[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 107 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
OPEN FORUM ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE RULE OF LAW IN CHINA
=======================================================================
ROUNDTABLE
before the
CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 4, 2002
__________
Printed for the use of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.cecc.gov
79-302 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2002
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
Senate
House
MAX BAUCUS, Montana, Chairman DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska, Co-
CARL LEVIN, Michigan Chairman
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California JIM LEACH, Iowa
BYRON DORGAN, North Dakota DAVID DREIER, California
EVAN BAYH, Indiana FRANK WOLF, Virginia
CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska JOE PITTS, Pennsylvania
BOB SMITH, New Hampshire SANDER LEVIN, Michigan
SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas NANCY PELOSI, California
JIM DAVIS, Florida
EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
PAULA DOBRIANSKY, Department of State
GRANT ALDONAS, Department of Commerce
D. CAMERON FINDLAY, Department of Labor
LORNE CRANER, Department of State
JAMES KELLY, Department of State
Ira Wolf, Staff Director
John Foarde, Deputy Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS
Opening statement of Ira Wolf, Staff Director, Congressional-
Executive Commission on China.................................. 1
Ding, Ignatius Y., Chairman, Silicon Valley for Democracy in
China.......................................................... 2
Martin, G. Eugene, consultant, former Deputy Chief of Mission,
U.S. Embassy, Beijing, China................................... 3
Zhang, Erping, President, Falun Gong International Committee for
Human Rights................................................... 5
Purohit, Raj, Lawyers Committee on Human Rights.................. 7
Hou, Wenzhuo, student, Harvard University Law School............. 10
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements
Martin, G. Eugene................................................ 24
Zhang, Erping.................................................... 25
Purohit, Raj..................................................... 27
Hou, Wenzhuo..................................................... 29
Submission for the Record
Prepared statement of Wenhe Lu and Ciping Huang, board members of
the Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars in
the United States.............................................. 32
OPEN FORUM ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE RULE OF LAW IN CHINA
----------
MONDAY, MARCH 4, 2002
Congressional-Executive
Commission on China,
Washington, DC.
The roundtable was convened, pursuant to notice, at 2:30
p.m., in room SD-215, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Mr. Ira
Wolf (staff director of the Commission) presiding.
Also present: Mr. John Foarde, Deputy Staff Director; Ms.
Holly Vineyard, representing Grant Aldonas, U.S. Department of
Commerce; Mr. Michael Castellano, Office of Representative
Sander Levin; Ms. Jennifer Goedke, Office of Representative
Marcy Kaptur; Ms. Sharon Payt, Office of Senator Sam Brownback;
Ms. Kate Friedrich, representing Paula Dobriansky, State
Department; and Ms. Susan O'Sullivan, representing Lorne
Craner, State Department.
OPENING STATEMENT OF IRA WOLF, STAFF DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL-
EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA
Mr. Wolf. Good afternoon. My name is Ira Wolf. I am the
staff director of the Congressional-Executive Commission on
China. This is John Foarde, the deputy staff director.
I would like to welcome everyone here today to the first
public issues roundtable being held by the Congressional-
Executive Commission on China.
We have been instructed by Senator Baucus, the chairman,
and Congressman Bereuter, the co-chairman, to hold a series of
staff-led public issues roundtables to go into greater detail
on areas of concern to the Commission.
We are starting this series with today's open forum, where
we are allowing anyone to present his or her views on human
rights and rule of law in China--personal views or
organizational views. We hope to do this several times a year.
Once we have completed this open forum, we will begin
roundtables on specific issues. There is a list on the back
table that has the schedule for these continuing roundtables.
The next session will be on March 18 on labor rights. Also,
the list in the back of the room has the schedule for full
commission hearings. The next one will be April 11 on human
rights and legal reform.
Let me briefly describe the format today. We will have each
presenter speak for 5 minutes, and then we will have questions
from the staff of the members.
The lights behind me will go off. The yellow light will go
off in 4 minutes, and in 5 minutes the red light and the bell
will go off. So, you have 5 minutes to present your oral
statement, and we will be happy to take any written statement
or documents for the record.
We also are happy to accept any written documents from
people who are not here to testify today--also for the record.
This is the first time we are doing this, so it is a
learning experience for all of us, including the staff members
for the commissioners.
Let us start with Mr. Ding, chairman of Silicon Valley for
Democracy in China. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF IGNATIUS Y. DING, CHAIRMAN, SILICON VALLEY FOR
DEMOCRACY IN CHINA
Mr. Ding. I am from Silicon Valley. That is on the edge of
the ocean. Anyway, I just came back from China around February
18, exactly 2 weeks ago. So I have some recent experience
traveling to China, not only in cities, but we purposely, a
group of us, went out and traveled into rural areas, several
hundred miles away from the city.
We just wanted to get some sense of what is going on,
because 90 percent of the Chinese population, as you know, are
in the rural areas, mostly in the farming community.
Anyway, the primary purpose for my personal reason for
being there, was attending an International Law Conference.
That was the first surprise, when I heard that the discussion
in Shanghai and human rights came up. They were heated
discussions, talking about between the laws between the KMT and
the Communist Party. It was kind of interesting discussion that
I did not expect.
But immediately, there is no surprise, the media got chased
out of the room half-way through. So, that was my first taste
of the use of the Security Bureau in China.
Anyway, the media followed us when they found out we were
going to rural areas. So, there are two national teams from
northern China that followed us into the village. Actually, in
the slides you can see the pictures. They followed us even
during Chinese New Year. They followed us all the way through
in the 2-week duration there.
So I have to emphasize that there is a major difference in
the press censorship in a city and in the rural area. It is
much more open. So, I want to make that point.
The other thing I noticed, because I do not have much time,
but I spent a little bit of time, since I am from Silicon
Valley, I cannot help it, but looking into why we stopped
receiving e-mails from China.
So the first thing I did in Shanghai, was to get into an
Internet cafe and start looking around. What I found
interesting enough, is they have high-speed access and very
low-speed reception. It is pretty evident that the censorship
is on all the time.
When I went to the rural area, the Internet cafe was closed
during the New Year, so they did not get a chance to check it
out.
But when I got back, I found an article that is in a
package. It turned out, the American corporations are helping
the Chinese Government censor their e-mail down to the packets,
is the terminology.
In other words, every little bit coming through the sisko
box in IBM, all the corporate giants from America, to make a
buck, they cannot resist temptation and they have developed the
software and the hardware to help the Chinese Government to
censor everything coming through the wire.
So that is one thing I think the Commission should take
note of and look into, how to convince these people not to do
this any more.
But, again, coming back to the media, what I find is, the
liberal attitude, especially when I attended several town hall
meetings in the village, I find it is very refreshing and
hopeful.
So I believe one of the things to address the Chinese human
rights issue is not to beat them up, but encourage the county-
to-county chamber of commerce at the lower level, to develop a
grassroots relationship. I believe that will really liberate
and help improve the human rights conditions there.
For example, we have a Falun Gong representative here. I
saw all kinds of propaganda in their city halls, but nobody
paid any attention in the counties. In the cities, of course,
if you mention that word, you are in the next wagon going to
you know where.
Anyway, so I believe it is important for the Commission to
look into this matter and improve or develop some kind of
mechanism to adopt a county by U.S. counties, or some kind of
college program that encourages students to go there and teach
English, learn Chinese, learn the culture, to do the grassroot
exchanges. That will, I think, have a huge push in the human
rights area.
That is my observation. I will entertain any questions,
because I spent quite a bit of time, the entire time in the
rural area, and I asked a lot of questions. I would be more
than happy to answer questions. I want to just conclude here.
Mr. Wolf. Thanks a lot, Mr. Ding.
Next is Eugene Martin, a consultant and former Deputy Chief
of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing.
Mr. Martin.
STATEMENT OF G. EUGENE MARTIN, CONSULTANT, FORMER DEPUTY CHIEF
OF MISSION, U.S. EMBASSY, BEIJING, CHINA
Mr. Martin. Thank you. It is a pleasure to be here.
After having the opportunity to attend the hearing on
February 7, I was very impressed by the comments of the
witnesses at that time. Going home and thinking about it, I
thought one of the things that would be worth mentioning in
relationship to the development of rule of law and democracy in
China, is the need for China to move toward a civil society.
As it looks toward representative government under a rule
of law, I think the development of a civil society will be a
critical building block. Allowing citizens to form and join
groups which foster common goals of society while furthering
their own interests will advance human rights and democracy by
providing a shock-absorbing cushion between the government and
private citizens.
Civil society can be defined, in part, as institutions
formed by citizens individually or collective which are apart
from state or party apparatus. The institutions' goals can be
to serve the goals or the interests of their own members, or as
part of furthering their societal goals as a whole.
These institutions could be oriented toward social goals,
services, religious pursuits, academic, professional, or
various other business goals. Individuals would have a sense of
belonging to a group or body with shared ideals and objectives,
perhaps reducing alienation and dissension.
The problem in China is that the government sees such
organizations as potential rival power centers, competing
ideological or philosophical bodies, and socially destabilizing
agents.
China has a long history of secret societies and movements
which became either criminal or political, and, on occasion,
succeeded in overthrowing the dynasties. One need only look at
the Taiping Rebellion in the 19th century, or Sun Yat-sen's
Tongmenghui movement at the latter part of the 19th century.
Given the increased availability of information and the
speed of modern communication, organizations have enhanced
means of connecting their members throughout the country.
This is in part why the Chinese Government has clamped down
so hard on a number of such groups, whether they are Falun
Gong, independent labor unions or religious bodies, insisting
on state/party control over all organizations.
Nongovernmental civil society organizations, however, are
an important component in the nation's effort to provide its
citizens with the means to prosper, meet society's needs, and
advance national interests.
During the first 30 years of the People's Republic, the
Party insisted on controlling and dictating all activity,
whether economic, political, or social. Individuals had little,
if any, private space in which to pursue their own ideas and
interests.
Under the economic reforms initiated by Deng Xiaoping,
China unleashed Chinese citizens' innate abilities and
enthusiasm. The citizens, therefore, gained greater control
over their private lives.
As they got more choices in their lives, the Chinese had a
growing desire to protect and advance their own individual and
collective interests in association with other like-minded
people.
Professional, cultural, religious, and social groupings
advocate development of a transparent and consistent rule of
law, as well as greater ``political space'' to express opinions
and ideas. These goals often parallel those advocated by the
government and the party; occasionally, they diverge.
In most cases, those that differ from the state/party are
not antithetical or threatening. Rather, they propose a
different approach to problems based upon grassroots
perspectives.
Such diversity can only strengthen and stabilize China's
society by giving citizens peaceful, lawful means to express
their opinions and to work to advance them. While some groups
undoubtedly will oppose state or party policies, transparency,
diversity, and public discussion usually will result in
moderate policies toward common societal goals.
Civil society is taking root in China. As economic reforms
develop, the government finds it is unable to provide all of
its citizens' needs and expectations. The State Owned
Enterprise [SOE] crisis, floating population, rural recession,
urban dislocations cause problems the government cannot resolve
on its own.
A number of nongovernmental organizations [NGOs] have been
allowed, even encouraged, by the government, albeit under close
state or party supervision and control. These deal with
environment, natural disaster, and poverty challenges.
Other nongovernmental groups have stepped in, mostly at the
local level, to provide social services when the government
cannot for financial or structural reasons. These include
volunteer support in orphanages or elder homes, counseling to
migrants and unemployed SOE workers, medical assistance in
rural or migrant communities, and tutorial help to students.
These services are desperately needed by the society in
transition from a planned to a market economy and can be
accomplished through private organizations. By allowing such
groups to fill the void, the government is already beginning to
foster a civil society. Much more needs to be done.
In conclusion, the development of a broader civil society
in China is an integral part of the advancement of the rule of
law and human rights.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Martin appears in the
appendix.]
Mr. Wolf. Thank you very much.
Next is Mr. Erping Zhang, president of the Falun Gong
International Committee for Human Rights.
STATEMENT OF ERPING ZHANG, PRESIDENT, FALUN GONG INTERNATIONAL
COMMITTEE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
Mr. Zhang. Thank you very much. Thank you for giving us the
opportunity to speak on the plight of the Falun Gong
practitioners in China.
As you may recall, the U.S. House and Senate unanimously
passed concurrent resolutions in November 1999 condemning the
People's Republic of China for its brutal persecution of Falun
Gong practitioners.
Some victims have also been invited to testify their
stories before Congress and we are grateful for the support
that the U.S. Congress has shown us during this difficult time.
We are, however, sad to report that in the year 2002, the
repression has only worsened. At last account, it has been
confirmed that 375 practitioners have died in police custody
since Falun Gong was banned in China in July 1999, while the
unofficial report is over 1,600 deaths.
The Chinese vice premier, Li Lanqing, said in a speed that
in just 3 short months, between July and October 1999, over
35,000 people who appealed to the Beijing regime were arrested.
According to human rights groups and media reports, at
least 100,000 people have been sent to labor camps without a
trial; some 600 people have been handed extended jail sentences
up to 18 years in jail; more than 1,000 have been sent to
mental institutions where they were given forced injections and
drugs.
One harrowing case is that of Ms. Zhao Xin, a 32-year-old
lecturer in economics at a Beijing business university. After
she was rounded up in a park for doing her exercises with her
friends, police beat her so viciously that they crushed three
of the vertebrae in her spine.
She was paralyzed from the neck down and her vocal chords
were damaged during surgery so she could no longer talk. Later,
she died, and the police tried to interrupt her funeral
procession organized by her university colleagues and students.
We can imagine the despair of her family. All of their
efforts to appeal to the courts or to get some explanation from
the authorities about how their daughter could have been
treated this way have been summarily dismissed.
For every case that we know about, there are many, many
more. There are cases of discrimination and harassment that,
while less severe than torture, have nonetheless wreaked havoc
with people's lives. Thousands upon thousands of practitioners
have lost their jobs, schools, pensions, and even their homes.
Falun Gong is not a Chinese issue, but an international
matter. Recently, groups of western Falun Gong practitioners
throughout the world went to the Tiananmen Square in Beijing to
peacefully appeal to the Chinese regime to stop the killing and
lifting the ban. Over 30 of them were Americans.
For their peaceful appeal, they were harshly treated and
physically abused before being deported. Many had their
personal belongings taken away by police, such as credit cards,
cash, cameras, laptops, and so on.
It is hard to imagine that this apolitical meditation is
peacefully practiced in over 50 countries, and yet is brutally
suppressed in its own homeland.
While China is stepping up its domestic efforts in
persecuting Falun Gong practitioners, its propaganda and
harassment against Falun Gong have also arrived overseas,
especially here in America.
The Wall Street Journal reported, on February 21, 2002:
``The approach, made variously by letter, phone call or
personal visit from a Chinese official based at China's
Washington Embassy or one of its numerous consulates, tends to
combine gross disinformation with scare tactics, and in some
cases, slyly implied diplomatic and commercial pressure.''
Typical is the experience of Santee, California, a city of
58,000 on the outskirts of San Diego County. A little over a
year ago, Mayor Randy Voepel received a letter from the newly
arrived Chinese consul general in Los Angeles, asking him to
not support Falun Gong and saying that it could ``jeopardize
your social stability.''
Also, noting that China would ``like to establish and
develop friendly relations with your city,'' and implying this
would require complying with China's wishes. This letter went
on to urge that ``no recognition and support in any form should
be given to the Falun Gong,'' and urged banning them from
registration as any kind of official organization.
The mayor replied, ``Your letter personally chilled me to
my bones. I was shocked that a Communist Nation would go to
this amount of trouble to suppress what is routinely accepted
in this country . . . I have the greatest respect for the
Chinese people in your country and everywhere in the world, but
I must be honest in my concern for the suppression of human
rights by your government as evidenced by your request.'' Then
this issued a mayoral proclamation commending the Falun Gong.
Such blunt assault on the civil liberty of U.S. citizens
and intervention on American internal affairs are in direct
violation of U.S. and international laws.
Last month, He Yafei, deputy chief of Mission of the
Chinese Embassy visited Mr. Rocky Anderson, the mayor of Salt
Lake City, who issued a proclamation last year honoring Falun
Gong. In a ``security briefing'' for Mr. Andersen, he attempted
to label Falun Gong as a ``terrorist group.''
Yet, the Wall Street Journal reported: ``Mr. Anderson let
the demonstration go ahead, on February 7. It was so peaceful,
says a mayoral spokesman, that the sole problem with the Falun
Gong was that ``they walked very slow.''
We appeal to this Congressional-Executive Commission on
China to investigate and stop such harassment by the Chinese
Government on United States soil.
We are hoping to work with the Commission to put in place
concrete and specific measures to, first, pressure the Beijing
government to release those detained and imprisoned Falun Gong
practitioners; second, help those imprisoned Falun Gong
practitioners seeking medical treatment abroad, due to
maltreatment and harsh conditions in prison; third, hold
hearings for victims of Falun Gong practitioners so that this
largest modern-day atrocity in China is highlighted; fourth,
identify those Chinese officials who have engaged in human
rights abuses and ban them from entering the United States;
fifth, use every opportunity and tool this Commission has to
call for an end of Beijing's suppression of Falun Gong.
Thank you very much for your consideration.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Zhang appears in the
appendix.]
Mr. Wolf. Thank you.
Next is Mr. Raj Purohit with the Lawyers Committee on Human
Rights.
STATEMENT OF RAJ PUROHIT, LAWYERS COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Mr. Purohit. The Lawyers Committee is an independent
nongovernment human rights organization based in New York and
Washington, DC. We aim to hold governments accountable to
international standards of human rights and work to develop
stronger models of corporate accountability in the global
marketplace.
The Lawyers Committee considers that human rights
conditions in China continue to be an issue of deep concern.
Over the past year, China has secured a prominent position in
the international arena, symbolized by its admission to the WTO
[World Trade Organization] as a successful bid to host the 2008
Olympics and the recent visit of President Bush.
However, this has not been accompanied by a parallel
improvement in human rights. Instead, government statements
about upholding the rule of law have frequently veiled harsh
political repression.
This is most poignantly illustrated by the Strike Hard
campaign which resulted in scores of executions after
procedural and substantive abuses of domestic criminal law in
China.
Moreover, in the aftermath of the September 11 tragedy in
New York and Washington, DC and Virginia, antiterrorist
rhetoric has been misused to legitimize harsh crackdowns and
illegitimate censorship of all forms of media, including the
Internet in China.
An abundance of NGO reports, as well as the annual
evaluations of China's human rights practices by the State
Department's Bureau of Democracy Human Rights and Labor, rate
these and other violations of the most fundamental human
rights.
They described crackdowns on dissidents, cases of arbitrary
arrest and detention of suspects, torture, forced prison labor,
and abusive labor conditions.
Freedom of expression continues to be restricted and voices
that have endeavored to draw attention to pressing issues of
national and global concern are violently silenced.
The Lawyers Committee has welcomed positive developments in
the Chinese legal system over the past few decades. However,
continuing violations illustrate that a strong legislative
framework cannot, by itself, secure the rule of law.
It is necessary to enforce this legal framework and
practice. To that end, China needs to build a strong,
independent legal profession.
I would like to focus briefly on the persecution of lawyers
in China. I would just like to sort of highlight a concern
about the continuing persecution, threats, and harassment
suffered by lawyers who confront common injustices in China.
In 1998, we addressed this and related issues in our report
``Lawyers in China: Obstacles to Independence in the Defense of
Rights.'' It is a copy I shall make available to the Commission
and its members.
Unfortunately, many of the problems described in that
report continue to be matters of concern. The report includes
analysis of the 1996 Lawyers Law, which in general terms
regulates the legal profession. The Lawyers Law was inspired
by, yet does not wholly encompass, the U.N. Basic Principles of
the Role on Lawyers from 1990.
Nevertheless, the law and the basic principle share their
intention to protect lawyers from physical or other forms of
abuse, and from interference when carrying out their
responsibilities in accordance with the law.
However, despite the strong legal framework, there are
reoccurring reports of intimidation and threats targeted at
legal practitioners.
One such case, that of Mr. Litai, illustrates this problem.
Since 1996, Mr. Litai has helped workers in the Shenzhen area
to obtain their rights in legal battles against local
government authorities, foreign investors, and company owners
in a series of cases that have drawn public attention. Over the
years, he had represented more than 800 factory workers in
labor disputes and struggles for compensation for grave work
injuries.
Many of these cases involved legal action against the Labor
Bureau or the social security department. In August last year,
he represented 56 women in a South Korean-owned wig factory in
Shenzhen who had been the victim of illegal body searches. The
company chose to settle the case out of court.
On December 19, 2001, the Longgang District Bureau of
Justice in Shenzhen ordered Mr. Zhou to close his legal
practice. The order, which apparently contravenes both
international law and domestic regulations, seems to be an
illegitimate retaliation for the negative attention that Mr.
Zhou's successful litigation practice has drawn to the Shenzhen
region.
As noted above, the Chinese Lawyers Law expressly protects
lawyers from such ungrounded interference and intimidation.
Such interference is also outlawed in international human
rights standards.
Specifically, the Lawyers Law states in its Article 12 that
``legal practice shall not be subject to geographical
limitation.'' This means that a lawyer licensed in one region
of China may practice in another without obstruction from the
local authorities.
Mr. Zhou, who is in possession of a Chongqing license, is
entitled to practice anywhere in China. The District Bureau has
no power to obstruct Mr. Zhou's practice of law.
He has, in fact, filed suit against the District Bureau of
Justice with the Longgang District People's Court to contest
the legitimacy of the order. In this respect, it should be
noted that the Shenzhen local Bureau of Justice has previously
attempted to confiscate his license shortly after he started
his practice in 1997. At that time the bureau returned the
license to Mr. Zhou after he initiated legal proceedings.
The Lawyers Committee believes that the case of Mr. Zhou
deserves particular consideration in light of China's recent
ascension to the WTO and the obligations that membership in
this organization entails with respect to the elimination of
barriers to trade.
It should be considered that the continuing threats and
harassment threats against Mr. Zhou, and in particular possible
withdrawal of his license to practice, are wholly inconsistent
with China's obligations under the WTO and set a most
disturbing precedent.
Mr. Zhou's activities show that the Chinese people
increasingly turn to the legal system for protection. This
commendable development needs to be protected and stimulated.
Working toward the development of the rule of law, it is of
key importance that China continues to build and enforce its
legal system to guarantee a sustainable protection of basic
human rights, as well as the interests of foreign investors
The legal system will only be as strong as the
professionals who work within it. China should adhere to its
own laws and to international standards, upholding the
independence of lawyers and their protection from persecution.
I have just a few brief recommendations here. We believe
that it is important to recognize the educative, guiding role
that can be played by foreign governments, human rights groups,
law schools, bar associations, and other international actors
in the development of law in China.
Underlining the position of China as a prominent member of
the international community, efforts should be made to ensure
that the continued involvement of these foreign actors.
The Chinese Government should fully comply with the
provisions of the U.N. Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers,
and to revise those aspects of Chinese law that restrict the
ability of lawyers to freely represent their clients and to
organize independent bar associations.
Lawyers should be free to carry out their professional
duties without official interference, restrictions, threats, or
intimidation.
Particular assistance should be provided to the training of
lawyers, both in China and abroad. Training programs should be
designed to fit with China's particular conditions and needs.
The exchange and sharing of relevant information should be
stimulated. Assistance should be also provided to China's law
schools for the design of courses and teaching methods.
Bar associations and the Chinese Ministry of Justice should
be engaged to create mechanisms that ensure the adequate
protection of legal practitioners.
At the same time, to promote high professional standards,
these institutions should be encouraged to publicize and
facilitate the rights of clients to bring malpractice suits, in
the belief that this will encourage lawyers to seriously
consider their professional responsibilities.
Assistance should be provided in the creation of a legal
aid system, by providing know-how and financial support where
appropriate.
Assistance should be provided to train and sensitive the
relevant branches of government to the importance of the
independent role of the lawyer within the legal system.
These are just a few observations in this particular area.
I look forward to working with the members of the Commission
and the staff. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Purohit appears in the
appendix.]
Mr. Wolf. Thanks very much.
Next is Ms. Wenzhuo Hou, who is a visiting fellow at
Harvard Law School. Please go ahead.
STATEMENT OF WENZHUO HOU, STUDENT, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL
Ms. Hou. Thank you very much.
Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to highlight here today
about a kind of human rights violation which affects the
largest number of Chinese people, and yet has hardly gained
much attention from the international community or the Chinese
Government.
That is, the human rights violation against peasants and
rural migrant workers, who number over 1 billion people and
more than 70 percent of the Chinese population.
The Chinese household registration system, that is, the
hukou system, created in the 1950s established a rural/urban
dichotomy system. Since then, Chinese citizens are classified
into two categories: those who are urban hukou versus those who
are rural hukou.
These two kinds of hukou status have made Chinese citizens
live in two worlds, the urban first world and the rural third
world.
I have recently been undertaking research, making
comparisons between the Chinese hukou system versus the
apartheid regime in South Africa. There are astonishing
similarities in these two countries.
Population registration laws in both countries, that is,
the Population Registration Act in South Africa and the
Household Registration Regulation in China, are the
cornerstones of a discriminatory system where one higher
category group dominated the rest.
While in South Africa black and colored people were
deprived or confined in their working rights, in China,
according to election law, the peasants only have one-fourth or
one-eighth of the representative rights that an urban citizen
has.
The largest social group in China, the peasants have no
national or regional representative associations, which
directly contributed to their marginalized political situation.
The peasants are also deprived of equal opportunities to
get access to housing, primary education, higher education,
employment, medical care, social security, and so on.
Black people in South Africa are regularly checked for
their pass, while in China rural migrants are checked for their
temporary residential card, work permits, and often are
arbitrarily sent to custody and repatriation centers.
Even worse than what is experienced by black people, the
Chinese peasants have minimal rights to land. Rights of
property and products are often traded upon. They not only have
to pay this proportional heavy tax to the state and collective,
but also are subject to numerous arbitrary fines and fees.
We know that rural women in China have the highest suicide
rate in the world. As we know, school children in Jiangsee were
killed when they had to produce fireworks for a living.
In Shanghai Province, teenaged boys were tricked into
working in gold mines where they were treated as slaves, or
even worse. Such horrific stories happen all over China very
often.
In a broader sense, all Chinese peasants and rural migrants
are all virtual slaves of the state. The rights and properties
are often abused by various governments at will, their
liberties are often deprived arbitrarily. In industrial areas,
the monetary compensation they get is even less than half of an
urban hukou person, if at all.
If we truly mean to talk about human rights today, the
human rights of peasants and migrants are too huge to ignore.
If we do not want to see the impoverished and desperate
peasants start another violent peasant revolution, as has
happened so many times in Chinese history, we must address the
human rights injustices for peasants now.
If we acknowledge this discrimination against peasants is
comprehensive, multifaceted, and institutionalized, we should
realize that it is not enough to address the problem in the
classical human rights approach.
It calls for a more systematic approach. Therefore, I
advocate that rights of peasants and rural migrants be singled
out as a major category of human rights and seriously studied,
as we do for women's rights, children's rights, or labor
rights, and so on.
Therefore, I call upon the international community to
examine and monitor the human rights of peasants and migrant
workers in China.
I recommend the following actions should be taken. First,
to adopt a categorical, identical discrimination approach in
monitoring human rights situations of peasants. That is,
discrimination based on descent, the hukou.
Second, to single out discrimination and human rights
violations against peasants and migrants while documenting
human rights in China, such as in the U.S. State Department
reports.
Third, to facilitate the reform of rural government, which
has become increasingly rent-seeking and exploitative in
nature.
Fourth, to review the impact of the WTO on Chinese
peasants. Noting the WTO's potential devastating effects on
peasants' livelihood, which may unleash social unrest from
rural China to the rest, it is of particular immediacy and
importance to address the human rights concerns of peasants.
To bring the human rights of peasants into the forefront of
the human rights discussion would greatly empower the peasants
and migrants. It will make this human rights argument more
relevant to the most powerless people in China who are willing
to participate.
I believe attention to human rights of peasants and
migrants would give tremendous support to the democracy
movement in China.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Hou appears in the
appendix.]
Mr. Wolf. Thank you very much.
Is Mr. Wenhe Lu here, by any chance?
[No response]
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lu appears in the appendix.]
All right. That concludes the presentations from those who
came today. We appreciate it very much.
We are going to go around and we will use the normal 5-
minute rule. We will do this in the order that everyone came
today. If you choose not to ask questions, that is also all
right, too.
So let me start. This question is for both Mr. Martin and
Mr. Purohit on legal aid. In light of the problems that you
mentioned, for example, with Mr. Zhou, the lawyer that we have
all read about so much, what is the possible impact, over the
short term, of increased assistance to legal aid projects? I
have the same question for you, Mr. Martin, in terms of the
efforts to build civil society.
Mr. Purohit. I think when one considers, be it the legal
aid groups, the civil society groups, bar associations, et
cetera, I think there is a very general notion.
We are of the belief at the Lawyers Committee that we have
got to have this combination, in a country like China, of
external pressures, at the same time sort of working with those
internally within the system who are trying to effectuate some
change. If you like, that is sort of the moderates within the
system.
So be it the individual is trying to set up legal aid
clinics, or bar associations, or for that matter chamber of
commerce groups, etc., I think whatever can be done, both at
the Commission level and through private partners that the
Commission and the United States Government-at-large is working
with, whatever can be done to get those groups engaged in a
sort of constructed and supported way in China, I think, is
useful.
It is sort of supporting those who need the support. The
external pressure, I think, is going to be there, both from the
government and nongovernment, but sort of getting this balance
right is what it is all about.
Mr. Martin. I think there are a lot of things that could be
done. The proviso, of course, is any time we have an
international organization that tries to go in and work with a
domestic organization in China, the government becomes
suspicious of what the goals and intentions of the foreign
organization are.
When I was in China with the consulate in Guangzhou, Rotary
International was very interested in trying to open up
opportunities to have Rotary in China. I think things like
Rotary, and business societies, and professional groups would
be very, very useful.
I know that there are a number of professional groups that
are starting their own organizations in China. I hope that at
some point it will be possible for them to have an association
or working relationship with other organizations such as
Kiwanis, or Rotary, or what have you, overseas. There is a
tremendous amount of service that could be provided by such
organizations.
Mr. Wolf. Mr. Ding, I wonder if you have a comment.
Mr. Ding. It just so happens that I went to China to attend
the International Law Conference, which was attended by over
100 legal scholars and lawyers, and this particular subject
came up.
In fact, what they indicated was, instead of outside
interference or pressure, they would welcome the opportunity if
there is any kind of assistance to provide grassroots education
and training programs, short-term training programs, let them
organize it themselves, and they can promulgate this throughout
the country.
This talk is like a foreign type of thing at a conference.
The leading advocate of this is one of the retired prosecutors
that has returned from Hague, who was a prosecutor who
represented China in the International Court.
So, I believe with the legal scholars inside China to back
this effort, if somehow we can provide assistance to provide
like sabbatical programs and actually train people inside China
and let them provide legal aid program, I think that that is
doable.
Mr. Wolf. Ms. Hou, the concerns you raise, are they
addressed at all by providing legal assistance to individuals
at the grassroots?
Ms. Hou. I still would like to highlight what is
experienced in rural China. I happened to talk to some women's
groups who are working for promoting the anti-family violence
movement. We should be concerned. The legal construction in
rural China is really very underdeveloped, far more
underdeveloped than urban China. The legal system in rural
China is very corrupted.
So I think the focus, therefore, should be really put more
on those very underdeveloped areas. I do not know exactly what
kind of program can be undertaken, but if we are serious in
that there can be something done to promote a turning and
capacity building of a rural legal justice system.
Mr. Wolf. Thank you.
Next is John Foarde.
Mr. Foarde. Thank you.
Mr. Ding, let me ask you if you have seen this. You were
probably in China when this came about. But about 10 days ago,
there was an article in the Weekly Standard magazine.
Mr. Ding. Yes. That is in the package.
Mr. Foarde. It is in the package?
Mr. Ding. Yes.
Mr. Foarde. All right. And it reflects some of the themes
that you talked about, particularly the role of U.S. businesses
in providing the software, the hardware, and the backbone
sometimes for the efforts by public security authorities to
control e-mail and other things. Could you elaborate a little?
Mr. Ding. That is almost half true. I believe the firewall
is building toward the outside. All the guns are pointed
outside. But I have also seen very devastating, very ugly
Internet access there. If you go to an Internet cafe, it is
very, very popular there for the young people, sad to say, and
it is full of pornography.
So, the censorship is actually not working inside. So they
basically censor the IP addresses. So anything coming from
outside is censored. They are not doing anything inside. So, it
is corrupt inside, but yet they are not doing anything at all.
The reason I looked at it, is because we stopped receiving e-
mails and I knew something was wrong.
It is because of the four-tier suffix that they key on
certain things that come in from the United States It becomes
automatically a candidate. They cannot possibly decensor
everything.
So I think that's what they build, and it is blocking the
e-mail coming from outside. Not just e-mails, also the Web site
traffic. I think that this, by and large, is what the American
corporations should take responsibility for.
Mr. Foarde. When you say ``censor,'' exactly what are they
doing? Are they not permitting the mail to get through, or are
they taking out words or whole sections of text? What is
happening in censorship?
Mr. Ding. They just block it. You cannot see it.
Mr. Foarde. So you do not see it.
Mr. Ding. You do not see it at all. It says, ``Time Out.''
That is all. They use a different word, but it is essentially
just a time out. You cannot see it. You ran out of time. You
cannot access it. They have high-speed access, but things are
so slow. It is very evident that something is behind it,
checking it.
Mr. Foarde. Let me switch just a little bit, on the same
topic. You said you visited a number of rural areas and
villages. How much connectivity is there really in villages and
how much would people use the Internet if they could?
Mr. Ding. It is available there. But the problem is, they
have the end-user access, but there is not enough ISP. The
service largely depends on the cities. So that is why one of
the things I addressed was the rural areas, the rights of the
rural people. It is county-to-county.
We need to try to push this commerce relationship into
services down to that level, and then they will become
independent from the big cities. Then I think they will have
the access more freely.
Mr. Foarde. Is it fair to say, from what your observations
were during your trip, that the closer you get to a big city
the better the connectivity is in a rural area?
Mr. Ding. Yes. But also less freedom. Actually, the cops
are all over the place. If you go to a rural area, and you can
see the picture that I included on the CD-ROM, the press just
goes freely anywhere they want to. But, in a city, they are
basically handicapped. They were locked up in a hotel and they
could not do anything.
Mr. Foarde. Thank you.
Mr. Wolf. Next is Holly Vineyard from the Department of
Commerce.
Ms. Vineyard. I have a question, directed primarily to Mr.
Martin, but others should feel free to comment.
From your time that you spent in China, could you comment
perhaps on the types of technical assistance that we provided
for commercial rule of law development? What kinds of those are
most helpful for fostering civil society and improving human
rights?
Mr. Martin. There are training programs by a number of the
law schools in the United States with various law schools at
universities in China that are providing them both, in terms of
case studies, as well as examples. In addition, a lot of
Chinese, of course, come to the United States and study here
and then go back.
There are also training courses for defense lawyers and
also for prosecutors and judges to try to help them in terms of
regularizing their work and making sure that they follow the
rules and the laws that are on the books in China.
Ms. Hou. I have a comment. I think, regarding the legal
development, that, yes, the commercial law is developing very
fast. What is not paid enough attention to, is cut-purse
ethics. When you ask whether McDonald's or another
international business or domestic business pays enough
attention to cut-purse ethics? No.
I mean, if you look on the Internet, there was a case, not
so much paid attention to in the English media, that was where
McDonald's was paying far less to local, domestic Chinese
laborers.
It was about 2 yen an hour to domestic laborers to domestic
Chinese workers in McDonald's, which is about 200 yen something
a month.
They are selling things at McDonald's at the same price as
in the United States, while the workers there do not even have
enough to eat for the whole day after working 6 or 7 hours.
Corporations only care about whether they are doing good
business. They do not care about labor rights.
There is not enough enforcement about whether corporations
observe and respect the ethics. It is because the Chinese
Government does not care so much about that, nor does
international business care about it. So, that, I wanted to
say.
Mr. Zhang. If you do not mind, I would like to clarify a
few things on the side in terms of rule of law. In China, it is
different. We do not have a rule of law, we have rule by the
law.
The law is the policy of the Chinese Communist Party [CCP].
We have a constitution on paper, which probably quite as
comprehensive as it is here. They do not follow it. They follow
the central policy.
For example, in the case of Falun Gong, the Central
Communist Party Committee has 16 offices. The 16 offices are
set up for the Communist Party Leader, Nochow Jomin, and headed
by the Vice Premier, Lelon Ching.
They have all the authority to arrest, to put people behind
bars, to kill them, to do anything without going through
trials, without having lawyers present in court, without
following any legal procedures. So, I just wanted to clarify
that so people can concentrate on that.
Mr. Wolf. Next is Susan O'Sullivan from the State
Department Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor.
Ms. O'Sullivan. I have a question for Zhang Erping. I have
heard some reports that prospective employees are required to
sign pledges that they will not join the Falun Gong, and that
employees already in American companies are asked to sign these
pledges. I am wondering if you have any information on that
subject, particularly in foreign-owned businesses in China.
Mr. Zhang. Yes. Thank you. We have seen, in Time magazine
that the foreign companies are required to comply with the
Chinese Government policy to not hire anyone who believes or
practices Falun Gong.
But so far, none of the foreign companies have confessed
that they have worked with the Chinese Government in this
regard, except for the Danish Brewery Company. Obviously, they
have fired a person for practicing Falun Gong, who has just
been released after 2 years in a labor camp.
We are also trying to collect evidence to work with our
government on the details, but I am sure that all of the
foreign companies based in China have been pressured to comply
with this procedure.
Ms. O'Sullivan. Thank you.
Mr. Wolf. Next Kate Friedrich from the Office of the Under
Secretary for Global Affairs at the State Department.
Ms. Friedrich. Yes. I have a question for Mr. Ding. When
you talked about your 14-day trip to cities in rural areas of
China, which specific rural areas were you in? This is sort of
a two-part question. Did you find that, when you talked about
more freedom, there was less censorship in those areas where
the Internet was available?
Mr. Ding. I was only in Jiangshu and Shojon Provinces in
southern China.
Ms. Friedrich. And the censorship?
Mr. Ding. I did not really see that much censorship. I do
not know whether it was just shut down during the New Year
period or whether they just have more freedom in the rural
areas. I can see actually people being followed in the city. I
was surprised I was let in at all. Actually, I got in faster
than anybody else, and I suspect there was a reason behind
that. But I did not want to figure it out, I just went in. I
went in there and, as soon as I got out of the city, I found
that there is no interference whatsoever.
I did not check the Internet, like I said. All the Internet
cafes were shut down so I did not get a chance. But I could see
that people talked more freely, act more freely. Actually, it
is the reverse compared with 2 years ago. I heard in the city
you have more income, have more things available.
Now, everything is available in the rural area, but the
living standard is much lower. But in the city, people do not
make enough. So when we say people do not make enough to eat at
McDonald's, even if they work there, that is in the city. You
do not find McDonald's in the rural areas, but I think people
find plenty of food there. So, it is sort of a reversed fortune
at the moment.
Ms. Friedrich. Thank you.
Mr. Wolf. Next is Jennifer Goedke from the Office of
Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur.
Ms. Goedke. This question is for Mr. Martin and anyone else
who would like to join in. As we see more United States- and
foreign-owned businesses moving into China, how can those
businesses then help to foster some of the groups that you
spoke about? I know that we have heard stories of, people who
work at the McDonald's cannot even afford to eat at the
McDonald's.
So how then would the United States or other foreign-owned
businesses actually go beyond meeting minimum needs to
encouraging some of the broader needs, whether it be organizing
the labor or even just smaller social groups?
Mr. Martin. I think one example I would give is in some of
the large, say, Nike factories, shoe factories, or electronics
factories in Guangdong Province, where you have say, 3,000
young women and a couple of hundred men who are working there.
These are people who have left home in the rural areas for the
first time, are away from family and community structures.
I think some companies--not all--have been quite helpful in
trying to provide counseling, providing recreation facilities,
helping the workers structure themselves so that they can take
care of their own social problems, providing counseling and
other things. I think this is a very good way that they can do
it.
We have also found that, in most foreign-invested
companies, that the working conditions are much better than
they are in many of the, shall we say, other Asian-invested
companies, or even in the Chinese state companies. So people
prefer to work there.
I am shocked to hear about McDonald's pay scales. But, in
the McDonald's I have been in China, they seem to be quite
happy working there.
Now, I have not been aware of their wages and salaries, but
I think that there are a number of ways in which the foreign-
invested companies do help them in terms of both their working
conditions, but also working in terms of the environment, in
terms of work rights, and so forth.
Mr. Zhang. I would like to respond to Susan's question
regarding the foreign companies. We do have a few Americans who
were arrested in China in the year 2000-2001 and were detained
in a detention center. They were making hairbrushes and making
McDonald's toys, and making other things for export during
their 30-day and 2-week detention in southern China, in
Shenzhen City.
So, we do not know which foreign company exactly is doing
that, but the inmates told the Americans who were making
hairbrushes there from 9 o'clock until 10 o'clock in the
evening that these were for export to the United States.
Ms. Goedke. I have one more question, and anyone can feel
free to answer. As we are talking about human rights, another
item might be a right to health care. With this huge spread of
either AIDS or other infectious diseases, how would either a
legal framework, which would allow people more access to health
care, or through some of the multinational corporations that
are there, can anyone speak to access to health care as well?
Ms. Hou. I may have a small comment, although I am not an
expert. A friend of mine recently undertook a trip, a law
student at Harvard, to several provinces in China to research
on the AIDS issue.
I think, in fact, you can see that the AIDS problem in
China is less because of the health or availability of health
care. Yes, it is available, but the more fundamental reasons
are the political corruption and control of information.
For example, this patent law. The patent law, like for
Microsoft software, there are lots of copied things. You can
buy them easily in Beijing. But the patent rights of AIDS
medicines were strictly enforced. Why?
In his words, the patents of AIDS medicines was too
sensitive. Well, they are risking people's lives to protect
those patents, while they do not really take care of patents of
whatever other products.
So I think we have to address, really, the fundamental
political problem and legal problem. If foreign businesses
would like or are willing to help, what they have done in South
Africa is they have offered lots of medicine there for a lower
price. Certainly, they should pressure the government. They
should not adopt a rigid approach regarding the maximum price.
I believe in transparency. The problem is very important
and it is really because of this control of information. It has
caused the problem. It is a lot more serious than it is.
Ms. Goedke. Thank you.
Mr. Ding. Actually, there is something I have seen. The
funny thing is, if you go to China, anything is for a bargain,
even if you go to a restaurant. I had an experience where we
sat down, were about to order a banquet. We would make a deal.
We would actually get a discount, then we order.
But there is one monopoly in China. You go to a pharmacy.
Down to the single penny, there is no bargain. It is very
expensive stuff. There is a total monopoly. I do not know who
is behind it, but this is absolutely true.
I know some people cannot afford to buy those things. Of
course, if we use U.S. dollars, we think it is cheap, but
obviously the average person cannot afford it.
Mr. Martin. Could I just add one word? I think you have put
your finger on a real serious problem, particularly in rural
areas, is the lack of medical access.
There have been a few encouraging news stories about,
particularly in Henan, where you have got a tremendous problem
of HIV because of the polluted blood supply. I think that a
couple of people have actually won legal cases on that, and
that is quite encouraging. Obviously there is a lot more that
needs to be done.
Mr. Wolf. Thanks.
Next is Mike Castellano from the office of Congressman
Levin.
Mr. Castellano. Thank you. This is for Mr. Martin and for
whoever else would like to answer.
We have heard a lot with China's WTO accession of how
western companies, with increased investment and with the
umbrella of the WTO, can help influence positively the
development of China's legal system and the rule of law in
China.
I guess some of the things you all have commented on today
make me worry, though, about the reverse of that process, which
is China's legal regime and political regime impacting the
western companies there and either encouraging them to not
employ members of the Falun Gong, or encouraging them to engage
in censorship if they are an Internet company.
How can the western governments best position themselves to
ensure that the process is going the right way? That is, it is
the values from the west coming in rather than sort of the
reverse of that with the Chinese impacting the western
companies' business practices there?
Mr. Martin. I think my initial comment would be that, by
providing western management techniques and working conditions,
that they are showing that there are different ways of doing
things, to which most Chinese workers have not had much
exposure.
They have clean working conditions, they have regular
hours, they are listened to, they are allowed to make decisions
on their own rather than just following orders. I think this is
spreading throughout the society far beyond just the factories.
I think the American chambers of commerce in China are
helpful in terms of getting the individual companies to be able
to work together collectively to resist some of these
government pressures, and also to encourage an opening up and a
broader approach to worker rights, and also to working
conditions in general.
There are many ways in which I think the example of
American companies is spreading, because Chinese companies now
have to compete, in many cases, with western companies. I think
they are finding that it is hard to get workers, good workers,
to work for them. Everybody wants to work for the foreign-
invested company.
So, I think these things are a gradual process. I think
that, generally, the American companies are trying to do well.
You have got to distinguish, of course, between those who are
contract companies and others.
Shoe manufacturers are often Korean- or Taiwan-invested,
owned, and run rather than American themselves. But I think,
even there, most companies have a code of conduct that they
take very seriously.
Ms. Hou. I have a comment about the WTO issue. I think we
should not assume that the WTO necessarily would bring a rule
of law into China and a free market would necessarily do good
to China. There are lots of signs. It has actually contributed
to worsening labor situations, their disrespect of labor
rights.
What is more important, we should give more support to the
domestic and local initiative of self-governing, self-
organizing to support the trade union effort and to support
those areas which traditionally are neglected.
For example, the trade union of migrant workers. There is
no such organization like this free trade union of migrant
workers. No. There is no farmers union in China, no peasants
union. There is no such thing. We should really give lots of
attention on those traditionally neglected areas. I have talked
with a few farmers' organizations. At Harvard, there are some
students doing something like that.
If, let us say, we promote Chinese peasants to learn
something from an American farmers union, collective
bargaining, and so on, we can therefore promote their
bargaining power in politics.
If we promote the capacity building of the rural migrant
workers, farmers, and so on, there will be a more powerful
construction of those organizations. That will put business
more on the alert to labor rights. That is a more fundamental
approach to address the issue.
I believe, yes, the United States can do something to
promote this kind of international exchange and to help mold
capacity building in those neglected areas.
Mr. Zhang. If you do not mind, I will add a few points. I
think probably everyone knows that the Falun Gong is not
against the WTO in China. I think it is probably innocent to
project that China will automatically behave itself in human
rights with its entry into the WTO.
As the saying goes, it is very difficult to train a tiger
to become a vegetarian. The business community has been
pressured by the government to comply with the suppressive
policy on the Falun Gong practitioners.
A report produced by the U.S. State Department, and also by
the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, the
suppression and human rights abuses have worsened, not
improved.
I think the United States needs to stand very firmly on its
moral grounds, as it did in the case of the former Soviet
Union. We should trade with principles and we should engage
with the people, not just the dictators who abuse the human
rights of their citizens. Thanks.
Mr. Ding. I think I want to make a distinction, because we
are not talking about one problem here, we are talking about
more than one problem. So we probably will not develop one
single solution, a panacea, to address them all.
But to go back to the basics, we will be able to help with
basic legal training, helping them organize themselves. Also,
give them the background to understand how they can work
solutions out by cultural exchanges down to the lower levels.
My own son went to China to actually teach English by using
just daily life, what we do, how we live, and how we fight
battles with each other. That sort of thing actually
enlightened them. They did not realize that there are rights in
their own life. They can develop that.
As far as Internet problems, I think if you look at
bribery, for example, why did American companies stop bribing
officials? Sanaka Sony took the bribes from Lockheed Space
Missiles Corporation back in the 1970s. It is because the
Americans passed laws. So, I think on that side, legislation
will help.
But for workers rights and the rural area, those kinds of
things, I think we need to really look at the very basic
things. The law is not going to do anything. We need to empower
the people, going through very basic stuff.
Mr. Wolf. Thank you.
Next is Sharon Payt with Senator Brownback.
Ms. Payt. Thank you, Ira.
We understand that there has been a rise, a dramatic
increase in religious persecution in the last couple of years.
I am sorry I missed your presentation, Erping, but we have
talked many times.
Senator Brownback is, of course, a supporter of China and
PNTR [Permanent Normal Trade Relations], but he is also very
concerned about this most recent wave of religious persecution.
I do not know whether you mentioned Pastor Gungshang Ling,
who was set for execution along with his niece on January 5 and
a group of people intervened. The execution was temporarily
stayed, but he still sits in prison. I know there are many
others also facing this specter.
Just on a rather lighter note, a couple of Kansans, 2 weeks
ago, were even arrested as Falun Gong practitioners. They had
not even gotten into Tiananmen Square. They were actually on
their way and they were picked up and held. They do not have
the same fate as many people in China do to practice their
faith freely, quietly, with dignity.
How do we address this and how can we help expand or
promote the expansion of religious freedom in China, Erping or
Raj?
Mr. Zhang. I think, Sharon, you raise a very important
issue. Like I said earlier, I think the United States is at its
best when it is acting according to a firm moral ground, as we
did with the former Soviet Union.
We should not give in under any pressure, for trade or
whatever, to the demands of the Chinese Government. We trade
with principle in every engagement with China, not just with a
dictator. We engage with the people, we empower the people,
like Mr. Ding said.
The other thing that is alarming from my statement earlier,
is that Chinese Government harassment has come over to the
United States, as reported by the Wall Street Journal, by the
Washington Post, by the Chicago Tribune. I will file these in
the congressional record. It is alarming.
They are coming over here with propaganda, harassing,
intimidating local government and business communities not to
support U.S. citizens living in this country, freely practicing
whatever faith they want.
So, this is very scary and, thus, something that I hope
that this Commission will investigate and stop this kind of
harassment. Obviously, it is very important that, when we
engage with China, we have to raise this issue, that religious
freedom is very basic to civil society, to the rule of law, and
to the prosperity of China. It is for peace, not just for the
Chinese people, but also people worldwide.
Ms. Payt. And Erping, just to clarify, you are referring to
several incidents involving municipalities, cities, counties
that had put forth resolutions adopted condemning religious
persecution activities by the government, and then later
retracted them because of pressure.
Mr. Zhang. That is right. Yes. Also, there were local
governments who, because of the diplomatic and commercial
threats and pressure, felt frightened.
So, they had to rescind their proclamations, issued for the
local citizens who practice Falun Gong, condemning the
persecution. The majority of the people stand up to the
pressure. They say, here, on U.S. soil you cannot do that,
intimidate us here. I hope that our government will speak out
on this important issue.
Ms. Payt. I know there are many Members of Congress who
have talked about it among themselves and who are very
concerned about it. We have had many phone calls, ourselves.
Mr. Zhang. Thank you very much.
Mr. Purohit. I think just to sort of add on that point, a
lot of the talk here today has been about sort of constructed
engagement and working with bar associations, civil society
groups, and the chambers of commerce. All of that is crucial,
through the WTO and trade.
All of those sorts of engagements, particularly at the
private sector level, are going to happen. I think, as all of
you know as well as we do, that the other dimension is going to
be the external pressure now that we are done with some of
these trade debates, getting that pressure put on the Chinese
Government, raising these issues in a high-profile manner.
When the Commission is in a position where it starts to go
over that, taking the commissioners over and actually raising
the profile of human rights, labor, religious freedoms in
China, all of those--and I think we are preaching to people who
already know this stuff--things are going to be so important
because we have got to have this balance between engagement,
but also pressure and flagging at a very, very high level the
problems.
I think, be it China or any other number of countries
across the world where groups such as ours are concerned, we
look to opportunities, for example, in presidential visits, for
certain magic words to be raised, a particular case or a
particular problem raised at the highest level, for the members
of this Commission in particular, but all Members of Congress,
I think, for them in their interactions with Chinese Government
members, parliamentarians, etc.
It is all right to be critical. It is all right to be
critical and then, on the other hand, to be supportive of
engagement. But we should not risk going too far the other way.
Ms. Payt. Yes. I agree, Raj.
Mr. Wolf. On behalf of the chairman and co-chairman, and I
think on behalf of all the commissioners, we appreciate your
coming here, especially those of you who came from out of town.
It shows a deep and important commitment that all of the
members of the Commission share.
We hope this will be the first of regular open forums like
this. We are glad that the five of you came. Next time, we hope
to see twice as many, and twice as many after that, as we try
to hear from as many voices as possible in the communities that
are interested in the issues of human rights and rule of law in
China.
[Whereupon, at 3:45 p.m. the roundtable was concluded.]
A P P E N D I X
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS
----------
Prepared Statement of G. Eugene Martin
march 4, 2002
toward a civil society
As China moves toward more representative government under the rule
of law, the development of civil society will be a critical building
block. Allowing citizens to form and join groups which foster common
goals of society while furthering their own interests will advance
human rights and democracy by providing a shock absorbing cushion
between government and individuals.
Civil society can be defined in part as institutions formed by
citizens individually or collectively apart from the State or party
apparatus. The institutions' or organizations' primary goal would be to
serve the goals or interests of their members. The groups could be
oriented toward social goals, services, religious pursuits, or academic
ends. Individuals would have a sense of belonging to a group or body
with shared ideals and objectives, thus reducing alienation and
dissention.
The problem in China is the government sees such organizations as
potential rival power centers, competing ideological or philosophical
bodies, or socially destabilizing agents. China has a long history of
secret societies and movements which became either criminal or
political and, on occasion, succeeded in overthrowing the dynastic
government. One need only look at the Taiping Rebellion or Sun Yat-
sen's Tongmenghui movement. Given the increased availability of
information and the speed of modern communication, organizations have
enhanced means of connecting their members throughout the country. This
in part is why the Chinese government has clamped down so hard on a
number of groups, from the Falung Gong to independent labor unions and
religious bodies, insisting on state/party control over all
organizations.
Non-governmental civil society organizations are, however, an
important component in a nation's efforts to provide its citizens with
the means to prosper, to meet society's needs, and advance national
interests. Many countries have learned that an engaged, informed and
active citizenry can complement the government's efforts to achieve
common goals. During the first 30 years of the People's Republic, the
Party insisted on controlling and dictating all activity, whether
economic, political or social. Individuals had little if any private
space in which to pursue their own interests or ideas. Then under Deng
Xiaoping's economic reforms, China unleashed Chinese citizens' innate
abilities and enthusiasm. The resulting transformation of China's
economy also gave its citizens greater control over their private
lives.
As Chinese citizens gain more choices in their lives, there is a
growing desire to protect and advance their individual and collective
interests by associating with like-minded people. Professional,
cultural, religious or social groupings advocate development of a
transparent and consistent rule of law as well as greater ``political
space'' to express their opinions and needs. These goals often parallel
those advocated by the government and party; occasionally, they
diverge. In most cases, those that differ from the state/party are not
antithetical or threatening. Rather, they propose a different approach
to problems based upon grass roots perspectives. Such diversity can
only strengthen and stabilize China's society by giving citizens
peaceful, lawful means to express their opinions and to work to advance
them. While some groups undoubtedly oppose State or party policies,
transparency, diversity and public discussion usually result in
moderate policies toward common goals.
Civil society is taking root in China. As economic reforms develop,
the government finds it is unable to provide all its citizens' needs
and expectations. The State Owned Enterprise (SOE) crisis, floating
population, rural recession, urban dislocations cause problems the
government can not resolve. A number of non-governmental organizations
(NGO's) have been allowed, even encouraged, by the government, albeit
under close state/party supervision and control. These deal with
environmental, natural disaster, and poverty challenges. Other non-
governmental groups have stepped in to provide social services when the
government cannot for financial or structural reasons. These include
volunteer support in orphanages or elder homes, counseling to migrant
and unemployed SOE workers, medical assistance in rural or migrant
communities, and tutorial help to students. These services are
desperately needed by the society in transition from a planned to a
market economy and can be accomplished through private organizations.
By allowing such groups to fill the void, the government is already
fostering the beginnings of a civil society.
The development of a broader civil society in China is an integral
part of the advancement of the rule of law and human rights.
______
Prepared Statement of Erping Zhang
march 4, 2002
Mr. Chairman, members of this Commission, ladies and gentlemen:
Thank you for giving us this opportunity to speak on the flight of
Falun Gong practitioners in China.
As you may recall, the U.S. House and Senate unanimously passed
concurrent resolutions in November 1999, condemning the People's
Republic of China for its brutal persecution of Falun Gong
practitioners. Some victims have also been invited to testify their
stories before the Congress. We are grateful for the support the US
Congress has shown us during this difficult time.
We are, however, sad to report that in the year 2002, the
repression has only worsened. At last count, it has been confirmed that
375 practitioners have died in police custody since Falun Gong was
banned in China in July 1999, while the unofficial report is over 1,600
deaths. Chinese vice premier, Li Lanqing, said in a speech that in just
three short months between July and October of 1999, over 35,000 people
who appealed to the Beijing regime were arrested. According to human
rights groups and media reports, at least 100,000 people have been sent
to labor camps without a trial; some 600 people have been handed
extended jail sentences up to 18 years; more than 1,000 have been sent
to mental institutions where they are given forced injections and
drugs.
One harrowing case is that of Ms. Zhao Xin, a 32-year-old lecturer
in economics at Beijing Business University. After she was rounded up
in a park for doing her exercises with her friends, police beat her so
viciously that they crushed three of the vertebrae in her spine. She
was paralyzed from the neck down, and her vocal cords were damaged
during surgery so she could no longer speak. Later, she died, and the
police tried to interrupt her funeral procession organized by her
university colleagues and students. We can imagine the despair of her
family--all their efforts to appeal to the courts or to get some
explanation from the authorities about how their daughter could have
been treated in this way have been summarily dismissed.
Su Gang, a young software engineer from Shandong Province was
injected with nerve-damaging drugs while he was kept in a mental
hospital. Within a week, this healthy man became extremely weak and his
motor functions were severely compromised. He was released only because
a family member went on a hunger strike on his behalf, but it was too
late--he died shortly thereafter.
For every case that we know about, there are many, many more, and
there are cases of discrimination and harassment that, while less
severe than torture, have nonetheless wreaked havoc with people's
lives. Thousands upon thousands of practitioners have lost their jobs,
schools, pensions, and even their homes.
Unlike in the U.S., Chinese citizens cannot just change jobs as
they wish, so many families have become destitute and must rely on the
kindness of friends and other practitioners. In some towns, corrupt
local police are demanding stiff ``fines'' before they release Falun
Gong practitioners from detention, and very often the amount is more
than the life savings of entire families.
The list of abuses continues to grow. But counter to the Chinese
Government's expectations, Falun Gong practitioners are going stronger
in their nonviolent struggle for freedoms. If there is one thing that
the world is beginning to see is the sheer perseverance of the Falun
Gong practitioners in China. They know that their cause is just.
As a spiritual practice with ancient cultural roots, Falun Gong is
based on undeniably good and universal principles of Truthfulness,
Benevolence, and Forbearance. In addition to the health benefits, Falun
Gong has guided people to achieve greater inner peace and wisdom. Over
the past 2 years, the practice has helped people develop a strength of
character that is not commonly seen.
With all the beatings and mistreatment, the practitioners in China
have not retaliated and, in many instances, they are turning the other
cheek. They are forbearing, and they have chosen to use only peaceful,
non-violent means to appeal. People sometimes ask why the practitioners
in China don't just denounce Falun Gong, and then practice it secretly
anyway. For many millions, the reason is simple--such an action would
be a lie and a betrayal of their deepest convictions. These are people
who don't just pay lip service to their integrity--they live it.
Given the escalating persecution against other spiritual and
religious faiths in China, Rabbi David Saperstein, former Chair of the
U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom has said ``Falun
Gong has almost become the symbol of religious freedom more broadly.''
These practitioners are showing the people of China that freedom of
belief is so utterly basic to almost every other freedom. No matter
what your faith may or may not be, what we as human beings believe in
our souls must ultimately arise from free will. History tells us that
anyone who tries to dictate otherwise is ultimately not fighting on the
right side.
Falun Gong is not a China issue, but an international matter.
Recently, groups of Western Falun Gong practitioners throughout the
world went to Tiananmen Square in Beijing to peacefully appeal to the
Chinese regime for stopping the killing and lifting the ban. Over 30 of
them were Americans. For their peaceful appeal, they were harshly
treated and physically abused before being deported. Many had their
personal belongings taken away by police such as credit cards, cash,
cameras, etc. It is hard to imagine that this apolitical meditation is
being peacefully practiced in over 40 countries, and yet it is brutally
suppressed in its homeland.
While China is stepping up its domestic efforts in persecuting
Falun Gong practitioners, its propaganda and harassment against Falun
Gong have also arrived overseas, especially here in America. The Wall
Street Journal reported (Feb. 21, 2002):
The approach, made variously by letter, phone call or personal
visit from a Chinese official based at China's Washington
Embassy or one of its numerous consulates, tends to combine
gross disinformation with scare tactics and, in some cases,
slyly implied diplomatic and commercial pressure.
Typical is the experience of Santee, Calif., a city of 58,000
on the outskirts of San Diego County. A little over a year ago,
Mayor Randy Voepel received a letter from the newly arrived
Chinese consul general in Los Angeles, Lan Lijun. Mr. Lan's
letter began with a cheery greeting and rolled right along to
describe the Falun Gong movement as a ``doomsday'' cult that
creates ``a panic atmosphere'' and if left unchecked in America
could end up ``jeopardizing your social stability.'' Noting
that China would ``like to establish and develop friendly
relations with your city''--and implying this would require
complying with China's wishes--Mr. Lan's letter went on to urge
that ``no recognition and support in any form should be given
to the Falun Gong'' and urged banning them from registration as
any kind of official organization. Not so typical was Mr.
Voepel's reaction. A Vietnam War veteran, he wrote back: ``Your
letter personally chilled me to my bones. I was shocked that a
Communist Nation would go to this amount of trouble to suppress
what is routinely accepted in this country . . . I have the
greatest respect for the Chinese people in your country and
everywhere in the world, but must be honest in my concern for
the suppression of human rights by your government as evidenced
by your request.
Mr. Voepel then issued a mayoral proclamation commending the
Falun Gong.
Such blunt assault on the civil liberty of US citizens and
intervention on American internal affairs are in direct violation of
the US and international laws. Last month, He Yafei, deputy chief of
mission of the Chinese Embassy visited Mr. Rocky Anderson, Mayor of
Salt Lake City, who issued a proclamation last year honoring Falun
Gong. In a ``security briefing'' for Mr. Anderson, He attempted to
label Falun Gong as a ``terrorist group,'' as Falun Gong was one of
many groups that had applied for permission to hold a peaceful
demonstration during the Olympics. The Wall Street Journal reported:
``Mr. Anderson let the demonstration go ahead, on Feb. 7. It was so
peaceful, says a mayoral spokesman,
that the sole problem with the Falun Gong was that 'they walked
very slow.''' We appeal to this Congressional-Executive Commission on
China to investigate and stop such harassment by the Chinese Government
on the U.S. soil.
We are hoping to work with this Commission to put in place concrete
and specific measures to (1) pressure the Beijing regime to release
those detained and imprisoned Falun Gong practitioners; (2) help those
imprisoned Falun Gong practitioners seeking medical treatment abroad,
due to maltreatment and harsh conditions in prison; (3) hold hearings
for victims of Falun Gong practitioners so that this largest modern-day
atrocity in China is highlighted; (4) identify those Chinese officials
who have engaged in human rights abuses and ban them from entering the
U.S.; (5) use every opportunity and tool this Commission has to call
for an end of Beijing's suppression of Falun Gong.
Thank you for your consideration, and I will be pleased to take
your questions.
______
Prepared Statement of Raj Purohit
march 4, 2002
The Lawyers Committee is an independent non-governmental human
rights organization. We aim to hold governments accountable to the
international standards of human rights, and work to develop stronger
models of corporate accountability in the global market place.
The Lawyers Committee considers that human rights conditions in
China continue to be an issue of deep concern.
Over the past year, China has secured a prominent position in the
international arena, symbolized by its admission to the WTO, its
successful bid to host the 2008 Olympics and the recent visit of
President Bush. However, this has not been accompanied by a parallel
improvement in human rights. Instead, government statements about
upholding ``the rule of law'' have frequently veiled harsh political
repression. This is most poignantly illustrated by the ``Strike Hard''
campaign, which resulted in scores of executions after procedural and
substantive abuses of criminal law.
Moreover, in the aftermath of the September 11 tragedy in New York,
anti-terrorist rhetoric has been misused to legitimize harsh crack-
downs in Tibet and Xinjiang province, and illegitimate censorship of
all forms of media, including the internet.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For instance, the NGO Human Rights in China reports the recent
arrest and detention, on January 24, 2002, of Wang Daqi, Professor of
Construction of Hefei Industrial University and editor of Ecology
magazine. Since the 1989 Bejing crackdown, Professor Wang had published
articles about social and human rights issues. The Chinese authorities
previously attempted to prevent Prof. Wang from publishing these
articles. At http://iso.hrichina.org:8151/iso/news--item.adp?news--
id=691.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An abundance of NGO-reports, as well as the annual evaluations of
China's human rights practices by the State Department's Bureau of
Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, narrate these and other violations
of the most fundamental human rights. They describe crackdowns on
dissidents, cases of arbitrary arrest and detention of suspects,
torture, forced prison labor, and abusive labor conditions. Freedom of
expression continues to be restricted, and voices that endeavor to draw
attention to pressing issues of national and global concern are
frequently violently silenced.
The Lawyers Committee has welcomed positive developments in the
Chinese legal system over the past few decades. However, continuing
violations illustrate that a strong legislative framework cannot by
itself secure the rule of law. It is necessary to enforce this legal
framework in practice. To that end, China needs to build a strong,
independent legal profession.
persecution of lawyers
In this submission, the Lawyers Committee wishes to highlight its
concern about the continuing persecution, threats and harassment
suffered by lawyers who confront common injustices. In 1998 the Lawyers
Committee addressed this and related issues in a report on ``Lawyers in
China: Obstacles to Independence and the Defense of Rights.'' \2\
Unfortunately, many of the problems described in that report continue
to be matters of concern.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 1998, New York. A copies of this report are available upon
request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The report includes an analysis of the 1996 Lawyers Law, which, in
general terms, regulates the legal profession.\3\ The Lawyers Law was
inspired by, yet does not wholly encompass, the U.N. Basic Principles
on the Role of Lawyers (1990).\4\ Nevertheless, the Law and the Basic
Principles share the intention to protect lawyers from physical or
other forms of abuse, and from interference when carrying out their
responsibilities in accordance with the law.\5\ However, despite this
strong legal framework, there are recurring reports of intimidation and
threats targeted at legal practitioners. The case of Zhou Litai
illustrates this problem:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Lawyers Law of the People's Republic of China, adopted May 15,
1996, effective January 1, 1997. The Lawyers Law is available online at
http://www.qis.net/chinalaw/prclaw10.htm.
\4\ Adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention
of Crime and Treatment of Offenders, held in Havana, Cuba, August-
September 1990. The Basic Principles enshrine the rights and
responsibilities of lawyers around the world, and also lay out states'
obligations to ensure effective and equal access to lawyers for their
residents.
\5\ Article 3 of the Lawyers Law, supra note 6, declares that
lawful legal practice shall be protected by the law. Article 32
provides that the personal rights of a lawyer will be inviolable in the
course of his or her legal practice. The Basic Principles, supra note
7, are more detailed, yet provide essentially similar protection in
artt. 16-22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
zhou litai
Since 1996, Zhou Litai has helped workers in the Shenzhen area to
obtain their rights in legal battles against local government
authorities, foreign investors and company owners in a series of cases
that have drawn public attention. Over the years, he has represented
more than 800 factory workers in labor disputes and struggles for
compensation for grave work injuries. Many of his cases involved legal
action against the Labor Bureau or the social security department. In
August last year, he represented 56 women workers in a South Korean-
owned wig factory in Shenzhen, who had been the victim of illegal body
searches. The company chose to settle the case out-of-court.
On December 19, 2001 the Longgang District Bureau of Justice in
Shenzhen ordered Mr. Zhou to close his legal practice.\6\ The order,
which apparently contravenes both international law and domestic
regulations, seems to be an illegitimate retaliation for the negative
attention that Mr. Zhou's successful litigation practice has drawn to
the Shenzhen region.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ This matter was also covered in a New York Times article on
January 3, 2002, which can be found online at http://
college4.nytimes.com/guests/articles/2002/01/03/894481.xml.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted above, the Chinese Lawyers Law expressly protects lawyers
from such ungrounded interference and intimidation.\7\ Such
interference is also outlawed in international human rights standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the Lawyers Law states in its Article 12 that ``legal
practice shall not be subject to geographical limitation.'' This means
that a lawyer licensed in one region of China may practice in another
without obstruction from the local authorities. Mr. Zhou, who is in the
possession of a Chongqing license, is entitled to practice anywhere in
China. The District Bureau has no power under the law to obstruct Mr.
Zhou's practice of law.
Mr. Zhou Litai has filed suit against the District Bureau of
Justice with the Longgang District People's Court, to contest the
legitimacy of the order.\8\ In this respect it should be noted that the
Shenzhen local bureau of justice has previously attempted to confiscate
Mr. Zhou's license, shortly after he started his practice in 1997. At
that time, the bureau returned the license to Mr. Zhou after he
initiated legal proceedings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Report posted by the China Information Center on January 16,
2002:http://www.china.org.cn/english/2002/Jan/25353.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Lawyers Committee believes that the case of Mr. Zhou deserves
particular consideration in the light of China's recent accession to
the WTO, and the obligations that membership of this organization
entails with respect to the elimination of barriers to trade. It should
be considered that the continuing threats and harassment directed
against Mr. Zhou, and in particular the possible withdrawal of his
license to practice, are wholly inconsistent with China's obligations
under the WTO, and set a most disturbing precedent.
Mr. Zhou's activities show that the Chinese people increasingly
turn to the legal system for protection. This commendable development
needs to be protected and stimulated. Working toward the development of
the rule of law, it is of key importance that China continues to build
and enforce its legal system, to guarantee a sustainable protection of
basic human rights, as well as the interests of foreign investors.
The legal system will only be as strong as the professionals who
work within it.
China should adhere to its own laws, and to international
standards, upholding the independence of lawyers, and their protection
from persecution.
recommendations
1. The Lawyers Committee believes that it is important to recognize
the educative, guiding role that can be played by foreign governments,
human rights groups, law schools, bar associations and other
international actors in the development of law in China. Underlining
the position of China as a prominent member of the international
community, efforts should be made to ensure the continued involvement
of these foreign actors.
2. The Chinese government should fully comply with the provisions
of the U.N. Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, and to revise
those aspects of Chinese law that restrict the ability of lawyers to
freely represent their clients and to organize independent bar
associations.
3. Lawyers should be free to carry out their professional duties
without official interference, restrictions, threats or intimidation.
4. Particular assistance should be provided to the training of
lawyers, both in China and abroad. Training programs should be designed
to fit with China's particular conditions and needs. The exchange and
sharing of relevant information should be stimulated. Assistance should
also be provided to China's law schools for the design of courses and
teaching methods.
5. Bar associations and the Chinese Ministry of Justice should be
engaged to create mechanisms that ensure the adequate protection of
legal practitioners.
6. At the same time, to promote high professional standards, these
institutions should be encouraged to publicize and facilitate the
rights of clients to bring malpractice suits, in the belief that this
will encourage lawyers to seriously consider their professional
responsibilities.
7. Assistance should be provided in the creation of a legal aid
system, by providing know-how and financial support where appropriate.
8. Assistance should be provided to train and sensitize the
relevant branches of government to the importance of the independent
role of the lawyer within the legal system.
______
Prepared Statement of Wenzhuo Hou
march 4, 2002
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am going to talk here today about a kind of human rights
violation which affects the largest number of Chinese people, and yet
has hardly gained much attention from either the international
community or Chinese policymakers--that is the human rights violation
against peasants and rural migrant workers, who number over 1 billion
people and make up more than 70 percent of China's population.
When we talk about human rights, we often talk about the rights of
democracy activists, the rights to free speech, free association,
sometimes about the rights of workers and workers union. We hardly ever
hear about anything like the ``human rights of peasants''. The peasant
problem is widely understood as the fundamental political problem in
China. But, few think that they are suffering from the most severe and
systematic human rights violation, and deprivation of equal
citizenship.
The Chinese Household Registration System (ie. Hukou), created in
late 1950's, established a rural-urban dichotomy system. The Chinese
citizens are classified into two categories--``urban Hukou'' vs.
``rural Hukou''. These two kinds of Hukous have divided Chinese
citizens into two worlds: the urban first world and the rural Third
World.
I have recently been undertaking research making a comparison
between the discrimination experienced by the Chinese peasants and
rural migrants versus those experienced by black Bantu people under the
Apartheid regime of South Africa. Despite the huge political, legal and
cultural differences, there are astonishing similarities found.
Population registration laws, ``Population Registration Act'' in South
African, like the ``Household Registration Regulation'' in China,
established the cornerstone for a discriminatory and unjust system
where one higher categorized group dominated the rest. In South Africa,
black and colored people were deprived of or restricted in their voting
rights. In China, according to the Election Law, the peasants only have
one fourth or one eighth of the representative rights that urban
citizens have. The largest social group in China, the peasants have no
national or regional representative associations (while we do have all
kinds of union for various social classes/groups), which directly
contributed to their neglected/ marginalized political situation. The
peasants are also deprived of equal opportunity in access to housing,
primary education, higher education, employment, medical care, social
security and so on. Black people are regularly checked for their passes
in South Africa, while in China, rural migrants are checked for their
``temporary residential card'', ``work permit'', etc., and often are
arbitrarily sent to Custody and Repatriation centers. Even worse than
what is experienced by black people, for the Chinese peasants, their
minimal rights to land, rights of property and products are often
treaded upon. They not only have to pay a disproportionally heavy tax
to the State and collective, but also are subjected to numerous
arbitrary fines and fees. According to a book recently published by Li
Changping, an former county leader, the rural government authorities
have evolved into a group who live on their high interest loans to
peasants. This means, the corruption of rural government has
transformed the rural leaders into a group of landlord exploiting
peasants but in the name of the State, the central government.
We have known that rural women in China have the highest suicidal
rate in the world. We have seen lots of reports about children from
rural families who were not able to go to school, and sometimes had to
do dirty, unhealthy and even dangerous jobs. As we know, school
children in Jiangxi were killed while being forced to produce fireworks
for a living. In Qinghai province, teenager boys were tricked to work
in gold mines where they were treated as slaves, and even worse than
that. Such horrific stories happen all over China and very often. In a
broader sense, the whole Chinese peasants and rural migrants are all
virtual slaves of the state. Their rights and properties are often
abused by various governments at will, and their liberties are often
deprived arbitrarily. In the case of industrial or traffic deaths, the
monetary compensation they get is even less than half of an urban-Hukou
person's, if they get anything at all. Yet, there are always
policymakers justifying their policies, saying that peasants are
inferior, uneducated and therefore have to make sacrifices to the
country, and deserve how they are treated!
We should realize that the discrimination and exploitation of
peasants and migrants are in essence enforced through government
policies. The Hukou system and its connected policies are at its core.
But, these policies have been well incorporated into all kinds of
policies affecting normal citizens life, and have evolved into an
ideology justifying the mistreatment of peasants, and it has already
had the effect of fostering a widespread discriminatory attitude toward
peasants in the whole society.
If we truly mean to talk about human rights today, the human rights
of peasants and migrants are too huge to ignore. If we do not want to
see impoverished and desperate peasants start another violent peasant
revolution as happened so many times in Chinese history, we must
address the issues of human rights and social justice for peasants now.
If we acknowledge this discrimination against peasants is
comprehensive, multi-faceted and institutionalized, we should realize
that it is not enough to address the problem in the classical human
rights approach. It calls for a more systematic approach. Therefore, I
advocate the ``right of peasants and rural migrants'' to be singled out
as a major category of human rights and seriously studied as we do to
woman's rights, children's rights, labor rights and so on.
Therefore, I call upon the international community to examine and
monitor the human rights of peasants and migrant workers in China. I
recommend the following action be taken:
1. To adopt a ``categorical/identity discrimination'' approach in
monitoring the human rights situations of peasants/migrants, that is: a
discrimination based on their immutable characteristics (descent)--the
Hukou which is imposed on them by the state; by such an approach, we
can address the problem in a comprehensive way.
2. To facilitate political and legal institutional reform based on
Hukou; to investigate the whole implication of Hukou in Chinese
citizen's rights and equality; to support the on-going reform of Hukou,
provided that this regime is not replaced by another kind of repressive
and discriminating registration system.
3. To single out discrimination and human rights violations against
peasants/ migrants when documenting human rights in China, such as in
the US State Department Report.
4. To investigate the conflict between peasants and the governments
in the vast countryside of China; to study the growing discontent of
peasants from a human rights perspectives; to raise awareness among
peasants about their human rights; to support local community democracy
and self-governing initiatives, particularly in rural areas and urban
migrants neighborhood.
5. To address the agricultural problem in China, to investigate the
Chinese rural taxation and debts problem, to facilitate the reform of
rural government, which has become increasingly rent seeking and
exploitative in nature.
6. To facilitate capacity-building in rural China, to support
further training of grassroots social activists particularly those
representing rural peasants and migrant workers; activists working at
that level have the least chance of getting any training, or chance to
speak, yet, they can be greatly empowered if given such opportunities.
7. To review the impact of WTO on Chinese peasants; noting the
WTO's potential devastating effect on peasant's livelihood, which may
unleash social unrest from rural China to the rest, it is of particular
immediacy and importance to address the human rights concerns of
peasants.
8. To support academic research and study on the peasants and
migrants human rights.
When the exploitation of peasants and the corruption of rural
governments in China become international human rights concern, we can
have some hope that the misery of Chinese peasants can be ameliorated,
and their equal rights as citizens can be protected.
To bring the human rights of peasants into the forefront of human
rights discussion would greatly empower the peasant/migrants, and
enable them to have access to legal protection and encourage the
international community to voice out their concerns. It will make all
these human rights arguments more relevant to the most powerless people
in China, who are otherwise totally reliant upon the mercy of
authorities, and who would otherwise view ``human rights'' talk as
totally irrelevant to their life, and be unwilling to participate. I
believe introducing the issue of human rights for peasants/migrants
would broaden the dimension of human rights dialog, bringing new force,
gaining more public support, and therefore would give tremendous
support to the democracy movement in China.
SUBMISSION FOR THE RECORD
----------
Prepared Statement of Wenhe Lu & Ciping Huang, board members of the
Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars in the United
States
march 4, 2002
China's Problem: A Lack of Respect for Law
Dear members and staff of the Congressional-Executive Commission on
China,
My name is Wen-he Lu. I am a board member of the Independent
Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars in the United States. IFCSS
is a non-profit organization with members all over the United States.
From the inception of IFCSS, we have been promoting human rights and
democracy in China, and the interests of Chinese students and scholars
in the US. I am here to speak for Ms. Huang Ci-ping, who could not come
to Washington DC today.
After the US gave China PNTR and China joined the WTO, direct
contact between citizens in the United States and China has been
increasing. All Americans who are involved with China should be made
aware that China's general problem now is a lack of respect for law. In
China, there are many laws on paper but not in practice. China signed
the United Nations' International Covenants to respect its citizens'
human rights, but the Chinese government is in violation of that many
times over. There are numerous reports about human rights violations in
China, especially that of religious persecution, particularly toward
FaLunGong and underground Christian church members.
For example, the families of victims from the Tiananmen Massacre on
June 4, 1989 are still watched today, and as recently as March 2, their
telephones were cut at the will of the government. Their mail is
searched so that any charitable donations from abroad are forced to
take a secret way to get into their hands. We want the Congressional
Executive Commission on China to urge China to respect the law of mail
correspondence and to let donations go through to the victims' families
of the June 4 massacre. Donations to June 4 victim families were also
intercepted in the name of China's national security in 1998, and funds
from Germany are still frozen in the bank by the China National
Security Bureau. We urge the Congressional Executive Commission on
China to put pressure on China to let the victim families of the June
4th Massacre receive the humanitarian donations from abroad, which were
donated in good faith by ordinary people in the United States and other
countries.
During the PNTR debate in the year 2000, many argued that China's
human rights situation would be improved by the granting of PNTR.
Contrary to this argument, PNTR has allowed the Chinese government to
feel free from international pressure, especially from economic
sanctions. The human rights situation has worsened considerably after
China got PNTR and WTO. Recent arrests of FaLunGong followers in
Tiananmen Square are examples.
China now has joined the WTO. We all know that this will impose
international standards on the daily business practice in China. We
want to remind the Congressional Executive Commission on China that
although the current court system is trying to accommodate this
reality, there is still a long way to go before China's current legal
system is in full accordance with international standards. There are
numerous reported and anecdotal pieces of evidence that corruption is
widespread inside China's court system. Judges and court personnel need
to be bribed even to move cases forward.
There are laws in China against child labor; however, many workers
in Guangdong and Guangxi provinces are under age. In reality, the
Chinese workers have no rights to organize their own workers' unions or
to join in labor movements.
We hope the Commission will be helpful to force the respect of
labor laws in China. Although cheap labor has been one of the big lures
for the multi-national companies that promoted and lobbied for PNTR, we
want to remind the Commission that not only have illegal labor
practices in China taken away Chinese workers' rights, but they have
also caused unfair competition for American workers. Because the USA
has not yet climbed out of the recent recession, it is now more
important than ever to protect the rights of the American workers. We
want to say that taking advantage of the Chinese workers' rights is
ultimately hurting the American workers as well. Furthermore, the abuse
of human rights in China infects the rights of all the citizens in the
world.
China has laws on accounting practices. But what ENRON did is
merely a daily practice in China. Recently, the Minshen Bank, the only
huge private bank in China, is reported to have a huge corruption case.
Similar cases break out every day in China in the financial sector. The
financial reports of some stock companies in the Shanghai Exchange have
been found to be fraudulent. The financial reporting is so unreliable
that Primer Zhu Rongji recently felt compelled to emphasize that people
in the accounting profession must not book false numbers.
There are Environmental laws in China too. However, short-term
business interests usually prevail over the environmental consideration
and laws. There are lawsuits in Henan and Anhui provinces where whole
villages are suing companies close by for causing health damage by
neglecting the water pollution.
In conclusion, the Chinese government has not enough respect for
the law in human rights, for preserving confidentiality in mail
correspondence, for environmental protection, for the court system and
for business practices. It is our hope that this committee will be able
to learn the reality in China and play a vital function to monitor the
human rights condition in China and to play a vital role in putting
pressure on the Chinese government to respect the law. If that could be
done, then we will not have to regret that the economic interests of
the United States have overcome the essential human values that we all
cherish.