by natural disasters; the pressure brought by the increasing costs is still pressing. The increase on the costs of consumable electronics and construction industries is the case in point.㉔

The official perspective on CPI and PPI offered by the Chinese authorities is very similar to the analyses offered by South Weekend, arguing that the reason of inflation crisis in China is due to ‘the loosen-up of urbanisation’. South Week also argues that inflation occurred in Brazil, Russia, India and China, the so-called ‘BRICs’, are caused by rapid urbanisation, converting most arable land into construction fields. The loss of agricultural production sites results in the shortage of primary product, and such shortage unavoidably results in the increase on raw material prices in the international market.㉕ Under such circumstance, China is now challenged by not only the increasing housing and commodity prices but also the disputes over land use events.

IV. Countless events of Illegal Land Use

There were many local violations on land use, sell and transfer in the pursuit of quick profits report in 2007; no exceptional that these violations have been continuously practiced at local levels in 2008. The State Council published ‘A State Council Notification on the Effective and Efficient Use of State Land’, also known as State Document No. 2, hoping that by implementing this policy, the overheated of housing prices and illegal land selling can be repressed.㉖ However, when reviewing what happened in the past 12 months, illegal land use is still in common, which did not affect by the slight slip on housing price.

A Hundred Day of Legal Land Act implemented at the beginning of this year clearly pointed out the seriousness of illegal legal use and transfer in Guangdong and Shandong provinces. For instance, as a county-level city, Kaiping City Government in Guangdong does not have the right to convert arable land for other uses. The city party secretary and mayor seemed to illegally authorise the conversion of nearly

2000 hectares (ha) arable land nevertheless. These government officials not only took briberies, invaded compensation fees for rural households, they even beat up those farmers or arbitrarily put them into jail.㉗

There are 1960 ha of newly converted land for construction in Shandong Province since 2005. There are 942 cases about illegal renting, 23 cases about illegal possession, 263 cases about using without approval, and 680 people have been handed over to the Commission of Inspection and Discipline. Among these 680 people, 630 was punished through the party disciplines, 282 out of this 636 were put into custody and 55 out of this 282 were charged with criminal offence.㉘ Since illegal land use is no news to China, the State Department of State Land and Resource listed ten typical illegal land use events in its third season report of 2008: 1) Hebei Province disciplined Shijiazhuang estate developer Huaying company’s act of illegal land possession 2) Liaoning Province disciplined Shuangdao cherry farm’s illegal possession of arable land in Lushunkou District, Dalian 3) Jiangsu Province disciplined illegal land use event in Rugao harbour developmental zone 4) Zhejiang Province disciplined illegal land possession case done by the Fenghua city transportation company 5) Anhui Province disciplined Langxi County Government and the branch of state land bureau regarding their illegal transfer of state land and approval of license 6) Jiangxi Province disciplined Lichuan County Government for its illegal imposition of local land, 7) Henan Province disciplined Jinda and Jinyuan estate developers regarding their illegal land use, 8) Guangdong Province disciplined Suixi County Government for its illegal land imposition, 9) Chongqing City disciplined illegal expansion of Jiulong industrial park and 10) Gansu Province disciplined Yelinguan Hotel for its illegal land possession. It is recorded that the violation of land use has reached up to 3 thousands and 5 hundreds ha, with 9 millions fines, and penalized 32 governmental officers.㉙ Notably, according to the investigation done by the State Bureau of Land and Resource of Beijing, ‘most illegal land use seems to happen at the basic level’.㉚ Local cadres ignore central decree on the return of invaded land, as well as the delay on the compensation for legal land imposition. As a result, many citizens start to protest against such government behaviour or seek opportunities to appeal.㉛ For local cadres, (illegal) land transfer and imposition are their shortcuts to economic profit and promotion. The fastest way to solve such problem is through legal restrain or penalties. ‘The Punishment for the Violation of Land Management Regulations’ published on May 2008 lists the punishment for political leaders and

governmental officials involving in illegal land use.㉜ However, the origin of illegal land uses derived from that the central and local governments seem to have serious conflicts of interests over arable land transfer and the compensation system for imposed land. In other words, due to the lack of supervision and the shortage of local public finance, the responsibility system currently established by government does not solve the actual problem. For example, Zhong Xian Xing Feng Xiang (County) decided to take collective investment in constructing new roads and bridges, however, even people (Wu Bao Hu) who transfer their registration to other place and dead people are required to contribute to the fund. The legal foundation of such act is based on the Rural Village Land Contract Law- whoever uses the land, guaranteed by 30 year non-changeable contract, requires paying such fee.㉝ However, does this unreasonable implementation also indicate the ambiguity of the understanding on the concept of human rights in mainland China?

V. Patron-Client Exchanges at Local Levels

Apart from corruption through illegal land transfer, local cadres also benefit from covering notorious enterprises. Patron-client exchange is considered an important factor for environmental pollution. For instance, the leader of Jianghua Autonomous County Environmental Protection Bureau and the director of the Disciplinary Division in Henan Province took briberies from a few local copper factories which produced serious water and air pollution. They were also shareholders of one of copper factories.㉞ Another case is given in Lishui City, by Zhejiang Province. The City Environmental Protection Bureau took no action on the Oriental Molybdenum Company which wasted water was ph 4.55. The authorities even labelled those appealed residents as ‘badly behaved citizens’.㉟ In Lincheng County, Hebei Province, Sanyangjiao Chemistry Factory was shut down by the State Bureau of Environmental Protection (henceforward SBEP), but it managed to continue its operation by bribing local cadres later on.㊱ Similarly, chemistry factories in Huangzhong County, in Qinghai Province Xining City, which were also highly polluted, were shouted down by the SBEP in 2003. Three months later, they went back to production under the permission of local Environmental Protection Bureau.㊲

Local cadres’ attitudes and explanation towards enterprises which bring pollution

to local environments can be revealed through two typical cases. The first happened in Jia Country, Henan Province. Local cadres proclaimed the operation of a local stone- processing factory was legal since it already paid the pollution fee. Because of the pollution produced, the fruit trees nearby have been whitened, and residents need to switch on the light when driving in the daytime.㊳ Secondly, when a polluted factory shouted down de jure as a result of civil protest, local authorities actually allowed them to continuously operate under the excuse that: ‘how can we shout down an entire enterprise simply because one procedure is missing?’㊴

Kuang Ping, one of the Members of State Political Consultative Commission, pointed out that the reason why such polluted enterprises can locate their factories in rural areas is mainly because the lack of investment in these underdeveloped areas. Some underdeveloped rural villages even proclaim that: ‘it is better to be choked to dead rather than starved to dead, putting meals on table is more important than protecting environment’.㊵ The vice Procurator-General of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, Wang Zhenchuan, indicated that in these crime cases, local cadres often followed the logics of ‘polluting first and dealing with it later’.㊶ These cadres either did nothing or even provided protection to those polluted enterprises.㊷

It is the exact reason worsening man-made environmental pollution, which directly damaged public health and safety. For instance, due to the abusive mining of nephrite in Yulongkashi River, Xinjiang Autonomous region, the sequela includes serious soil erosion, the destruction of riverside vegetation and the hazard on the safety during flood-period.㊸ In Chenxi Country, Huaihua City Hunan Province, the two subsidiaries of local coal mine, sulphuric acid and aluminite factories, chronically polluted local underground water. Although in 2007, the county Environmental Protection Bureau proclaimed the safety of local water, the outbreak of water poisoning event has revealed in 2008.㊹

VI. Serious Land Pollution

Land pollution can be evaluated through illegal land imposition and governmental toleration on pollution, resulting in two different outcomes. One is land pollution or the uselessness of polluted land, the other is desertification. The former can be illustrated by mining industries in Shanxi and Shaanxi Provinces. Because of the over- exploitation of coal mine, there were more than 6,700 ‘ecological refugees’ in Shenmu

County, Shaanxi Province.㊺ Zhang Lianlian, researcher of the Economics Research Centre, Shanxi Social Science Academe, asserts that every ton of coal exploited in Shanxi Province would create the loss of 245 square kilometre soil and water. During the past 50 years, 47 per cent of river in Shanxi were cut-out, whereas the waterline of underground water was decreased and land was subsided. More than 4000 square kilometre of land was emptied each year, whereas more than 2940 square kilometre of land was damaged, resulting 94 square kilometre of land subsidence per year.㊻ Although the government kept subsidising these ‘ecological refugees’, such subsidies are never able to catch up with the inflation rate. Similar situation also occurred as the result of the denudation of state national forests in Hainan Province.㊼ The report for mountain patrol was fabricated, and damage created by such denudation reached 6.06 hectare.㊽

In terms of desertification, according to the Official Report on China Forestry and Ecological Establishment published by the State Forestry Administration, China is one of the most land degenerated and soil eroded countries. The total area of desertification has reached 1,739,700 square kilometres, which is 18.12 per cent of China’s total land. The soil erosion created the loss of 3,560,000 square kilometre land, which is 37.1 per cent of China’s total area.㊾ The direct economic loss created by such damages is around 50 billion RMB. Apart from that, China’s is also one of the most desertificated countries in the world. The total area affected by desertification has reached 2,630,000 square kilometres, which is one third of China’s total territory. There are nearly 0.4 billion of population affected by the desertification and the degeneration of land in China, and half amount of poor people in China live in these regions.㊿

The most obvious examples of desertification can be found from Qinghai, Gansu and Xinjiang areas. In 2008, light erosion of soil and water has reached 350,000 square kilometres, which is 49 per cent of land in Qinghai Province. In Xinjiang, the degeneration of Bayanbulak grassland reached 4,572,000 hectare, whereas the total area of desertification is 329,300 hectare. The situation of desertification is even more serious in Minqin county, Gansu Province. Because Minqin County is the origin of East Asian and Northeast Asian dust storm, once it is fully desertificated, not only Tengger and Badain Jaran Deserts but also Silk Road in the Gansu Corridor will disappear.

According to Yang GenSheng, former dean of the Desert Research Centre, China Science Academe, the disappearance of Minqin Oasis is because of ‘people over-

exploited, the denudation of the forests located in the upstream of Shiyang River, Qilian mountain resulted in the decrease on the water capacity. In addition to that, the residents in Wuwei, where the midstream of the river is, used too much water, which left no water for people in the downstream’. According to statistics, the annual water capacity of Mingqin region was 580,000,000 cubic meter. Now the figure has declined to 80,000,000 cubic meter. As a consequence, the Chinese authorities are trying to release the pressure created by land over-exploitation and flood via various ways.

One solution to solve the problem of desertification is to reduce human activities, the Chinese authorities know very well about it. From the ecological and recovery projects done in Bayanbulak grassland as well as the Three-Gorge Reservoir project to relocating resident, the Chinese authorities not only forced residents to relocate but also changed their life style from nomadising to farming. The concern rises on the avoidance of the second-time pollution during the process of relocating, including settling residents in the new localities as well as changing their life styles.

VII. Problematic Water Pollution

Apart from the irreversibility of land pollution, water pollution is another major concern. According to official reports regarding the quality of China’s ocean environment, China’s ocean damages and China’s ocean area in 2007, 87.6 per cent of the 573 wastewater effluent entrances exceeded their limits. The total amount of waste injected into the oceans was about 35.9 billion ton. The wastewater effluent entrances among the coasts of Bohai Sea had the highest rate of wastewater effluence among various seas around the coast. The seriousness of pollution in Donhai Sea area is stressed by Professor Luan Weixin from the School of Management, Dalian Maritime University: ‘the body of water has been seriously affected in the east region of Liaoning Province, Bohai Sea, Hangzhou Bay, the estuaries of Yellow River, Yangzi River and Pearl River and other coastal regions...although the density of mercury, cadmium and lead in water is still below critical point, some parts of oceans have already exceeded that point. The exceeding amount of patrol and chemical oxygen demand (COD) is also problematic, and the most polluted one is Bohai Sea...’.

The Report on China’s Ocean Development published in February illustrates parts of urban coasts and bays are severely polluted, and the area of polluted ocean has doubled during the past ten years, exceeding 160,000 square kilometres. The scope of the sources of ocean pollution is wide, which persistence and deffusibility can hardly

be put under control. The upcoming ‘Island Protection Law’ attempts to regulate ocean into various zones. Ten provinces such as Jiangsu Province have implemented local regulations and policies regarding the management and protection of water area and ocean environment.

In the management of rivers and lakes, according to official report on the Chinese Environment published by the State Bureau of Environmental Protection in 2007, it is clear that among all protection projects, the issue on river pollution came on the top. There are 197 rivers put under long term supervision. 50.1 per cent of water sampling from 407 river faults have been recorded as the forth, fifth and bad quality water. The second focus of these protection projects is ocean pollution. 37.2 per cent of coastal water was listed the third, the forth and bad quality water, which increased 4.9 per cent compared to last year’s figure. Finally, the problem of environmental pollution and ecological damage is also serious in rural areas, especially after the increase on civil pollution, the expansion of pollution sources, mining, the safety of drinking water, the lack of solution towards the degeneration of ecological environment, etc.

Apart from water pollution caused by Sichuan earthquake on April, 70 per cent of lakes in China are polluted at different levels due to urbanisation and industrialisation. Water quality of Poyanghu Lake becomes worsening each year. The blue algae has been troubled Taihu Lake for a long time. Chaohu Lake has too much green algae, categorised as heavy polluted for the trailing four months. In Shi villiage, Xiangning County of Linfen City, Shanxi Province, an unlicensed coal-washing factory directly injected its wastewater into Yellow River. The explosion of a Polyethylene factory in Maoming City, Guangdong Province turned well’s water into black colour, which affecting more than 5000 people’s living. A crew of transportation in Foshan City, on the other hand, did not follow the instructions to deal with the poisons carried, eventually polluted 250 square kilometre of land, similarly. In Yunnan, the drinking water for 20,000 people was polluted as well.

Water pollution not only leads to the short supply of drinking water but also causes various diseases and illnesses. For instance, the industrial snow-melting agent used to keep the Jingzhu Highway from blockage by spreading saline-alkalised sand in Shaoguan, Ruyuan, Lechang and other areas alongside the highway. However, this aline cathartics penetrated to underground with melting snow, polluting underground water and damaging vegetation. 3,000 residents from these areas have been recorded of having fever, vomit and sole throat syndromes. In Fuxingtun of Liu County

Dongsheng Village, Shulan City, Jilin Province, 70 households, with more than 370 people, suffered from nephritis, kidney stone and uraemia syndromes, which is believed to be related to polluted underground water due to the waste effluence of the pharmaceuticals in the upstream region.

It is noteworthy that, during ‘the working conference for the prevention and protection of water pollution in major water areas’ hold in Qufu, Shandong Province this year, China has enlarged major water areas, which covered 40 per cent of Chinese rivers and lakes. Apart from the three rivers and three lakes (Huaihe Rivier, Haihe River, Liaohe River, Taihu Lake, Chaohu Lake, Dianchi Lake) which have been listed in the Ninth Five Year Plan, the Tenth Five Year Plan included the water area of Songhuajiang, the Three-Gorge Reservoir and its upstream, the south water for north use regions and effected areas. The upstream and midstream of the Yellow River are later included in 2008.

The main reason of water pollution can be contributed to people’s carelessness over environmental protection or sustainability. From the case of Wuhan City, ‘the polluter is actually the victim’. Accompanying the increase on civil sewage, the riverside residents, apart from industrial wastewater, dump their daily wastewater directly into the river. Their logic is that ‘it does not matter if the river is polluted, it is not drinking water’. In addition, since the government charged them effluence fee, they think it is government’s responsibility to clean up the river.

VIII. Different Standard of Air Pollution

Apart from water pollution, thanks to Beijing Olympics, Chinese governmental officials used to assert the air quality in Beijing can match with international standard by the time in August. However, from various environmental reports, such as the 2007 Official Reports on China’s Environmental Conditions, it is known that the COD decreased 3.14 per cent in 2007 compared to the rate of COD in 2006. The emission of sulphur dioxide decreased 4.66 per cent compared to the rate of emission in 2006. These figures seem to indicate the improvement on the quality of air inChina. However, according to the observation report done by an institution concerning global air pollution in Netherlands, since exceeding the USA in 2006, it is her second time to be the world largest CO2 emission country.

Although data in the two reports addressed above does not contradict to each

other, the former is merely based on the pervious data within China, while the later is the comparison between China and other countries’ emission amount. There is no doubt that air pollution have been kept increasing due to the rapid growth of the Chinese economy. For instance, the total number of automobiles and the consumption of energy used in Pearl Delta were increasing; the sidewalk trees in Xining City, Qinhai Province were veiled by black dust due to coal mining. The total amount of carbon monoxide and sulphur dioxide emitted through the illegal exploitation of coal mine in Urumqi City was expected to exceed 100,000 ton per year. The situation of Fluoride emission cased by local aluminium factories made the residents in Feicheng City, Shandong Province suffered from breath difficulties and skin itch. Heavy haze, which has been thickening during the past fifty years, becomes problematic in Nanjing; the city seemed to lose eight hours of sun light illumination per year due to the increasing density of haze.

Moreover, seasonal dust storm also causes serious air pollution in Lanzhou, Beijing and Gansu, which made the Australia Association of Athletics Federations proclaimed that Australian athletics would not participate in the opening ceremony of 2008 Beijing Olympics. Jacques Rogge, the President of the International Olympics Committee, even admitted prior to the game that it was possible to postpone marathon and other long-endurance games if needed. After Beijing government asserted that air quality has reached certain standard, many foreign athletics (i.e. British, American and Japanese) still decided to wear masks brought from their own countries.

The Chinese government spent about 17 billion US dollar in improving air quality in Beijing during the Olympics period. After temporarily shutting down the construction sites, as well as banning vehicles with even and odd-numbered license plates on alternate days, Beijing proclaimed that its air quality could reach the standard during the Olympics period. However, according to independent supervision done by BBC reporters and the report produced by the Green Peace, the standards adopted by the Chinese government to assess the air quality are different to the standard implemented by the World Health Organisation (WHO). As a consequence, even the Chinese government stressed the satisfactory of air quality in Beijing, judging by ‘the Chinese standards’, many foreign athletics were still unhappy about it.

Current standards for air quality adopted in China was firstly implemented in 1996 and amended in 2000, whereas the standards for air quality adopted by the WHO was amended in 2005. The BBC reporter used PM10 to testify the quality of air in

China. The Chinese standards are annual MP10 below 100 μg per cubic meter, and the average PM10 for twenty four hours below 150 μg per cubic meter. But the WHO standards are annual PM10 below 20 μg per cubic meter, and daily PM10 below 50 μg per cubic meter.

The BBC reporter also conducted an one week air-quality monitoring alongside the pathway of male individual cycling game. Reporter indicated that ‘there were six days out of seven that air quality in Beijing did not reach the WHO standards. In one particular day, the PM10 in Beijing was actually seven times higher than the WHO standards!’ In other words, air quality in Beijing seemed to satisfy the Chinese standards but not the WHO standards.

IX. The Emergence of the Concern on Human Rights and the Lack of Protection

Although there are still many violations on economic and environmental human rights in 2008, it is noteworthy that some new policies have been implemented in response to various violations. The concept of ‘Green GDP’ has turned silent this year, but it is clear that China has been making more effect than ever regarding such matters, and this attempt has been revealed by the organisational changes within the Chinese government. Recently, the State Council partially adjust its institutional structure, upgrading ‘the Bureau of State Environmental Protection’ to ‘the Ministry of State Environmental Protection’. After pronouncing ‘the concerns on guiding the development of environmental pollution responsibility insurance’, the State Council installed two new polices. One is ‘Green Loan’, and the other is ‘the system of environmental pollution responsibility insurance’, also known as ‘Green Insurance’. This economic policy, on the one hand, solves the problem that private enterprises may not be able to compensate for the environmental pollution done by them. On the other hand, it also releases the state’s financial burden on environmental losses and any compensation in relation to environmental pollution.

However, the reliability of these two polices is considered highly questionable. For instance, ‘Green Loan’ seemed to create the conflicts of interests between government and private enterprises. ‘Green Insurance’ attempts to not only reduce enterprise cost on environmental protection but also release financial burden to subsidise these enterprises. However, the first concern is whether private insurance companies will

be willing to participate in such system; and secondly, whether private enterprises will put their trust on these insurance companies. In addition to that, the global financial system seems to face serious challenge in 2008, the efficacy of these two policies require more observations.

The ineffectiveness of these green policies roots in the lack of cooperation from relevant authorities and their lack of willingness to be responsible for policy implementation. For instance, in Chongqing City, there was a ragpicker who had been burdening cable wires for over 20 years, but none of first-class city authorities, such as the Bureau of Environmental Protection and Health and the Bureau of Administrative Execution show no concern on this matter. Similar situations also happened to the issue of medical disposals. No hospitals, recycling agents or authorities are willing to take the responsibility of recycling these wastes, therefore, they are dumped to general garbage recycling centres. Shenze and Wuji counties, under the jurisdiction of Hebei Shijiachuang City government are facing a cross-county water pollution event. Victims from Shenze County tried to appeal to both County Governments as well as to the City Government. None of the victims managed to get any forms of compensation so far.

The plan of ‘transferring water from the West to the East’, proposed by the Zhengzhou City also demonstrated the lack of cooperation and responsibility among government organizations. Many governmental departments, such as Zhengzhou Water Conservancy Bureau, the State Land and Resources Bureau, the Bureau of Environmental Protection and the Bureau of Gardens, declared that Xiliuhu Lake, the former source of drinking water in Zhengzhou, was polluted, which made it no longer suitable for supplying drinking water in Zhengzhou. However, according to ‘Plan for Protecting Urban Drinking Water Sources in Henan Province’ published by the Henan Provincial Government, Xiliuhu Lake was still listed as drinking water resource for Zhengzhou City. Such lack of coordination results in to so-called ‘Four Difficulties and Four Appeals’: difficult to get a legal case, difficult to get required evidence, difficult to win the case and the lack of appropriate authorities to appeal to, the lack of willingness to appeal, the lack of encouragement to appeal and the lack of ability to appeal.

A positive example is given by the establishment and operation of environmental protection court in Guizhou Province. The court has processed two cases so far, one is the case of illegal felling done by Lang Xueyou in Qingzhen County, Henan Province and the other is the case of ‘illegal dumping phosphogypsum wastes conducted by

Guizhou Tianfung Chemical Company in Guiyang City’. The victims of the coal mine pollution event in Zhazuohe River, Guizhou Province also hope to bring their case to court. Among the ninety cases currently proceeding at court, 85 per cent of them are illegal acts conducted in forest areas, 5 per cent involve with water pollution. The Chinese government added a new criminal offense ‘environmental pollution crime’- in 1997. However, the current system of environmental protection still focuses on prevention rather than protection and punishment. As a consequence, there are still no legal sources to support land pollution cases and compensation arrangements, regardless the promise made by the Associate Minister of the State Environmental Protection Bureau Pan Yue in September that it has been coordinating with other economic departments to produce new policies regarding environmental taxes, as well as to discuss the possibilities to levy environmental protection tax.

However, citizens can hardly be forced to learn or enhance their understanding of their rights. Using the voluntary tree planting project as an example, while the state stressing on the rate of civil responsibility plantation, some local governments actually forced their citizens to pay 550 RMB per person for ‘planting trees on their behalf’ or charged them with green building fees for planting trees in other places. After receiving local protests, these local governments said these fees are not ‘compulsory’. Whether the environmental protection court will take such cases or not turns out to be an interesting observation point in the near future.

X. The Concerns on False Statistics

In preparation for Beijing Olympics, the Chinese government kept publishing new statistics in order to convince the public that various environmental conditions in China were actually satisfactory by now. For instance, in Yongle, a town of Ruicheng County in Shanxi Province, local residents attempted to appeal their case against a local paper factory which dumped its industrial waste directly to Yellow River during the Olympics period. The local government, therefore, put road obstacles on their way, in an attempt to prevent their journey to Beijing.

While reviewing the past year, it is clear that different localities across China may adopt different standards for the assessment of economic and environmental human rights. Using the real estate sector as an example, according to the statistics offered by the On-line Real Estate, the official source of China’s real estate industries, the total area

of first-hand residential houses sold are 993,250 square meters, and the accumulation of ordinary house area sold reached 503,100 square meters. However, according to the statistics offered by the Shanghai Statistics Bureau, the total area of commercial housing sold for the first half year was 12,289,100 square meters, and the areaof newly-built residential houses reached 10,703,200 square meters. Notwithstanding deep throat did point out that the official statistics has one month time gap compared to the statistics offered by the On-line Real Estate, which demonstrate the manipulative nature of such statistics.

Different sources, different calculative methods and different situations often lead to different set of statistics. Apart from the air quality assessment in Beijing, China urgently needs to improve her scaling and standard systems. Whether it is the approval of environmental-friendly materials for construction or selective examination on food, the validity and reliability of these official reports on environmental quality published by the Chinese government are considerably weak due to the lack of effective licensing and approval system. The ‘Green Trap’ is often heard that fake licenses are offered to products which pretend to be environmental friendly.

Apart from that, the construction and implementation of environmental evaluation reports for establishing business projects are also problematic. In the case of Hunan Jingtian Technology Ltd, many expert opinions listed in the report were ignored, and the quality of the report was considerable. For instance, the total number of experts supposed to be odd-numbered, but in this report, it had an even-number. The timeframe for scientific examination and environmental evaluation was unreasonable: the examination was conducted prior to environmental evaluation. This report also did not include the primary opinions generated from the relevant authorities at country level. Because of these concerns, although the establishment of Environmental Protection Court and the Ministry of Environmental Protection are indeed some big institutional innovation, there are still plenty of problems facing by the development of economic and environmental human rights in 2008.

Notes

① Wang Guo Cheng, “Sale price has increased 10 per cent in 70 middle to large cities in April,” Xinhuanet, May 15, 2008, http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/news. xinhuanet.com/house/2008-05/15/content_8177226.htm. ② “Sale price has increased 8.2 per cent in 70 middle to large cities in June,” Sxgov, July 16, 2008, http://www.sxgov.cn/xwjj/575684.shtml; “Sale price has increased 7 per cent in 70 middle to large cities in July,” People, August 12, 2008, http://house. people.com.cn/GB/98385/98473/7655137.html; Wang Guocheng, “Sale price has increased 9.2 per cent in 70 middle to large cities in the second season,”Wenweipo, July 21, 2008, http://news.wenweipo.com/2008/07/21/IN0807210080.htm; NDRC, “Sale price has increased 5.2 per cent in 70 middle to large cities in August,” NDRC, September 16, 2008, http://www.sdpc.gov.cn/xwfb/t20080916_235959.htm. ③ Li He Yu, “Sale price of real estate remain high, especially in the secondary and third levels cities,” China Jilin, January 18, 2008, http://www.chinajilin.com.cn/ content/2008-01/18/content_1109036.htm. ④ Guan Hong Hong, “Wulumuqi has listed number 1 on the increase of sale prince of house for 8 months,” Tianshannet, July 18, 2008, http//www.xjts.cn/news/content/ 2008-07/18/content_2706517.htm. ⑤ “Experts alert the influence of real estate toward economic for the high price in Beijing,” Tencent lnc, July 16, 2008, http://news.qq.com/a/20080717/000176_1. htm. ⑥ Huang Lei and Wei Jun Tao, “Shenzhen’s real estate,” Nanfang Daily, July 4, 2008, http://www.nanfangdaily.com.cn/southnews/sjjj/200807040076.asp. ⑦ Wang Li Li and Chen Xuan, “The developer claims no worries on Xian’ real estate,” HSW, February 29, 2008, http://realty.huash.com/2008-02/29/content_6836923. htm. ⑧ Pei Yan, “The increase on construction material will boot the price of real estate,” Nxnet, June 26, 2008, http://www.nxnet.net/fangchan/xwzx/200806/t20080626_ 249148.htm. ⑨ Lai Jian Qiang, “No supervision on the price on real estate during New Year,” Shm, February 2, 2008, http://www.shm.com.cn/house/2008-02/02/content_2236 731.htm.

⑩ Yang Li Ping, “Real Estate at Turing Point: the separation of the price and its value,” Nanfang Daily, March 14, 2008, http://www.nanfangdaily.com.cn/southnews/sjjj/ 200803140078.asp. ⑪ Yuan De Liang and Che Yu Ming, “Advance booking system becomes an accompliance of the increase of real estate,” Gxnews, March 17, 2008, http://www. gxnews.com.cn/staticpages/20080317/newgx47ddd826-1417399.shtml. ⑫ Long Ming, “The sign of the breaking contract in real estate,” People, February 3, 2008, http://finance.people.com.cn/GB/42877/6862227.html. ⑬ “Real estate in Shenyang, the importance of location in good educational area,” Lnd, July 25, 2008, http://house.lnd.com.cn/htm/2008-07/25/content_263325.htm. ⑭ Song Gui Fang, “Where will the bank lead the real estate to,” Zjol, August 23, 2008, http://zjc.zjol.com.cn/05zjc/system/2008/08/23/009866768.shtml. ⑮ “NSB: CPI increased 4.8 per cent in 2007,” Ynet, January 24, 2008, http://www. ynet.com/view.jsp?oid=27292897. ⑯ “More than have provinces in China’s CPI have increased 5 per cent last year,” Tencent lnc, May 31, 2008, http://nes.qq.com/a/20080531/000106.htm. ⑰ Xu Guang Mu, “CPI has influenced daily life,” Zsnews, January 26, 2008, http:// www.zsnews.cn/News/2008/01/26/790023.shtml. ⑱ Tang Zhen Long, “It is impossible to reduce the increase of CPI this year,” Eastday, April 26, 2008, http://finance.eastday.com/m/20080426/u1a3553919.html. ⑲ “NSB: The increase of CPI and real estate remain,” Rednet, July 1, 2008, http:// china.rednet.cn/c/2008/07/01/1540661.htm. ⑳ NDRC, “The tension of the increase of price remain, the price on meat has stabilsed,” Chinanews, July 14, 2008, http://www.chinanews.com.cn/cj/xfsh/news/2008/07- 14/1311909.shtml. ㉑ Zheng Chun Feng, “the decrease of CPI to 7.1 per cent, the increase of PPI to 8.8 per cent in June,” Nanfangdaily, July 17, 2008, http://www.nanfangdaily.com.cn/ southnews/djjz/200807170066.asp. ㉒ Hai Yan, “the sharp increase of oil price lead to the increase of PPI to 8.2 per cent,” Wenweipo, June 11, 2008, http://www.cns.hk:89/cj/gncj/news/2008/06-12/12794 78.shtml.

㉓ Li Mei Ling and Li JingRui, “the increase of CPI to 4.9 per cent in August,” The Beijingnews, September 11, 2008, http://www.thebeijingnews.com/economy/2008/ 09-11/[email protected]. ㉔ NDRC, “The tension of the increase of price remain, the price on meat has stabilsed,” Chinanews, July 14, 2008, http://www.chinanews.com.cn/cj/xfsh/news/2008/07- 14/1311909.shtml. ㉕ Chen gong, Li Hui and Zhang Wei Bai, “Urbanization out of control, the real reason of inflation,” Nanfangdaily, May 15, 2008, http://www.nanfangdaily.com. cn/southnews/zmzg/200805150055.asp. ㉖ “the adjustment of the price of real estate in 2008,” Daynews, January 18, 2008, http://house.daynews.com.cn/yjxw/454034.html. ㉗ Fang Yuan, “nine peasants have taken into custody because of demanding on indemnification on land,” RFA , January 24, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/ shenrubaodao/2008/01/24/tudi/; Liang GangHua, “Be strictly guard land against local corruption,” Tianshannet, January 23, 2008, http://www.tianshannet.com.cn/ news/content/2008-01/23/content_2409998.htm. ㉘ Zhang Hong Sheng, “Illegal land use in Shandong,” Cnxbr, January 31, 2008, http://www.cnxbr.com/News/2008131/website/310791116100.html. ㉙ Qin Jing Wu, “The announcement of 10 illegal land use,” Zjol, July 9, 2008, http:// china.zjol.com.cn/05china/system/2008/07/09/009712317.shtml. ㉚ Yu Mei Ying, “1035 illegal land use cases were found in Beijing,” Ynet, April 11, 2008, http://house.ynet.com/view.jsp?oid=1207311. ㉛ Xin Yu, “A sit-in demonstration of hundreds peasants in Wenzhou, Zhejiang,” RFA, February 21, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/02/21/ dongtou/; Wang Pei Wei, Du Gu and Xiao Si Si, “the investment of land in Pearl Delta,” Chinanews, July 29, 2008, http://chinanews.com.cn/gn/news/2008/07-29/ 1327790.shtml. ㉜ Jiang Jie, “The press on Q&A of the punishment for the violation of land management regulations,” DBW, June 1, 2008, http://internal.northeast.cn/system/ 2008/06/01/051296055.shtml. ㉝ Zhou Lu, “The death should pay for toll as well,” Cqnews, July 7, 2008, http:// cqtoday.cqnews.net/system/2008/07/07/001271192.shtml.

㉞ Xia Xiong Deng, “The Direct of Environmental Protection Bureau possesses share of polluted factory,” Tencent lnc, February 27, 2008, http://news.qq.com/a/20080227/ 001154.htm. ㉟ Chen Zhi Qiang, “The labelling of badly behaved citizens of the Environmental Protection Bureau,” Shm, February 20, 2008, http://news.shm.com.cn/2008-02/20/ content_2245266.htm. ㊱ Li Ji Ping and Lian Yun, “Whos behind Sanyangjiao chemistory factory,” Farmer, January 15, 2008, http://www.farmer.com.cn/gd/cmgc/200801/t20080115_377314. htm. ㊲ Lu Xue Li, “The unstoppable pollution projects,” People, May 4, 2008, http://env. people.com.cn/GB/7191121.html. ㊳ Mu Jia Xuan, “No supervision over stone-processing factory,” Dhe, May 5, 2008, http://dhe.cn/xwzx/sz/t20080505_1298745.htm. ㊴ Zhang Wen Ling, “Officer claims of know nothing: the pollution of arsenic,”Lfnews , September 21, 2008, http://www.lfnews.cn/index.php/viewnews-33659.html. ㊵ Zhu Wei, “Kuang Ping argues the need to use carrot and stick at the same time,” Lyd, March 10, 2008, http://www.lyd.com.cn/news/cy.asp?newsid=326983. ㊶ “How to deal with illegal crimes,” Yzhbw, April 25, 2008, http://www.yzhbw.net/ news/shownews-17_11541.dot. ㊷ Wang Dao Bin, “Environmental Protection Bureau of Guangzhou has inspected suspected for 54 times without any evidence,” Nmgnews, February 21, 2008, http// cnnews.nmgnews.com.cn/system/2008/02/21/010013213.shtm. ㊸ Liu Bing, “The crazy of China jade and the crying of Yulong River,” Cyol, April 21, 2008, http://zqb.cyol.com/content/2008-04/21/content_2151256.htm. ㊹ Tan Ren Wei, “The pollution of vitriol turns 3 death and thousands poison,” Nanfang Daily, January 24, 2008, http://www.nanfangdaily.com.cn/southnews/ jwxy/200801240873.asp. ㊺ Chen Gang, “Who is response for ecological refugees,” Rznews, April 1, 2008, http://www.rznews.cn/news/2008-04/01/content_27020.htm. ㊻ Huang Teng, “The dry out of underground water in Shanxi,” Eastday, February 19, 2008, http://61.129.65.8:82/gate/big5/news.eastday.com/c/20080219/u1a3412009. html.

㊼ Mao Hai Feng and Ding Jing, “The existent village in name in northern Shanxi,” People, April 2, 2008, http://env.people.com.cn/BIG5/7073397.html. ㊽ Li Xuan Fu, “The forgery record of national nature reserve,” HJBH, July 19, 2008, http://www.hjbhw.com/TradeNews/ViewTradeInfo.aspx?InfoId=7148. ㊾ “Desertification has reached to 18.12 per cent of national territory,” Lnd, January 22, 2008, http://newsls.lnd.com.cn/bgw/lnnews/200801/65659120080122.htm. ㊿ Xi Wang, “The erosion of soil has reached a third of national territory,” RFA, January 25, 2008, http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/shenrubaodao/2008/01/25/huangmo/. Miao Xiao, “Serious desertification of Qinghai, expansion rate around 100,000 ha per year,” Hinews, August 30, 2008, http://www.hinews.cn/news/system/2008/08/30/ 010323308.shtml. “Thousands migration due to ecology crisis in Xijiang,” Hebei, September 8, 2008, http://news.hebei.com.cn/system/2008/09/08/010103105.shtml. Lin Ke Lun, “The disappearance of oasis,” China Times, September 29, 2008, http:// news.chinatimes.com/2007Cti/2007Cti-News/2007Cti-News-Content/0,4521,110 505+112008092900039,00.html. “Thousands migration due to ecology crisis in Xijiang,” Hebei, September 8, 2008, http://news.hebei.com.cn/system/2008/09/08/010103105.shtml. Yu Jian Bin, “78 per cent of ocean are not healthy in China,” People, January 18, 2008, http://env.people.com.cn/GB/6790839.html. Li Peng, “Half of the seas along China’s coast have contaminated seriously, especially Bohai Sea,” Hebei, July 2, 2008, http://news.hebei.com.cn/system/2008/07/02/0100 81519.shtml. Sun Wen, “Coastal water’s contamination doubled for the past 10 years,” CCAJ, February 22, 2008, http://www.ccaj.net/html1/2008/2/22/f438011.shtml. Li Peng, “Half of the seas along China’s coast have contaminated seriously, especially Bohai Sea,” Hebei, July 2, 2008, http://news.hebei.com.cn/system/2008/07/02/0100 81519.shtml. Gu Rui Zhen and Yu Chun Sheng, “The understanding of 2007 the Chinese Environmental Situation Report,” TFOL, June 5, 2008, http://news.tfol.com/10026 /10032/2008/6/5/10576626.shtml.

Ma Li, “25 reservoirs are in danger,” Dahe, May 22, 2008, http://www.dahe.cn/ xwzx/sz/t20080522_1311400.htm. Dang Xin De, “The pollution of lake cannot be ignored,” Xinhuanet, March 31, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/environment/2008-03/31/content_7889769.htm. Li Peng, “Taihu Lake’s blue algae invasion,” Nanfang Daily, April 18, 2008, http:// www.nanfangdaily.com.cn/southnews/sjjj/200804180083.asp; “Taihu Lake’s stinky blue algae,” Xinmin, April 21, 2008, http://news.xinmin.cn/domestic/shehui/2008/ 04/21/1122908.html. Jian Ya Jie, “Chaohu Lake has been seriously polluted last month,” Anhuinews, April 1, 2008, http://ah.anhuinews.com/system/2008/04/01/001982768.shtml; Cai Min, “Chaohu Lake has reached serious polluted quality for the fourth month,” Xinhuanet, June 4, 2008, http://www.ah.xinhua.org/news/2008-06/04/content_134 51748.htm. Jiang Tao, “The emission of dark water by coaling factory,” Chinanews, March 25, 2008, http://www.sx.chinanews.com.cn/2008-03-25/1/61614.html. Guan Jia Yu, Sun Ting Ting and Zhao An Ran, “Polyethylene factory’s pollution turn well’s water into black,” People, June 5, 2008, http://env.people.com.cn/GB/ 7346870.html. Weng Xiao Peng and Deng Zhu Feng, “Malice dumping in Guangdong, 10 tons of oil remain on road,” Laiwunews, June 16, 2008, http://www.laiwunews.cn/Article/ guanzhu/200806/Article_20080616092704.html. Zhou Hua, “Incident of leaking dangerous chemical in Guanxi,” Idoican, June 10, 2008, http://news.idoican.com.cn/glrb/html/2008-06/10/content_6320439.htm. Lin Jin Song, “Thousands tons of saline-alkalised sand contaminated drinking water,” Udn, February 17, 2008, http://udn.com/NEWS/WORLD/WOR1/4221068. shtml. Zhao Xian Nan, “370 residents have nephritis due to water contamination,” Ghongqing, March 28, 2008, http://news.online.cq.cn/ContentFolder/news/guonei/ 2008/3/2008328673608.html. Wang Ru Tang, “40 per cent of territory has listed into national pollution recovery plan,” Sdinfo, September 10, 2008, http://news.sdinfo.net/cjxw/499803.shtml. Niu Yan Bin, “no blue sky and clear water for the past half year,” Sxgov, July 16, 2008, http://www.sxgov.cn/xwzx/sxxw/sxyw/575591.shtml.

Hu Xin Qiao, “Embarrassing regulate water plan for 21 years in Wuhan City,” Tencent Inc, August 11, 2008, http://news.qq.com/a/20080811/002422.htm. Gu Zhong Yang, “Drinking water and river water both require protection,” People, September 12, 2008, http://env.people.com.cn/GB/7963884.html. Wang Wei Luo, “Which air standard has Beijing matched,” BBC Chinese, July 21, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/simp/hi/newsid_7510000/newsid_7516900/75 16995.stm. Gu Rui Zhen and Yu Chun Sheng, “The understanding of 2007 China’s Environmental Situation Report,” Tfol, June 5, 2008, http://news.tfol.com/10026/10032/2008/6/5/ 10576626.shtml. “China’s emission on carbon dioxide lists number 1 in the world,” Sinovision, June 13, 2008, http://gate.sinovision.net:82/gate/big5/www.sinovision.net/news. php?act=details&col_id=3&news_id=48088. “The consequence of consistent highly development: air pollution in Peal Delta,” Vodvv, June 23, 2008, http://brand.vodvv.com/hnzl/hnzl07/0001.html. Hai Jun and Tian Na, “Serious coal mining pollution of Xining City,” Qhnews, August 1, 2008, http://www.qhnews.com/index/system/2008/08/01/002570070. shtml. Xue Mo, “Urumqi City facing illegal quarrying coal,” Tianshannet, August 16, 2008, http://www.tianshannet.com/news/content/2008-08/16/content_2834443.htm. “The pollution of fluoridate in Shandong, the failure of appeal,”Beelink , August 15, 2008, http://www.beelink.com.cn/20080815/2568211.shtml. Yu Fei, “Nanjing’s humidity result in air pollution,” Beelink, August 4, 2008, http:// nj.jschina.com.cn/gb/jschina/nj/node20872/userobject1ai1980997.html. Zhao Hui and Zhu Jie, “Seasonal dust storm attacks Lanzhou,” Gscn, May 3, 2008, http://www.gscn.com.cn/Get/gsnews/085313540853164_72.htm. Zhang Jun, “dust storm reappearance,” Idoican, May 28, 2008, http://news.idoican. com.cn/bjrb/html/2008-05/28/content_5273613.htm; Chang SiSi, “Dust Storm emerges in Beijing,” Xinhuanet, March 18, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/ life/2008-03/18/content_7814554.htm. Song Zhen Feng, “Gansu’s first dust storm,” Gscn, March 1, 2008, http://www. gscn.com.cn/get/Daytitle/083108500830162_12.html.

“Beijing’s air pollution, Australian player refuses to attain Olympic opening ceremony,” Chinatimes, June 17, 2008, http://news.chinatimes.com/2007Cti/2007 Cti-News/2007Cti-News-Content/0,4521,130505+132008061701037,00.html. Xiao Jia Ling, “Jacques Rogge worries Beijing’s air pollution,” Udn, March 12, 2008, http://udn.com/NEWS/WORLD/WOR1/4253904.shtml. “Japanese Olympic teams bring masks of their owns,” Udn, July 28, 2008, http:// udn.com/NEWS/WORLD/WOR1/4445473.shtml. Zhuang Ya Ting, “air pollution index remains high,” Udn, August 6, 2008, http:// udn.com/NEWS/MAINLAND/MAI1/4456477.shtml/ “Air pollution index remain double in Beijing,” China Times, July 29, 2008, http:// news.chinatimes.com/2007Cti/2007Cti-News/2007Cti-News-Content/0,4521,110 505+112008072900062,00.html. Wang Wei Luo, “Which standard has Beijing’s air quality reach,” BBC Chinese, July 21, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/simp/hi/newsid_7510000/newsid_751 6900/7516995.stm. Qie Jian Rong, “The future of Green Insurance,” People, December 19, 2008, http// env.people.com.cn/GB/6896785.html. Wang Guang Ping, “The difficulty of Green Loan,”Cnfol , February 14, 2008, http:// www5.cnfol.com/big5/news.cnfol.com/080214/101,1277,3783716,00.shtml. Liang Jiang Tao, “Beware of Green Insurance,” Ycwb, February 20, 2008, http:// www.ycwb.com/ycwb/2008-02/20/content_1796677.htm. Yang Cheng, “Lack of supervision for 20 years,” Ghongqing, January 31, 2008, http://news.online.cq.cn/ContentFolder/news/pic/cqpic/2008/1/2008131664947. html. Chen Ya, Yan Lin and Li Wen Hui, “Recycling station discovers 33 tons of medicinal refuse,” Enorth, February 1, 2008, http://news.enorth.com.cn/system/2008/01/30/ 002750467.shtml. Li Yu Fa and Liu Fen Yue, “The county government refuses to compensate its people for polluted water,” Qingdao, February 25, 2008, http://www.qingdaonews. com/content/2008-02/25/content_7815497.htm. Cheng Hui, “Zhangzhou’s water transfer plan,” Dahe, July 18, 2008, http//www. dahe.cn/xwzx/sz/t20080718_1348175.htm.

Cheng Hui, “Zhangzhou’s water transfer play,” Dahe, July 18, 2008, http//www. dahe.cn/xwzx/sz/t20080718_1348175.htm. Jia Hua, “3 thousands villagers drinking water were inflected due to the contamination of water,” Gog, August 1, 2008, http://gzdsb.gog.com.cn/system/2008/08/29/01033 9185.shtml. Wang Zhi Qiu, “The possibility of breaking the bottleneck of environmental protection court in Guizhou,” Henannews, September 18, 2008, http://www. henannews.com.cn/lanmu/news/305/2008-09-18/news-305-32346.shtml. Zha Jun, “Paying environmental tax does not imply to no pollution,” Cnhubei, September 14, 2008, http://focus.cnhubei.com/original/200809/t437388.shtml. Chen Juan, “Compulsory tree planting project and voluntary tree planting project,” CFEJ, July 16, 2008, http://www.cfej.net/Environment/ShowArticle.asp? ArticleID=16450. Bu Ping, “Waste water has directly discharge into Yellow River without supervision,” People, August 28, 2008, http://pic.people.com.cn/GB/31655/7741351.html. Wu Feng Lan, “The interest underneath official data of real estate in Shanghai,” Dtnews, August 1, 2008, http://www.dtnews.cn/_model.asp?id=85727&sid=31. “The need to establish environmental protection standard,” Gxnews, August 7, 2008, http://www.gxnews.com.cn/staticpages/20080807/newgx489a5f90-1601638. shtml. Wen Xing Ming, “Bottle water inspection for 70 per cent failure of safety,” Rednet, September 13, 2008, http://hn.rednet.cn/c/2008/09/13/1592133.htm. “The need to establish environmental protection standard for construction materials and products,” Gxnews, August 7, 2008, http://www.gxnews.com.cn/ staticpages/20080807/newgx489a5f90-1601638.shtml. Wang Shao Fang, “Be ware of the Green trap: a reminder from insider,” Ynet, April 2, 2008, http://house.ynet.com/view.jsp?oid=1202814. Wu Xiao Feng, “The largest garlic industry has polluted for 7 years,” Xzcn, July 20, 2008, http://digg.xzcn.com/subject/5b9fb8e37a2038c5bd771232bfd85beb.html. Liang Jiang Tao, “Environmental Protection Bureau shows its future,” Newssc, August 14, 2008, http://comment.newssc.org/system/2008/08/16/011041567.shtml.

Education and Cultural Rights

Chang-yen Tsai*

I. Introduction

The fundamental of “right to education and culture” is that every human being enjoys equal right to school education and participation in cultural life. Article 13 to Article 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and Article 28 of the Convention of the Rights of Child, both adopted by the United Nations, clearly stipulate the basic right to school education, the essential objectives of promoting primary education, and the participation in cultural life. Therefore, the meaning and the spirit of education and cultural rights are manifest in the prescription and regulation of the above-mentioned treaties.

By referring to the articles of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), this chapter will discuss and analyze the policy and implementation of education and cultural rights in China in 2008. In addition, this chapter will offer an introduction of international human rights pertaining to education and cultural rights. Education right will be examined based on the implementation of compulsory education, high school education and higher education in China’s education system. Observation of cultural rights in China will be followed by the examination of education rights. Finally, this chapter will conclude with an overall evaluation of China’s education and cultural rights based on the criteria of ICESCR. Generally speaking, the practice of education and cultural rights in China in 2008 still reserves great room for improvement and deserves to be kept under continuous observation.

* Chang-yen Tsai is Chair of the Department of East Asian Culture and Development and joint appoint associate professor of the Graduate Institute of Political Science, National Taiwan Normal University.

II. The Evaluation Criteria of “Education and Cultural Rights”

Article 13 and Article 14 in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) guarantee that everyone has the right to education. To achieve the full realization of this goal, the ICESCR requires all sate parties to the covenant to implement the following:

(a) Primary education shall be compulsory and free for all.

(b) Secondary education, including technical and vocational education, shall be made generally available and accessible to all by every appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education.

(c) Higher education shall be made equally accessible to all-on the basis of capability by every appropriate means, and in particular, by the progress introduction of free education.

(d) Fundamental education shall be encouraged or intensified as far as possible for those persons who have not received or not completed primary education.

(e) The development of a system of schools at all levels shall be actively pursued, an adequate fellowship system shall be established, and the material conditions of teaching staff shall be continuously improved.

(f) The state parties to the covenant undertook to respect the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to choose schools for their children, other than those established by public authorities, which conform to such minimum educational standards as may be laid down or approved by the state, and to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.

Besides, Article 15 of ICESCR says that state parties to the covenant should recognize the right of everyone to take part in cultural life, to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications, to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which s/he is the author.

Based on the above three articles in the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, it is evident that educational rights include not simply the right to education, but also the abolition of rules and practices which interfere with individual’s rights to education. Moreover, the covenant is emphatic that in addition to protecting fundamental freedoms necessary for culture preservation and development, states should promote international co-operation and exchange in the fields of science

and culture so as to improve the civilization of all human beings. In this backdrop, the following sections of this chapter will examine and discuss the situation of ‘education and cultural rights’ in China in 2008, by referring to the guidelines stipulated in ICESCR.

III. Observation of Education and Cultural Rights in China in 2007

Compulsory Education 1. School Selection Fee

As a common problem in China, school selection is closely related to uneven allocation of educational resources. According to the state policy, it is prohibited charging sponsor fee or selection fee in the compulsory education phase. School promotion should be based on the proximity of residence as the regulations of Compulsory Education Law show: “Local governments at all levels should ensure that all school-age children and teenagers are able to attend schools in the district of their registered household”. Therefore, Public schools should enforce the practice of recruiting students in their school district and strictly prohibit cross-district enrollment. However, the uneven allocation of educational resources among schools is too much to satisfy social demand. The uneven allocation, as the primary origin of compulsory education problem, not only impedes the construction of a society of educational justice, but makes parents and students toiling over schools.①

Furthermore, many schools peculate school selection fee which is usually recorded out of balance sheet. Some magnet schools in district or city level charge school selection fee in disguise of “voluntary donation fee” which is for school staff the breeding ground of corruption rather than for students improving equipment and teachers’ quality.②

Students struggle for high quality resources concentrating merely on magnet schools by which “school selection” is becoming a fashion. Yet “school selection fee” not only results in educational corruption but hinders educational fairness. There is existing governmental prohibition of school selection whereas the problem is never resolved, even getting worse. Experts argue that one of the main reasons is that government lacks in capability to implement practical policies. Therefore governments

are responsible for the problem of school selection.③

2. Arbitrary Charges

Since school selection is a perennial problem that all levels of government have related regulation, there are arbitrary charges existing in order to avoid the prohibition. Since 2006, Chinese government implemented policies of tuition exemption for compulsory education in rural area and subsidies for students of poor family. It further announced that tuition exemption will be expanded to all urban and rural areas nationwide. However, according to price report, the good will of tuition exemption has been discounted by arbitrary charges which represent in various ways including arbitrary charging items, sponsor fee and voluntary donation fee connected with admission, bundled charges, and other charges concealed by reorganization.④

The survey of budget auditing of compulsory education in rural area, including 16 provinces, districts, cities, and 54 counties, covering time span from January 2006 to June 2007, conducted by The National Audit Office of China, reported on July 4th this (2008) year that there are 3 out of 16 provinces and 8 out of 54 counties violating the regulation of budget using. Moreover, 5 county governments reduced rather than increase the budget of compulsory education and more than half of 54 county governments in total detained 45% of educational budget.⑤

When local governments avoid the responsibility of protecting or even peculate the budget of compulsory education, the burden is on towns and villages. Experiences tell that local governments usually keep silence or turn a blind eye on many apparently illegal charges. This phenomenon makes invalid the rule of tuition exemption in urban and rural areas of Compulsory Education Law. Some scholars note that the so called ‘tuition exemption’ is in fact relatively minor to total educational spending for students thus has little impacts on improving educational level for all citizens. China’s institutions of compulsory education are problematic, because even based on the official definition of ‘tuition exemption’ most of the educational spending are parents’ burden.⑥

3. Resources Allocation of Compulsory Education

The problems of school selection fee and arbitrary charges come from the uneven

allocation of educational resources. Recently China has implemented a series of policies such as teachers turnover and computer-based assignment which to some extend mitigate school selection fever. Yet the “institutional bottle-neck” of allocation of educational resources is still the key to thoroughly solve the problem.

Uneven allocation of educational resources is usual in China due to severely insufficient governmental investment. Although most people live in rural area, most educational resources disproportionately concentrate on urban area especially big cities. Thus students from countryside have much less opportunity to receive high quality education than students from cities. For example, schools in country side, which is strictly constrained by local economy and standard of social development, not only fall behind but are small scale, lower level, and simple functions compared with those in cities. Given the majority of disciplines in rural schools is traditional, fundamental rather than social development and local economy, most graduates lack in competitive advantages in labor market.⑦

Although Chinese government attributes insufficient investment in education to the fiscal problem, the governmental fiscal income has increased sharply tothe extent of 34% last year (2007). Governmental investment in education, however, does not increase with the fiscal income. Therefore, Chinese government does not increase educational investment to 4% of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) it promised more than a decade ago. Statistics shows that in 2006, 16 provinces invested less in education than previous year.⑧

The educational inequality is represented in following aspects:

First of all, the uneven development of local economy has apparent influence on regional difference of education in terms of budgetary fund per student, public expenditure, and educational infrastructure. For example, in 2006 nationwide budgetary fund per student in elementary school is 1,633.51 RMB (Ren Min Bi). The same indicator in Beijing is 5,401.01 RMB; whereas it is 1,264.00 RMB in Anhui province and 948.57 RMB in Henan province, the least in China. Thus the budgetary fund per student in elementary school in Beijing is almost 6 times more than Henan. For public expenditure per student, in 2006 it is 270.94 RMB nationwide, 2,308.80 RMB in Shanghai, and 1,619.42 in Beijing. On the other hand, it is 136.21 RMB in Shandong and 102.38 RMB in Anhui, that is, Shanghai is 21 times more than Anhui and Beijing is 12 times more than Shandong. The tremendous regional difference in budgetary funds and public expenditure per student results in the inequality of

educational infrastructure. In many western areas, even safety of school buildings are not guaranteed, yet in some wealthy cities like Beijing it is usual to have up-to-date multimedia equipment.

Second, it is a perennial problem that China’s educational investment favored cities so that the inequality between cities and countryside is getting worse. Since 2003, budgetary fund and public expenditure per student of elementary and junior high schools in rural area are both lower than national average. For example, in 2006, nationwide budgetary fund per student is 1,633.51 RMB and public expenditure per student is 270.94 RMB for elementary school; in rural area they are 1,505.51 RMB and 248.53 RMB respectively. For junior high school, nationwide budgetary fund per student and public expenditure are 1,896.56 RMB and 378.42 RMB whereas they are 1,717.22 RMB and 346.04 RMB in rural area.

Third, according to Xinhua news agency, there is tremendous inequality among schools. Based on the survey in Shandong, Liaoning, and Beijing, Xinhua reporter found that governments have favored magnet schools in terms of policies and resources which result in continuing expanding the gap between magnet and non-magnet schools.

Fourth, the discrimination of household registration (hukou) has been the obstacle for immigrant workers’ children to continue education. With the implementation of Compulsory Education Law, immigrant workers’ children are able to receive compulsory education in cities. However, current educational policies and college entrance examination are connected with students’ hukou which makes immigrant workers’ children whose hukou are in the country unable to continue education after junior high school.⑨

High School Education 1. High School Selection Fee

The problem of high school selection fee also resulted from the insufficient governmental investment in education. Chinese government has “three regulations” policy to constrain the recruiting score, number of students, and standard of charge for public high schools to recruit students through school selection. The proportion of students from school selection and required admission score are decided by educational administration of provincial government; the amount of selection fee is collaborated

by educational, financial, and economic administration of provincial government then approved by provincial people government. Schools are not allowed to expand the proportion of students from school selection, to lower required admission score, raise the selection fee, nor any other arbitrary charges.

However, since high school students have to prepare for the college entrance examination, for parents and students to attend to reputational high schools is a guarantee to good college which further raises the school selection fee. Scholars noted that the heavy burden of school selection fee has been more than half of the household income for average family.⑩ Many high schools attract students by raising college entrance rate and reputation and then charge high school selection fee. Consequently, school selection fee, in disguise, make qualified students have rights to choose good schools and to receive good education, but in fact transfer educational cost toward students. Furthermore, the institution of school selection fee makes the unfair situation even worse by excluding students who cannot afford it.

For example, in the Sichuan earthquake, students from surrounding rural areas have to attend to school in Chengdu city which was less damaged. Thus many schools take the advantages of the increase amounts of students to raise school selection fee such as 80,000 RMB for three years which is much more than average family can afford.⑪ The case shows that though concrete rules are institutionalized, both central and local governments still need to be improved in practice.⑫

2. Arbitrary Charges

Though the National Development and Reform Commission issued a circular notice asking for supervision of educational charges and standardization of miscellaneous tuition fees including “school inside schools”, “class inside schools”, “one school two systems”, or other similar ways, in some poor counties such as Xinhua, the “school inside schools” keeps arbitrarily charging students tuition between 1,200 and 1,500 RMB for every semester. According to a survey, the “school in schools” in Xinhua not only seizes public educational resources but has the same president as the public school. Local government says that because schools lack in sufficient budget, the “school in schools” is not prohibited so that the arbitrary charges are merely based on usual

standards reported by TV stations without mandate from superior price department.⑬

In addition, other arbitrary charges include files and materials charge for new students, paper charge for final exam, adulthood memorial card charge, graduation certificate charge, journal publication charge, and sports equipment charge.⑭

Higher Education 1. The Problem of College Entrance Examination Immigration

The chances for college entrance are seriously unfair in China due to the policy of provincial quota and different standard of admission in regions. This is the institutional factor of the difficulty to prohibit the college entrance examination immigration. Those who are qualified to get admission from reputational college in Beijing can only get admission from average college in Hubei province with the same score. As many media reports have shown, the hukou system and the regulation of education seriously violate the rights of fair education for students.

In late March this year (2008), there were 14 immigrants suing the department of education of Xian city government for their rights of participating exam. The governments denied their qualification to college entrance examination and asked them take the exam in their original household because their hukou are less than three years in Shaanxi province. On April 18th, the 14 students sued the departments concerned and asked for reclaim their qualification to take the exam in Shaanxi province which was called “the first collective lawsuit of college entrance examination immigration” by press. In mid May the court overruled students’ lawsuit nevertheless.⑮

Furthermore, many real estate developers often use “college entrance examination immigration” as slogan for promoting. Parents can register the household for their children with buying an apartment and have similar rights and treatment as local students.⑯ On the other hand, some immigrant students are treated unfairly by governments regarding students as “local green card” or “college entrance examination immigrants”. This situation not only damages the educational justice but blocks the circulation of human resources.⑰

The Problem of Finding a Job for College Graduates

Chinese Academy of Social Science declared 2008 Bluebook of Society which reported that there were one million college graduates still unemployed out of nearly five million in 2007. In China, the gross rate of college entrance is merely 20% which is much lower than industrialized countries and other newly industrialized countries nearby. Thus development of college should be continued. However, how to solve the problem of unemployment of college graduates will be a hurdle for China after the problem of lay-off employees of state-owned enterprises.⑱

According to reports, in 2008 there are 4,130,000 college graduates which is 750,000 more than that in 2007, or 22% increased. The sharp raise of college graduate increases the pressure to get a job. A survey shows that 65% of respondents think current employment situation is more difficult and stressful than before; 21% of respondents think the pressure is no different; 14% of respondents think the pressure is too high to deal with.⑲

On the other hand, the number of graduate student keeps increasing. The number of graduate students in 2007 is 424,000, 557 times more than 1998. Since the expansion of recruiting graduate students in 1999, the number increases with the rate of 26.9% each year. In 2004, there were 115,000 master graduates and 195,000 in 2005, that is, the number increased 76.47%; it is 330,000 in 2007 which increased 22.22% from 2006. However, the demand for graduate students does not increase with the sharp increase of master graduates so that the situation of employment is more difficult than before.⑳

The implementation of The Labor Contract Law makes firms deliberate in recruiting new employees which further affects the employment of college graduates. There are three impacts of The Labor Contract Law on employment of college graduates:

1. The law makes firms more deliberate to recruit college graduates and deteriorates the employment situation.

2. Mass recruiting and elimination are not viable. Firms used to recruit a lot of college graduates and eliminated the disqualified after probation period assessment. There are 80 to 90% of firms recruit employees in this way which needs to be changed after the implementation of The Labor Contract Law.

3. More attention will be paid to human resources. After the implementation of

The Labor Contract Law, firms will emphasize more on capacity rather than diploma because the law requires firms to recruit competitive and highly qualified employees to reduce costs and maintain market competitiveness. Thus the era in which looking for a job can rely on reputation has gone.㉑

Basic Facts about Cultural Rights Bans on Books and Periodicals

The situation of prohibition of books or journals is an important index to observe a country’s cultural right. Chinese government had promised to improve the situation of human rights and freedom of the press in order to success of the Olympic Game in Beijing. Yet it still arbitrarily blacks out publications when concerning political issues or those which are harmful to state image.

For example, Asian Weekly received notification that since January 2008 it is prohibited to accept subscription in China. According to the report from Ming Pao Weekly, the subscription agencies mandated by Chinese government, Chinese Book Import and Export Corporation and Chinese International Books Trade Corporation, said that the orders from higher authorities have informed the termination of subscription since 2008 and will return the money to subscribers.㉒

Another influential journal Financial Times was terminated for three months due to the reports about Agricultural Bank Changde city of Hunan province branch counterfeiting the seals and state documents for embezzling bad assets valued 4,621,000,000 to Changsha Assets Management Corporation. Financial Times was penalized terminating publication for three months for violating the disciplines that reports should follow the normal process.㉓

Bans on News, TVs, Movies, other Media Productions

Chinese government has promised to improve the situation of human rights during applying for the Olympic Game including deregulation of the press to report political dissentients. But from the preparation to the end of the Olympic Game, Chinese government never deregulated the press. On the contrary, it controlled more strictly for the success of the Olympic Game.

During the period of the Olympic Game, Chinese government controlled the negative reports more tightly. Southern Metropolis Daily, Southern Weekly, Finance, and other media had received the order that cease the exposure of public opinions and negative reports.㉔ On the other hand, Hong Kong media report only positive news consistently about the organization of the Olympic Game in Beijing and the outstanding performance of Chinese athletics, but keep silence to human rights, fake performance in opening, and the protests. This phenomenon shows that Hong Kong media are afraid of the pressure from Beijing and keeps self auditing.㉕

In September 2008, San Lu milk powders were detected poisoned which shocked the world. In Fact, according to Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD), many media had received the clues about the problem of San Lu milk powders in July. But all the negative news was blocked due to the coming of the Olympic Game. An editor of Southern Weekend points out that in July she had received the information about the problem of baby’s stone resulted from San Lu milk powders in Hubei province. At that time, many doctors in Hubei, Hunan, and Jiangxi have been suspicious to San Lu milk powders and reminded the parents not to use San Lu anymore. However, related news was not published due to the prohibition from Central Publicity Department and the clues were investigated after the end of the Olympic Game.㉖

After the scandal was exposed, San Lu mobilized to cover the truth and to seal the newspapers in Hubei via power relations. The Central Publicity Department not only prohibited unapproved reports, but regulated all reports as official version. It further blocked the internet discussions by which sought to keep the focus on San Lu Company rather than Chinese image.㉗

Restrictions on Freedom of Religion

U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) reports that in the past year though the freedom of Chinese people to participate religious activities have been expanded, Chinese government only allows activities held by approved and registered religious groups by which controls all religious groups. The report also notes that Chinese government has represses Xinjiang Muslins, Tibetan Buddhists, underground Catholics, family Christians, and Falun Gong. In general, religious communities have developed fast in China while Chinese government still violates freedom of religion. Thus the report again enlists China as one of the Countries of Particular Concern

(CPC).㉘

Before the opening of the Beijing Olympic Game, Chinese government has strengthened the repression of unregistered Christians in order to the success of opening ceremony. The repressions include framing up Christians as separatists in Xinjiang, expelling foreign Christians, and unfairly charging Chinese unity of family church and leaders.㉙ The chair of Chinese unity of family church Chang M ingshuan appealed to China’s President, Hu Jintao, for freedom of religion and social forgiveness with three public letters. However, Chang was expelled from Beijing and his house was sealed right before the opening of the Olympic Game. Though he was released later but was not allowed to be back to Beijing.㉚

Chinese government often represses the family churches with the crime such as “using evil organizations to violate laws” and “illegal operation”. Thus many family churches are forced to shut down.㉛ In Guangzhou city a Korean family church with hundreds of members was attacked by policemen and forced to shut down which is the third time in eight months.㉜ There have also many other churches been expelled and members arrested around China.㉝

Though international organizations for human rights ask Chinese government to realize the promises of improving human rights during the applying for the Olympic Game, they also notice that Chinese government strengthen the extent of repression on the contrary. In general, the situation of the freedom of religion did not move toward the right direction before the Olympic Game.㉞ For example, a group of American Christians were detained and the 300 Bibles they took were confiscated by custom officials when they arrived at Kunming airport in Yunnan province.㉟

On the March 10th, the memorial day of Tibetan opposition to China’s rule for 49 years, the Tibetan lamas protested peacefully and were repressed by policemen. The repression invoked mass insurrection and many injured in Lhasa, the capital city of Tibet. According to reports, the protest against China is due to the long term dissents to the continued repression of Tibetan religion and the discriminated treatment by Chinese government.㊱

Since the situation of Chinese religious human rights are not improved for a long time, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor of the U.S. Department of State enlisted China as “special concerned country” which seriously violates freedom of religion, in the International Report on Freedom of Religion 2008. China has been

consecutively enlisted as special concerned country for 10 years since 1999.

The report criticizes Chinese government of repression on Tibetan protest in March, arresting and charging of hundreds of people, expelling Tibetan monks from temples, forcing the monks to sign an announcement of condemn Dalai Lama, and to take the brain wash activities “patriotism education”. The report also denounces Chinese government often arrest and detain Xinjiang people for they do not have approved religious documents or participating religious activities.㊲

Human Rights in Internet Access

The regulation of internet has long been criticized as violating human rights in China. Before the opening of the Olympic Game, in order to deal with the international opinions and to insure the success of the Game, Chinese government uses contradictory tactics that deregulate international websites but control domestic communication of information on internet.

In the late December, 2007, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and the State Administration of Radio Film (MIIT) and Television (SARFT) announced Rules of Internet Programs Services Management which was valid from January, 31st, 2008. The Rules regulate that only state owned enterprises are allowed to provide internet programs which means state directly control. The Rules also prohibit the publication of films with violence, pornography, gambling, exposure of content of confidential, harmful to state unity, and to society and polity. According to the Rules, the internet programs have to apply to “the certificate of information communication of internet program” which is valid for three years.㊳

After the random inspection for two months, the SARFT announced suspension of 25 video sharing websites on March 20th, and caution to 32 websites. This shows that China would tighten the control to online content before Beijing Olympic Game.㊴

International Olympic Committee reminded China before the opening of the Game that China had to ensure the free access of internet during the Game in August. According to the contract, China was responsible for the convenience of internet access for reporters. The senior staff of International Olympic Committee warned that if China had tried to block internet during the Game, the image of China would be damaged.㊵

However, in June many websites for human rights such as Gandanshanzhau discussion board in Beijing,㊶ the Uighur online,㊷ and the Chinese Monitoring Net in Hubei were forced to shut down.㊸ Chinese government further blocked iTunes duet to the free access to downloading music of supporting Tibet.㊹

One of the website concerning the problem of Chinese website blockade, 64culture.com, reports that Chinese government deregulated some media websites with foreign official background, but none of the oppositional websites were ever deregulated. For example, 64culture.com, MonitorChina.org, Epochtimes (Dajiyuan), Boxun, New Tang Dynasty, Observe China, and Democratic China (minzhuzhongguo. org) are not deregulated at all.㊺

One Taiwanese reporter who resides in Beijing reports that not only news websites but also You Tube and all the blogs are blocked. Even the non-sensitive websites such as the wretch.com and pixnet.com from Taiwan are all blind in China. Though Chinese government released some international media websites such as BBC in order to alleviate the critics, the websites of Open Magazine from Hong Kong and the Human Rights in China from the U.S. were still not accessible for Chinese people.㊻

According to the Global Alliance of Internet Liberty, Chinese government has spent billions RMB to construct the “Golden Shield Project” including firewall and an internet legion with 280,000 soldiers. The aim for this project is to monitor all the websites, discussion boards, and blogs. Soldiers even take part in the discussion in order to redirect the content favorable to the government.㊼

Conclusion

In sum, the educational and cultural rights in China during the past year were improved through law making and institutionalization of policies in some aspects such as generalization of compulsory education and endowment of equal educational rights. The policies included the announcement of the Compulsory Education Law waiving the tuition of urban and rural schools in the whole country, for middle school the regulation of the upper limit of school selection fee, the “one charge policy” for the arbitrary charges, and the “three regulations” for regulating the number of school selection students. However, these policies had encountered huge obstacles in practice so that it is still much to improve for Chinese educational rights. Concretely speaking, the remained problems of educational rights include the insufficient investment

in compulsory education, severe inequality of regional distribution of educational resources, unregulated charging standards, scandals of college entrance examination immigration, and the problem of unemployment of college graduates. Therefore, the effects of related policies on improvement of educational rights need to be observed in the future.

On the other hand, the situation of cultural rights in the past year did not improve anymore even deteriorate. In many reports or surveys from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) or human rights organizations Chinese cultural rights were not qualified even the lowest standard. In concrete, there were still cases of journals enjoined and the press more strictly monitored. The persecutions to religion were continued in that it was often heard about the mass arrests of religious figures, especially in Tibet and Xinjiang which caught the eyes of international opinions.

For the human rights of internet access, China still strictly monitors, shut down websites, and arrests users. These cases show that Chinese government intentionally ignores the critics and denouncement from international opinion. Though Chinese government had promised to improve the freedom of the press, it took two faces tactics which deregulated and controlled together.

Based on the empirical data and news last year, this article concludes that in 2008 the current situation of educational and cultural rights in China still lags behind the world standard. The Beijing Olympic Game did not make the improvement of educational and cultural rights in China. After the Olympic Game, it is the critical chance for China to reverse its negative image by improving situations of human rights and positively responding to international opinions.

(Dr. Chang-yen Tsai/ Chair of the Department of East Asian Culture and Development and joint appoint associate professor of the Graduate Institute of Political Science, National Taiwan Normal University.)

Appendix: Case Analysis of Educational and Cultural Rights 1. Control of the religious center in Beijing Olympic village invoked discontent

During the Olympic Game, many foreigners criticized the bad services of the religious center in Beijing Olympic village. Since the services of staff and rites in religious center were far from the organizers’ promises, they had been the aims for foreign

athletics, coaches, and representatives to protest silently.

According to the reports of the Washington Post, the Olympic Game organizers welcomed the religious staff coming with athletics before. This time in Beijing Chinese government prohibited foreign religious staff to live in the players’ village with athletics and promised that the imams (Islamic staff) and other Chinese religious staff would provide the religious services.

The case that Todd Bachman, the father-in-law of the coach of American man volleyball team, was killed demonstrates the problem of the regulation of religious staff by Chinese government. For alleviating the grievance, the American team had to apply the official certificate in a rush for the approval of entrance of a pastor with fluent English. The 65 volunteers in the religious center in Beijing Olympic village are all students who cannot speak good foreign languages and are unable to meet the demands.

In fact, Chinese government keeps suspicious to all possibilities which may threaten the regime. The registered churches are allowed to worship while unregistered churches are monitored or even ransacked. The encroachment of freedom of religion can also be seen in the Olympic villages which means that Chinese government does not improve the religious and cultural rights under the pressure of international opinions.

2. Two face tactics: Chinese government does not deregulate the oppositional websites overseas

The regulation of internet has long been criticized as violating human rights in China. During the period of applying for the Olympic Game, the International Olympic Committee had asked Chinese government to deregulate the websites in order to be qualified the spirits of equality and liberty of the Olympic Game. However, websites such as Voice of America and Radio Free Asia were deregulated after the opening of the Olympic Game; the oppositional websites overseas such as 64culture.com, MonitorChina.org, Epochtimes (Dajiyuan), Boxun, New Tang Dynasty, Observe China, and Democratic China (minzhuzhongguo.org) were not deregulated at all.

This indicated that in order to calm the international opinions and to insure the success of the Olympic Game, Chinese government uses contradictory tactics that deregulated websites with foreign official background on the one hand, and repressed

Notes

① Xu Jiangfong, “School Selection Fee Is Getting Higher; Educations from Preschool to High School Are Hard To Be Fair,” Chinanews, September 1, 2007, http://www. chinanews.com.cn/edu/xyztc/news/2008/09-01/1367037.shtml. ② Chang Chienkao, “It Is Dangerous to Take Too Much School Selection Fee,” Chinanews, September 4, 2008, http://www.chinanews.com.cn/edu/jysp/news/ 2008/09-04/1371388.shtml; Chou Daping, “Public Schools Are Corrupted; Sponsor Fee Is In Dark Area,” Chinanews, September 8, 2008, http://www.chinanews.com. cn/edu/xyztc/news/2008/09-08/1374902.shtml. ③ Chang Xiaojing and Kuo Chien, “Experts Said the School Selection Fever Is the Responsibility of Government,” Chinanews, August 29, 2008, http://edu.china news.cn/edu/xyztc/news/2008/08-29/1364515.shtml. ④ Chang Yi, “The Various Arbitrary Charges Discount the Favor of Subsidy Policies,” Renminnet, April 19, 2008, http://edu.people.com.cn/GB/1053/7140048.html; Wen Chian, “The Charges of Chinese Compulsory Education Are Diverse,” Dajiyuan, April 30, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/4/30/n2100091.htm. ⑤ “Free And Arbitrary Charges: Can Educational Budget Be Transferred to School?” Xinhuanet, July 6, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2008-07/06/content_8497 329.htm; “It Is Common to Embezzle the Budget For Compulsory Education in Rural China,” Dajiyuan, July 6, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/7/6/n2181 132.htm. ⑥ Hua Ming, “The Compulsory Education In China Is Problematic,” Dajiyuan, September 8, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/9/8/n2255530.htm. ⑦ Chang Wenlin, “The Local Colleges With Low Quality, Sterile Resources, and Difficult to Get Jobs Are Getting Out Of People’s Visions,”Xinhuanet , January 18, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2008-01/18/content_7442734.htm. ⑧ Chi Zifong, “Beijing Recognizes the Problem of Unfair Education in China,” Dajiyuan, March 5, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/3/5/n2032546.htm. ⑨ Chang Yadong, “Why Educational Fairness and Professional Education Are Still the Primary Concerns This Year?” Xinhuanet, March 25, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet. com/edu/2008-03/25/content_7854295.htm.

⑩ Shen Chau, “The Proportion of High School Selection Fee Is More than Half Of the Income of Average Families,” Economic Observe Net, June 26, 2008, http:// www.eeo.com.cn/observer/rwmltt/zxf/2008/06/25/104326.html. ⑪ Min Jie, “It Costs 80,000 for Three Years High School: Some Schools in Chengdu City Rase School Seleciton Fee After the Earthquake,” Xinhuanet, July 31, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/school/2008-07/31/content_8868379.htm; Wu Yinmei, “Chilu Late News: It Is Making Money Though National Diasters to Charge School Selecion Fee to Students From Earthquake Areas,” Chinanews, August 8, 2008, http://edu.chinanews.cn/edu/jysp/news/2008/08-01/1331865.shtml. ⑫ “High School Selection Fee Is the Tester of Educational Responsibility of Government,” Tenshindachennet, July 31, 2008, http://cd.qq.com/a/20080731/000 256.htm. ⑬ Wu Shianjia, “The Arbitrary Charges of School in Schools Become the Revenue Creating Tools,” Xinhuanet, December 13, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/ school/2007-12/13/content_7239964.htm. ⑭ Fan Xia, “Price Department of Jiaxin City Inspected Out Arbitrary Charges of 2,200,000,” Renminnet, November 26, 2008, http://edu.people.com.cn/GB/1053/ 6574628.html. ⑮ Chou Chuenlin, “The Contradictory Policies Result in Collective Lawsuits for College Entrance Examination Immigration,” Chinanews, May 5, 2008, http://edu. chinanews.cn/edu/xyztc/news/2008/05-05/1238943.shtml; Li Lingpeng, “Sichuan Workers Immigrate to Shaanxi by Any Cost: Children Are Rejected to Join the College Entrance Examination,” Chinanews, May 14, 2008, http://edu.chinanews. cn/edu/xyztc/news/2008/05-14/1250028.shtml; Chiang Wei and Ma Zhauyun, “The First Cast of the Lawsuit for College Entrance Examination Immigration in China: Where Is My Rights to Join the Exam?” Chinanews, May 14, 2008, http://edu. chinanews.cn/edu/xyztc/news/2008/05-14/1248983.shtml; Kuo Sonmin, “What Is the Solution of the College Entrance Examination Immigration?” Chinanews, May 13, 2008, http://edu.chinanews.cn/edu/jysp/news/2008/05-13/1247322.shtml; Lu Lioujiu, “The Follow Up of the First Cast of the Lawsuit for College Entrance Examination Immigration: 12 Student Immigrant in Shaanxi Are Failed,” Chinanews, May 27, 2008, http://edu.chinanews.cn/edu/xyztc/news/2008/05-27/12 62978.shtml.

⑯ Huo Shimin and Chang Kuochian, “Liaoning Government Is Indifferent to the Real Estate Promotion of the College Entrance Examination Immigration in Shenyang,” Chinanews, May 27, 2008, http://edu.chinanews.cn/edu/xyztc/news/2008/05-27/ 1262951.shtml. ⑰ Kuo Hwei, “Why Immigrant Students Cannot Take Exam Right Here?” Xinhuanet, March 17, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/school/2008-03/17/content_7803698. htm; “50 Students Are Cancelled Their Qualification to Join the College Entrance Examination Due to Immigrant Status,” Xinhuanet, March 24, 2008, http://news. xinhuanet.com/edu/2008-03/24/content_7844948.htm; “The College Entrance Examination Immigration Is Unsolvable: Who Are the Victims?” Xinhuanet, April 5, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2008-04/05/content_7921485.htm; Wang Shenzi and Wen Yiwei, “It Is Difficult to Study in Both Cities and Counries: Where Should Workers’ Children Go for Studying?” Xinhuanet, April 22, 2008, http:// news.xinhuanet.com/school/2008-04/22/content_8025388.htm. ⑱ “The Bluebook of Society: There Are Millions of College Graduates Unemployed Last Year,” Xinhuanet, January 3, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2008-01/ 03/content_7359221.htm. ⑲ Chang Shawding, “The Sharp Increase of College Graduates Worsened Employment: Senior Students Stayed on Campus,” Xinhuanet, February 4, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/school/2008-02/04/content_7564866.htm. ⑳ Chang Shiying and Ju Weikwan, “Graduate Students Stay on Campus to Avoid Difficult Employment,” Xinhuanet, February 28, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/ school/2008-02/28/content_7684160.htm. ㉑ Chou Kai, “The People’s Committee of Shanghai Said the Labor Contract Law Is a Double-Edged Sword for the Employment of College Graduate,” Xinhuanet, January 28, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2008-01/28/content_7508659. htm. ㉒ “Asia Weekly Is Blocked by Chinese Government,” Dajiyuan, December 28, 2007, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/7/12/28/n1957306.htm. ㉓ Sin Fei, “Financial Times Announced Temporarily Suspended and Argued Innocent,” Dajiyuan, September 28, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/9/28/n2278133. htm.

㉔ Wen Chian, “Strictly Control of Negative Reports: Beijing Uses Two Faces Tactics,” Dajiyuan, August 8, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/8/8/n2220 952.htm. ㉕ Li Bao, “Hong Kong Media Keeps Self Auditing in that Only Positive Reports of Olympic Game are Shown,” Voice of America, August 26, 2008, http://www. voanews.com/chinese/w2008-08-26-voa47.cfm. ㉖ “San Lu Poison Was Known In July But Prohibited for Olympic Game,” United Daily News, September 30, 2008, http://udn.com/NEWS/MAINLAND/MAI1/4538 746.shtml. ㉗ “Chinese Publicity Department Prohibited Reports of San Lu Event,” Duoweinews, September 15, 2008, http://www.dwnews.com/gb/MainNews/SinoNews/Mainland/ 2008_9_14_16_30_41_992.html. ㉘ An Pei, “Reports from American Government Claimed China Keep Violating Freedom of Religion,” Dajiyuan, May 3, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/5/3/ n2103929.htm; Hwa Ming, “The U.S. Evaluates Countries Seriously Violating Freedom of Religion in which China Is on the Top,” Dajiyuan, May 6, 2008, http:// www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/5/6/n2107840.htm. ㉙ Fu Xichou, “The Situation of Repression of Religion Is Getting Worse Two Months Before the Olympic Game,” Dajiyuan, June 11, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/ b5/8/6/11/n2150106.htm; “Religioous Groups Claim that Chinese Government Represses Family Churches More Tightly,” Dajiyuan, June 12, 2008, http:// www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/6/12/n2151212.htm; Fan Yuan, “Members of Family Churches Around China Are Arrested,” Dajiyuan, May 14, 2008, http://www. epochtimes.com/b5/8/5/14/n2116657.htm; Xin Yu, “Family Churches and Church Schools Are Inspected and Gatherings Are Froced to Dismissed,” Dajiyuan, May 15, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/5/15/n2118002.htm. ㉚ Shei Shan, “Pastor Chan MingShuan Is Released but Not Allowed to Enter Beijing,” Dajiyuan, September 1, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/9/1/n224 7701.htm. ㉛ Fan Yuan, “The Government Strictly Represses Family Churches Before the Olympic Game,” Dajiyuan, July 5, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/7/5/ n2180127.htm.

㉜ Ding Xiao, “Family Churches Are Still Harassed: Hope for Rational Communication by Law,” Dajiyuan, September 30, 2008, http://www.epochtimes. com/b5/8/9/20/n2269593.htm. ㉝ Chin Yue and Li Ming, “The Chair of Family Churches Was Expelled From Beijing,” Dajiyuan, August 4, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/8/4/n2215 845.htm. ㉞ Chen Su, “Beijing Represses Family Churches Before the Olympic Game,” Dajiyuan, July 5, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/7/5/n2180723.htm. ㉟ “Americans With 300 Copies of Bible Are Detained and Refused to Leave in Kunming,” BBC, August 18, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_ 7560000/newsid_7567200/7567291.stm. ㊱ Luo Yanjie, “Beijing’s Repression of Religion Invoked Lamas’ Anger,” Dajiyuan, March 16, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/3/16/n2046701.htm. ㊲ Tian Chin, “China Is Once Againg Enlisted in the Blacklist of the U.S. Report of Freedom of Religion 2008,” Dajiyuan, September 20, 2008, http://www.epochtimes. com/b5/8/9/20/n2269998.htm; “The U.S. Criticizes China of Deterioration of Freedom of Religion,” Dajiyuan, September 24, 2008, http://www.epochtimes. com/b5/8/9/24/n2273373.htm. ㊳ “New Rules Are Coming: Chinese Video Websits Are Worried to be Bankrupted,” BBC, January 4, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7170000/ newsid_7171100/7171134.stm; Geoffrey A. Fowler, “Chinese Government Seeks to Empower the Auditing of Video Websites,” Wallstreet Journal, January 4, 2008, http://chinese.wsj.com/gb/20080104/bch115520.asp?source=whatnews3; Ro, Si, “Chinese Government Strethens the Control of Video Websites,” Voice of America, January 30, 2008, http://www.voanews.com/chinese/w2008-01-30-voa59.cfm. ㊴ “Chinese Government Announces the Black List of Video Sharing Websites,” BBC, March 21, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7300000/ newsid_7308300/7308333.stml; “Chinese Government Shut Down 25 Websites Programs,” Voice of America, March 21, 2008, http://www.voanews.com/chinese/ w2008-03-21-voa34.cfm. ㊵ “International Olympic Committees Ask Beijing Not to Block Internet During Olympic Game,” BBC, April 1, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/new sid_7320000/newsid_7324600/7324629.stm.

㊶ Chi Yonming, “Beijing Gandanshanzhau Website Is Blocked,” Voice of America, June 5, 2008, http://www.voanews.com/chinese/w2008-06-05-voa52.cfm. ㊷ Wen Chian, “The Uighur Online Was Shut Down,” Dajiyuan, June 1, 2008, http:// www.epochtimes.com/b5/8/6/1/n2138239.htm. ㊸ Lin Ping, “Chinese Monitoring Net Was Shut Down; Was It Revenged for Criticizing Officials?” Dajiyuan, May 30, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/ 8/5/30/n2136051.htm. ㊹ Cheng Yuwen, “China Blocked the Download Websites for Supporting Tibetan Music,” Voice of America, August 22, 2008, http://www.voanews.com/chinese/ w2008-08-22-voa57.cfm. ㊺ Chu Lushen, “Two Face Tactics: China Does Not Deregulate Oppositional Websites Overseas,” Dajiyuan, August 28, 2008, http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/ 8/8/28/n2244011.htm. ㊻ Chang Mingquen, “After the Beijing Olympic Game the Progress of Deregulation of Websites Are Not Optimistic,” Dajiyuan, September 8, 2008, http://www. epochtimes.com/b5/8/9/21/n2270730.htm. ㊼ Cheng Yuwen, “China Controls Internet Strictly and Exports the Technology to Totalitarianism Countries,” Dajiyuan, September 13, 2008, http://www.epoch times.com/b5/8/9/13/n2261491.htm.

Background Taiwan’s peaceful transition to democracy is not only a historical accomplishment for its twenty-three million people, but a landmark in the worldwide spread of democracy. Only after years of struggle and effort could this transformation take place. We must never forget this history, for it shapes the cornerstone of our continued commitment to the principles of democracy and human rights. The Foundation was established with an inter-related, two-tracked mission in mind. Domestically, the TFD strives to play a positive role in consolidating Taiwan’s democracy and fortifying its commitment to human rights; internationally, the Foundation hopes to become a strong link in the world’s democratic network, joining forces with related organizations around the world. Through the years, Taiwan has received valuable long-term assistance and stalwart support from the international community, and it is now time to repay that community for all of its efforts. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs initiated the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy project in 2002. After much research and careful evaluation, the Ministry integrated the required resources from many sectors of society. In January 2003, the Ministry obtained the support of all political parties to pass the budget for the Foundation in the legislature. The TFD formally came into being on June 17, 2003, with its first meeting of the Board of Trustees and Supervisory Board. At that meeting, Legislative Yuan President Wang Jin-pyng was elected its first chairman. According to its By-laws, the TFD is governed by a total of fifteen trustees and five supervisors, representing political parties, the government, academia, non-governmental organizations, and the business sector. Mission The Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD) is the first democracy assistance foundation to be established in Asia, and is devoted to strengthening democracy and human rights in Taiwan and abroad. Its primary concerns are to further consolidate Taiwan’s democratic system, promote democracy in Asia, and actively participate in the global democratic network. The TFD will put its ideals into practice through farsighted, transparent, and non-partisan management. Building on the strength of both political parties and civil society, the TFD will enable Taiwan to positively contribute to the worldwide movement for democracy. According to its By-laws, the Foundation’s mission is as follows: ■ Work with the international community to strengthen democracy around the globe and expand Taiwan’s participation in international activities; ■ Support democratization in Asia and the rest of the world by establishing close relationships with leaders of the world’s democracies and cooperative partnerships with civil society groups, political parties, think tanks, and non-governmental organizations in democratic countries; and ■ Elevate Taiwan’s democracy and further consolidate its democratic development by promoting education in democracy and international exchanges among academic circles, think tanks, parliaments, and political parties from the world over. Our Tasks The primacy source of funding for the TFD is the government. However, it is independently incorporated, non-partisan, and non-profit. According to its By-laws, the Foundation may accept international and domestic donations. One-third of its budget is reserved for Taiwan’s political parties, supporting their own international and local initiatives that are in line with the mission of the TFD. The remaining budget is used for the TFD core activities, including: ■ Building relationships with related institutions around the world; ■ Participating actively in the global promotion of democracy and supporting the improvement of human rights conditions; ■ Supporting democracy promotion activities of NGOs and academic institutions; ■ Promoting research and publications on democratic developments at home and abroad; and ■ Holding seminars, workshops, conferences, and other educational activities in the area of democracy and human rights. 臺灣民主基金會

緣起與成立臺灣民主轉型成功，不僅是兩千三百萬臺灣人民值得驕傲的歷史性成就，更是國際社會讚賞的焦點。此一轉型並非一朝一夕所能完成，而是經歷了一段漫長的爭自由、爭人權的過程。這段歷史見證吾人追求民主、人權之過程。基此，為積極鞏固我國民主與人權進步實績、回饋國際對我長期的堅定支持與協助，同時藉由參與全球民主力量網路的聯繫，促進我國參與全球民主政黨及相關組織之活動，財團法人臺灣民主基金會之設立理念於焉成型。外交部自2002年即積極推動籌設，經過長期資料蒐整及審慎評估後，結合我國產、官、學及民間等各方面人力、經驗與資金，在朝野各政黨之支持下，於2003年元月獲立法院審查通過預算。2003年6月17日，財團法人臺灣民主基金會在召開首屆董事暨監察人會議後正式成立，立法院王院長金平獲推舉擔任首屆董事長。依照章程規定，十五位董事分別依照比例，由來自政府、政黨、學界、非政府組織，以及企業界的代表出任。

宗旨做為亞洲地區所建立的第一個國家級民主基金會，臺灣民主基金會的基本理念是在全民共識的基礎上，建立一個永續經營、具遠景並運作透明化的超黨派機構，透過凝聚政黨、民間組織力量，共同為擴大臺灣參與全球民主接軌及鞏固民主實績而努力。依照章程，基金會設立宗旨包括： ■ 與民主國家相關社團、政黨、智庫及非政府組織（NGOs）等建構合作夥伴關係，並與國際民主力量接軌，有效凝集世界民主力量，拓展我國國際活動空間。 ■ 支持亞洲及世界各地之民主化，與全球各地民主領袖建立密切合作及聯繫網絡，並致力推動全球民主發展。 ■ 透過全球學術界、智庫、國會、政黨等管道推動民主教育及國際交流，提升臺灣民主素質，鞏固民主發展。

工作方向財團法人臺灣民主基金會係由政府贊助設立，惟仍屬獨立運作的、超黨派的組織，依據章程，基金會得接受國內外民間捐款。基金會三分之一預算保留作為各主要政黨申請從事國內、外民主人權相關活動之用；其餘三分之二則作為推動各項業務之經費。本會業務推動範圍包括： ■ 推動與世界各國民主組織建立結盟關係。 ■ 支持國內外學術界、智庫、民間非政府組織推展有關民主與人權之活動。 ■ 支援國內各政黨從事國會外交及國際民主交流活動。 ■ 發掘國內外民主發展問題、研發政策並發行書刊。 ■ 推動有關民主、人權之研討會，舉辦公共論壇及相關民主教育活動。 China Human Rights Report 2008

Publisher: Taiwan Foundation for Democracy Contact: Taiwan Foundation for Democracy No.4, Alley 17, Lane 147, Sec.3, Sinyi Rd., Taipei 106, Taiwan Telephone +886 (2) 2708-0100 Fax +886 (2) 2708-1128, 2708-1148 [email protected] http://www.tfd.org.tw Printing institution: Ji-Rui Ltd. Co. Telephone +886 (2) 2397-9161~3 Fax +886 (2) 2391-0579 © 2008 by Taiwan Foundation for Democracy

2008 中國人權觀察報告

出版：財團法人臺灣民主基金會地址：106臺北市信義路三段147巷17弄4號電話：+886 (2) 2708-0100（代表號）傳真：+886 (2) 2708-1128, 2708-1148 電子信箱：[email protected] 網址：http://www.tfd.org.tw 印刷：積瑞實業有限公司電話：+886 (2) 2397-9161~3 傳真：+886 (2) 2391-0579 © 2008年/版權屬臺灣民主基金會