UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW
FOURTH WORKING GROUP
( 5 – 16 February 2009)
People’s Republic of China
The Human Rights Crisis in Tibet
second part of this page:
One-child policy and forced abortion in China
Open Letter to President Obama
third part of this page:
China says NO to democracy and human rights
This submission on the Human Rights Crisis in Tibet is an initiative of Tibetan UPR Forum, a global coalition of
organizations acting as the Tibetan consultation on the UPR. This report notes with that there have been no
independent reports of any consultations held in Tibet on the national report of the People’s Republic of China
(PRC). The only independent information that ordinary Tibetans in Tibet may have received about the Universal
Periodic Review mechanism of the Human Rights Council is from external radio broadcasts in Tibetan language by
Voice of Tibet, Radio Free Asia and Voice of America.
Introduction
As the prospect of China's 1949-50 invasion grew, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama made a series of appeals to the
United Nations and its members, requesting intervention on his country's behalf. While resolutions concerning Tibet
were adopted by the General Assembly in 1959, 1961 and 1965, Tibet failed to be recognized as an independent country.
In his paper, “Is Tibet Entitled to Self-Determination?”, Hong Kong human rights lawyer, Paul Harris said:
‘No-one disputes that the Tibetans are a distinct people with their own language and culture,
who form a large majority of the population of Tibet. They do not control their own destiny.
Tibet is controlled by the Chinese Government by means of military occupation for the benefit of the Chinese state.
Tibet is a country under foreign military occupation, and its people are subject to alien subjugation, domination
and exploitation within the meaning of the UN Resolutions on Colonial Peoples and on Friendly Relations.”
Nature of Human Rights Violations in Tibet
Since 10 March 2008 over 125 demonstrations in more than 60 counties on the Tibetan Plateau have taken place to
protest the lack of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights as a result of Chinese misrule.
Tibetans are unable to fully participate in the political process and decide the rules whereby their society
is governed without being subject to politically motivated arrest and detention.
The Special Rapporteur on racism has stated that Tibetans in the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) suffer various forms
of systematic and institutional discrimination in the fields of employment, health care, education,
housing and public representation. On political representation, the Special Rapporteur said that:
“Although laws guarantee Tibet self-government, Tibetans’ governing power is very restricted and is subject to
strict supervision and authorization by the central authority.”
The Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women has stated that “women in Tibet continue to undergo hardship and
are also subjected to gender-specific crimes, including reproductive rights violations such as forced sterilization,
forced abortion, coercive birth control policies and the monitoring of menstrual cycles.” In May 2005,
the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) said it was "deeply concerned about reports of
forced abortions and forced sterilisations imposed on women, including those belonging to ethnic minority groups,
by local officials in the context of the one-child policy, and of the high maternal mortality rate as a result
of unsafe abortions."
According to a report submitted by Katarina Tomaševski, the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education, she was
“dismayed at the illiteracy rate in Tibet, 39.5 per cent, and asked the Ministry of Education
[of the People’s Republic of China] whether one reason might be the fact that the literacy test was in Tibetan,
while Mandarin is used in political, economic and social life…Otherwise, education is seen as assimilationist and,
hence, not compatible with China's human rights obligations."
‘Reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution’
Tibetans describe the current military crackdown and policies adopted by China towards Tibetans as reminiscent of
the Cultural Revolution. Well known Tibetan commentator, Woeser, reported on her blog on April 20: "All the working
units in TAR and other Tibetan areas in Gansu, Qinghai, Sichuan and Yunnan provinces, one after another,
held the various meetings angrily to condemn the ‘Dalai Clique.’ Some former Red Guards, the former rebel
factions and the form ‘activists’, who were active during the ‘Cultural Revolution’ have again picked up the crazy
languages prevalent during the ’Cultural Revolution.’ They gibed at the Dalai Lama and Tibetans in exile,
and some even launched personal attacks against the former. Some cadres who retired with special honors or
retired regularly suggested that the authorities should establish Joint Defense organizations among the
residents, in reality, these organizations are just like the militia organization which ‘turned all the
civilians into soldiers’ during the ‘Cultural Revolution.’ In other words, they are plainclothes police."
A comprehensive report on the 2008 Tibet Uprising by the International Campaign for Tibet, “Tibet at the
Turning Point: The Spring Uprising and China’s New Crackdown,” said: “While demonstrators in the late 1980s
were primarily monks and some nuns, although many protests were joined by laypeople too, unrest since the spring
has involved farmers, nomads, university students, school children, laborers, and intellectuals as well as monks
and nuns, expressing a unified nationalistic sentiment and a wish for the Dalai Lama to return home.”
Some of the alarming findings of this report were:
The ‘disappearance’ and detention of hundreds of Tibetans, including monks, nuns and school children, who are
treated with extreme brutality in custody;
Unarmed peaceful protestors who have been shot dead, or have died following torture in prison or as a result of
suicide. It is believed that at least 100 Tibetans were killed in Lhasa and nearby areas during the crackdown from
March 14 onwards, while at least 40 Tibetans were shot dead or died as a result of the repression of dissent in
other Tibetan areas;
More than 125 protests across the Tibetan plateau—the overwhelming majority non-violent;
Sweeping new measures to purge monasteries of monks and ban worship in the wake of the protests, revealing a
systematic new attack on Tibetan Buddhism led by Chinese leader Hu Jintao that is reminiscent of the excesses of
the Cultural Revolution.
Arbitrary Detention
An analysis by the Congressional Executive Commission on China (CECC) of figures disclosed by Chinese officials
since March 10 reveals that over 4,400 Tibetans have been detained or allegedly surrendered in connection with
protests which began on 10 March 2008. These figures cover Lhasa in the TAR and Gannan Tibet Autonomous Prefecture
in Gansu province, as well as in Ngaba prefecture in Sichuan province, but does not include every Tibetan area
of the PRC where protests and detentions have occurred. Over 3,000 Tibetans have reportedly been released,
leaving the detention status of over 1,200 Tibetans unknown.
On 20 June 2008, Amesty International urged the Chinese authorities “to provide information about the over 1,000
people detained during the protests last March and called for free access to Tibet by independent observers.
The call came as Amnesty International published an update on the situation in Tibet since the outbreak of
violence – looking at the continuing violent crackdown against protesters, the situation of those detained,
including those reported to have been beaten and deprived of proper health care and adequate food, and the
severe censorship facing journalists and Tibetans.
Disappearances
The International Campaign for Tibet has reported that “since the first protests in Lhasa and Qinghai on March
10…monasteries have been encircled by armed soldiers, while thousands of Tibetans – farmers, nomads, monks, nuns,
students, shopkeepers – have ‘disappeared.’ In Lhasa, people sleep in their clothes, fearful of a knock on the
door in the middle of the night. Someone disappeared from almost every Tibetan household in Lhasa in the weeks
since March 14, according to one Tibetan source…”
“Many Tibetans are being taken to prisons far from their homes, and their families have no idea whether they are
alive or dead. Hundreds of Tibetans from Lhasa, including many monks, have been seen being taken out of the city
on the new train to Qinghai.”
The enforced disappearance of the Panchen Lama, in accordance with the UN Declaration on the Protection of All
Persons from Enforced Disappearance, “is a continuous crime,” according to a joint statement by 15 NGO’s delivered
to the UN Human Rights Council by the Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples. Since 1995,
China has refused to publicly declare the whereabouts of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, the Eleventh Panchen Lama and
avoids responding to calls by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child to allow an independent expert to
meet and confirm the well-being of the Panchen Lama.
Torture
Despite the UN Committee Against Torture’s recommendation that China “ensure the prompt, thorough, effective and
impartial investigation of all allegations of torture”, reports again emerged following the 2008 Tibet Uprising
on the continued use of torture on Tibetan detainees, including cases of Tibetans who have died while in detention
due to torture. In one instance, a 38-year-old Tibetan woman named Nechung, succumbed to torture in late-March
after nine days detention following her participation in Tibetan protests in Ngapa county, Sichuan province on
16 and 17 March. In another instance, Dawa, a 31 year-old Tibetan farmer from Phenpo Lhundup County in the
Tibetan Autonomous Region, died on 1 April 2008 after being severely beaten by Chinese prison guards.
In another case, Thabkey, a 30 year-old monk of Labrang Monastery, arrested along with seven other monks
for briefing a group of foreign media personal on a government managed tour in Labrang, Gansu province,
was released after being detained for several days while in a mentally unstable condition with bruise marks
all over his body from severe beatings while in police custody.
Administration of Justice
While the PRC denies the existence of “political prisoners”, Tibetans continue to be prosecuted under political
terms for crimes such as “splittism” (“splitting the State or undermining unity of the country”) for expressions
of the Tibetan identity.
In commenting on the case of a group of Tibetans who established a “youth group” whose “purpose was to associate
peacefully, or express their beliefs peacefully, without inciting or resorting to violence” and subsequently charged
with “endangering national security and supporting separatist activities”, the UN Human Rights Council’s Working
Group on Arbitrary Detention adopted the opinion that “unless the application of these crimes [“endangering
national security and supporing separatist activities”] is restricted to clearly defined areas and in clearly
defined circumstances, there is a serious risk of misuse.”
Venerable Ngawang Phulchung released in October 2007 after spending more than 18 years of imprisonment.
One of his “crimes” was distributing a Tibetan version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with his nine
monk-colleagues.
Another case concerns a Tibetan teacher whose unpublished manuscript entitled “The Restless Himalayas”,
which discusses political and social issues such as sovereignty, religion, history and geography and who was
planning a project addressing women’s rights in Tibet. He was sentenced in September 2005 to 10 years’
imprisonment for “endangering State security”.
In November 2007, Ronggye Adak (52) was sentenced to 8 years. Adak told the court that he did not carry out his
protest (of 1 August 2007 in Lithang) in favor of the Dalai Lama to be a hero. He said: "I wanted His Holiness
to return, and wanted to raise Tibetan concerns and grievances, as there is no outlet for us to do so.
That made me sad and made me act." Ronggye Adak's government-appointed lawyer reportedly argued that asking
for the return of the Dalai Lama to Tibet was purely a religious action, and not an act to bring down the
government. Three other Tibetans charged of being involved were tried. Ronggye Adak's nephew, Adak Lupoe,
sentenced to ten years, Kunkhyen, was sentenced to nine years while Jarib Lothog was sentenced to three years.
Indoctrination Campaigns and Religious Freedom
China’s “patriotic education” campaign aimed at undermining Tibetan Buddhism and the spiritual authority of
religious figures, such as the Dalai Lama, remains active in Tibet’s monasteries and nunneries. According to
the Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy, more than 10,000 monks and nuns have either been expelled or
left their monasteries and nunneries after the “patriotic education” sessions introduced in 1996. In one example,
Radio Free Asia reported on the resignation of Khenpo Tsanor, 70, as head of Dungkyab monastery in Gade county,
Golog Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Qinghai. Commenting on his resignation, Khenpo Tsanor said:
"I saw the government documents...It was written that the Dalai Lama should be thoroughly criticized and
his splittist behavior should be condemned."
"I had no intention to sign. I knew very well that all who do not sign have to face trial in a Chinese court.
They even threatened that the monastery would be shut down if we did not sign documents.”
"Some county officials came to the monastery [and] asked me whether I will agree to step down from the position
of chief abbot," he said. "I agreed since I didn't have the option of not accepting it."
In June 2008, Sweeping new measures introduced in Kardze, Sichuan province to purge monasteries of monks and
restrict religious practice in the wake of protests across the plateau reveal a systematic new attack on Tibetan
Buddhism that is reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution. According to the new measures, specified in an official
document from Kardze (Chinese: Ganzi) Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture in Sichuan province
(the Tibetan area of Kham):
Monks who express dissent or refuse to 'conform' can be expelled and their residence demolished;
Tulkus (reincarnate lamas) could be 'stripped of the right to hold the incarnation lineage' if they communicate
with foreigners or engage in protests against the Chinese authorities - a measure that is consistent
with an earlier ruling that all reincarnate lamas must have the approval of the Chinese government;
Buddhist practice will be suspended in monasteries where a specific percentage of monks have engaged in protest or
dissent;
Senior religious teachers could face public 'rectification' or imprisonment if they are shown to have even
'tolerated' peaceful protest activity.
The document, dated June 28 and published under the name of the head of Kardze prefecture, Li Zhangping,
the measures are aimed at "dealing clearly with participants in illegal activities aimed at inciting the division
of nationalities, such as shouting reactionary slogans, distributing reactionary writings, flying and popularising
the 'snow lion flag' and holding illegal demonstrations."
Right to Development and Population Transfer
In the last fifty years, China claims that it has ‘developed’ Tibet and improved the living standards of Tibetans
and that “Tibet Autonomous Region” today enjoys extraordinary economic growth averaging over 10 percent during
the past five years. In 2001, the “TAR” showed the highest growth rate in all of China at 12.8 percent…Beijing
pours huge subsidies and funds into Tibet, especially in the “TAR”, amounting to more than 90 percent of
the region’s total revenue, thereby making Tibetans inefficiently dependent on government sources of finance
from Beijing. Such finance continues to be targeted at urban areas where Tibetans have the hardest time
competing with Chinese migrants.
Available statistics on Tibet indicate that Tibetans now lead impoverished lives. Based on UNDP’s China Human
Development Reports in 1997, 1999, 2002 and 2005, the “Tibet Autonomous Region” continues to remain at the bottom
when ranked on the Human Development Index, a composite of health, education and in come indicators.
The World Bank also puts the TAR at the very bottom, in its 2003 report, East Asia Integrates. According
to the UNDP’s National Human Development Report 2005, education in the TAR is the worst among all of the
31 Chinese provinces. It estimates that 55 percent of the Tibetan population are illiterate, while the
other 30 provinces have illiteracy rates below 20 per cent.
China’s Western Development Strategy (WDS) is now being seen as another threat to both the fragile environment
of the Tibetan Plateau and to the very survival of the Tibetans as a people. The WDS has caused concern is the
exploitation of Tibet’s rich natural resources, including water. China has stated that since 1999 over 1000
researchers divided into 24 separate regiments fanned out across the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau to geologically map
the area, finding 16 major new deposits of copper, iron, lead, zinc and other minerals worth an estimated
US $128 billion. If the findings are confirmed, it would make Tibet one of the richest areas of China.
Forced Evictions
One development linked to the WDS is highlighted in a new report by Human Rights Watch, whereby the Chinese
authorities have been implementing forced evictions, land confiscation and fencing policies in pastoral areas
inhabited primarily by Tibetans causing irreparable consequence on their livelihood. While thousands of
Tibetan nomads and farmers have been moved from their lands, on 15 August 2008, China’s state media announced
that 73,700 nomadic Tibetans living in Gannan (Tib: Kanlho) "Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture" ('TAP')
will be relocated to brick houses in the next five years. It is estimated that in the past few years,
more than 250,000 Tibetans have been forced to move into these "socialist villages."
Questioning China’s commitment to improving the human rights situation in Tibet
Attempts by the international community, the UN and civil society organizations outside China to engage
China on substantive issues related to the human rights situation in Tibet are met either with silence or a fierce,
uncompromising response from the Chinese government. Government policies in Tibet, no matter what thei
characteristics or consequences, are deemed purely the internal affairs of China and not subject to ‘outside
interference’. Participants in bilateral and multilateral human rights dialogues with China report
little substantive progress other than the existence of the dialogues themselves.
Even objective assessments of the situation in Tibet supported by independent, expert research and testimony by
human rights defenders are rejected by Beijing as tactics to shame China or the acts of “hostile foreign forces”.
Nevertheless, several high profile Tibetan political prisoners have been released to the United States since 2001,
some of whom have testified at the UN Human Rights Commission and Council, while foreign delegations, including
UN human rights experts have been received on tightly-controlled fact-finding missions to Tibet.
Instead, the Chinese government has exacerbated existing human right problems, introducing harsh new restrictions
on how Tibetans practise their Buddhist faith and increasing pressure on both the Tibetan monasteries and laypeople
to publicly denounce the Dalai Lama in an atmosphere reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution. In March 2008,
the Communist Party leader in Tibet Autonomous Region called the Dalai Lama "a jackal in Buddhist monk's robes,
an evil spirit with a human face and the heart of a beast". This kind of rhetoric aimed at the most revered
spiritual symbol for Tibetans can only contribute to a widening gap between Tibetans and the Beijing government.
The complete lack of political will by Chinese authorities to acknowledge the existence of a human rights problem
in Tibet means that the legitimate grievances of the Tibetan people receive no fair hearing. This refusal to
engage in discussions with Tibetans and the Dalai Lama on their real concerns must be considered a primary cause
of the wide scale uprising by Tibetans against Chinese rule during Spring, 2008.
In March 2008, a letter from Tibet which reached the outside world following the demonstrations in Lhasa had this
appeal to the Chinese authorities: “Instead of simply blaming the unrest on the Dalai Lama, the government should
look closely at the situation with an open mind and enter into negotiations with Dalai Lama. What we are seeking
is a genuine degree of autonomy (not to be confused with an independent Tibet), where Tibetans have the right to
govern themselves within the Chinese system and preserve their own cultural and religious identity,
while having equal economic opportunities to those afforded to the Chinese. As long as Tibetans can live happy,
prosperous lives, we don't care what flag what we do it under.”
Prospect for a negotiated solution to the Tibet question
The Dalai Lama has consistently stated that a solution for Tibet must be found through non-violent means.
To this end, since 2002, envoys of the Dalai Lama have met with representatives of the Chinese government
on eight occasions in an effort to begin a substantive dialogue on the situation in Tibet and how it can best be
resolved.
Such a dialogue and eventual negotiations could, with courage and compromise on both sides, result in a sustainable
solution that satisfies both parties. However, again here the genuine commitment of the Chinese government to this
process as a tool for real progress for Tibet must be called into question.
After the last round of discussion between the two sides concluded on 3 July this year, Special Envoy of His Holiness
the Dalai Lama, Lodi Gyari, head of the Tibetan delegation said in a statement that: “Throughout our talks we have
reiterated to our counterparts that the issue at hand is the welfare of the Tibetan people and is not about the
personal status and affairs of His Holiness the Dalai Lama or that of the Tibetans in exile”, and that
“In the course of our discussions we were compelled to candidly convey to our counterparts that in the
absence of serious and sincere commitment on their part the continuation of the present dialogue process
would serve no purpose.”
Addressing the ground realities in Tibet in cooperation with the Dalai Lama is the Chinese government’s only
path to legitimacy in Tibet and the peaceful development of Tibetan areas. Members of the UN Human Rights
Council must do all they can to acknowledge and address those ground realities, and to compel their Chinese
counterparts to respect the human rights of all China’s citizens and to engage sincerely with the Dalai Lama
in order to bring respect, welfare and peace to Tibet.
Recommendations to the Government of the People’s Republic of China
This report offers the following recommendations:
Adopt and implement laws and regulations for Tibetans that create conditions of genuine autonomy, where Tibetans
have the rights and means to participate in decision-making on the future direction and development of Tibet
Provide unimpeded access to Tibet for UN human rights experts, including the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
and other independent observers to assess the human rights situation in Tibet
Provide unrestricted foreign media access to all Tibetan areas
Fully implement the many recommendations on Tibet as issued by the Special Procedures mandate-holders and UN
Treaty Bodies
Release immediately and unconditionally all those detained and imprisoned solely for engaging in peaceful protest
and/or other peaceful political activities
Receive and allow access to Tibet for the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief and other invited
Special Procedure mandate-holders of the UN Human Rights Council, including the Special Rapporteur on Summary or
Arbitrary Executions
End policies and practices targeted at Tibetan Buddhist institutions and which undermine the practice and preservation
of Tibetan Buddhism, including State intervention in the identification and training of Tibetan reincarnate lamas,
and the use of ‘patriotic education’ campaigns, which include denunciations of the Dalai Lama
Fully implement the recommendations of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, including access for an
independent body to visit the Gendun Choekyi Nyima, the 11th Panchen Lama of Tibet
Allow the functioning of independent civil society organizations in Tibetan areas, and offer access and support
to bilateral technical assistance providers and international NGO programs to further the development of Tibetan
CSOs
Impose a moratorium on the resettlement of Tibetan nomads displaced by government development policies, pending
an independent assessment and legal review of such policies. In all prior instances of resettlement,
offer affected persons the opportunity to return or settle in an area nearby or like the one from which they
have been moved
Ratify immediately the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and ensure that its protections are
extended to all Tibetans
************************************
One-child policy and forced abortion in China
Open Letter to President Obama
Reggie Garcia Littlejohn
Expert, China's One-Child Policy
Human Rights Without Frontiers
Reggielittlejohn@gmail.com
January 28, 2009
REQUEST TO DELAY UNFPA FUNDING PENDING AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION OF UNFPA'S COMPLICITY
WITH FORCED ABORTION IN CHINA.
Dear President Obama:
I serve as the expert on China's One-Child Policy for Human Rights Without Frontiers.
On December 2, 2008,
I addressed the European Parliament concerning this Policy, the enforcement of which is coercive.
As an attorney, I have represented Chinese refugees in their cases for political asylum in the United States.
You have stated that you will work with Congress to resume U.S. funding of the United Nations Population Fund ("UNFPA").
I write to urge you to delay funding to UNFPA pending a thorough, independent investigation into whether the money will
be used to fund forced abortions in China.
In the past, you have characterized abortion as a "personal tragedy." You have also stated that,
while you believe in a woman's right to choose, you are not "pro-abortion." Rather, you seek to reduce the conditions
that make women feel they have to choose an abortion.
Unfortunately, women in China cannot choose whether or not to have
an abortion. They are coerced.
The Chinese Communist Party boasts that it has "prevented" 400 million births since 1979 through its One-Child Policy.[i]
This figure is greater than the entire population of the United States. How have these births been "prevented"?
Through coercive measures that include forced abortion, forced sterilization, detention of family members until the
illegally pregnant woman gives herself up for an abortion, job loss and other financial pressure, and the destruction
of homes for those who escape forced abortion.
COLIN POWELL'S INVESTIGATION REVEALED A CONNECTION BETWEEN UNFPA AND FORCED ABORTION IN CHINA.
In July of 2004, your strong supporter, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, issued the following official statement
after a fact-finding mission into China to determine whether UNFPA is complicit with China's coercive population control
program. Former Secretary Powell stated:
[China] has in place a regime of severe penalties on women who have unapproved births. This regime plainly operates to
coerce pregnant women to have abortions in order to avoid the penalties and therefore amounts to a 'program of coercive
abortion.'
UNFPA's support of, and involvement in, China's population-planning activities allows the Chinese government to implement
more effectively its program of coercive abortion. Therefore, it is not permissible to continue funding UNFPA at
this time.[ii]
Former Secretary Powell then sent to Congress a memo stating that, because of its involvement with China, UNFPA violates
the Kemp-Kaston law, which prohibits the United States from using taxpayer dollars to fund coercive family planning
programs.
Ample evidence exists that, to this day, the Chinese Communist Party forces women to have abortions and to be sterilized
in the process of enforcing its One-Child Policy. Restoring UNFPA funding would use U.S. taxpayer dollars to pay for
these procedures.
PRO-CHOICE ADVOCATES SUCH AS HILLARY CLINTON HAVE OPPOSED FORCED ABORTION, BECAUSE IT IS NOT A CHOICE.
The One-Child Policy is an issue about which pro-life people and pro-choice people can agree. No one supports forced
abortion, because it is not a choice. For example, Secretary of State (then First Lady) Hillary Rodham Clinton publicly
criticized the coercive enforcement of the One-Child Policy during the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing,
in 1995. Indeed, pro-choice activists have classified forced abortion as a form of torture.[iii]
There is ample documentation of the coercive family planning practices of the Chinese Communist Party.
I have cited some of this documentation in this letter, for your convenience. Given the strength of this evidence,
it is the duty of the Executive and Legislative branches to commission an independent investigation into whether
the One-Child Policy is still enforced through forced abortion and forced sterilization, including in the areas
in which UNFPA is in operation. I have no doubt that such an independent investigation will reveal that coercive
implementation is routine, including in areas in which UNFPA has been operational. To restore UNFPA funding without
investigating whether these coercive practices still exist, and whether UNFPA has been complicit with them, would be
irresponsible.
THE CASE OF JIN YANI DEMONSTRATES THE BRUTALITY OF ENFORCEMENT AND THE ABSENCE OF REDRESS.
On October 5 of 2008, an article appeared in the South China Morning Post about a young woman, Jin Yani, who was drifting
off to sleep one night when the family planning police smashed the lock to her front door and dragged her out of her
house in her nightclothes, screaming and terrified. Her crime: getting pregnant without a birth permit.
Her punishment: forced abortion, even though she was nine months pregnant, and this was her first child.[iv]
Jin Yani knelt on the floor of the family planning center and begged the police to let her keep her baby.
They dragged her crying and screaming, and five people held her down on the hospital bed as they ripped off her
clothes and injected saline solution with a long needle through her womb and into the full-term fetus to terminate it.
The dead baby was extracted on September 9, 2000. When her husband, Yang, returned from his business trip,
he rushed to the hospital to find Jin Yani purple and near death from blood loss. She spent 44 days in the hospital
because of severe hemorrhaging. Now, she is infertile.
Such brutality, unfortunately, is not uncommon in present-day China. This incident is outstanding because Jin Yani and
her husband, Yang, sued the Chinese government for the loss of their child and fertility. For the first time,
a Beijing court agreed to hear the case. Later, a court in Qinhuangdao, Hebei province, ruled that certain officials
should be replaced. This has not happened. Nor did the court offer any monetary compensation to Jin Yani or her husband.
As of October of 2008, Jin Yani and Yang were living in hiding - not even their mothers know where they are.
They cannot return to their village for fear that the cadres there will retaliate for the lawsuit.[v]
THE ONE-CHILD POLICY HAS NOT BEEN RELAXED.
As an initial matter, the top population official in China recently announced that the Chinese Communist Party has
no plans to change the One-Child Policy for at least another ten years.[vi]
The Chinese Communist Party, nevertheless, would have the world believe that it has relaxed its One-Child Policy.
To this end, they point out that they have created an exception - couples who are both only children can now have
two children. Also, certain other exceptions have long existed. In the countryside, couples whose first child is
a girl are often allowed to have a second child in the attempt to have a boy. Further, certain ethic minorities are
allowed to have more than one child. In addition, the wealthy can circumvent the policy by paying exorbitant fines or
moving to Hong Kong for the birth of their second child. This option, of course, is not available for the vast majority
of people in China, seventy percent of whom still live in the countryside. It can also create resentment among those who
cannot afford to buy their way out of the policy.
In my view, these exceptions do not constitute improvement. The problem with the one-child policy lies not in the number
of children allowed. The problem lies with the coercive enforcement of the birth limit, whatever that limit might be.
Whether a couple is allowed to have one child or two children, it is a human rights atrocity to drag a woman out of her
home in the middle of the night, screaming and pleading, to forcibly abort her pregnancy, even in the
ninth month -- and under certain circumstances, to sterilize her -- because she does not possess a
government-issued birth permit. This is a crime against women and, in my opinion, a crime against humanity
of the first order.
THESE COERCIVE POLICIES ARE MANDATED BY BEIJING.
The Chinese Communist Party would also have the world believe that compliance with the One-Child Policy is voluntary,
achieved through education and persuasion. It is not. According to reports by the United States Department of State,
Amnesty International, the Laogai Research Foundation, the Population Research Institute, hearings conducted in the
United States Congress, and other sources too numerous to name, the implementation of the One-Child Policy remains coercive.
[vii]
The Chinese Communist Party states that these coercive measures are carried out by local officials who are acting
in violation of the law. Evidence points to the contrary, for at least three reasons:
1. Provincial Regulations. According to the 2008 State Department UNFPA Determination, official provincial
regulations mandate forced abortion for out of plan pregnancies. See, for example, the Hunan Province Population and
Family Planning Regulations, Article 22, which states, in pertinent part: " . . . Pregnancies that do not comply with
the legal requirements for childbirths shall be terminated in a timely manner."[viii]
2. Gao Xiao Duan. A former family planning official, Gao Xiao Duan, brought to the West documentary evidence
that the coercive implementation of the One-Child Policy is mandated by Beijing. Her testimony and documentation are in
the United States Congressional Record.[ix]
3. Chen Guangcheng. Blind activist Chen Guangcheng exposed the 130,000 mass forced abortions and forced
sterilizations in Linyi County, Shandong Province, in 2005.[x] For this he is currently serving a four-year prison
sentence. On April 30, 2006, Time Magazine named him in its list of "2006's Top 100 People Who Shape Our World,"
in the category of "Heroes and Pioneers."[xi] In June of 2007, according to an Amnesty International report,
he was severely beaten in prison and denied medical attention.[xii] In January of 2009, he was said to be extremely
weakened, and possibly near death, due to untreated medical conditions.[xiii]
If it is true, as the Chinese Communist Party contends, that officials who perform forced abortions and forced
sterilizations are breaking the law, then why aren't these Family Planning Officials in jail? Why, instead, is Chen
Guangcheng in jail for reporting these abuses? If the One- Child Policy is truly voluntary, then why doesn't the Chinese
Communist Party free Chen Guangcheng immediately?
THE ONE-CHILD POLICY HAS SPAWNED AT LEAST TEN OTHER SERIOUS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.
The One-Child Policy has given rise to many other human rights violations, including the following ten issues:
1. Gendercide. Because of the traditional preference for boys, most of the aborted babies are girls. Due to the
availability of ultrasound technology, sex-selective abortion is practiced and tens of millions of girls are aborted.
[xiv] There are 117 boys born for every 100 girls born in China, and in some areas the number is as high as 130 boys
born for every 100 girls. Given that 400 million births - greater than the entire population of the United States -
have been "prevented" through the One-Child Policy, there is an entire nation of women not living in China today because
they were aborted before they were born. This is gendercide.
2. Human Trafficking and Sexual Slavery. Because of abortion, abandonment, and infanticide of baby girls, there are
an estimated 20 to 30 million Chinese men who will never marry because their future wives were terminated before they
were born. This gender imbalance is a powerful, driving force behind trafficking in women and sexual slavery, not only
in China, but all over Asia. According to a statement by the United States Department of State, "Women and children are
trafficked into [China] from North Korea, Vietnam, Burma, Mongolia and Thailand."[xv]
3. Female suicide. Forced abortion traumatizes women. In the West, post-abortive counseling is becoming available
to help women deal with the physical and emotional aftermath of having an abortion. No so in China. According to the World
Health Organization, China has the highest female suicide rate of any country in the world, and it is the only nation
in which more women than men kill themselves.[xvi] Suicide is now the leading cause of death among rural Chinese women.
[xvii] Congressman Christopher Smith, who has taken a leading role in exposing the atrocities of the One-Child Policy
through Congressional hearings and other means, stated, "According to the most recent State Department Human Rights
Report, one consequence of '[China's] birth limitation policies' is that 56% of the world's female suicides occur
in China, which is five times the world average, and approximately 500 suicides by women per day."[xviii]
4. Stolen Children. A film was released in 2008 entitled China's Stolen Children, documenting the burgeoning
black market in stolen children - 70,000 a year -- created by the One-Child Policy.[xix]
5. "Illegal" children. After the earthquake in Sichuan Province in May of this year, the Chinese Communist Party
attempted to comfort bereaved parents by offering three things. First, if you lost your only child, they said,
the government will issue a birth permit allowing you to have another child. Second, if you've been sterilized,
the government will send a physician to attempt to reverse the sterilization. Third, if your legal child was killed,
then your illegal second child can become legal, and hence eligible for education and healthcare.[xx] These offers
of help also constitute a series of startling admissions. First, the Chinese Communist Party has unwittingly admitted
that Chinese citizens must have a birth permit to be allowed to give birth. Second, they have admitted that sterilization
occurs under the One-Child Policy. Third, they have admitted that that there is a whole population of "illegal"
second children, who are not eligible for education or health care. Indeed, these "illegal children" have no official
existence, which will likely prevent them from marrying or obtaining employment later in life. A lawyer representing
parents of children killed in the earthquake has been arrested.[xxi]
6. "Forsaken" Children. Recent research done by the China Aid Association has revealed that there are children who
have been abandoned by their parents in the aftermath of a divorce. When the divorced parents re-marry and would like
to have a child with their new spouses, they are only allowed one child, so they may abandon the child of their first
marriage. These children are left destitute and have been called "forsaken."[xxii]
7. Rioting and Violence. In May of 2007, thousands of villagers in Guangxi province clashed violently with police
after a two-month crackdown against violators of the One-Child Policy. According to villagers, family planning
officials "chased people down the streets and into the fields . . . men and women were rounded up for forced
sterilizations" and women were forcibly aborted. Those with second children were fined heavily, and if they
could not pay, their valuables were confiscated, and in some cases, their homes were destroyed. The villagers
responded by breaking into a government building, smashing computers and setting the building on fire.
There were inconsistent reports of death and injuries during the riot.[xxiii]
8. Health problems due to forced sterilizations. When the Family Planning Police sterilize women for violating
the One-Child Policy, these sterilizations are most often not performed by highly trained gynecological surgeons,
especially in the countryside. Often, there are infections and other complications. Many women have complained that
their health was destroyed by these forced sterilizations.
9. Aging Population. Further, the One-Child Policy has created the intractable problem of the aging of the
Chinese population. Soon on the demographic horizon, after the year 2030, the proportion of retirees to working
people will increase to the point that the shrunken youthful population will not be able to sustain the retirees
in their old age.[xxiv] Nor does China offer Social Security. The Chinese Communist Party has not unveiled any
plan on how they will handle this problem.
10.Tibetans and Uighurs. Even though, as ethnic minorities, Tibetans and Uighurs are supposed to be exempt from
the One-Child Policy, it has been reported that forced abortion and sterilization are rampant.[xxv]
THE ONE-CHILD POLICY VIOLATES THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND DISCRIMINATES AGAINST WOMEN.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which China is a signatory, celebrated its 60th Anniversary
on December 10, 2008.[xxvi] China's coercive enforcement of its One-Child Policy violates the spirit and
the letter of this Universal Declaration, which protects the rights of women, children, and the family.[xxvii]
Furthermore, the One-Child Policy violates provisions of the "Convention on the Elimination of all forms of
Discrimination against Women" (CEDAW), which China ratified in September 1980,[xxviii] and also the "Declaration
of the Fourth World Conference on Women" held in Beijing in 1995.[xxix]
THE "WOMB POLICE" MUST BE STOPPED.
"A society will be judged on the basis of how it treats its weakest members, and among the most vulnerable are
surely the unborn and the dying."[xxx] There is no more intimate part of a woman's body than her womb.
For the Chinese Communist Party to function as "womb police," wielding the very power of life and death,
is a violation of a woman's innermost being - physically, emotionally and spiritually. Men also are deeply
affected by this violence and loss of control, as are children. For China to enter its destiny as a nation,
the Chinese Communist Party must turn from this most abhorrent of human rights atrocities and instead embrace
the weakest and most vulnerable members of its society.
For the above reasons, I respectfully request that a thorough, independent investigation be made into the current
implementation of the One-Child Policy, especially in those areas in which UNFPA has been operating,
before any decision is made to restore U.S. funding to UNFPA. If UNFPA has been complicit in any way with coercive
family planning practices in China, then UNFPA funding should not be restored.
Sincerely,
Reggie Garcia Littlejohn
One-Child Policy Expert
Human Rights Without Frontiers
Cc: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
terug naar boven
United Nations: China says NO to democracy and human rights
China unashamedly rejects recommendations of 19 countries, including ALL the EU member states
16 February 2009
United Nations: China says NO to democracy and human rights
China unashamedly rejects the recommendations of 19 countries, including ALL the EU member states
By Willy Fautré, Human Rights Without Frontiers Int'l
HRWF Int'l (16.02.2009) - After Cuba, China has sabotaged the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) as no other
country has done it since the implementation of this new mechanism of the Human Rights Council in 2008.
The true face of China: NO to democracy and human rights!
The Chinese delegation has rejected almost all the recommendations aiming at promoting democracy and human
rights made by ALL the EU member states and by Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Mexico, New Zealand, Switzerland.
See the excerpts from the "Conclusions and/or Recommandations" of the Draft Report of the UPR Working Group.
NO to Australia's following recommendations
(...) Noting grave concerns about reports of harassment, arbitrary arrest, punishment and detention of religious
and ethnic minorities, including Tibetans, it recommended that China:
(...) (b) abolish the death penalty and, as interim steps, reduce the number of crimes for which the death penalty
can be imposed and publish figures on executions.
Welcoming the softening of media regulations for foreign journalists and encouraging China to ensure restrictions
are not imposed on journalists' access to the Tibetan Autonomous Region and to rural areas, it recommended
(c) that the new regulations be extended to Chinese journalists.
Australia further recommended that China
(d) respond positively to outstanding visit requests by special procedures and issue a standing invitation;
(e) ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as quickly as possible and with minimal
reservations;
(f) establish a national human rights institution, in accordance with the Paris Principles; and (g) investigate reports
of harassment and detention of human rights defenders, including alleged mistreatment while in police custody,
with a view to ending impunity.
NO to all of Canada's recommendations
(...) Canada expressed deep concern about reports of arbitrary detention of ethnic minorities members, including Tibetans,
Uighurs and Mongols as well as religious believers, including Falun Gong practitioners, without information about
their charges, their location and wellbeing.
Canada recommended that China:
(a) accelerate legislative and judicial reforms, particularly on death penalty and administrative detention,
to be in compliance with the ICCPR;
(b) reduce the number of crimes carrying the death penalty and
(c) regularly publish
detailed statistics on death penalty use;
(d) abolish all forms of administrative detention, including "Re-Education Through Labour";
(e) eliminate abuse of psychiatric committal;
(f) provide those held on State-security charges with all fundamental legal safeguards, including
access to counsel, public trial and sentencing, and eligibility for sentence reduction and parole;
(g) take immediate measures to implement the recommendations of November 2008 of the Committee against Torture,
particularly on the inadmissibility in court of statements made under
torture and the non-refoulement of refugees from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea;
(h) respond positively to outstanding requests made by several United Nations Special Procedures, including the
Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, to visit China, and
(i) facilitate an early visit by the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
NO to The Netherlands's following recommendations
(...) It recommended that China:
(...) (b) ratify the ICCPR as soon as possible and bring its legislation into line with its provisions; and
(c) extend a standing invitation to all United Nations special rapporteurs. It said it looked forward to the
publication of the Human Rights Action Plan 2009-2010.
NO to all of Switzerland's recommendations
(...) It welcomed the inclusion of an article on the protection of human rights in the Constitution and the
promulgation of a number of laws that protect human rights and recommended that China
(a) amend the criminal procedure code in order to ensure the right to a lawyer and put in place a law for the
protection of witnesses.
It requested more information on the process and timeframe for ratification of the ICCPR,
which China signed in 1998.
It further welcomed the systematic revision of the death penalty by the People's Supreme
Court effective from January 2007, which resulted in a decrease in executions,
and recommended that China
(b) publish the statistics of the total number of executions since the introduction of its revision to allow
measurement of the decline in numbers;
(c) install a moratorium on the death penalty as a first step towards its total abolition.
While stressing that the rights and the particularities of minorities should be recognized and protected,
and that their economic development should be supported, Switzerland expressed concern over the situation of
ethnic minorities in Xinjiang and Tibet.
Switzerland recommended that the Chinese authorities:
(d) respect the fundamental rights of these ethnic minorities, notably freedom of religion and movement.
NO to all of Mexico's recommendations
(...) Mexico also noted that it would be desirable to continue fostering cooperation with international mechanisms and
for this reason recommended that China
a) respond positively to requests from Special Procedures on the right to food, human rights defenders,
adequate housing,
health, extrajudicial executions and toxic waste to visit China; and b) give positive consideration to ratifying
the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture (OP-CAT), the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (CRPD) and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from
Enforced Disappearance (CED).
Mexico commended China for having implemented additional safeguards concerning the application of the death penalty.
This being a subject to which it attaches the utmost importance, Mexico recommended that China that consider positively
declaring a moratorium on the application of the death penalty with a view to abolishing it.
NO to all of the recommendations of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
(...) It expressed concern about the human rights situation in the Tibet Autonomous Region and other Tibetan areas,
particularly as regards cultural rights, including religious rights, and the use and teaching of minority languages,
history and culture.
It asked about plans to strengthen protections for Chinese media, who face non-official
obstacles to reporting freely, in line with the ICCPR.
It asked also how China intends to implement recommendations
by the Committee against Torture on re-education through labour, the treatment of human rights defenders,
and protection for defence lawyers.
It recommended that China: (a) release a clear timetable for work towards ICCPR ratification;
(b) reduce the scope
of application of the death penalty, and publish statistics to show that the use of the death penalty is falling in China;
(c) issue a standing invitation to the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council; and
(d) grant greater access
to Tibetan areas for OHCHR and other United Nations bodies, as well as diplomats and the international media.
NO to Germany's following recommendations
(...) Germany recommended that China:
(a) abolish administrative detention and forced labour without proper trial, access to legal representation and
independent supervision;
(b) ensure every detainee has the right to regularly see visitors and has permanent access to legal counsel and
effective complaint mechanisms;
(...)
(e) continue efforts to change its legal practice in a way which is conducive to markedly reducing the number of the
death sentences being imposed and persons executed;
(f) consider an early release of detainees who are of old age or in fragile health;
(g) review its approach towards religious groups and practitioners, including those not organized in the officially
recognized churches;
(h) and guarantee all citizens of China, including its minority communities and religions, the exercise of religious
freedom, freedom of belief and the freedom of worshipping in private.
NO to all of France's recommendations
France noted that NGOs' reports frequently referred to various methods of confinement, such as detention, house arrest,
secret prisons and re-education through labour centres.
It asked about any planned reforms on this matter and of what
progress has been made in improving the situation of re-education through labour.
France enquired about progress in
adopting a law to ensure the legal protection of mentally ill persons.
It asked about the new role played by the Supreme
People's Court regarding the pronouncement of death penalty sentences.
Noting that the law on the work of foreign journalists was the first step towards creating respect for freedom of movement
and information, France recommended that
(a) provisions of this law be extended to Chinese journalists. France enquired about progress in adopting legislative
and regulatory texts for the ratification of ICCPR and recommended that China
(b) state a precise calendar for ratification and adoption of the necessary measures for the ratification of the ICCPR.
France recommended
(c) the reduction of the great number of crimes which are subject to capital punishment, specifically, first of all,
economic crimes, as well as abolishing the death penalty and increasing transparency on this issue by publishing
national official statistics. It recommended that China
(d) become a party to the Rome statute of the ICC.
NO to Finland's following recommendations
(...) Finland recommended that China
(a) take effective measures to ensure that lawyers can defend their clients without fear of harassment and can
participate in the management of their own professional organizations (...)
(c) withdraw its reservation to the article 6 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
NO to Latvia's following recommendation
(...) Latvia recommended that China consider extending a standing invitation to all special procedures of the Human
Rights Council.
NO to all the recommendations of the Czech Republic (presidency of the EU)
(...) The Czech Republic recommended that China:
(a) accede to the OPCAT, improve its national implementation of the CAT, establish an independent and effective
complaints procedure for victims of torture and review its compliance with the principle of "non-refoulement";
(b) revise its legislation and practice that violate the right to freedom of expression and release all persons
held in this connection, e.g., Mr. Paljor Norbu and persons arrested in connection with Charter 08.
In relation to the right to a fair trial, Czech Republic recommended that China
(c) reform its State secrets Law and definitions of crimes as incitement to subversion of state power so that they
cannot be abused for persecution of human rights defenders in particular petitioners or journalists;
(d) ensure the
independence of judiciary and lawyers;
(e) abolish the system of re-education through labour and black jails.
With regard to protection of human rights of national minorities, including Tibetans and Uyghurs, Czech Republic
recommended that China
(f) review laws and practices in particular with regard to ensuring protection of their freedom of religion, movement,
protection of their culture and language.
In relation to Tibet, Czech Republic recommended that China
(g) end the "strike hard campaign" associated with numerous serious violations of human rights; (h) investigate all
cases of police brutality and torture, e.g., death of Mr. Pema Tsepak in Chambo in January this year; and
(i) ensure protection of the right of peaceful assembly and release all persons arrested in this
connection, e.g., Ms. Tashi Tao and Ms. Dhungtso in Kardze County.
NO to New Zealand's following recommendations
(...) Noting that the establishment of a fully funded and independent national human rights institution has proved
helpful in a number of countries, it recommended
(a) establishing a national human rights institution, in accordance with the Paris Principles.
It noted with concern continuing allegations around the use of forced labour as a corrective measure, torture,
detention without trial and ill-treatment of suspects in policy custody, harassment of lawyers and human rights
defenders, and ongoing restrictions on freedom of religion, information and expression.
It recommended (...)
(c) continued reform towards the eventual abolition of the death penalty, including greater transparency around its use.
It further recommended
(d) conducting a review of its application of the 1984 safeguards, as adopted by ECOSOC 1984/50.
It noted an OHCHR report referring to human rights concerns in Tibet raised by special rapporteurs and by various treaty
bodies.
New Zealand has been a consistent supporter of dialogue to achieve meaningful outcomes that address the
interests of all communities in Tibet and it understands that China intends to resume this dialogue and recommended
that
(e) it do so.
It recommended that
g) the national action plan on human rights reflect concrete steps towards the ratification of the ICCPR.
NO to Argentina's following recommendation
(...) Argentina recommended (a) analysing the possibility of ratifying human rights instruments which are considered
relevant in strengthening its promotion and protection, highlighting: ICCPR, International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons Against Enforced Disappearances, and assess the possibility of accepting the competency
of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances in accordance with the Convention, and the Protocol to Prevent,
Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, supplementing the Convention against
Transnational Organised Crime;
NO to Portugal's following recommendation
(...) Portugal recommended that China (b) ensure that primary education attains the constitutionally guaranteed universal
compulsory status. In spite of all the progresses in the field of education, Portugal expressed concern over programmes
like "Work and Study" as the regulations failed to provide a clear definition of the acceptable kind, intensity and
overall time duration of this special category of work.
It welcomed the ratification of the ICRPD and the accessibility
improvements witnessed during the Beijing Olympics and Paralympics.
NO to Austria's following recommendations
(...) Austria recommended
(b) further reducing the applicability of the death penalty, in particular for non-violent crimes, and to provide
statistics on the number of death sentences as well as on the SPC review procedure (how many cases are returned
for retrial; in how many cases are defendants heard by the SPC).
It further recommended
(e) strengthening cooperation through open invitations to Special Procedures.
NO to Sweden's following recommendations
(...) Sweden further recommended
(b) removing restrictions on freedom of information and expression;
c) taking urgent steps to abolish the various systems of arbitrary detention;
(d) ensuring that any reformed prison or compulsory care system meets international human rights standards;
(e) continuing and deepening judicial reform, including by adopting measures to address the
institutional weakness and lack of independence of the judiciary;
(f) abolishing or reforming the current hukou residency system to ensure that all citizens are ensured basic access
to education, health care and other relevant social welfare systems on an equitable basis and in line with the principles
of non-discrimination; and
(g) lifting the current reservation to article 8.1(a) of the ICESCR, which ensures the right of everyone to
form trade unions and join the trade union of his or her choice and welcomed more information on possible reforms
in this area.
Sweden also recommended
(h) establishing an independent national human rights institution in line with the Paris principles.
NO Brazil's following recommendations
(...) Brazil recommended to China, bearing in mind resolution 9/12 entitled "Human Rights Goals", (...) to adhere to
both the
(b) Rome Statute of the ICC and
(c) the OP-CAT.
It further recommended that China
(d) consider establishing a moratorium on death penalty; adopt specific legislation on domestic violence; and continue
its cooperation with OHCHR.
NO to all of Italy's recommendations
(...) Italy recommended that China
(a) lift secrecy on figures and statistics concerning death penalty; restrict its application to the most serious
crimes according to international minimum standards; and to consider the establishment of a moratorium on the use
of death penalty with a view to its abolition;
(b) simplify requirements for official approval of religious practices in order to allow more individuals to exercise
their freedom of religion and belief and to better respect the religious rights of minorities; and
(c) respond positively to requests of visits made by United Nations special procedures and to consider issuing a
standing invitation to them.
NO to all of Hungary's recommendations
Hungary expressed concern that forced labour could be a corrective measure in China, such as child labour in school,
and that these could result in exploitation of children. (...)
It also fully acknowledged the importance of the fact that, according to the provisions of the Constitution, Chinese
citizens have the right to freely express their opinion. Hungary recommended that China accept different opinion if it
is expressed by human rights defenders through peaceful demonstration.
Recommendations already implemented?
(...) China indicated that the following recommendations are pertaining to measures already being implemented or which
had already been implemented:
1. Guarantee that all detainees, regardless of their crimes, are held in facilities with decent standard and treatment
(Germany);
2. Develop and adopt a comprehensive policy to combat child labour (Finland);
3. Strengthen the protection of ethnic minorities' religious, civil, socio-economic and political rights (Australia);
In accordance with the Constitution, allow ethnic minorities to fully exercise their human rights, to preserve their
cultural identity and to ensure their participation in decision-making; (and address these issues in the National Plan
of Action) (Austria).
Delayed answers to the following recommendations
The following recommendations will be examined by China which will provide responses in due time.
The responses of
China to these recommendations will be included in the outcome report adopted by the Human Rights Council at its
eleventh session:
1. Inscribe a legal definition of discrimination in its national law (Portugal)/Evaluate the possibility of establishing
a legal description of discrimination taking into account international legal standards in this area (Argentina);
2. Reduce the number of crimes carrying the death penalty (Australia, Canada);
3. Adopt specific legislation on domestic violence (Brazil);
4. Follow-up on this UPR (Austria).
HRWF Int'l Conclusions
Now that the Olympics are over, China has shown its true face: NO to democracy, the rule of law, human rights
international standards.
The EU and its member states should draw their conclusions for their human rights dialogues
with China and drastically revise their strategies.
terug naar boven
|