Link
August 18, 2009
Xu Zhiyong, a Chinese legal scholar and aid campaigner, has been formally arrested on tax evasion charges, in the latest step in Beijing’s crackdown on legal activists.
Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, where Mr Xu teaches law, was notified of his official arrest, said Zhou Ze, Mr Xu’s lawyer. “This letter was received,” said a colleague of Mr Xu’s who asked not to be identified.
Under China’s opaque legal system, it is unclear whether Mr Xu will be prosecuted. But his formal arrest makes it more likely that he will go to trial. As a leading proponent of legal reform in China, his case could serve as a test for how committed Beijing is to continue developing the rule of law.
Mr Xu was taken away from his home at dawn on July 29 shortly after the government closed down the Open Constitution Initiative, a non-governmental group co-founded and run by him which provides legal assistance in public interest cases.
The centre was closed after the authorities fined the group Rmb1.4m, saying it had failed to pay its taxes. Mr Xu’s detention came a day before he was due for a hearing on that case.
Mr Xu became widely known in 2003 when he campaigned against China’s extralegal detention of people staying in a city they lack a residential permit for. Mr Xu called upon the National People’s Congress, China’s parliament, to check whether the system was constitutional after Sun Zhigang, a university graduate, died following a beating while in police custody. Later that year, that form of detention was abolished.
Since then, Mr Xu has taken on numerous public interest cases. Most recently, his centre’s lawyers represented parents of children who died or fell ill after consuming melamine-tainted milk powder.
If found guilty of tax evasion, Mr Xu could face a sentence of up to seven years. Lawyers working with the centre said the tax evasion charges were part of Beijing’s broader attempt to harass activist lawyers and legal aid groups.
Open Constitution was set up as a company because aid groups that try to register as nonprofits often face insurmountable administrative hurdles in China. However, the alternative exposes them to government demands to declare tax as a for-profit business.
Earlier this month, centre organizers called for public donations and tried to settle the fine. However, they said this proved difficult because tax authorities refused to issue necessary paperwork and the bank accounts of the centre and Mr Xu were frozen.
Mr Zhou said he was allowed to visit Mr Xu late last week in a Beijing detention facility where Mr Xu remained as of Tuesday.
Showing posts with label public interest law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public interest law. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Friday, August 14, 2009
¨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?
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?
Sunday, August 9, 2009
"China snares NGOs with foreign funding," by Simon Montlake, Christian Science Monitor
Link
August 4, 2009
Beijing - It began with a tax notice for $200,000. Three days later, on July 17, officials raided the group's Beijing office and seized its computers. Then, just before dawn on July 29, police detained its founder, Xu Zhiyong at his home
On the same day, government officials went to the office of Yi Ren Ping, another nongovernmental organization, and confiscated copies of its newsletter on the grounds that it didn't have a publishing license.
Taken together, the raids appear part of a tightening of controls on critical voices in the run-up to Oct. 1, the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China. The two NGOs are among a growing number here using the law to hold authorities to account on issues such as food safety, patient rights, and illegal detention.
But they share another common thread: Both received grants from American and other foreign donors. The tax fine for Open Constitution Initiative, the group headed by Mr. Xu, was assessed largely on a donation from Yale Law School. Xu, a lawyer and elected legislator, is being detained on suspicion of tax evasion, according to an OCI official.
The harassment of these and other foreign-funded NGOs in Beijing has raised fears of a Russian-style squeeze on civil society. Since 2006, Russia has stripped the tax-free status of many foreign foundations and forced NGOs to report their activities in exhaustive detail, while accusing foreign-funded human rights groups of being Trojan horses for Western powers. It recently amended its NGO law, easing some of these controls.
An alternate view in Beijing is that the groups targeted had pushed too aggressively into forbidden political zones, setting off a reaction. NGO workers and experts on civil society say the investigations into taxes and licenses are a smokescreen for a clampdown on legal activism, including the recent disbarring of 20 civil rights lawyers in Beijing.
"It's what you do with the money that matters," says a researcher on Chinese NGOs, who declined to be named. He says investigations into foreign funding provide a "post hoc excuse" for authorities.
Foreign funds become a liability
Because of the difficulty of registering as nonprofits, many Chinese NGOs are listed as businesses. That makes them liable for potentially crippling tax demands, says Wan Yanhai, who runs an HIV/AIDS advocacy group in Beijing.
"This is a big issue. If there is a similar action [as OCI's tax case] against us, we could be fined tens of millions of yuan," he says.
Mr. Wan and other activists say that soliciting foreign funds is routine for many NGOs in China. Some government officials are supportive as they also benefit from funding for public programs from the same foreign donors. And they tend to overlook the fact that foreign-funded NGOs were registered as businesses, say activists.
A crackdown on this practice – and the risk of a backdated tax bill – would be chilling, says Sara Davis, executive director of Asia Catalyst, a New York-based nonprofit that provides technical support to civil society groups in China.
"It's a tough situation. For most grass-roots groups working on humanitarian and civil rights issues in China, there's no domestic funding. They're also not allowed to register as NGOs. That leaves very little option except to go to foreign donors," she says.
Another dilemma for activists is that foreign donors often want to fund projects that rub against the grain in China, such as research into last year's riots in Tibet, which inflamed foreign opinion. In a recent report, OCI said the official explanation that the Dalai Lama had fomented the unrest ignored the government's own repressive actions in Tibet.
It also took up the cause of families suing companies that sold contaminated milk powder last year, until the practice was exposed. China's government has tried to draw a line under the scandal by paying compensation to those that agree not to bring lawsuits against manufacturers.
An official at an overseas grant-making organization, who requested anonymity, says informal agreements with tax authorities on giving money to Chinese recipients may now be in doubt. But he and others in the NGO field say it's too soon to say if a broader crackdown is underway and, if so, whether foreign funding would be squeezed.
State projects get outside aid, too
On the day of his arrest, Xu was due to prepare his defense in the tax case. The next day, a municipal tax bureau found against OCI, which had argued that the money from Yale and another private donor had already been declared.
Jeffrey Prescott, deputy director of Yale's China Law Center, says he was disturbed by the detention of Xu, a former visiting scholar at Yale, and its implications for lawyers working with marginalized groups. He says Yale also supported government-run programs in China, including research on legal reform with state universities.
"Obviously these issues can be sensitive in China. But if you look at what [OCI] is doing, it's pretty mainstream public interest law," he says.
August 4, 2009
Beijing - It began with a tax notice for $200,000. Three days later, on July 17, officials raided the group's Beijing office and seized its computers. Then, just before dawn on July 29, police detained its founder, Xu Zhiyong at his home
On the same day, government officials went to the office of Yi Ren Ping, another nongovernmental organization, and confiscated copies of its newsletter on the grounds that it didn't have a publishing license.
Taken together, the raids appear part of a tightening of controls on critical voices in the run-up to Oct. 1, the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China. The two NGOs are among a growing number here using the law to hold authorities to account on issues such as food safety, patient rights, and illegal detention.
But they share another common thread: Both received grants from American and other foreign donors. The tax fine for Open Constitution Initiative, the group headed by Mr. Xu, was assessed largely on a donation from Yale Law School. Xu, a lawyer and elected legislator, is being detained on suspicion of tax evasion, according to an OCI official.
The harassment of these and other foreign-funded NGOs in Beijing has raised fears of a Russian-style squeeze on civil society. Since 2006, Russia has stripped the tax-free status of many foreign foundations and forced NGOs to report their activities in exhaustive detail, while accusing foreign-funded human rights groups of being Trojan horses for Western powers. It recently amended its NGO law, easing some of these controls.
An alternate view in Beijing is that the groups targeted had pushed too aggressively into forbidden political zones, setting off a reaction. NGO workers and experts on civil society say the investigations into taxes and licenses are a smokescreen for a clampdown on legal activism, including the recent disbarring of 20 civil rights lawyers in Beijing.
"It's what you do with the money that matters," says a researcher on Chinese NGOs, who declined to be named. He says investigations into foreign funding provide a "post hoc excuse" for authorities.
Foreign funds become a liability
Because of the difficulty of registering as nonprofits, many Chinese NGOs are listed as businesses. That makes them liable for potentially crippling tax demands, says Wan Yanhai, who runs an HIV/AIDS advocacy group in Beijing.
"This is a big issue. If there is a similar action [as OCI's tax case] against us, we could be fined tens of millions of yuan," he says.
Mr. Wan and other activists say that soliciting foreign funds is routine for many NGOs in China. Some government officials are supportive as they also benefit from funding for public programs from the same foreign donors. And they tend to overlook the fact that foreign-funded NGOs were registered as businesses, say activists.
A crackdown on this practice – and the risk of a backdated tax bill – would be chilling, says Sara Davis, executive director of Asia Catalyst, a New York-based nonprofit that provides technical support to civil society groups in China.
"It's a tough situation. For most grass-roots groups working on humanitarian and civil rights issues in China, there's no domestic funding. They're also not allowed to register as NGOs. That leaves very little option except to go to foreign donors," she says.
Another dilemma for activists is that foreign donors often want to fund projects that rub against the grain in China, such as research into last year's riots in Tibet, which inflamed foreign opinion. In a recent report, OCI said the official explanation that the Dalai Lama had fomented the unrest ignored the government's own repressive actions in Tibet.
It also took up the cause of families suing companies that sold contaminated milk powder last year, until the practice was exposed. China's government has tried to draw a line under the scandal by paying compensation to those that agree not to bring lawsuits against manufacturers.
An official at an overseas grant-making organization, who requested anonymity, says informal agreements with tax authorities on giving money to Chinese recipients may now be in doubt. But he and others in the NGO field say it's too soon to say if a broader crackdown is underway and, if so, whether foreign funding would be squeezed.
State projects get outside aid, too
On the day of his arrest, Xu was due to prepare his defense in the tax case. The next day, a municipal tax bureau found against OCI, which had argued that the money from Yale and another private donor had already been declared.
Jeffrey Prescott, deputy director of Yale's China Law Center, says he was disturbed by the detention of Xu, a former visiting scholar at Yale, and its implications for lawyers working with marginalized groups. He says Yale also supported government-run programs in China, including research on legal reform with state universities.
"Obviously these issues can be sensitive in China. But if you look at what [OCI] is doing, it's pretty mainstream public interest law," he says.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
