China | Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards

Posts Tagged ‘China’

China’s tactics to block voices of human rights defenders at the UN – major report

April 28, 2025

In a new report, ISHR analyses China’s tactics to restrict access for independent civil society actors in UN human rights bodies. The report provides an analysis of China’s membership of the UN Committee on NGOs, the growing presence of Chinese Government-Organised NGOs (GONGOs), and patterns of intimidation and reprisals by the Chinese government.

In the report, published on 28 April 2025 the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) uncovers the tactics deployed by the Chinese government to restrict access to UN human rights bodies to independent civil society actors and human rights defenders, and intimidate and retaliate against those who do so.

These tactics include using its membership of the UN Committee on NGOs to systematically defer NGO applications, increasing the presence of GONGOs to limit space for independent NGOs and advance pro-government narratives, systematically committing acts of intimidation and reprisals against those seeking to cooperate with the UN, weaponising procedural tactics to silence NGO speakers and threatening diplomats not to meet with them, and opposing reform initiatives and efforts at norm-setting on safe and unhindered civil society participation at the Human Rights Council.

These tactics strongly contrast China’s stated commitment to being a reliable multilateral leader. They stem from the Chinese Party-State’s primary foreign policy objective of shielding itself from human rights criticism and enhancing its international image by restricting and deterring critical civil society voices, crowding out civil society space with GONGOs, and stalling and diverting reform initiatives.

While China is the focus of this report, the issues addressed are systemic. Based on this report’s findings, ISHR puts forward a set of targeted recommendations to UN bodies and Member States, aimed at protecting civil society space from interference and restrictions. The recommendations are designed to strengthen UN processes and prevent any State from manipulating international mechanisms to suppress independent voices. These include:

Reforming the Committee on NGOs to increase transparency, limit abuse of deferrals, and ensure fair access to UN bodies for independent NGOs;

Strengthening protection mechanisms against reprisals, including rapid response to incidents inside UN premises, public accountability for perpetrators, and consistent long-term follow-up on unresolved cases;
Curbing the influence of GONGOs by distinguishing clearly between independent and State-organised NGOs, and better documenting their presence and impact; and,
Strengthening measures at the Human Rights Council and other UN bodies to make civil society participation safer, more inclusive, and less vulnerable to obstruction

The report has been featured prominently in a global investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) launched on 28 April 2025.

See also the earlier report in February 2023: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/02/08/ngo-report-on-chinas-influencing-of-un-human-rights-bodies/

https://ishr.ch/defenders-toolbox/resources/un-access-china-report

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250428-china-deploys-army-of-fake-ngos-at-un-to-intimidate-critics-media-probe

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Defenders, ISHR, UN | 1 Comment »
Tags: China, civil society organisations, CONGOs, Geneva, human rights, Human Rights Defenders, International Service for Human Rights, news, NGOs, politics, reprisals, UN, UN Human Rights Council

New Director for Fortify Rights: Benedict Rogers

April 7, 2025

On 4 April 2025 Scoop news informed that human rights defender and author Benedict Rogers is now a Senior Director at Fortify Rights. Rogers brings more than three decades of experience advancing human rights throughout Asia, with a particular focus on China, Hong Kong, Myanmar, and North Korea.

“We’re so honored to welcome Benedict to our team of human rights defenders,” said Matthew Smith, Chief Executive Officer at Fortify Rights. “Benedict’s principled leadership, deep expertise, and unwavering commitment to human rights are invaluable assets to our work. He will significantly help our ability to strengthen community-based responses to human rights violations and to combat rising authoritarianism.”

Benedict Rogers co-founded and served as Chief Executive of Hong Kong Watch from 2020 to 2024 and remains a trustee of the organization. He is a member of the advisory group of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, an advisor to the Stop Uyghur Genocide Campaign, and a co-founder of the International Coalition to Stop Crimes Against Humanity in North Korea. Rogers previously worked for nearly 30 years with Christian Solidarity Worldwide, including as East Asia Team Leader and Senior Analyst for East Asia.

He is the author of seven books, including The China Nexus: Thirty Years In and Around the Chinese Communist Party’s Tyranny (2022) and Burma: A Nation at the Crossroads (2012), and he has written numerous articles, editorials, and reports on human rights conditions in Myanmar, China, North Korea, and elsewhere.

In line with Fortify Rights’s mandate to strengthen community-based responses to human rights violations, Rogers will work directly with frontline human rights defenders, civil society organizations, and affected communities, sharing his expertise and supporting their efforts to document abuses, advocate for justice, and build resilient movements for change. His decades of experience conducting trainings, mentoring activists, and leading international advocacy initiatives will help amplify the voices of those most affected by rights violations.

It is a great privilege to join Fortify Rights, which is an organization whose frontline investigations, in-depth research, and brave and reliable advocacy have long inspired me,” said Benedict Rogers. “Fortify Rights has built a remarkable reputation for its courage, integrity, and impact. Joining Fortify Rights feels like a natural next chapter in my journey and an important opportunity to contribute—supporting its work in Myanmar, across Asia, and in Ukraine; providing an advocacy voice in London, Europe, and beyond; expanding efforts into China and North Korea; and strengthening the capacity of brave human rights defenders throughout the region. I look forward to contributing to its mission and expanding its important work across Asia and beyond.”

Fortify Rights

https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO2504/S00054/fortify-rights-welcomes-benedict-rogers-as-senior-director.htm

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: Asia, Benedict Rogers, China, Fortify Rights (NGO), history, news, politics, scoop, the appointment

China on dissent: over 1,500 convicted in six years, report finds

March 11, 2025

Alan Lu for RFA on 5 March 2025 refers to a a new report which shows the extent of Beijing’s arbitrary detentions, with severe sentences for prisoners of conscience.

Chinese authorities have arbitrarily detained thousands of people for peacefully defending or exercising their rights over the past six years and convicted 1,545 prisoners of conscience, a rights group said on Wednesday.

Chinese Human Rights Defenders, or CHRD, a non-government organization of domestic and overseas Chinese rights activists, said the scope and scale of wrongful detention by Chinese authorities may constitute crimes against humanity.

“They were sentenced and imprisoned on charges that stem from laws that are not in conformity with the Chinese government’s domestic and international human rights obligations,” the group said in a report.

“Their cases proceeded through the full criminal justice system, with police, prosecutors, and courts arbitrarily depriving them of their liberty in violation of their human rights.”

Prisoners of conscience have faced severe penalties, with an average sentence of six years, increasing to seven for national security charges.

Three people, identified as Tashpolat Tiyip, Sattar Sawut and Yang Hengjun, were sentenced to death, while two, Rahile Dawut and Abdurazaq Sayim, received life sentences, the group said, adding that 48 were jailed for at least a decade.

Map of sentenced prisoners of conscience in mainland China, excluding Hong Kong and Macao. (CHRD)

Among the convicted, women activists and marginalized groups, including ethnic Tibetans and Uyghurs, were disproportionately represented among those wrongfully detained, the group said.

Out of all the prisoners of conscience aged 60 or older, two-thirds were women, it added.

“Human rights experts and international experts have raised that people over the age of 60 should generally not be held in custody due to the effects on their physical and mental health,” Angeli Datt, research consultant with CHRD, told journalists in a press briefing Wednesday.

“That two-thirds of them are women was really shocking to me,” she said.

“Worse still, the impunity Chinese government officials enjoy at home emboldens them to commit abuses abroad,” the group said.

China dismissed a Swiss report last month alleging that it pressures Tibetans and Uyghurs in Switzerland to spy on their communities.

‘Endangering national security’

The CHRD said that under Chinese leader Xi Jinping, the scope and scale of the use of arbitrary detention to silence critics and punish human rights personnel had grown.

The organization documented a total of 58 individuals known to have been convicted of “endangering national security.”

“The overall average prison sentence for a national security crime is 6.72 years, though this figure excludes those sentenced to death with a two-year reprieve or life imprisonment,” it said.

In Hong Kong, more people were convicted of “subversion” and “inciting subversion” — terms that the U.N. describes as “broad and imprecise, making them prone to misapplication and misuse.”

In one 2024 case, authorities convicted 45 people for participating in a primary election, an act fully protected under both domestic and international law. Subversion charges accounted for 37% of all prisoners of conscience sentenced in Hong Kong during this period.

https://www.rfa.org/english/china/2025/03/06/chia-dissent-crack-down-humgn-rights/

https://thediplomat.com/2025/03/chinas-system-of-mass-arbitrary-detention/

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: Alan Lu, arbitrary arrest, China, Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD), detention, Human Rights Defenders, mass violations, prison sentence, RFA, Sattar Sawut, Tashpolat Tiyip, transnational represion, Uyghur, women, Yang Hengjun

Canada’s Hogue report – missed opportunity to tackle transnational repression

February 19, 2025

Emile Dirks, Noura Aljizawi, Siena Anstis and Ron Deibert wrote in the The Globe and Mail of 10 February 2025 about the problem of transnational repression.

The final report of the public inquiry into foreign interference (the Hogue Commission) offers a measure of reassurance to Canadians; there is no evidence that Canadian MPs worked with foreign states to undermine the 2019 or 2021 federal elections. Justice Marie-Josée Hogue’s findings, however, are cold comfort to people at risk. While the commission’s work has ended, distant autocrats continue to target Canadians and Canadian residents with transnational repression, the most coercive form of foreign interference.

*Commissioner Justice Marie-Josee Hogue Patrick Doyle/Reuters*

Through digital harassment, assault and even assassination, authoritarians reach across borders to silence their foes abroad. Victims include activists, human-rights defenders, exiled critics and asylum seekers tied by citizenship or ancestry to repressive states like China, Russia, India or Saudi Arabia. For authoritarians, these people are not citizens, but disloyal subjects to silence.

The danger that transnational repression poses is not new. A 2020 report by the Canadian Coalition on Human Rights in China demanded the Canadian government address threats against pro-democracy activists, while a 2022 report by the Citizen Lab highlighted the lack of support to victims of digital transnational repression. Prior to the 2024 election, the Biden-Harris administration adopted a whole-of-government approach to ensure government agencies like the State Department, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, and the FBI worked together to provide recommendations to victims on how to better protect themselves.

Researchers and civil society have long worried that Canadian authorities are overlooking transnational repression as a unique challenge that requires tailored responses. Considering the seriousness of the threat and the stark absence of action by the government, many researchers anticipated the commission’s final report would explore transnational repression as a distinct form of foreign interference. Yet, while Justice Hogue wrote that “it would be challenging to overstate the seriousness of transnational repression,” she ultimately reasoned the issue lay outside her mandate.

This was a mistake. The final report was a missed opportunity to fully explore the corrosive impact of transnational repression on Canadian democracy. A recent report by the Citizen Lab highlights the profound toll transnational repression takes on vulnerable people, especially women, in Canada and beyond. Intimidation, surveillance and physical attacks prevent victims from participating fully in civic life and create a climate of persistent fear.

Transnational repression harms victims in more subtle ways, too. Our research shows that the mere threat of an online or offline attack is enough to frighten many diaspora members into silence. Victims become wary of participating in social media or even using digital devices. They report being afraid to engage with members of their communities, leaving them increasingly isolated. It has an insidious, chilling effect on targeted communities.

Unfortunately, the future looks bleak. Democratic backsliding in the United States threatens to deprive Canada of an ally in the fight and reverse whatever measures U.S. agencies might have taken on the issue. Our research shows that suspicion of law enforcement discourages victims from contacting authorities. Proposed moves by the Trump administration – including halting asylum hearings, ending resettlement programs, and sending “criminal” migrants to Guantanamo Bay – will further erode victims’ confidence in the U.S.’s willingness to protect them.

Big Tech is also worsening the problem. Across social-media platforms, state-backed harassment of vulnerable diaspora members is rife. Elon Musk’s X tolerates and even promotes hate-mongering accounts, while Mark Zuckerberg’s announcement that Meta will stop using “politically biased” fact-checkers signals a worrying disinterest in robust content moderation. We should expect a tsunami of digital transnational repression targeting vulnerable Canadians now that tech CEOs are loosening the restraints.

Canada cannot rely on outside leadership or corporate actors to tackle this problem. What is needed is a commission on transnational repression. On Jan. 24, the British parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights launched such an inquiry. Once our House of Commons sits again we can follow our British counterparts and resume the Subcommittee on International Human Rights’s work on transnational repression. The new Parliament should launch a multiparty inquiry into the crisis, with a mandate to examine repression outside of federal elections. Crucially, it must earn the trust of victims, something the Hogue Commission lacked. The Uyghur Rights Advocacy Project and the Canadian Friends of Hong Kong both pulled out of the inquiry, citing the participation of three legislators with alleged links to the Chinese government.

This is not a partisan issue. Whoever wins the next federal election will have a duty to contend with the continuing threat transnational repression poses to Canada. With global authoritarianism on the rise, the problem is only likely to worsen in the years to come.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-final-hogue-report-was-a-missed-opportunity-to-tackle/

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: Canada, China, Hogue Commission, Human Rights Defenders, news, politics, Russia, transnational represion

Joint civil society statement on the fifth anniversary of the “Xiamen gathering” crackdown

February 11, 2025

On the fifth anniversary of the “Xiamen Gathering” crackdown, 34 civil society organisations (on 10 February 2025) across the world reaffirm their solidarity with Chinese human rights defenders and lawyers persecuted for advocating for human rights:

26 December 2024 marked the fifth anniversary of the crackdown on the “Xiamen gathering”, a private gathering that about 20 Chinese human rights defenders and lawyers convened in Xiamen, China in December 2019 to discuss the situation of human rights and civil society in China. In the weeks after, Chinese authorities interrogated, harassed, detained and imprisoned every participant who was not able to leave China then and subjected almost all of them, including some families and friends, to travel bans, up to the present day, under the pretext of national security.

Among those detained were legal scholar Xu Zhiyong and human rights lawyer Ding Jiaxi. Both are leading human rights defenders who spearheaded the “New Citizens’ Movement”, empowering citizens as rights-bearers to advocate for a more equal, rights-respecting and free society, and to combat corruption, wealth inequality and discrimination in access to education. In 2014, Xu and Ding were both sentenced to four years and three and a half years in prison, respectively, for participating in the New Citizens’ Movement and charged with “gathering a crowd to disturb public order”.

From 26 December 2019, and over the weeks that followed, the Chinese authorities forcibly disappeared both under Residential Surveillance at a Designated Location (RSDL), a criminal procedure allowing secret detention for up to six months without access to legal counsel or family. RSDL is considered by UN Special Procedures experts to constitute secret detention and a form of enforced disappearance, and may amount to torture or other ill-treatment. While held under RSDL, both men were subjected to torture and other ill-treatment, before being charged with the national security crime of “subversion of State power”. They were subsequently convicted in a secret trial and handed severe prison sentences of 14 and 12 years, respectively, in April 2023. Despite multiple calls from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk and from UN Special Procedures’ experts as recently as November 2024, China has failed to address these grave violations.

These cases are emblematic of a broader and alarming trend of persecution of human rights defenders and lawyers in China. Authorities systematically employ RSDL, harsh national security charges, torture and other ill-treatment, prolonged detention, travel bans and harassment to silence dissent and dismantle independent civil society. The use of vague charges such as “subversion of State power” or “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” has become a routine tactic to criminalise human rights work, despite UN human rights experts’ repeated call for them to be repealed. Victims often face prolonged pre-trial detention, lack of due process, restricted access to lawyer and adequate healthcare, and torture or other ill-treatment aimed at extracting forced ‘confessions’.

This systematic repression is further reflected in the cases of human rights lawyers Xie Yang and Lu Siwei, feminist activist Huang Xueqin, labour activist Wang Jianbing, and citizen journalist Zhang Zhan, all of whom are currently subjected to arbitrary detention or imprisonment . UN Special Procedures’ experts have recently described these cases as part of “recurring patterns of repression, including incommunicado detention and enforced disappearance aimed at […] silencing human rights defenders and dissenting or opposing views critical of the Government”.

As we commemorate the fifth anniversary of the crackdown, we, organisations and activists from all over the world, continue to stand in solidarity with all human rights defenders and lawyers in China who courageously advocate for justice despite knowing the risks of doing so.

We urge the Chinese government to:

Immediately and unconditionally release all human rights defenders and lawyers arbitrarily detained or imprisoned for their human rights work, including Xu Zhiyong and Ding Jiaxi;
End the systematic crackdown on civil society, including harassment, unjustified detention, enforced disappearance, and imprisonment of human rights defenders and lawyers;
Amend laws and regulations, including national security legislation, the Criminal Law and the Criminal Procedure Law, to bring them fully in line with international human rights standards;
Rescind the travel bans imposed on the gathering participants as well as their friends and families immediately.

Signatories:

Alliance for Citizens Rights
Amnesty International
Asian Lawyers Network (ALN) (Japan)
CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
Free Tibet (United Kingdom)
Human Rights in China
India Tibet Friendship Society Nagpur Maharashtra (India)
International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI)
International Campaign for Tibet
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
International Tibet Network
Judicial Reform Foundation (Taiwan)
Lawyers for Lawyers (Netherlands)
LUNGTA – Active for Tibet (Belgium)
PEN America (United States)
Safeguard Defenders (Spain)
Swiss Tibetan Friendship Association (Switzerland)
Taiwan Association for Human Rights (Taiwan)
The 29 Principles (United Kingdom)
The Network of Chinese Human Rights Defenders
The Rights Practice (United Kingdom)
Tibet Justice Center (United States)
Tibet Solidarity (United Kingdom)
Voluntary Tibet Advocacy Group (V-TAG) (Netherlands)
World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
Acción Solidaria (Venezuela)
Amnistía Internacional Chile (Chile)
CADAL (Argentina)
Centro de Derechos Humanos Fray Francisco de Vitoria OP, A.C. (Mexico)
CONTIOCAP – Coordinadora Nacional de Defensa de Territorios Indígenas Originarios Campesinos y Áreas Protegidas en Bolivia (Bolivia)
Movimiento Autónomo de Mujeres (Nicaragua)
Red Nacional de Organismos Civiles de Derechos Humanos Todos los Derechos para todas, todos y todes (Mexico)
Voces de Tíbet (Mexico)

https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/joint-civil-society-statement-on-the-fifth-anniversary-of-the-xiamen-gathering-crackdown

https://safeguarddefenders.com/en/blog/fifth-anniversary-xiamen-gathering-crackdown

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Defenders, ISHR, OHCHR | Leave a Comment »
Tags: China, crackdown, Ding Jiaxi, human rights, Human Rights Defenders, human rights lawyers, ISHR, joint statement, New Citizens’ Movement, news, politics, Residential Surveillance at a Designated Location (RSDL), Safeguard Defenders (NGO), Xiamen gathering, Xu Zhiyong

The Human Rights Foundation shows the documentary “Dissidents” on 2 February

January 29, 2025

A screening of the feature documentary “Dissidents” will take place on Sunday, Feb. 2, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. EST. The event location is Firehouse Cinema, 87 Lafayette Street, New York. “Dissidents” tells the story of three Chinese dissidents who continue to fight for democracy against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) through art, protest, and grassroots organizing despite being exiled from their own home and despite the CCP’s transnational attempts to threaten them with violence, criminal charges, and arson. The film features Juntao Wang, a primary organizer of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests; Weiming Chen, a human rights artist whose sculpture criticizing Xi Jinping was burnt down; and asylum seeker Chunyan Wang, who was arrested for attempting to deliver a petition letter to Chinese vice premiers during the US-China trade talks.

VIEW THE TRAILER

After the film, there will be a panel discussion featuring: Yaqiu Wang, research director for China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan at Freedom House Joey Siu, Hong Kong activist and executive council member at the World Liberty Congress Weiming Chen, human rights artist known for the Liberty Sculpture Park in CaliforniaYi Chen, director of “Dissidents” at C35 FilmsPema Doma, Executive Director, Students For a Free Tibet
The event is free and open to the public, but registration is required. Please be sure to RSVP on Eventbrite as soon as possible, as reservations are granted on a first come, first serve basis.

RSVP HERE

https://mailchi.mp/hrf.org/call-for-applications-hrf-uyghur-workshop-9101325?e=f80cec329e

Posted in films, human rights, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: China, Chunyan Wang, Dissidents (film), exile, film, Human Rights Defenders, human rights film, Human Rights Foundation, izaac-wang, Juntao Wang, New York, sean-wang, Weiming Chen

Yu Wensheng’s appeal rejected by Chinese court

January 8, 2025

Responding to the rejection of Chinese human rights lawyer see also:s appeal against his three-year prison sentence for “inciting subversion of state power”, Amnesty International’s Interim Regional Deputy Director for Research Kate Schuetze said on 6 January, 2025: “The charges against Yu Wensheng and his wife, activist Xu Yan – who was convicted of the same offence – are entirely baseless. They reveal the authorities’ inability to provide any legitimate justification for their imprisonment.

“The Chinese government has used Yu’s online comments and his numerous international human rights awards as an excuse to label him a threat to national security. But all this really demonstrates is Beijing’s deep fear of human rights defenders who dare to dissent.

“Yu Wensheng and Xu Yan have been imprisoned solely for exercising their right to freedom of expression and they must be released immediately and unconditionally.”

Yu Wensheng is the winner of the 2021 Martin Ennals Award. [https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/69fc7057-b583-40c3-b6fa-b8603531248e]

China: Jailed human rights lawyer’s failed appeal highlights fear of dissent

Posted in AI, Amnesty international, human rights, Human Rights Defenders, MEA | Leave a Comment »
Tags: Amnesty International, China, human rights lawyer, judicial harasment, laureate MEA, Martin Ennals Award, news, political prisoners, politics, Yu Wensheng

NGOs say that Chinese Government manipulates human rights (UPR) review

July 31, 2024

4 July 202: China’s government accepted – wholly or partially – 298 of the 428 (70%) recommendations the country received from UN member states during its fourth UPR on 23 January 2024. This represents a 12% drop in the proportion of recommendations the government accepted compared to the previous UPR in 2018.

In a worrying sign of the government’s outright refusal to heed the mounting international concern over key human rights issues, of the 130 recommendations Beijing did not accept, an unprecedented number – 98 – were categorised as “rejected” and 32 were “noted.

China’s government used the United Nations (UN)-backed review of its human rights record to rebuff international concern over serious abuses, issue blanket denials, and make blatantly false statements, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), Human Rights in China (HRIC), the International Campaign for Tibet (ICT), the Taiwan Association for Human Rights (TAHR), and the Database Center for North Korean Human Rights (NKDB) said after the adoption of the outcome of China’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in Geneva, Switzerland.

Despite well-documented evidence to the contrary, the government claimed that many of the recommendations it accepted were being implemented or had already been implemented. Such was the case regarding the accepted recommendations related to human rights in Hong Kong, Tibet, and Xinjiang, and the situation of human rights defenders, lawyers, civil society, media, and journalists. The government also made the false claim that it protected “freedom of speech, association and assembly” and “the lawful rights of all citizens as equals“.

FIDH, HRIC, ICT, TAHR, and NKDB urge China’s government to reverse course and use the fourth UPR to address the concerns voiced by numerous UN member states without delay by implementing all the recommendations that are consistent with its obligations under international human rights law.

Below is an analysis of the government’s response to the UPR recommendations on selected human rights issues.

Human rights situation in Hong Kong, Tibet, and Xinjiang

The government received 57 recommendations on human right issues in Hong Kong, Tibet, and Xinjiang and accepted only 19 (33%) of them. With regard to Hong Kong, the rejected recommendations were overwhelmingly related to the National Security Law and its negative impacts. Rejected recommendations concerning the situation of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang included those that called for the implementation of the 2022 UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) assessment on Xinjiang which China’s government called “illegal“. China rejected 70% of the unprecedented number of Tibet-specific recommendations it received – notably the ones calling for an end of the boarding school system for Tibetan children – often claiming they were based on “false information” despite many verified reports, including by UN experts. Other recommendations concerning the respect of cultural and religious rights in Tibet were listed as “accepted and already implemented” in a blunt misrepresentation of the reality on the ground. Many of the recommendations received by China’s government concerning the situation in Tibet echoed those contained in the joint submission made by FIDH and the International Campaign for Tibet (ICT) for China’s fourth UPR.

Human rights defenders, lawyers, and civil society

The government accepted only 10 of the 25 recommendations it received on human rights defenders, lawyers, and civil society. It rejected recommendations that called on China’s authorities to end the harassment and arbitrary detention of human rights defenders and lawyers and to cease the restrictions on civil society. A submission by HRIC highlights how online rights and internet freedoms in Hong Kong have significantly deteriorated in the post-COVID era, especially after the promulgation of the National Security Law, and that women have been disproportionately affected, as evidenced by the online gender-based violence they experienced.

Media and journalists

The government rejected 10 of the 14 recommendations it received concerning the protection of media and journalists, claiming the authorities protect the right to freedom of speech.

Death penalty

The government rejected all 20 recommendations it received concerning the death penalty. It stated that the death penalty “should be retained with its application strictly and prudently limited” – a statement that clashes with the reality of a country that has consistently ranked as the world’s most prolific executioner.

https://www.fidh.org/en/region/asia/china/china-government-manipulates-human-rights-review

https://www.msn.com/en-xl/news/other/ngos-slam-china-for-rejecting-upr-recommendations-at-unhrc-s-56th-session/ar-BB1pu4Wz

Posted in FIDH, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: China, joint statement, NGOs, United Nations System, UPR

JOINT NGO LETTER asks to suspend EU-CHINA HUMAN RIGHTS DIALOGUE 2024

June 17, 2024

On 12 June 2024, a group of important NGOs addressed the following letter to Josep Borrell, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs:

We, the undersigned civil society organisations, are writing to reiterate our request for the European Union to suspend its human rights dialogue with China, and to consider other, more impactful measures at the EU’s disposal to address the Chinese government’s assault on human rights at home and abroad.

While appreciative of the open and frank discussion and engagement with the EEAS in preparation of each round of human rights dialogue with China, we regret that the EU continues this exercise despite its amply proven ineffectiveness over 38 rounds. While the EU raises concerns during these dialogues, it knows that the Chinese government will not acknowledge abuses, will not undertake any effort to secure accountability, and will not be persuaded to undertake any policy or legislative action to comply with China’s international human rights obligations. The EU’s reluctance to establish any measurable benchmark of progress, or even to establish clearly defined objectives beyond having a dialogue, exacerbates the ineffectiveness of this exercise.

This year’s human rights dialogue would also entail EU officials sitting down with authorities in Beijing to “engage… through dialogue and cooperation” on human rights, days after the 35th anniversary of the Tiananmen massacre.

Since Xi Jinping came to power in 2013, the Chinese government has intensified its crackdown on dissent, harassing and imprisoning human rights defenders and activists including the Swedish bookseller Gui Minhai, the Uyghur economist and Sakharov Prize laureate Ilham Tohti [7 human rights awards, see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/37AE7DC4-16DB-51E9-4CF8-AB0828AEF491], the Hong-Kong barrister and human rights activist Chow Hang-tung and human rights lawyers Yu Wensheng and his wife Xu Yan, who were arrested a little over a year ago on their way to meet with the EU delegation [see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/69fc7057-b583-40c3-b6fa-b8603531248e and https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/07/12/new-wave-of-repression-against-human-rights-lawyers-unleashed-in-china/]. The Chinese government has committed egregious violations against Uyghur and other Turkic communities in Xinjiang/The Uyghur Region, which a report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in August 2022 stated “may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity.” Beijing has also intensified its repression in Tibet, while in Hong Kong the creation of a new national security architecture at Beijing’s behest has severely restricted the rights and freedoms long enjoyed by Hong Kong’s people.

Beijing’s foreign policy has also been increasingly detrimental to human rights, both in the region and beyond. The Chinese government continues to support highly abusive governments, to challenge international efforts to secure accountability for grave abuses, and to intensify efforts to undermine the international human rights system and rewrite its norms. The Chinese government has also engaged in increasingly brazen transnational repression – abuses committed outside its borders – including in EU countries.

The EU has already suspended human rights dialogues with highly repressive countries such as Russia, Syria, Belarus, and Myanmar, among others, in light of the nature, scale and pervasiveness of their authorities’ human rights abuses and violations of international law. The Chinese government has committed serious crimes amounting to crimes against humanity. It has long been evident that the human rights dialogue is not an appropriate nor an effective tool to address them. There is no reason to expect the 39th round will prove more beneficial to the rights of people in China than the previous 38. The EU and its member states should pursue different, more effective actions to press the Chinese government to end its crimes against humanity and other serious violations – and to hold accountable those responsible for failing to do so.

We have long been suggesting alternative action, latest in this February 2023 letter. We stand ready to discuss these and other options with you any time.

Signatories:
Amnesty International
Front Line Defenders
Human Rights Watch
International Service for Human Rights
World Uyghur Congress

https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/statement-report/joint-public-civil-society-letter-eu-china-human-rights-dialogue-2024

and see https://www.ucanews.com/news/jailing-of-chinese-metoo-journalist-upsets-rights-groups/105431

https://www.aol.com/news/eu-urges-china-stop-human-145953152.html

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/eu-urges-china-stop-human-rights-crackdown-2024-06-17/

Posted in Amnesty international, Front Line, HRW, Human Rights Defenders, ISHR | Leave a Comment »
Tags: China, Chow Hang-tung, digest of human rights awards and laureates, EU, EU–China dialogue, Front Line (NGO), Gui Minhai, human rights, Human Rights Defenders, Ilham Tohti, joint letter, Josep Borrell, news, NGOs, politics, Sophia Huang Xueqin, suspension, Xi Jinping, Yu Wensheng

Q&A: Transnational Repression

June 14, 2024

On 12 June 2024, Human Rights Watch published a useful, short “questions-and-answers” document which outlines key questions on the global trend of transnational repression.

Illustration of a map being used to bind someone's mouth — *© 2024 Brian Stauffer for Human Rights Watch*

What is transnational repression?

The term “transnational repression” is increasingly used to refer to state actors reaching beyond their borders to suppress or stifle dissent by targeting human rights defenders, journalists, government critics and opposition activists, academics and others, in violation of their human rights. Particularly vulnerable are nationals or former nationals, members of diaspora communities and those living in exile. Many are asylum seekers or refugees in their place of exile, while others may be at risk of extradition or forced return. Back home, a person’s family members and friends may also be targeted, by way of retribution and with the aim of silencing a relative in exile or forcing their return.

Transnational repression can have far-reaching consequences, including a chilling effect on the rights to freedom of expression and association. While there is no formal legal definition, the framing of transnational repression, which encompasses a wide range of rights abuses, allows us to better understand it and propose victim-centered responses.

What tactics are used?

Documented tactics of transnational repression include killings, abductions, enforced disappearances, unlawful removals, online harassment, the use of digital surveillance including spyware, targeting of relatives, and the abuse of consular services. Interpol’s Red Notice system has also been used as a tool of transnational repression, to facilitate unlawful extraditions. Interpol has made advances in improving its vetting systems, yet governments continue to abuse the Red Notice system by publishing unlawful notices seeking citizens who have fled abroad on spurious charges. This leaves targets vulnerable to arrest and return to their country of origin to be mistreated, even after they have fled to seek safety abroad.

Is transnational repression a new phenomenon?

No, the practice of governments violating human rights beyond their borders is not new. Civil society organizations have been documenting such abuses for decades. What is new, however, is the growing recognition of transnational repression as more than a collection of grave incidents, but also as an increasing phenomenon of global concern, requiring global responses. What is also new is the increasing access to and use of sophisticated technology to harass, threaten, surveil and track people no matter where they are. This makes the reach of transnational repression even more pervasive.

Where is transnational repression happening?

Transnational repression is a global phenomenon. Cases have been documented in countries and regions around the world. The use of technology such as spyware increases the reach of transnational repression, essentially turning an infected device, such as a mobile phone, into a portable surveillance tool, allowing targeted individuals to be spied on and tracked around the world.

Do only “repressive” states commit transnational repression?

While many authoritarian states resort to repressive tactics beyond their own borders, any government that seeks to silence dissent by targeting critics abroad is committing transnational repression. Democratic governments have also contributed to cases of transnational repression, for example through the provision of spyware, collaborating with repressive governments to deny visas or facilitate returns, or relying upon flawed Interpol Red Notices that expose targeted individuals to risk.

Are steps being taken to recognize and address transnational repression?

Increasingly, human rights organizations, UN experts and states are documenting and taking steps to address transnational repression.

For example, Freedom House has published several reports on transnational repression and maintains an online resource documenting incidents globally. Human Rights Watch has published reports, including one outlining cases of transnational repression globally and another focusing on Southeast Asia. Amnesty International has published a report on transnational repression in Europe. Many other nongovernmental organizations are increasingly producing research and reports on the issue. In her report on journalists in exile, the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression dedicated a chapter to transnational repression. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights used the term in a June 2024 statement.

Certain governments are increasingly aware of the harms posed by transnational repression. Some are passing legislation to address the problem, while others are signing joint statements or raising transnational repression in international forums. However, government responses are often piecemeal, and a more cohesive and coordinated approach is needed.

What should be done?

Governments should speak out and condemn all cases of transnational repression, including by their friends and allies. They should take tangible steps to address transnational repression, including by adopting rights-respecting legal frameworks and policies to address it. Governments should put victims at the forefront of their response to these forms of repression. They should be particularly mindful of the risks and fears experienced by refugee and asylum communities. They should investigate and appropriately prosecute those responsible. Interpol should continue to improve vetting process by subjecting governments with a poor human rights record to more scrutiny when they submit Red Notices. Interpol should be transparent on which governments are continually abusing the Red Notice system, and limit their access to the database.

At the international level, more can be done to integrate transnational repression within existing human rights reporting, and to mandate dedicated reporting on cases of transnational repression, trends, and steps needed to address it.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/06/12/qa-transnational-repression

Posted in books, HRW, human rights, Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: abduction, China, extra-territorial, human rights, Human Rights Defenders, Human Rights Watch, news, on-line harassment, politics, security, Surveillance, transnational represion

Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards