From one of Denmark's national papers today (Politiken):
The first 2 columns, if you want to read it better (click to enlarge).
Centre columns
Final column.Here's something interesting from the Amnesty International link from my previous post (in case you didn't have time to read through it all):
Abstract:
Amnesty International is also concerned about the continued existence of two other forms of punitive administrative detention imposed by the police in China: 'Custody and Education' (shourong jiaoyu), used to punish alleged prostitutes and their clients with between six months and two years' administrative detention, and Enforced Drug Rehabilitation' (qiangzhi jiedu), which enables the police to impose between three and six months' detention for alleged drug addicts.
Recommendations to the Chinese authorities
In line with official commitments to improve human rights in the run-up to the Olympics in August 2008, Amnesty International urges the Chinese authorities to introduce concrete reforms in the following areas:
Fair trials, torture and administrative detention
Take concrete steps to bring all forms of detention in China into line with international human rights law and standards, including measures to uphold the rights to fair trial and prevent torture. These should include:
- Abolishing 'Re-education through Labour', 'Enforced Drug Rehabilitation' and 'Custody and Education', ensuring that decisions on detention are no longer exclusively in the hands of the police.
From another interesting link:
Abstract:
First of all, during the Cultural Revolution, China's legal system was disabled. The Public Security police, the prosecutors and the court were all paralysed. After the Cultural Revolution, in an effort to restore the function of the police, the prosecutors and the court, the government gave the police exclusive rights to arrest people. No other department has the authority to make an arrest. Therefore, in the general publics minds, it is legal for the police department to arrest people. In today's China, most people don't understand the law. Most Chinese people naively think that if the police arrest somebody, then this person must have committed a crime. Otherwise, why would they arrest this person? People will tell you that the Cultural Revolution is over; no one gets arrested without a good reason. Therefore in many Chinese people's minds, only the police can arrest people. Hence a common misunderstanding exists. If the police arrest you, then you must have committed a crime. The due processes such as the prosecutor work and trials in the court are only procedures to decide on a proper punishment. There is no question on whether or not this person indeed committed a crime. During and after the Cultural Revolution, the police authority went from useless to absolute power above the law. The evil regime took advantage of the situation and conveniently fooled people into the current misconceptions.
In China, along with the economic development and open door policy, the collective social morality is rapidly declining. Widespread social ills go undeterred. Things that never existed in China quickly found their way in and have become much worse in China. The moral decline is out of control. Under this circumstance, China's traditional legal system could not effectively improve public security and maintain social order. To stay in power, the Communist regime deployed "harsh crackdown" in the late 70's and early 80's. The slogan was, "Heavily and swiftly strike all kinds of crimes and ugly phenomena in society." However, the new policy of "heavily and swiftly strike" might not be readily convenient if a case would need to go through the due process that involves independent Prosecutor and Court trial. Under such a social background, the Communist government conveniently recycled the "Re-Education through Labour" system, which was abolished as early as during the Cultural Revolution.
China's own constitution clearly states that Chinese citizens cannot be arrested without the prosecutor's approval and they are not guilty unless decided by a court trial.
In other words, Chinese citizens can only receive a verdict after a fair court trial. This is in line with the rest of the world. Moreover, China is now "opening up" its doors to the world. A very important element is to harmonise China's laws with those of the world. In any country, to determine if a citizen has committed crimes can only be done through a fair court trial. This is beyond question in all countries.
Then why in China, are sentences of "Re-Education through Labour" not decided by the courts? Why can the police alone sentence citizens to "Re-Education through Labour?"
Here, the evil regime plays another trick. In the official definition, "Re-Education through Labour" does not require a guilty verdict. The government says that criminal trials belong to the court, and that the police cannot decide who's guilty. On the other hand, the police can impose administrative penalties on citizens. In their dictionary, a "Re-Education through Labour" is the most severe administrative penalty, not a guilty verdict.
*******
Like I said before, China has a loooong way to go in getting up to accepted international legal standards. I hope with enough international pressure, they will change their system. Some say that the world needs China (implying that they can basically do what they want), but I believe that as much as the world needs China, China too, needs the world. It's a 2-way highway. After all, if major countries do not want to have anything to do with China, or if international companies do not invest in China, where would China really be right now? It has the rest of the world to thank for for her growing economy!
And let's not forget, China isn't the only big and highly populated country in the world. There is also India, and as far as I know, labour in India is just as cheap, if not cheaper than in China, English is an official language there (unlike in China), Indians can be very hardworking, and most importantly, they do not have "human rights" issues the way China does. It will take time for India to grow to the current economic status that China is enjoying, but I strongly believe that they will get there. And when they do, would the world really need China as much anymore?
