Human rights group accuses China of punishing dissent, activism with vague laws – Newsday Zimbabwe

Chen Xu (right), head of the Chinese mission to the UN in Geneva, gestures before the review of China’s rights situation by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, on January 23. (Photo: AFP)

China’s legal system has long been criticized for its opacity and its use of vague and sweeping laws to stifle dissent and activism.

Under the leadership of President Xi Jinping, this tactic has intensified, with critics accusing the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) of using its legal system as a tool to suppress free speech, punish political opposition, and maintain its uncontested power.

From national security laws to accusations of “picking quarrels,” the Chinese government has expanded its legal arsenal to target activists, lawyers, journalists and even ordinary citizens who challenge its authority.

China’s legal framework allows authorities to arrest and punish individuals for a wide range of actions considered threatening to the state.

One of the most striking examples is the concept of “endangering national security,” which is interpreted broadly by the CCP.

Within this framework, activities ranging from the defense of human rights to public criticism of government policies can be interpreted as threats to the stability of the state.

Laws such as the National Security Law of 2015 and the Hong Kong National Security Law of 2020 give authorities enormous latitude to define dissent as criminal behavior.

These laws include charges such as “subversion of state power,” “separatism,” and “terrorism,” but their definitions are deliberately vague, allowing the government to apply them to a wide range of actions.

Hong Kong’s national security law has been used to target not only independence protesters, but also journalists, pro-democracy activists and opposition politicians.

In mainland China, similar accusations have been used to suppress ethnic minorities, notably in Xinjiang and Tibet.

Perhaps the most notorious charge used against activists and dissidents in China is “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”, a vague charge that allows authorities to arrest individuals for anything from from publications on social networks to public demonstrations.

The charge, codified in Article 293 of Chinese criminal law, carries a sentence of up to five years in prison, but is often used in politically motivated cases.

Human rights defenders, lawyers and even artists have been targeted by this accusation.

The vagueness of the law allows authorities to apply it arbitrarily, which has a chilling effect on public discourse.

China’s vague laws are often enforced with particular severity in regions populated by ethnic minorities, such as Xinjiang, Tibet and Inner Mongolia.

In these areas, the Chinese government has justified its repression under the guise of national security and anti-terrorism measures, suppressing individuals for their religious practices, cultural activities, and linguistic expression.

A few days ago, a global human rights organization accused China of using its vaguely worded laws to penalize citizens and human rights defenders who express dissent or engage in activist activities.

According to the report titled *For China, human rights disrupt social order*, released on October 8 by the Spanish human rights group Safeguard Defenders, Chinese authorities frequently accuse rights defenders of of man to “disturb the social order”.

The report highlights that although “disturbing social order” is the main charge against human rights defenders, the most common category of crime among the general population is “endangering public security.” .

This broad category covers a wide range of offenses, from violent crime and dangerous driving to the sale of counterfeit drugs.

Safeguard Defenders points out that China’s legal system uses very vague laws, giving authorities significant discretion to interpret them and apply charges as they see fit.

The report’s findings are based on data collected from 2008 to 2022, as well as figures from the Judicial Statistics Bulletin of the National Court (Gongbao) of the Supreme Court of China for the years 2009 to 2022.

Although Gongbao’s data consists of “resolved cases” – those that went to trial and received a verdict, guilty or not guilty – it does not include cases that were appealed.

Given China’s near-perfect conviction rate, Safeguard Defenders concludes that cleared cases almost always result in convictions.

The report also incorporates data from sources such as the US Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC) and the NGO Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD).

Safeguard Defenders’ analysis reveals that 62 percent of cases in its database involve charges related to obstructing the administration of social order, particularly the charge of “disturbing social order.” “.

One of the most common charges in this category is “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” (Article 293 of the Chinese Criminal Code), a vague charge often used against petitioners, activists, and government critics.

Another frequently used law is the Anti-Cult Law (Article 300), which targets groups like Falun Gong and other banned religious organizations.

According to the report, Chinese authorities often increase charges against human rights defenders to ensure harsher sanctions.

Initially accused of “disturbing social order”, the activists are then accused of more serious crimes, such as “endangering national security”, “incitement to subversion of state power” or “subversion of power of the state.”

These charges carry significantly harsher sentences and are part of the government’s strategy to silence dissent.

The report also highlights the rapid growth of criminal cases over the past decade.

Gongbao data shows that the number of criminal cases tried by lower courts increased by 35.35 percent, from 766,746 in 2009 to 1.03 million in 2022.

Despite China’s restrictive stance on data transparency, Safeguard Defenders managed to document these numbers.

The group notes that it has become increasingly difficult to access court judgment data as China has begun to limit access and remove previously available data from its online databases.

The peak in criminal cases occurred in 2019, with nearly 1.3 million cases resolved that year alone. Since then, cases involving “endangering public safety” have increased, quadrupling from 86,814 in 2009 to 350,290 in 2022.

Likewise, cases related to “obstruction of the administration of social order” more than doubled, from 133,639 in 2009 to 298,803 in 2022.

The report highlights that since 2018, “endangering public safety” has become the most common category of crime.

Safeguard Defenders’ findings highlight that China’s anti-cult laws play a significant role in the repression of human rights defenders.

More than half (55%) of human rights cases between 2008 and 2020 were linked to China’s anti-cult legislation, which has been used to target religious groups that the government considers a threat to its authority.

Thirteen percent of human rights cases involved accusations of subversion and incitement, while seven percent involved vague accusations of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.”

The report shows how China’s laws are used strategically to punish dissent and create a climate of fear.

Intentionally ambiguous laws, such as those related to “social order” and “public security,” allow the Chinese government to arrest and charge activists, journalists, and ordinary citizens with crimes that carry harsh penalties. .

These laws allow authorities to maintain control by silencing opposition and ensuring that any form of activism or criticism is swiftly punished.

China’s use of vague laws to suppress dissent has drawn widespread condemnation from the international community.

Human rights organizations and foreign governments have repeatedly criticized Beijing’s tactics, accusing it of violating basic rights such as freedom of expression, freedom of religion and the right to a fair trial.

At the United Nations, several countries have called for investigations into human rights violations in Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong.

Governments in Europe and North America have also imposed sanctions on Chinese officials linked to human rights abuses, but these measures have so far done little to deter the Chinese government from continuing its policies. repressive.

However, China, which occupies a powerful position on the UN Security Council and enjoys economic influence on the global stage, continues to reject these accusations, seeing its actions as necessary to maintain social stability and national security.

Although international pressure has resulted in some limited sanctions and convictions, China’s significant global influence has made it difficult to hold the government accountable for its human rights violations.

The increasing opacity surrounding China’s legal system, including the suppression of court data, underscores the government’s efforts to limit transparency and shield itself from scrutiny.

The Safeguard Defenders report denounces the Chinese government’s continued use of vague laws to silence dissent and suppress activism.

Whether accusations of “disturbing social order,” “picking quarrels,” or “endangering national security,” China’s legal system remains a powerful tool in the arsenal of the CCP to punish those who challenge its authority.

With criminal cases increasing and access to legal data limited, it is clear that China’s grip on free speech and activism shows no signs of loosening.

China’s use of vague and sweeping laws to punish dissent and activism has created a climate of fear and repression.

The ambiguity of charges such as “endangering national security” or “picking quarrels” allows the government to target anyone who challenges its authority, whether lawyers, journalists, activists or citizens. ordinary.

These tactics not only silenced critics, but also undermined the basic rights and freedoms of the Chinese people.

As global awareness of these practices grows, the international community must continue to push for more transparency and accountability in China’s legal system, the report said.

Related topics