Today, we mark China Human Rights Lawyers Day, in remembrance of the
Chinese government’s roundup of over 300 human rights lawyers and
legal assistants in the days following July 9, 2015, in what is known
as the ‘709 crackdown’. UN experts are
dismayed that ‘the profession of human rights lawyer
has been effectively criminalised in China.’
Human rights lawyers
are a cornerstone of China’s human rights movement. From Uyghurs,
Tibetans and Hong Kongers, to religious minorities, LGBTQI and
feminist advocates, journalists, and political dissidents: human
rights lawyers defend the full spectrum of civil society. They
accompany and empower the most vulnerable against land evictions,
discrimination, health scandals, or extra-legal detention. They
embody the promise of rule of law and hold the government accountable
to its commitments under China’s constitution, laws, and the
international human rights treaties it has ratified. They ensure that
no one is left behind.
Today, we call for
urgent global attention to the Chinese government’s new wave of
repression against human rights lawyers unfolding over the past three
months.
On April 10, Ding
Jiaxi and Xu Zhiyong were sentenced to 12 and 14 years in
prison and 3 and 4 years’ deprivation of political rights
respectively, on grounds of ‘subversion of State power,’
prompting grave
concerns by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Both attended a private gathering in the coastal city of Xiamen in
December 2019 to discuss the future of civil society in China. Xu’s
partner, feminist activist Li Qiaochu, was recently tried
behind closed doors for ‘inciting subversion of State power’, and
her lawyer was not permitted to question witnesses or review
evidence. Li has also been denied access to adequate healthcare
despite severe mental health issues in custody.
Another Xiamen
gathering attendee, lawyer Chang Weiping, was sentenced to
three and half years in prison on similar charges on June 8. The
three lawyers had previously been forcibly disappeared under
‘Residential
Surveillance at a Designated Location’ (RSDL), a
criminal procedure systematically used against human rights lawyers
and defenders, tantamount to enforced disappearance and torture
according
to UN experts.
On April 14, lawyer Yu
Wensheng and his wife Xu Yan, were detained on their way
to attend a meeting at the Delegation of the European Union in
Beijing. Both have since been formally arrested, Yu for ‘picking
quarrels and provoking trouble,’ Xu for ‘inciting subversion of
State power’. Yu left prison in March 2022 upon completion of a
first four-year sentence on national security grounds, prompting
concerns that he may now face a harsher sentence. He is the recipient
of the 2021 Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders, and the
2019 Franco-German Prize for Human Rights and the Rule of Law.
We strongly condemn the
Chinese government’s abuse of national security, in law and
practice, to target human rights lawyers and activists, as documented
by UN experts. The authorities make systematic use of
national security crimes under China’s Criminal Law, in particular
‘subversion of State power’ or ‘inciting subversion’ (Article
105) that carry lengthy prison sentences. According
to UN human rights experts, China’s Criminal
Procedure Law, including Articles 39 and 85, ‘provides for explicit
exemptions and restrictions to [legal provisions guaranteeing due
process] for national security crimes, such as notification of family
members of arrest within 24 hours, or access to a lawyer within 48
hours.’ UN experts have called on China to repeal
Article 105 of the Criminal Law, and legal provisions
allowing for RSDL. In 2015, the UN
Committee Against Torture called on China to repeal
restrictions to the right to counsel and to family notification on
national security grounds.
We are further
concerned that the Hong Kong authorities are following a similar path
since the imposition of the National Security Law. Prominent lawyers
Chow Hang-tung, Albert Ho and Margaret Ng are
currently awaiting trial on a range of national security crimes, for
their human rights work. UN experts have recently called
for Chow Hang-tung's release.
We remain deeply
concerned at the Chinese government’s increasing use of exit bans
to impede human rights lawyers and activists from leaving the
country, sometimes to visit a critically ill relative. On June 9,
lawyer Li Heping and his family were intercepted
by border police at Chengdu’s international airport. Similarly to
activist Guo Feixiong and other cases over the past years, the
authorities considered Li and his family’s planned travel to
‘endanger national security.’ In May 2021, lawyer Tang Jitian
was prevented by authorities from visiting his daughter on life
support in Tokyo. He was released in January 2023 after being
forcibly disappeared for 398 days following an attempt to observe
Human Rights Day at the Delegation of the European Union in Beijing
in 2021.
We are alarmed at the
severe harassment against released human rights lawyers and their
relatives, including children. Li
Heping and three other lawyers have reported that
State Security agents, or unidentified individuals acting on their
behalf, regularly intimidate and threaten family members, including
elderly parents, and hinder their children’s access to education.
Over the past two months, lawyer Wang Quanzhang and his family
have been forced to move 13 times in Beijing. The family has also
suffered from constant harassment and threats at their doors, as well
as electricity and gas cuts. Lawyer Bao Longjun has been
prevented from leaving his home multiple times by unidentified
individuals blocking his door. Lawyer Zhou Shifeng, who was
arrested as part of the ‘709 crackdown’ in 2015 and was released
after completing his seven-year prison sentence in November 2022, has
reported leaving Beijing in May in relation to increasing pressure
and surveillance by State authorities.
We also urge greater
attention to the Chinese government’s disbarment of human rights
lawyers. At least 30 human rights lawyers have seen their practising
license suspended or revoked by the authorities since 2017. Since
2016, administrative measures have criminalised lawyers ‘using the
Internet or media to express dissatisfaction with the Party or the
government’, joining ‘sit-ins, holding banners, shouting slogans,
expressing solidarity’ and other acts in exercise of their rights
to free speech and peaceful assembly. Similar rules have tightened
ideological control of law firms, with at least three penalised over
the same period.
Detained human rights
lawyers are constantly subject to physical and psychological torture
and ill-treatment in pre-trial detention and prison. They are
routinely denied contact with their relatives and access to medical
care, despite critical health issues. The government impedes
family-appointed lawyers from accessing court documents and
representing victims, instead imposing government-appointed lawyers
whose identities are not disclosed or refuse to communicate with
relatives. Detained lawyers are often convicted during sham
closed-door trials, without notification to families nor disclosure
of court verdicts for prolonged periods.
The UN Working Group on
Arbitrary Detention has determined
that China has a ‘systemic problem with arbitrary detention which
amounts to a serious violation of international law’.
Over the years,
sustained attention from the international community has contributed
to the release and improvement of conditions for those detained, and
brought lawyers and relatives vital moral support.
Against this new
wave of repression, which has been known as the ‘709 crackdown
2.0’, we call on the international community to urge the Chinese
government to:
- Put an end to
its crackdown on human rights lawyers and defenders;
- Immediately and
unconditionally release all those arbitrarily detained;
- Amend laws and
regulations, including national security legislation, its Criminal
Law and Criminal Procedure Law, to bring them into full compliance
with international human rights standards; and meaningfully
cooperate with the United Nations human rights bodies to that end.
|