Link
August 12, 2009
Since legal scholar and founder of Gongmeng (Open Constitution Initiative) Xu Zhiyong was detained, his virtual existence has also been cleaned up in Chinese cyberspace. His blog on sina.cn.com was completely deleted around 11 am on August 12 and searching his name in Baidu and Google will produce the following error pages:
Netizens have pointed out that similar search results will appear at the following links as well: Douban group Search, Douban Topic search, Sina Community Search, Sougou, Netease Search, Tom, Qihu Search … (豆瓣小组搜索，豆瓣话题搜索，新浪社区搜索，搜狗，网易有道，TOM，奇虎搜索……)
Hecaitou, a long time and hugely popular blogger tweeted about his experience in searching “Xu Zhiyong” “许志永” on Baidu today: in addition to the standard error message (”Your search results may relate to contents which is not consistent with relevant law, regulations and policies, and therefore cannot be displayed”), the upper-right corner banner ad on the same page will automatically enter the search term “Xu Zhiyong” into a popular Baidu online service, “Baidu Send Your Feelings (百度传情).” So the banner reads:
Other tech savvy netizens provided links to download the compressed version of Xu Zhiyong’ blog content.
Even before Xu Zhiyong’s blog was taken off-line, Beijing blogger Wang Lihong (王荔蕻) anticipated this possibility and set up a blog on a Yam.com, a hosting service in Taiwan. She then spent several days hand copying and pasting each of Xu’s articles into this new mirror site here.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Friday, August 14, 2009
¨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.
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?
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?
Monday, August 10, 2009
"Fearing the Rule of Law, Chinese Government Arrests Prominent Human Rights Lawyer," by Jessica Corsi, Human Rights Foreign Policy Blog
Link
August 10, 2009
The blogosphere is abuzz with the unsettling news that the Chinese government has arrested Xu Zhiyong, a 36-year-old attorney, thereby dealing another blow to the growing Chinese rule of law movement. In authoritarian countries or nations in transition, lawyers often play a key role in bringing greater democracy through the judicial protections, accountability, and transparency that are hallmarks of the rule of law. In 2007, Pakistan’s so-called lawyers revolution demonstrated the centrality of the judiciary and attorneys in protecting Constitutional freedoms and the rule of law in the face of General Musharraf’s imposition of emergency rule. While Pakistan is lauded as a successful instance of resistance, human rights lawyers around the world continue to face a hostile environment. To name a few examples, in 2003 the Ethiopian government disbanded the Women’s Lawyers Association, a women’s rights group, and in the same year the Tunisian government assaulted human rights lawyers and refused to legalize their organizations. As recently as January 2009, a human rights lawyer working on abuses by the Russian military in Chechnya was shot and killed in broad daylight, following a news conference in Moscow. In China as elsewhere, corrupt and oppressive governments fear being held legally accountable, and strike out against lawyers in an attempt to maintain impunity.
Mr. Xu seems by all accounts an excellent but certainly far from radical lawyer. Since his graduation from Peking University law school he had taken up cases of disenfranchised or abused persons, such as those suffering from government beatings, arrested for publishing news offensive to the Chinese government, and victims of poisoned milk. Before his arrest he was preparing to challenge “black jails,” the Chinese government’s illegal holding cells for vocal critics. He had co-founded the Open Constitution Initiative, a Beijing-based non-profit legal services and research center, which the Chinese government shut down following a raid on July 17, 2009. Claiming that the center was involved in tax evasion, the government also disbarred 53 Beijing lawyers at this time. The center had been involved in highly sensitive cases such as challenging the Chinese government’s role in 2008’s Tibetan unrest, and this together with Mr. Xu’s arrest imply that, whatever tax problems did or did not exist, the government’s motive in closing the center and in Mr. Xu’s arrest is to squash the rule of law movement.
Lawyers play a critical role in investigating and reporting human rights violations and in ensuring the responsibility of the state and remedies for victims. Mr. Xu and the Open Constitution Initiative represent real and effective action to secure human rights in China; for example, Mr. Xu’s very first case led to the abolition of vagrancy laws that allowed police to detain people traveling without a permit outside of their registered towns, demonstrating that one legal action can have significant impact throughout China. The New York Times writes today that “China is at a critical [legal] juncture” following 30 years of reform. China lacks neither lawyers nor functioning courts, and while objectively this is a good thing and necessary for the rule of law, the government appears immensely threatened by the prospect of a functioning judiciary and the ability of its citizens to redress human rights violations. Chinese law professor He Weifang states that the Communist Party’s concern regarding lawyers is that they will be able to challenge China’s one party rule and to lead a pro-democracy movement by mobilizing their network of clients that have legal and other grievances against the Chinese government. More generally, the Chinese government seems to fear any movement from civil society to hold it legally accountable.
Whether the next wave of democratic change in China will come at the hands of lawyers remains to be seen, but it is certain that future reforms cannot take place without progress towards the rule of law. Like human rights defenders around the world, Mr. Xu is owed protection by his government rather than attack from it. Hopefully, the current media attention around his case will save him from harm and ensure his prompt release.
August 10, 2009
The blogosphere is abuzz with the unsettling news that the Chinese government has arrested Xu Zhiyong, a 36-year-old attorney, thereby dealing another blow to the growing Chinese rule of law movement. In authoritarian countries or nations in transition, lawyers often play a key role in bringing greater democracy through the judicial protections, accountability, and transparency that are hallmarks of the rule of law. In 2007, Pakistan’s so-called lawyers revolution demonstrated the centrality of the judiciary and attorneys in protecting Constitutional freedoms and the rule of law in the face of General Musharraf’s imposition of emergency rule. While Pakistan is lauded as a successful instance of resistance, human rights lawyers around the world continue to face a hostile environment. To name a few examples, in 2003 the Ethiopian government disbanded the Women’s Lawyers Association, a women’s rights group, and in the same year the Tunisian government assaulted human rights lawyers and refused to legalize their organizations. As recently as January 2009, a human rights lawyer working on abuses by the Russian military in Chechnya was shot and killed in broad daylight, following a news conference in Moscow. In China as elsewhere, corrupt and oppressive governments fear being held legally accountable, and strike out against lawyers in an attempt to maintain impunity.
Mr. Xu seems by all accounts an excellent but certainly far from radical lawyer. Since his graduation from Peking University law school he had taken up cases of disenfranchised or abused persons, such as those suffering from government beatings, arrested for publishing news offensive to the Chinese government, and victims of poisoned milk. Before his arrest he was preparing to challenge “black jails,” the Chinese government’s illegal holding cells for vocal critics. He had co-founded the Open Constitution Initiative, a Beijing-based non-profit legal services and research center, which the Chinese government shut down following a raid on July 17, 2009. Claiming that the center was involved in tax evasion, the government also disbarred 53 Beijing lawyers at this time. The center had been involved in highly sensitive cases such as challenging the Chinese government’s role in 2008’s Tibetan unrest, and this together with Mr. Xu’s arrest imply that, whatever tax problems did or did not exist, the government’s motive in closing the center and in Mr. Xu’s arrest is to squash the rule of law movement.
Lawyers play a critical role in investigating and reporting human rights violations and in ensuring the responsibility of the state and remedies for victims. Mr. Xu and the Open Constitution Initiative represent real and effective action to secure human rights in China; for example, Mr. Xu’s very first case led to the abolition of vagrancy laws that allowed police to detain people traveling without a permit outside of their registered towns, demonstrating that one legal action can have significant impact throughout China. The New York Times writes today that “China is at a critical [legal] juncture” following 30 years of reform. China lacks neither lawyers nor functioning courts, and while objectively this is a good thing and necessary for the rule of law, the government appears immensely threatened by the prospect of a functioning judiciary and the ability of its citizens to redress human rights violations. Chinese law professor He Weifang states that the Communist Party’s concern regarding lawyers is that they will be able to challenge China’s one party rule and to lead a pro-democracy movement by mobilizing their network of clients that have legal and other grievances against the Chinese government. More generally, the Chinese government seems to fear any movement from civil society to hold it legally accountable.
Whether the next wave of democratic change in China will come at the hands of lawyers remains to be seen, but it is certain that future reforms cannot take place without progress towards the rule of law. Like human rights defenders around the world, Mr. Xu is owed protection by his government rather than attack from it. Hopefully, the current media attention around his case will save him from harm and ensure his prompt release.
"What Xu Zhiyong Stands For," by Austin Ramzy, TIME.com
Link
August 10, 2009
On the China Beat blog, our former colleague Susan Jakes takes a look at the breadth and boldness of detained legal scholar Xu Zhiyong's work:
Xu has a knack for seeing what's possible where others see only futility. In 2003 and again in 2006 he ran as one of China's handful of independent—that is, not CCP pre-approved—candidates in an election for his district People's Congress. He not only won by a landslide, but in both of his terms in office has sought to prove through his actions—by providing constituent services, demanding budget reviews, preventing the relocation of the Beijing Zoo and lobbying on behalf of aggrieved dog owners—that the congress was not the parody of a political institution it sometimes seemed to be. “Actually,” he explained, “the People's Congress has real power. It's just that people don't take it seriously.” I interviewed Xu shortly after his first election. When I asked him how he decided to run, he looked at me evenly for a moment before replying. “I ran,” he said, “because the law allows me to.”
Link: Susan Jakes full blog entry on The China Beat Blog.
August 10, 2009
On the China Beat blog, our former colleague Susan Jakes takes a look at the breadth and boldness of detained legal scholar Xu Zhiyong's work:
Xu has a knack for seeing what's possible where others see only futility. In 2003 and again in 2006 he ran as one of China's handful of independent—that is, not CCP pre-approved—candidates in an election for his district People's Congress. He not only won by a landslide, but in both of his terms in office has sought to prove through his actions—by providing constituent services, demanding budget reviews, preventing the relocation of the Beijing Zoo and lobbying on behalf of aggrieved dog owners—that the congress was not the parody of a political institution it sometimes seemed to be. “Actually,” he explained, “the People's Congress has real power. It's just that people don't take it seriously.” I interviewed Xu shortly after his first election. When I asked him how he decided to run, he looked at me evenly for a moment before replying. “I ran,” he said, “because the law allows me to.”
Link: Susan Jakes full blog entry on The China Beat Blog.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
"Lawyer’s Detention Shakes China’s Rights Movement," by Andrew Jacobs, The New York Times
Link
August 9, 2009
BEIJING — China’s nascent legal rights movement, already reeling from a crackdown on crusading lawyers, the kidnapping of defense witnesses and the shuttering of a prominent legal clinic, has been shaken by the detention of a widely respected rights defender who has been incommunicado since the police led him away from his apartment 12 days ago.
Xu Zhiyong, 36, a soft-spoken and politically shrewd legal scholar who has made a name representing migrant workers, death row inmates and the parents of babies poisoned by tainted milk, is accused of tax evasion. The charge is almost universally seen here as a cover for his true offense: angering the Communist Party leadership through his advocacy of the rule of law.
If convicted, he could face up to seven years in prison.
“We’re all shocked by his detention, because Xu Zhiyong has always tried to avoid taking on radical and politically sensitive cases,” said Teng Biao, a colleague. “His only interest is fighting for the rights of the vulnerable and trying to enhance China’s legal system.”
Mr. Teng helped Mr. Xu establish the Open Constitution Initiative, a six-year-old nonprofit legal center that the authorities closed last month, charging that it was improperly registered and that it failed to pay taxes.
Mr. Xu is not the first rights advocate in China to face the wrath of the authorities in recent years. Gao Zhisheng, a vocal lawyer, vanished into police custody six months ago, and Chen Guangcheng, a blind lawyer, was beaten and then jailed after exposing abuses in China’s birth-control program.
Although rights lawyers and grass-roots social organizations have always been tightly controlled here, the pressure has intensified in recent weeks. More than 20 lawyers known for taking on politically tinged cases were effectively disbarred, and the police raided a group that works to ease discrimination against people with Hepatitis B.
Last week China’s justice minister gave a speech saying that lawyers should above all obey the Communist Party and help foster a harmonious society. To improve discipline, the minister said, all law firms in the country would be sent party liaisons to “guide their work.”
But given Mr. Xu’s international stature and reputation for working within the law, legal scholars both in China and abroad say his prosecution suggests a new level of repression.
“What makes his detention particularly disturbing is that he’s a special figure in so many ways,” said Paul Gewirtz, director of the China Law Center at Yale Law School, which helped Mr. Xu establish his legal center, known here by its Chinese name, Gongmeng. “He’s at the forefront of advancing the rule of law, which is something everyone agrees China needs for its ongoing development.”
After 30 years of reform, China’s legal system is at a critical juncture. Law schools continue to pump out thousands of graduates each year, and the courts, even if imperfect, have increasingly become a forum for resolving disputes. Late last month the Supreme People’s Court announced reforms intended to markedly reduce executions.
But as lawyers here discover, there are limits to China’s embrace of judicial reform.
The Constitution, which includes guarantees of free speech and human rights, is unenforceable in court. Judges routinely ignore evidence, making determinations based on political considerations. And when it comes to vaguely defined offenses like “subversion of state power” or the invocation of “state secrets” laws, even the best-trained lawyers are powerless to defend the accused.
He Weifang, a law professor and legal adviser to Gongmeng, said conservative forces in the Communist Party were increasingly wary of lawyers, whom they suspect are ultimately seeking to challenge one-party rule. Their greatest fear, Mr. He said, is that advocacy lawyers and civil society organizations could one day lead a pro-democracy movement among the poor and disenfranchised citizens they represent.
“What the authorities don’t appreciate, though, is that lawyers are leading these people to the courts, where their complaints can be resolved by rule of law,” he said. “People like Xu Zhiyong can only help the government solve some of the problems it faces.”
According to Gongmeng, Mr. Xu is being held at the Beijing No. 1 Detention Center, although public security officials have not confirmed that he is in their custody. Peng Jian, a lawyer who is advising Gongmeng, said the authorities had imposed a $208,000 penalty for nonpayment of taxes due on funds received from Yale for cooperative research projects.
A day after the raid on Gongmeng’s office, Mr. Xu held a news conference to say that the accusations were baseless. He described the attack on his research center as a battle between corrupt officials and society’s most vulnerable citizens. “We believe conscience will surely triumph over the evil forces,” he said.
A week later, police officers came to his door and led him away. Another employee of the research center, Zhuang Lu, was also taken away the same day.
Soon after graduating from Peking University law school, Mr. Xu became immersed in the case of a graphic artist who was beaten to death in 2003 in police custody in the southern city of Guangzhou. The artist, Sun Zhigang, 27, had been arrested under vagrancy laws that allowed the police to detain people for traveling outside their registered hometowns without a permit.
Mr. Xu led a campaign to end the practice, which gained widespread media attention. A few months later, the State Council abolished the system.
That same year Mr. Xu rose to the defense of a muckraking editor jailed in Guangzhou after his newspaper, Southern Metropolis, ran a series of articles about Mr. Sun’s death. The editor, Cheng Yizhong, said Mr. Xu helped rally lawyers and journalists, leading to his release five months later. “Only Xu had the courage to take on my case,” he said.
More recently, he tried to prepare a challenge to black jails, the illegal holding cells that some officials use to silence persistent critics. Last year, friends say, he was roughed up several times while gathering evidence from petitioners who had come to Beijing to press their grievances to the central government.
Raised in a Christian home in Henan Province, Mr. Xu was fond of noting his birth in a county called Minquan, which translates as “civil rights.” In an interview last year with The Economic Observer, a Chinese weekly, he said this had a profound impact on his social consciousness.
“I strive to be a worthy Chinese citizen, a member of the group of people who promote the progress of the nation,” he said. “I want to make people believe in ideals and justice, and help them see the hope of change.”
August 9, 2009
BEIJING — China’s nascent legal rights movement, already reeling from a crackdown on crusading lawyers, the kidnapping of defense witnesses and the shuttering of a prominent legal clinic, has been shaken by the detention of a widely respected rights defender who has been incommunicado since the police led him away from his apartment 12 days ago.
Xu Zhiyong, 36, a soft-spoken and politically shrewd legal scholar who has made a name representing migrant workers, death row inmates and the parents of babies poisoned by tainted milk, is accused of tax evasion. The charge is almost universally seen here as a cover for his true offense: angering the Communist Party leadership through his advocacy of the rule of law.
If convicted, he could face up to seven years in prison.
“We’re all shocked by his detention, because Xu Zhiyong has always tried to avoid taking on radical and politically sensitive cases,” said Teng Biao, a colleague. “His only interest is fighting for the rights of the vulnerable and trying to enhance China’s legal system.”
Mr. Teng helped Mr. Xu establish the Open Constitution Initiative, a six-year-old nonprofit legal center that the authorities closed last month, charging that it was improperly registered and that it failed to pay taxes.
Mr. Xu is not the first rights advocate in China to face the wrath of the authorities in recent years. Gao Zhisheng, a vocal lawyer, vanished into police custody six months ago, and Chen Guangcheng, a blind lawyer, was beaten and then jailed after exposing abuses in China’s birth-control program.
Although rights lawyers and grass-roots social organizations have always been tightly controlled here, the pressure has intensified in recent weeks. More than 20 lawyers known for taking on politically tinged cases were effectively disbarred, and the police raided a group that works to ease discrimination against people with Hepatitis B.
Last week China’s justice minister gave a speech saying that lawyers should above all obey the Communist Party and help foster a harmonious society. To improve discipline, the minister said, all law firms in the country would be sent party liaisons to “guide their work.”
But given Mr. Xu’s international stature and reputation for working within the law, legal scholars both in China and abroad say his prosecution suggests a new level of repression.
“What makes his detention particularly disturbing is that he’s a special figure in so many ways,” said Paul Gewirtz, director of the China Law Center at Yale Law School, which helped Mr. Xu establish his legal center, known here by its Chinese name, Gongmeng. “He’s at the forefront of advancing the rule of law, which is something everyone agrees China needs for its ongoing development.”
After 30 years of reform, China’s legal system is at a critical juncture. Law schools continue to pump out thousands of graduates each year, and the courts, even if imperfect, have increasingly become a forum for resolving disputes. Late last month the Supreme People’s Court announced reforms intended to markedly reduce executions.
But as lawyers here discover, there are limits to China’s embrace of judicial reform.
The Constitution, which includes guarantees of free speech and human rights, is unenforceable in court. Judges routinely ignore evidence, making determinations based on political considerations. And when it comes to vaguely defined offenses like “subversion of state power” or the invocation of “state secrets” laws, even the best-trained lawyers are powerless to defend the accused.
He Weifang, a law professor and legal adviser to Gongmeng, said conservative forces in the Communist Party were increasingly wary of lawyers, whom they suspect are ultimately seeking to challenge one-party rule. Their greatest fear, Mr. He said, is that advocacy lawyers and civil society organizations could one day lead a pro-democracy movement among the poor and disenfranchised citizens they represent.
“What the authorities don’t appreciate, though, is that lawyers are leading these people to the courts, where their complaints can be resolved by rule of law,” he said. “People like Xu Zhiyong can only help the government solve some of the problems it faces.”
According to Gongmeng, Mr. Xu is being held at the Beijing No. 1 Detention Center, although public security officials have not confirmed that he is in their custody. Peng Jian, a lawyer who is advising Gongmeng, said the authorities had imposed a $208,000 penalty for nonpayment of taxes due on funds received from Yale for cooperative research projects.
A day after the raid on Gongmeng’s office, Mr. Xu held a news conference to say that the accusations were baseless. He described the attack on his research center as a battle between corrupt officials and society’s most vulnerable citizens. “We believe conscience will surely triumph over the evil forces,” he said.
A week later, police officers came to his door and led him away. Another employee of the research center, Zhuang Lu, was also taken away the same day.
Soon after graduating from Peking University law school, Mr. Xu became immersed in the case of a graphic artist who was beaten to death in 2003 in police custody in the southern city of Guangzhou. The artist, Sun Zhigang, 27, had been arrested under vagrancy laws that allowed the police to detain people for traveling outside their registered hometowns without a permit.
Mr. Xu led a campaign to end the practice, which gained widespread media attention. A few months later, the State Council abolished the system.
That same year Mr. Xu rose to the defense of a muckraking editor jailed in Guangzhou after his newspaper, Southern Metropolis, ran a series of articles about Mr. Sun’s death. The editor, Cheng Yizhong, said Mr. Xu helped rally lawyers and journalists, leading to his release five months later. “Only Xu had the courage to take on my case,” he said.
More recently, he tried to prepare a challenge to black jails, the illegal holding cells that some officials use to silence persistent critics. Last year, friends say, he was roughed up several times while gathering evidence from petitioners who had come to Beijing to press their grievances to the central government.
Raised in a Christian home in Henan Province, Mr. Xu was fond of noting his birth in a county called Minquan, which translates as “civil rights.” In an interview last year with The Economic Observer, a Chinese weekly, he said this had a profound impact on his social consciousness.
“I strive to be a worthy Chinese citizen, a member of the group of people who promote the progress of the nation,” he said. “I want to make people believe in ideals and justice, and help them see the hope of change.”
"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.
"China tightens reins on dissent," by Bill Schiller, Toronto Star
Link
August 8, 2009
BEIJING–Xu Zhiyong once confided to a Chinese journalist that even as a young high school student he knew exactly what he wanted to do in life. In a careful, youthful hand he'd penned it into his diary:
"Dedicate myself to public service," he wrote. "Advocate for social reform. Change the tradition of a nation. Help build an ideal society."
They were lofty, noble goals – outsized for most people, but not for Xu. He felt it was his duty – in fact his fate – to aspire to nothing less, born as he was in a place called Minquan County.
"Minquan means `civil rights,'" he often says.
Until last week, Xu Zhiyong, a highly respected 36-year-old legal scholar and rising role model for young Chinese, was busy achieving those goals: spreading knowledge about Chinese law among the common people; using Chinese law to defend the poor and the vulnerable; and earning a reputation as a selfless, tireless builder of China's nascent civil society.
Then six policemen came to his home at 5 a.m. Wednesday and led him away.
Today, Xu Zhiyong is detained somewhere in Beijing, another victim of China's ever-tightening control on lawyers, activists and non-governmental organizations, people the government views as potential threats to their absolute power.
Xu's detention surprised many, both here and abroad: he didn't criticize China's Communist Party, never spoke out against the government, and he abided by the law and played by the rules.
"With his detention, the government has now crossed a threshold in terms of its intolerance of dissent," says Nicholas Bequelin of the international rights organization Human Rights Watch. "This indicates a hardening of the government's attitude towards civil society. If Xu goes from detention to `formal arrest,' then no one is really safe."
Xu is being held without charges.
The government alleges his organization, the Open Constitution Initiative (OCI), which he helped found in 2003, failed to pay its taxes.
Supporters say the taxes were paid and that the trumped-up charges are aimed at halting overseas funding and shutting the operation down.
"Xu Zhiyong and OCI have done nothing illegal," says Teng Biao, friend of co-founder of the organization. "We have respected the law in every instance."
While some in the rights lawyers' movement take a more muscular approach to the law, often taking on the government head-on, Xu is a pragmatist, insisting on working within the system, pushing for change while taking care not to incite authorities. But he and his organization have not shirked from taking on controversial cases.
He provided legal assistance to farmers in the northeast whose land had been illegally seized by corrupt government officials for private gain.
He exposed and publicized a system of illegal "black jails" where citizens from the provinces, who'd come to Beijing to complain about corrupt provincial politicians, were routinely taken to be beaten.
More recently, he organized a class-action suit for parents whose babies had been poisoned by melamine-laced milk during last year's Sanlu milk scandal. At least 300,000 babies were poisoned, but the government says only six died.
"This is precisely the kind of organization whose work the government should value, as it helps ease grievances and minimizes unrest," says Sophie Richardson, Human Rights Watch's advocacy director. "This attack on the Open Constitution Initiative marks a new low in the Chinese government's campaign against human rights defenders."
But Xu and his organization are by no means the only ones in the government's sights.
China's most prominent human rights lawyers are also under attack. At least 53 had their licences invalidated earlier this year, 20 of whom have now been disbarred. All are known for their work on sensitive cases.
The Yirenping Centre, an organization that gives counsel and support to hepatitis B carriers, was also raided by security police last week. Police seized leaflets that advised patients of their rights, claiming the centre needed a publishing permit to distribute the leaflets.
"The purpose is to find excuses for suppressing China's NGOs," the centre's director, Lu Jun, charged.
This week, the New York-based NGO Asia Catalyst also revealed that a Chinese AIDS advocate had his passport seized by Chinese authorities and prevented from attending an international AIDS conference in Indonesia.
Police warned the advocate, who had been invited to the conference by UNAIDS, that if he spoke to the media or international organizations about the passport seizure, he would face "the same fate as Hu Jia."
Hu Jia is a well-known Chinese HIV/AIDS activist currently serving 3 1/2 years in prison.
Cumulatively, says Bequelin, the government's actions suggest that its security apparatus has been given freer rein.
The turning point, he believes, was U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's statement during her visit to China this year that human rights issues need not interfere with Sino-American relations. Says Bequelin, "We're now seeing how unwise it was for Clinton and the U.S. to have basically said, `We won't do anything on the human rights front.'"
August 8, 2009
BEIJING–Xu Zhiyong once confided to a Chinese journalist that even as a young high school student he knew exactly what he wanted to do in life. In a careful, youthful hand he'd penned it into his diary:
"Dedicate myself to public service," he wrote. "Advocate for social reform. Change the tradition of a nation. Help build an ideal society."
They were lofty, noble goals – outsized for most people, but not for Xu. He felt it was his duty – in fact his fate – to aspire to nothing less, born as he was in a place called Minquan County.
"Minquan means `civil rights,'" he often says.
Until last week, Xu Zhiyong, a highly respected 36-year-old legal scholar and rising role model for young Chinese, was busy achieving those goals: spreading knowledge about Chinese law among the common people; using Chinese law to defend the poor and the vulnerable; and earning a reputation as a selfless, tireless builder of China's nascent civil society.
Then six policemen came to his home at 5 a.m. Wednesday and led him away.
Today, Xu Zhiyong is detained somewhere in Beijing, another victim of China's ever-tightening control on lawyers, activists and non-governmental organizations, people the government views as potential threats to their absolute power.
Xu's detention surprised many, both here and abroad: he didn't criticize China's Communist Party, never spoke out against the government, and he abided by the law and played by the rules.
"With his detention, the government has now crossed a threshold in terms of its intolerance of dissent," says Nicholas Bequelin of the international rights organization Human Rights Watch. "This indicates a hardening of the government's attitude towards civil society. If Xu goes from detention to `formal arrest,' then no one is really safe."
Xu is being held without charges.
The government alleges his organization, the Open Constitution Initiative (OCI), which he helped found in 2003, failed to pay its taxes.
Supporters say the taxes were paid and that the trumped-up charges are aimed at halting overseas funding and shutting the operation down.
"Xu Zhiyong and OCI have done nothing illegal," says Teng Biao, friend of co-founder of the organization. "We have respected the law in every instance."
While some in the rights lawyers' movement take a more muscular approach to the law, often taking on the government head-on, Xu is a pragmatist, insisting on working within the system, pushing for change while taking care not to incite authorities. But he and his organization have not shirked from taking on controversial cases.
He provided legal assistance to farmers in the northeast whose land had been illegally seized by corrupt government officials for private gain.
He exposed and publicized a system of illegal "black jails" where citizens from the provinces, who'd come to Beijing to complain about corrupt provincial politicians, were routinely taken to be beaten.
More recently, he organized a class-action suit for parents whose babies had been poisoned by melamine-laced milk during last year's Sanlu milk scandal. At least 300,000 babies were poisoned, but the government says only six died.
"This is precisely the kind of organization whose work the government should value, as it helps ease grievances and minimizes unrest," says Sophie Richardson, Human Rights Watch's advocacy director. "This attack on the Open Constitution Initiative marks a new low in the Chinese government's campaign against human rights defenders."
But Xu and his organization are by no means the only ones in the government's sights.
China's most prominent human rights lawyers are also under attack. At least 53 had their licences invalidated earlier this year, 20 of whom have now been disbarred. All are known for their work on sensitive cases.
The Yirenping Centre, an organization that gives counsel and support to hepatitis B carriers, was also raided by security police last week. Police seized leaflets that advised patients of their rights, claiming the centre needed a publishing permit to distribute the leaflets.
"The purpose is to find excuses for suppressing China's NGOs," the centre's director, Lu Jun, charged.
This week, the New York-based NGO Asia Catalyst also revealed that a Chinese AIDS advocate had his passport seized by Chinese authorities and prevented from attending an international AIDS conference in Indonesia.
Police warned the advocate, who had been invited to the conference by UNAIDS, that if he spoke to the media or international organizations about the passport seizure, he would face "the same fate as Hu Jia."
Hu Jia is a well-known Chinese HIV/AIDS activist currently serving 3 1/2 years in prison.
Cumulatively, says Bequelin, the government's actions suggest that its security apparatus has been given freer rein.
The turning point, he believes, was U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's statement during her visit to China this year that human rights issues need not interfere with Sino-American relations. Says Bequelin, "We're now seeing how unwise it was for Clinton and the U.S. to have basically said, `We won't do anything on the human rights front.'"
"An Open Letter in Support of Xu Zhiyong," Cheng Wing Yan/Alice Poon, Asia Sentinel
Link
August 8, 2009
An excerpt of an open letter written by a Form 7 Hong Kong female student Cheng Wing Yan (鄭詠欣) addressed to Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao in support of Xu Zhiyong, the civil rights lawyer who has been arrested by the Chinese government. The letter has been published in Ming Pao Daily.
Here is my translation of the excerpt of the open letter titled “Please Convince Me from a Legal Standpoint”:-
"Recently Xu Zhiyong and Gongmeng (公盟) under his leadership have been targeted by the government. Gongmeng is a civil organization formed by a group of lawyers and academics who are concerned with China’s development. Through academic research, the organization has offered some advice and suggestions on China’s legal system reform, thereby promoting the realization of rule of law and democracy. Another area of their work, which is well known to Chinese citizens, is to provide legal aid to the powerless grass roots like petitioners and victims of land grabs and melamine milk powder, helping them to get justice within the existing legal framework. Judging from the fact that many petitioners who had received legal aid went bravely to Gongmeng’s office to voice their support soon after the tax authorities shut it down, everybody can clearly see that Gongmeng is the people’s ally. Why is it that the government under your leadership is still insisting on doing something that goes against the will of the people?
As far as I know, Gongmeng is a non-profit organization. They had once considered registering as a non-business civil unit, but their application was rejected and they had no alternative but to register as a limited company. In international societies, such an organization is tax-exempt, and donors can also obtain tax exemption benefits. But as Gongmeng members are law-abiding legal professionals, even though they think the system is unreasonable, they still pay their taxes as required. When the tax authorities accused them of omitting to report certain taxable items, they admitted their fault honestly. Why is it that the government under your leadership still imposing the maximum penalty, and on top of that, using a search warrant to take away all the files and data that are related to protection of civil rights? What is even more puzzling is that right before the convening of the second hearing, Mr. Xu was taken away from his home by security bureau officers and under-cover police, detained in custody and was not allowed to contact lawyers or his family. At the same time, Gongmeng was being ordered to shut down its website. This is a case of groundless seizure of citizens’ basic civil rights.
Premier Wen, you always say things like ‘administering according to rule of law’ and ‘governing according to rule of law’. May I ask, based on which legal clause did the law enforcement agency take away Mr. Xu? I only have a cursory knowledge of Chinese Law, but I know that the Constitution is the country’s most comprehensive basic law and has the highest level of binding power. Article 35 of our country’s Constitution states that citizens of People’s Republic of China have the freedom of speech and the freedom to form associations. Article 37 states clearly that citizens of People’s Republic of China enjoy personal freedom and it prohibits illegal arrest or other means of illegally seizing or limiting citizens’ personal freedom. Based on my own interpretation of these Articles, I think Mr. Xu should be free to stay in his home or work at his office.
In April this year, when my classmates and I were in Beijing as exchange students, we had the honor of discussing Chinese politics with Mr. Xu at his Gongmeng office. I saw that he is prepared to be selfless in doing all he can in the area of rule of law and democracy, and that he has great hope for China’s future. I was deeply moved. I can still remember during that visit I saw with my own eyes those menacing scarecrow gangsters who were trying to scare away the pitiable petitioners at the State Bureau for Letters and Visits. So, in our discussion, one of my classmates asked Mr. Xu, ‘Why does the Central Government tolerate the existence of those scarecrow gangsters?’ You know how Mr. Xu replied? He said that the number of petitioners far exceeds what the Letters and Visits Office can handle; so, in order to avoid overloading the Office, government cannot but bear with the scarecrow rogues. He reminded us several times that government is already doing its very best and that we need to be patient with it.
This is what Mr. Xu is like. He is full of ideals but he is not presumptuous. He is visionary but he insists on taking one step at a time. He does not mind getting negligible results that come slowly and bit by bit. He firmly believes that one day China will realize rule of law, democracy and freedom.
Premier Wen, I really don’t understand why your government can be so cruel. Why do you have to use such means to deal with a scholar who understands the hardship of the government and who wants only rational discourse? All he does is to play by the current rules of game and provide proper assistance to the weak and helpless to fight for the rights that the Constitution gives them. None of his deeds is not for the love of the country and its people. Why can’t the government spare such a person, and let him and Gongmeng handle the (tax) matter in accordance with open and fair civil proceedings?"
August 8, 2009
An excerpt of an open letter written by a Form 7 Hong Kong female student Cheng Wing Yan (鄭詠欣) addressed to Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao in support of Xu Zhiyong, the civil rights lawyer who has been arrested by the Chinese government. The letter has been published in Ming Pao Daily.
Here is my translation of the excerpt of the open letter titled “Please Convince Me from a Legal Standpoint”:-
"Recently Xu Zhiyong and Gongmeng (公盟) under his leadership have been targeted by the government. Gongmeng is a civil organization formed by a group of lawyers and academics who are concerned with China’s development. Through academic research, the organization has offered some advice and suggestions on China’s legal system reform, thereby promoting the realization of rule of law and democracy. Another area of their work, which is well known to Chinese citizens, is to provide legal aid to the powerless grass roots like petitioners and victims of land grabs and melamine milk powder, helping them to get justice within the existing legal framework. Judging from the fact that many petitioners who had received legal aid went bravely to Gongmeng’s office to voice their support soon after the tax authorities shut it down, everybody can clearly see that Gongmeng is the people’s ally. Why is it that the government under your leadership is still insisting on doing something that goes against the will of the people?
As far as I know, Gongmeng is a non-profit organization. They had once considered registering as a non-business civil unit, but their application was rejected and they had no alternative but to register as a limited company. In international societies, such an organization is tax-exempt, and donors can also obtain tax exemption benefits. But as Gongmeng members are law-abiding legal professionals, even though they think the system is unreasonable, they still pay their taxes as required. When the tax authorities accused them of omitting to report certain taxable items, they admitted their fault honestly. Why is it that the government under your leadership still imposing the maximum penalty, and on top of that, using a search warrant to take away all the files and data that are related to protection of civil rights? What is even more puzzling is that right before the convening of the second hearing, Mr. Xu was taken away from his home by security bureau officers and under-cover police, detained in custody and was not allowed to contact lawyers or his family. At the same time, Gongmeng was being ordered to shut down its website. This is a case of groundless seizure of citizens’ basic civil rights.
Premier Wen, you always say things like ‘administering according to rule of law’ and ‘governing according to rule of law’. May I ask, based on which legal clause did the law enforcement agency take away Mr. Xu? I only have a cursory knowledge of Chinese Law, but I know that the Constitution is the country’s most comprehensive basic law and has the highest level of binding power. Article 35 of our country’s Constitution states that citizens of People’s Republic of China have the freedom of speech and the freedom to form associations. Article 37 states clearly that citizens of People’s Republic of China enjoy personal freedom and it prohibits illegal arrest or other means of illegally seizing or limiting citizens’ personal freedom. Based on my own interpretation of these Articles, I think Mr. Xu should be free to stay in his home or work at his office.
In April this year, when my classmates and I were in Beijing as exchange students, we had the honor of discussing Chinese politics with Mr. Xu at his Gongmeng office. I saw that he is prepared to be selfless in doing all he can in the area of rule of law and democracy, and that he has great hope for China’s future. I was deeply moved. I can still remember during that visit I saw with my own eyes those menacing scarecrow gangsters who were trying to scare away the pitiable petitioners at the State Bureau for Letters and Visits. So, in our discussion, one of my classmates asked Mr. Xu, ‘Why does the Central Government tolerate the existence of those scarecrow gangsters?’ You know how Mr. Xu replied? He said that the number of petitioners far exceeds what the Letters and Visits Office can handle; so, in order to avoid overloading the Office, government cannot but bear with the scarecrow rogues. He reminded us several times that government is already doing its very best and that we need to be patient with it.
This is what Mr. Xu is like. He is full of ideals but he is not presumptuous. He is visionary but he insists on taking one step at a time. He does not mind getting negligible results that come slowly and bit by bit. He firmly believes that one day China will realize rule of law, democracy and freedom.
Premier Wen, I really don’t understand why your government can be so cruel. Why do you have to use such means to deal with a scholar who understands the hardship of the government and who wants only rational discourse? All he does is to play by the current rules of game and provide proper assistance to the weak and helpless to fight for the rights that the Constitution gives them. None of his deeds is not for the love of the country and its people. Why can’t the government spare such a person, and let him and Gongmeng handle the (tax) matter in accordance with open and fair civil proceedings?"
"China lawyer who fought unfair arrest is arrested," by Barbara Demick, Los Angeles Times
Link
August 7, 2009
Xu Zhiyong, who founded the consumer-oriented Open Constitution Initiative law firm in Beijing, is accused of tax evasion. The issues he's taken on include secret jails and the tainted-milk scandal.
Reporting from Beijing -- Xu Zhiyong, a 36-year-old Beijing lawyer, is renowned for his spirited defense of Chinese citizens victimized by unfair arrest or consumer fraud. Nowadays, the founder of the Open Constitution Initiative law firm will be lucky if he is able to defend himself.
Xu was seized from his home at 5 a.m. on July 29. His family and colleagues were given no official notice and only after a week of inquiries learned secondhand that he was arrested on charges of tax evasion. His detention has sent a chilling message not only to China's lawyers but to citizens who have found themselves in need of legal representation.
"If even a famous lawyer gets arrested, what can we ordinary little people do?" said Tong Zhongjun, 28, a migrant worker whose infant son developed kidney stones from drinking tainted baby formula.
Xu's law firm was one of the few in China willing to represent the parents of the nearly 300,000 children sickened and the six who died last year as a result of dangerous milk additives.
Since its founding in 2003, the firm, also known as Gongmeng, has not shied away from sensitive topics. It challenged China's secret detention centers, the so-called black jails, after a 27-year-old graphic designer who was arrested for failing to carry his identification card died in custody. Xu represented an editor of the hard-hitting newspaper Southern Metropolis Daily who was arrested in 2004 on what were widely seen as politically motivated bribery charges.
This summer, Xu's firm joined the chorus of voices opposing a requirement that all computers sold in China come preinstalled with software that would filter out pornographic or controversial content.
But Xu is by no means a dissident, preferring to work within a system he has hoped to improve, not overthrow.
His pedigree is impeccable: He earned his doctorate in law at prestigious Peking University, taught law at the Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications and served as a representative to the People's Congress for the Haidian District of Beijing, where he lives. He also was a visiting scholar at Yale Law School.
"He had such confidence in the legal system," said Yang Huiwen, the only lawyer still in the offices Wednesday. Yang said he had wanted to quit the law because of hassles by authorities, but Xu talked him out of it. "He always talked about how the rule of law would help China advance."
This has been a singularly grim year for China's lawyers, with some of the country's leading human rights advocates under arrest or denied the right to practice law. Last month, the Beijing Justice Bureau stripped 53 lawyers of their licenses, mostly on administrative technicalities.
Xu's troubles began last month when the firm got a tax bill for more than $200,000, an assessment made on donations it received from supporters, including Yale Law School.
Just three days later, before the firm had time to file a response, the police came and confiscated most of its computers, furniture and files.
Even after that, Xu was optimistic he could beat back the charges of tax evasion. In China, civic groups such as Xu's cannot legally register as nongovernmental organizations, so disputes about whether they should be taxed as charities or businesses are commonplace.
The evening of July 28, Xu met late into the night at a cafe with other lawyers, planning his defense. But the next morning, when he failed to show up for work, colleagues became worried.
"We were calling all his friends. We went to the university to look for him," said Tian Qizhuang, the firm's general manager. It wasn't until the next day that they found the night guard at Xu's apartment complex, who confirmed that the lawyer had been arrested.
Another week went by before Xu's brother learned from the Communist Party secretary at the Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications that his brother had been charged with tax evasion.
"We still haven't heard anything officially. Under Chinese law, family members are supposed to get notification within 48 hours, but they've heard nothing," said Tian in an interview at the law offices on Wednesday.
The offices are now virtually bare. The files have all been seized except for those relating to the tainted-milk cases, which are still wending their way through the courts. One of the senior lawyers at the firm, Teng Biao, managed to save those files by appealing to the conscience of the police officers as parents. ("How will you be able to face your kids if you take those files?" Teng asked the police, the office manager said.)
Sisi Liu of Amnesty International in Hong Kong said someone of Xu's stature suspected of tax evasion would normally be released on bail pending formal charges.
"Clearly, this is a politically motivated prosecution," she said, "and if there is such strong political motivation, we doubt that legal procedure will be followed."
No one knows how long Xu might be held without formal charges, but recent history isn't encouraging: Gao Zhisheng, a maverick lawyer who represented members of the banned Falun Gong movement, has been held incommunicado for more than six months.
August 7, 2009
Xu Zhiyong, who founded the consumer-oriented Open Constitution Initiative law firm in Beijing, is accused of tax evasion. The issues he's taken on include secret jails and the tainted-milk scandal.
Reporting from Beijing -- Xu Zhiyong, a 36-year-old Beijing lawyer, is renowned for his spirited defense of Chinese citizens victimized by unfair arrest or consumer fraud. Nowadays, the founder of the Open Constitution Initiative law firm will be lucky if he is able to defend himself.
Xu was seized from his home at 5 a.m. on July 29. His family and colleagues were given no official notice and only after a week of inquiries learned secondhand that he was arrested on charges of tax evasion. His detention has sent a chilling message not only to China's lawyers but to citizens who have found themselves in need of legal representation.
"If even a famous lawyer gets arrested, what can we ordinary little people do?" said Tong Zhongjun, 28, a migrant worker whose infant son developed kidney stones from drinking tainted baby formula.
Xu's law firm was one of the few in China willing to represent the parents of the nearly 300,000 children sickened and the six who died last year as a result of dangerous milk additives.
Since its founding in 2003, the firm, also known as Gongmeng, has not shied away from sensitive topics. It challenged China's secret detention centers, the so-called black jails, after a 27-year-old graphic designer who was arrested for failing to carry his identification card died in custody. Xu represented an editor of the hard-hitting newspaper Southern Metropolis Daily who was arrested in 2004 on what were widely seen as politically motivated bribery charges.
This summer, Xu's firm joined the chorus of voices opposing a requirement that all computers sold in China come preinstalled with software that would filter out pornographic or controversial content.
But Xu is by no means a dissident, preferring to work within a system he has hoped to improve, not overthrow.
His pedigree is impeccable: He earned his doctorate in law at prestigious Peking University, taught law at the Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications and served as a representative to the People's Congress for the Haidian District of Beijing, where he lives. He also was a visiting scholar at Yale Law School.
"He had such confidence in the legal system," said Yang Huiwen, the only lawyer still in the offices Wednesday. Yang said he had wanted to quit the law because of hassles by authorities, but Xu talked him out of it. "He always talked about how the rule of law would help China advance."
This has been a singularly grim year for China's lawyers, with some of the country's leading human rights advocates under arrest or denied the right to practice law. Last month, the Beijing Justice Bureau stripped 53 lawyers of their licenses, mostly on administrative technicalities.
Xu's troubles began last month when the firm got a tax bill for more than $200,000, an assessment made on donations it received from supporters, including Yale Law School.
Just three days later, before the firm had time to file a response, the police came and confiscated most of its computers, furniture and files.
Even after that, Xu was optimistic he could beat back the charges of tax evasion. In China, civic groups such as Xu's cannot legally register as nongovernmental organizations, so disputes about whether they should be taxed as charities or businesses are commonplace.
The evening of July 28, Xu met late into the night at a cafe with other lawyers, planning his defense. But the next morning, when he failed to show up for work, colleagues became worried.
"We were calling all his friends. We went to the university to look for him," said Tian Qizhuang, the firm's general manager. It wasn't until the next day that they found the night guard at Xu's apartment complex, who confirmed that the lawyer had been arrested.
Another week went by before Xu's brother learned from the Communist Party secretary at the Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications that his brother had been charged with tax evasion.
"We still haven't heard anything officially. Under Chinese law, family members are supposed to get notification within 48 hours, but they've heard nothing," said Tian in an interview at the law offices on Wednesday.
The offices are now virtually bare. The files have all been seized except for those relating to the tainted-milk cases, which are still wending their way through the courts. One of the senior lawyers at the firm, Teng Biao, managed to save those files by appealing to the conscience of the police officers as parents. ("How will you be able to face your kids if you take those files?" Teng asked the police, the office manager said.)
Sisi Liu of Amnesty International in Hong Kong said someone of Xu's stature suspected of tax evasion would normally be released on bail pending formal charges.
"Clearly, this is a politically motivated prosecution," she said, "and if there is such strong political motivation, we doubt that legal procedure will be followed."
No one knows how long Xu might be held without formal charges, but recent history isn't encouraging: Gao Zhisheng, a maverick lawyer who represented members of the banned Falun Gong movement, has been held incommunicado for more than six months.
"Chinese Legal Activist Charged With Tax Evasion as Crackdown Widens," by William Ide, Voice of America
Link
August 6, 2009
Close associates of Chinese legal activist Xu Zhiyong say he is being detained on charges of tax evasion. Xu's case is one of several that appear to be part of widening crackdown on dissent in China ahead of October's 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China.
More than a week ago, without explanation, Chinese police detained Xu Zhiyong, the head of a legal aid organization Gongmeng in Beijing.
Teng Biao, a co-founder of the group, says Xu's family has not seen him since he was taken from his home early on Wednesday last week.
Teng says Xu's brother went to the Beijing University of Post and Telecommunications, where Xu Zhiyong taught. There, he learned that his brother had been taken away by public security forces and was being charged with tax evasion.
Teng added that Zhang Lu, another member of Gongmeng who also has been missing since last week, has still not been heard from.
Many political analysts and human rights groups say Gongmeng and other activist groups are being targeted as part of a widening crackdown on dissent ahead of the October 1 anniversary of the founding of the communist government.
However, Randy Peerenboom a professor of law at La Trobe University in Melbourne who is now based in Beijing, sees a broader purpose. He thinks what is happening is part of an effort to ensure social stability that is not exclusively linked to the coming anniversary.
"The number of demonstrations has been rising in recent years, many of them becoming more violent, and so you see the government trying to crackdown on various sources of instability," he said.
Peerenboom says the government has tried to force many of the country's disputes and controversial cases into the court system, but in his opinion that has ended up being too costly and has not ended the protests. Because of that, the government has started targeting activist lawyers and legal groups like Gongmeng.
"I think that one of the problems is they've [Gongmeng] handled an increasingly wide range of cases and gotten involved in a wider range of issues and this is one of the reasons why I think the government is re-calibrating its strategy," he said.
Gongmeng's lawyers represented victims of the Sanlu toxic milk powder scandal, which made nearly 300,000 babies ill, and has investigated institutions such as illegal detention centers. Their researchers even issued a review of last year's unrest in Tibet, which said Tibetans were protesting because of failed government policies.
Gongmeng is not the only one being targeted.
Last month, Yirenping, which fights discrimination against hepatitis patients, faced a clampdown, and more than 50 Beijing lawyers, many of whom focus on human rights issues, had their licenses revoked.
Two activists who have criticized the government's handling of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake have also been put on trial.
One of them, Huang Qi, appeared in court Wednesday ON charges of illegally possessing state secrets.
Tan Zuoren, an activist who questioned why so many children died in the earthquake, will be tried for subversion next week.
August 6, 2009
Close associates of Chinese legal activist Xu Zhiyong say he is being detained on charges of tax evasion. Xu's case is one of several that appear to be part of widening crackdown on dissent in China ahead of October's 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China.
More than a week ago, without explanation, Chinese police detained Xu Zhiyong, the head of a legal aid organization Gongmeng in Beijing.
Teng Biao, a co-founder of the group, says Xu's family has not seen him since he was taken from his home early on Wednesday last week.
Teng says Xu's brother went to the Beijing University of Post and Telecommunications, where Xu Zhiyong taught. There, he learned that his brother had been taken away by public security forces and was being charged with tax evasion.
Teng added that Zhang Lu, another member of Gongmeng who also has been missing since last week, has still not been heard from.
Many political analysts and human rights groups say Gongmeng and other activist groups are being targeted as part of a widening crackdown on dissent ahead of the October 1 anniversary of the founding of the communist government.
However, Randy Peerenboom a professor of law at La Trobe University in Melbourne who is now based in Beijing, sees a broader purpose. He thinks what is happening is part of an effort to ensure social stability that is not exclusively linked to the coming anniversary.
"The number of demonstrations has been rising in recent years, many of them becoming more violent, and so you see the government trying to crackdown on various sources of instability," he said.
Peerenboom says the government has tried to force many of the country's disputes and controversial cases into the court system, but in his opinion that has ended up being too costly and has not ended the protests. Because of that, the government has started targeting activist lawyers and legal groups like Gongmeng.
"I think that one of the problems is they've [Gongmeng] handled an increasingly wide range of cases and gotten involved in a wider range of issues and this is one of the reasons why I think the government is re-calibrating its strategy," he said.
Gongmeng's lawyers represented victims of the Sanlu toxic milk powder scandal, which made nearly 300,000 babies ill, and has investigated institutions such as illegal detention centers. Their researchers even issued a review of last year's unrest in Tibet, which said Tibetans were protesting because of failed government policies.
Gongmeng is not the only one being targeted.
Last month, Yirenping, which fights discrimination against hepatitis patients, faced a clampdown, and more than 50 Beijing lawyers, many of whom focus on human rights issues, had their licenses revoked.
Two activists who have criticized the government's handling of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake have also been put on trial.
One of them, Huang Qi, appeared in court Wednesday ON charges of illegally possessing state secrets.
Tan Zuoren, an activist who questioned why so many children died in the earthquake, will be tried for subversion next week.
"Chinese start postcard drive to support dissidents," by Yu Le and Lucy Hornby (Reuters)
Link
August 6, 2009
BEIJING (Reuters Life!) - Chinese web users have launched a postcard campaign to support dissidents in prisons and to protest against their detention, one of the organizers told Reuters.
Chinese Internet activists launched their first postcard campaign last month, in a little-known case of a man detained in Fujian province in southern China.
They are now expanding the campaign to support better-known activists, including legal aid lawyer Xu Zhiyong and earthquake victim advocate Tan Zuoren.
"It depends on the prison or detention house whether they can receive the postcards," wrote Wen Yunchao, the blogger who initiated the idea.
"But pressure could be felt when huge amounts of postcards are flooding in."
Beijing is tightening its grip on the country's determined but small activist community, which has come under intense government pressure ahead of the celebrations for the 60th anniversary of the People's Republic in October.
Xu Zhiyong, who had taken on causes including helping victims of tainted baby milk formula and issuing an independent report on Tibet, was taken from his home last week and is being held in an undisclosed location.
Tan Zuoren, a writer who compiled a list of earthquake victims, faces trial next week on a charge of "inciting subversion of state power".
The first postcard campaign supported Guo Baofeng, detained for spreading information about ties between police and suspected rapists and murderers. Police said the woman died of illness.
Guo was released two weeks later, although it was not clear whether the postcards had helped. None ever reached his hands.
Advocates told web surfers and friends to write "Your mother calls you back home for lunch" on the postcards, referring to a phrase currently popular among the Chinese Internet community.
"'Come back home for lunch' is a metaphor for freedom," Ran Yunfei, a magazine editor who said he had sent postcards to Tan and Huang, told Reuters.
"And the word 'mother' makes people feel warm."
There is no evidence so far to show that the movement has any influence on the dissidents' cases, but Ran said at least it provides a way for people to express their opinion without risking unwelcome attention from security forces.
"The most important thing is to show your attitude," Ran said. "That's why it makes sense."
August 6, 2009
BEIJING (Reuters Life!) - Chinese web users have launched a postcard campaign to support dissidents in prisons and to protest against their detention, one of the organizers told Reuters.
Chinese Internet activists launched their first postcard campaign last month, in a little-known case of a man detained in Fujian province in southern China.
They are now expanding the campaign to support better-known activists, including legal aid lawyer Xu Zhiyong and earthquake victim advocate Tan Zuoren.
"It depends on the prison or detention house whether they can receive the postcards," wrote Wen Yunchao, the blogger who initiated the idea.
"But pressure could be felt when huge amounts of postcards are flooding in."
Beijing is tightening its grip on the country's determined but small activist community, which has come under intense government pressure ahead of the celebrations for the 60th anniversary of the People's Republic in October.
Xu Zhiyong, who had taken on causes including helping victims of tainted baby milk formula and issuing an independent report on Tibet, was taken from his home last week and is being held in an undisclosed location.
Tan Zuoren, a writer who compiled a list of earthquake victims, faces trial next week on a charge of "inciting subversion of state power".
The first postcard campaign supported Guo Baofeng, detained for spreading information about ties between police and suspected rapists and murderers. Police said the woman died of illness.
Guo was released two weeks later, although it was not clear whether the postcards had helped. None ever reached his hands.
Advocates told web surfers and friends to write "Your mother calls you back home for lunch" on the postcards, referring to a phrase currently popular among the Chinese Internet community.
"'Come back home for lunch' is a metaphor for freedom," Ran Yunfei, a magazine editor who said he had sent postcards to Tan and Huang, told Reuters.
"And the word 'mother' makes people feel warm."
There is no evidence so far to show that the movement has any influence on the dissidents' cases, but Ran said at least it provides a way for people to express their opinion without risking unwelcome attention from security forces.
"The most important thing is to show your attitude," Ran said. "That's why it makes sense."
"More on the detained Chinese lawyer," by James Fallows, The Atlantic
Link
August 1, 2009
Not being on-scene in Beijing, I don't have fresh info myself. But as a reference for anyone wanting to follow the case of Xu Zhiyong, the Chinese civil-rights lawyer who was taken from his home at 5am last week and has not been heard from since, here are some relevant sites:
- China Digital Times summary of the event and coverage;
- CDT on the recent crackdown on other legal-aid groups;
- Evan Osnos dispatch for the New Yorker on "Where is Xu Zhiyong?"
- The Chinese Media Project story;
- Xu's personal blog, in Chinese;
- Blog account in Chinese of tax charges against Xu and his response;
- English version of similar response;
- English account by one of Xu's colleagues, Teng Biao, of his own "kidnapping" by the police.
Check those sites for updates. The minor point that comes through these accounts is the excuse for the arrest of Xu. His legal-defense center, the Open Constitution Initiative, had been receiving support and grants from Yale Law School -- one of many instances of Western legal groups working to expand the rule of law in China. The authorities have found a way to declare that this support was improperly reported for tax purposes.
The major point that comes through is that Xu and his colleagues are the farthest thing from overthrow-the-system radical subversives. On the contrary: he files suit in Chinese courts, he bases his claims for protection on the Chinese constitution, and he has even been a successful candidate in a local election. (China has elections at the local level.) He is what real radicals would dismiss as a "liberal" and "inside-the-system reformer," but now his and similar efforts are beyond the pale.
Over the 20 years since Tiananmen Square, and certainly during the three years I could observe first-hand there, rule of law and civil liberties made a steady if uneven expansion in China. This and related recent crackdowns are a setback, whose significance we can judge depending on what happens next.
Consistent with the policy that the US should view China as a partner and friend in the many areas where collaboration is necessary and fruitful, but should speak up for its own values when they differ from Chinese government practice, US officials should say that they are watching this case. Not interfering in Chinese affairs, not telling the Chinese government what to do -- but watching, to see how the government respects its own citizens' rights.
August 1, 2009
Not being on-scene in Beijing, I don't have fresh info myself. But as a reference for anyone wanting to follow the case of Xu Zhiyong, the Chinese civil-rights lawyer who was taken from his home at 5am last week and has not been heard from since, here are some relevant sites:
- China Digital Times summary of the event and coverage;
- CDT on the recent crackdown on other legal-aid groups;
- Evan Osnos dispatch for the New Yorker on "Where is Xu Zhiyong?"
- The Chinese Media Project story;
- Xu's personal blog, in Chinese;
- Blog account in Chinese of tax charges against Xu and his response;
- English version of similar response;
- English account by one of Xu's colleagues, Teng Biao, of his own "kidnapping" by the police.
Check those sites for updates. The minor point that comes through these accounts is the excuse for the arrest of Xu. His legal-defense center, the Open Constitution Initiative, had been receiving support and grants from Yale Law School -- one of many instances of Western legal groups working to expand the rule of law in China. The authorities have found a way to declare that this support was improperly reported for tax purposes.
The major point that comes through is that Xu and his colleagues are the farthest thing from overthrow-the-system radical subversives. On the contrary: he files suit in Chinese courts, he bases his claims for protection on the Chinese constitution, and he has even been a successful candidate in a local election. (China has elections at the local level.) He is what real radicals would dismiss as a "liberal" and "inside-the-system reformer," but now his and similar efforts are beyond the pale.
Over the 20 years since Tiananmen Square, and certainly during the three years I could observe first-hand there, rule of law and civil liberties made a steady if uneven expansion in China. This and related recent crackdowns are a setback, whose significance we can judge depending on what happens next.
Consistent with the policy that the US should view China as a partner and friend in the many areas where collaboration is necessary and fruitful, but should speak up for its own values when they differ from Chinese government practice, US officials should say that they are watching this case. Not interfering in Chinese affairs, not telling the Chinese government what to do -- but watching, to see how the government respects its own citizens' rights.
"Arrested Lawyer's 'Chinese Dream'" by Austin Ramzy, TIME.com
Link
August 5, 2009
The lawyer Xu Zhiyong disappeared in Beijing one week ago, but now his image is popping up all over town. Xu, who was taken from his house by police, is featured in the latest edition of Shishang Xiansheng, the Chinese version of Esquire. He is one of 60 people interviewed by the magazine in recent months about their idea of the Chinese dream. The police haven't explained the charges against Xu, but his brother told the Associated Press that officials at the university where Xu taught said he was being held for tax evasion. The Open Constitution Initiative (or Gongmeng in Chinese), a legal advocacy group that Xu founded, was shuttered by tax authorities last month over allegations it owes $208,000 in taxes. Many observers think the closure is more likely related to Gongmeng's pioneering work on sensitive legal cases.
In the Esquire piece Xu is pictured with a white light behind his head and wearing a French-cuffed shirt and tie--not, by any means, his usual attire. He is featured with six other activists. Here, via China Digital Times, is a translation of his Chinese dream:
I wish our country could be a free and happy one. Every citizen does not need go against their conscience and can find their own place by their virtue and talents; a simple and happy society, where the goodness of humanity is expanded to the maximum, and the evilness of humanity is constrained to the maximum; honesty, trust, kindness, and helping each other are everyday occurences in life; there is not so much anger and anxiety, a pure smile on everyone's face.
August 5, 2009
The lawyer Xu Zhiyong disappeared in Beijing one week ago, but now his image is popping up all over town. Xu, who was taken from his house by police, is featured in the latest edition of Shishang Xiansheng, the Chinese version of Esquire. He is one of 60 people interviewed by the magazine in recent months about their idea of the Chinese dream. The police haven't explained the charges against Xu, but his brother told the Associated Press that officials at the university where Xu taught said he was being held for tax evasion. The Open Constitution Initiative (or Gongmeng in Chinese), a legal advocacy group that Xu founded, was shuttered by tax authorities last month over allegations it owes $208,000 in taxes. Many observers think the closure is more likely related to Gongmeng's pioneering work on sensitive legal cases.
In the Esquire piece Xu is pictured with a white light behind his head and wearing a French-cuffed shirt and tie--not, by any means, his usual attire. He is featured with six other activists. Here, via China Digital Times, is a translation of his Chinese dream:
I wish our country could be a free and happy one. Every citizen does not need go against their conscience and can find their own place by their virtue and talents; a simple and happy society, where the goodness of humanity is expanded to the maximum, and the evilness of humanity is constrained to the maximum; honesty, trust, kindness, and helping each other are everyday occurences in life; there is not so much anger and anxiety, a pure smile on everyone's face.
"Rules of the Game," by Evan Osnos, The New Yorker
Link
August 4, 2009
A Chinese lawyer uses the court to challenge policies he considers unfair and illegal, and he lands in police custody. Another Chinese lawyer uses the court in a similar spirit and earns a balanced story about him in a state-run newspaper. What’s the difference between them?
Nobody really knows these days. But finding the line on any given day is the central question facing Chinese lawyers and advocates at a moment in Chinese history when the boundaries of dissent are defined more by rules of thumb than by the rule of law. In the days since Xu Zhiyong, a prominent public-interest lawyer, was detained last week on suspicion of tax evasion, his case has emerged as a test of how China’s commitment to promoting the rule of law will unfold. (A few new details have emerged about Xu’s case.) Curiously, the Global Times, a new state-run English-language paper, chose to publish a story Tuesday about another lawyer, Xie Yanyi who reportedly “filed a lawsuit against Li Yizhong, the Industry and Information Technology minister, for infringing upon citizens’ freedom and privacy.” The “audacious legal action” is “in retaliation to the government’s plan to install all new computers in China with a filtering software program which can monitor an individual’s Internet use.”
Xie is no stranger to “audacious legal action,” and history suggests that his lawsuit will not get far. One rule of thumb is that legal actions against the state, even if technically permitted, rarely go anywhere. Then again, the filtering software known as Green Dam is just unpopular enough with Chinese Web users that maybe a pocket of the leadership will try to earn some populist capital by letting the case go for a while. Another rule of thumb, after all, is that the leadership recognizes the volatile power of Chinese Web users, and might be eager to let off some steam. So, who knows? If China achieves the rule of law that it avowedly seeks, this will someday be an answerable question.
August 4, 2009
A Chinese lawyer uses the court to challenge policies he considers unfair and illegal, and he lands in police custody. Another Chinese lawyer uses the court in a similar spirit and earns a balanced story about him in a state-run newspaper. What’s the difference between them?
Nobody really knows these days. But finding the line on any given day is the central question facing Chinese lawyers and advocates at a moment in Chinese history when the boundaries of dissent are defined more by rules of thumb than by the rule of law. In the days since Xu Zhiyong, a prominent public-interest lawyer, was detained last week on suspicion of tax evasion, his case has emerged as a test of how China’s commitment to promoting the rule of law will unfold. (A few new details have emerged about Xu’s case.) Curiously, the Global Times, a new state-run English-language paper, chose to publish a story Tuesday about another lawyer, Xie Yanyi who reportedly “filed a lawsuit against Li Yizhong, the Industry and Information Technology minister, for infringing upon citizens’ freedom and privacy.” The “audacious legal action” is “in retaliation to the government’s plan to install all new computers in China with a filtering software program which can monitor an individual’s Internet use.”
Xie is no stranger to “audacious legal action,” and history suggests that his lawsuit will not get far. One rule of thumb is that legal actions against the state, even if technically permitted, rarely go anywhere. Then again, the filtering software known as Green Dam is just unpopular enough with Chinese Web users that maybe a pocket of the leadership will try to earn some populist capital by letting the case go for a while. Another rule of thumb, after all, is that the leadership recognizes the volatile power of Chinese Web users, and might be eager to let off some steam. So, who knows? If China achieves the rule of law that it avowedly seeks, this will someday be an answerable question.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
