¨Jailing Xu Zhiyong A legal scholar's case tests China on the rule of law¨ by The Washington Post Opinion

Link
August 14, 2009

AT THE CONCLUSION of the Strategic Economic Dialogue on July 28, the United States and China issued a news release affirming "the importance of the rule of law to our two countries." One day later, Chinese police led prominent legal scholar Xu Zhiyong out of his apartment to be detained indefinitely.

Few people embrace the rule of law in China as openly or as wholeheartedly as Mr. Xu. After graduating from one of China's most prestigious law schools, he has dedicated his life to fighting for justice by means of the Chinese legal system. He has represented the parents of more than 300,000 children affected by melamine-contaminated milk, opposed secret "black jails" and fought for the rights of death row inmates. Mr. Xu is a strong proponent of working within the system for change -- so much so that he ran for office in one of China's rare contested elections and won. Along with his colleagues at the Open Constitution Initiative, which he helped establish, Mr. Xu is a highly visible legal figure to whom people have increasingly turned as they gained awareness of their constitutional rights.

Nongovernmental organizations such as the Open Constitution Initiative, or Gongmeng, occupy an uneasy place in China. Many register as businesses to avoid dealing with a system that limits the number of NGOs and that requires government agencies to oversee their operations. This decision leaves them in a legal gray area, and in July, Chinese authorities charged that Gongmeng was improperly registered and had failed to pay taxes. Officials entered the organization's offices and confiscated dozens of files.

Mr. Xu was confident that he could defend his organization against these allegations by his usual means: through the system. But scarcely a week before he was to appear in court, police took him from his home.

He is not the first to see his trust in the system backfire. Last month, China refused to renew the licenses of 53 human rights lawyers whose cases troubled the Communist Party. But by taking on a figure as public and as scrupulously law-respecting as Mr. Xu, the Chinese government has crossed a new line. China frequently affirms its commitment to the "rule of law." But because the Chinese judiciary is not independent -- its chief justice is a longtime party member who lacks a law degree -- and court decisions often depend upon policy calculations, it is thanks only to the tireless efforts of those such as Mr. Xu that the "rule of law" might come to mean anything at all.

According to Chinese practice, Mr. Xu can be held for 30 days while the government decides whether to press charges; during this interval, protests from abroad might have some impact. In February, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that human rights issues should not "interfere" in the discussion with China. But engaging with China does not mean abdicating the responsibility to strenuously object to its human rights violations -- especially in such an egregious case as the detention of Mr. Xu.

¨Legal rights violations in China: Should Obama speak up?¨ Los Angeles Times Opinion

Link
August 13, 2009

In what seems to be part of a crackdown on civil rights lawyers in China, the Chinese government has arrested prominent civil rights lawyer Xu Zhiyong on tax fraud charges. Zhiyong, who has not been heard from since his arrest two weeks ago, started the nonprofit Open Constitution Initiative legal clinic six years ago, which has recently represented victims of the poisoned milk powder that left three children dead and 6,000 sick in China. Zhiyong's clinic was shut down for "tax evasion." Experts say this arrest does not bode well for the already precarious rule of law in China, and human rights activists across the political spectrum are calling for President Obama to speak up on the issue.

While the Chinese government over the last several years has made much progress in multiple areas of law, including trade and corporate issues, civil rights law is less established and growing slowly because of the risks lawyers who practice in this field face. Very few lawyers (Freedom Watch says there are only several dozen) are willing to take on cases such as defending parents whose infants were affected by poisonous baby formula or death row inmates.

Xu was one of the few. Many of his fellow lawyers have been disbarred and believe they will never be reinstated as practicing attorneys, even though they were working within the law to try make change in China. "None of these guys were going around the government," Sophie Richardson of Human Rights Watch told me. "They took cases to court that were violations under Chinese law. It's not an anomaly when you disbar the only 50 people who practice this kind of law."
The question is, why now? According to Clayton Dube, associate director of the USC U.S.-China Institute, many blame this recent crackdown on the upcoming celebration of the 60th anniversary of Communist China. He says the government's skepticism of these lawyers started back with the earthquake in the Sichuan province, continued with the Tibetan protests (many of whom were represented by rights lawyers) and grew with the milk contamination cases. In other words, this isn't a new phenomenon.

Both Freedom Watch and Human Rights Watch have said that they wish the Obama administration would do more to confront China over the violation of legal and civil rights, the effects of which they say are not only felt by Chinese citizens but often also by foreigners, as was the case with the exported baby formula.

Should the Obama administration speak out against the infringement of human rights in China and the deterioration of this field of law? China is a strategic partner that might not react well to harsh criticism from its economic ally. Even so, is it the president's duty to press on this issue and risk economic consequences for the United States?