unmerging some refs |
unmerging some |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
===Statistics=== |
===Statistics=== |
||
Reports on re-education through labor have found it difficult to estimate the number of people in ''laojiao'' camps,<ref name="HRW"/> and nationwide statistics are generally unavailable.<ref name="HRIC"/> Reports from HRIC and the United States Department of State estimate that 3.5 million people have been detained in over 300 re-education centers since the system was instated, with some experts claiming that the number is actually higher,<ref name="HRIC"/><ref name="usstate2"/> while in 2007 the ''China Daily'' put the number as low as 400,000.<ref name="XH abolition"/> In 2003 official statistics claimed that there were 230,000 detainees in re-education through labor facilities during that year, while some NGOs estimated that the number was closer to 310,000.<ref name="usstate2"> |
Reports on re-education through labor have found it difficult to estimate the number of people in ''laojiao'' camps,<ref name="HRW"/> and nationwide statistics are generally unavailable.<ref name="HRIC"/> Reports from HRIC and the United States Department of State estimate that 3.5 million people have been detained in over 300 re-education centers since the system was instated, with some experts claiming that the number is actually higher,<ref name="HRIC"/><ref name="usstate2"/> while in 2007 the ''China Daily'' put the number as low as 400,000.<ref name="XH abolition"/> In 2003 official statistics claimed that there were 230,000 detainees in re-education through labor facilities during that year, while some NGOs estimated that the number was closer to 310,000.<ref name="usstate2">U.S Department of State, Section 1d: "Arbitrary Arrest, Detention, or Exile."</ref> Studies by the Human Rights Watch and HRIC have both placed the number of detainees in a given year at about 200,000 in the late 1990s,<ref name="HRIC"/><ref name="HRW"/> and 2007, the [[China Labor Bulletin]] estimated that there were over 300,000 detainees at re-education centers.<ref name="AHRC">{{cite web | url=http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=8628&size=A | title=Human rights groups doubt 'laojiao' abolished" | date=2 March 2007 | accessdaymonth=18 October | accessyear=2008 | work=[http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&size=A AsiaNews]}}</ref> One year earlier, however, the Laogai Research Foundation placed the estimate higher, saying the number in prison during that year may have been anywhere between 500,000 and 2 million.<ref name="LRF18">"Laogai Handbook," p. 18.</ref> Of these detainees, 5 to 10 percent are estimated to be political prisoners, and as many as 40 percent drug offenders.<ref name="issue"/> |
||
The ''China Daily'' estimated that there were a total of 310 re-education centers in China at in 2007.<ref name="XH abolition"/> The 2006 edition the Laogai Research Foundation's biennial report listed exactly 346 re-education centers in China, the provinces with the most centers being [[Guangdong]] (31), [[Heilongjiang]] (21), and [[Henan]] (21).<ref name="Laogai research">{{cite web | url=http://www.laogai.org/news2/book/handbook05-06.pdf | title=Laogai Handbook | publisher=[http://www.laogai.org The Laogai Research Foundation] | year=2006 | accessdaymonth=18 October | accessyear=2008}}</ref> |
The ''China Daily'' estimated that there were a total of 310 re-education centers in China at in 2007.<ref name="XH abolition"/> The 2006 edition the Laogai Research Foundation's biennial report listed exactly 346 re-education centers in China, the provinces with the most centers being [[Guangdong]] (31), [[Heilongjiang]] (21), and [[Henan]] (21).<ref name="Laogai research">{{cite web | url=http://www.laogai.org/news2/book/handbook05-06.pdf | title=Laogai Handbook | publisher=[http://www.laogai.org The Laogai Research Foundation] | year=2006 | accessdaymonth=18 October | accessyear=2008}}</ref> |
||
==Conditions== |
==Conditions== |
||
The United States Department of State called the conditions in prisons "harsh and frequently degrading," and said the conditions in re-education through labor facilities were similar, citing overcrowded living spaces, low-quality food, and poor or absent medical care.<ref name="usstate"> |
The United States Department of State called the conditions in prisons "harsh and frequently degrading," and said the conditions in re-education through labor facilities were similar, citing overcrowded living spaces, low-quality food, and poor or absent medical care.<ref name="usstate">U.S Department of State, Section 1c: "Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment."</ref><!--<ref name="winslow">{{cite web | url=http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/rwinslow/asia_pacific/china.html | work=[http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/rwinslow/index.html Crime and Society: A comparative criminology tour of the world | accessdaymonth=17 November | accessyear=2008 | last=Winslow | first=Robert | author2-last=Cunningham | author2-first=Makini Shani | date=3 October 2005}}</ref>--> Detainees in camps are required to work for little or no pay;<ref name="section6c">U.S Department of State, Section 6c: "Prohibition on Forced or Bonded Labor."</ref> while Chinese law requires that prison laborers' workday be limited to 12 hours a day, The United States Department of State and the Laogai Research Foundation have speculated that re-education through labor detainees in Tibet are forced to work longer.<ref name="sectionTibet">U.S Department of State, Section '''Tibet''': "Respect for Integrity of the Person."</ref><ref name="LRF15">"Laogai Handbook," p. 15.</ref> Much of the labor done by re-eduation through labor detainees is geared towards producing goods, many of which are sold internationally, since re-education through labor detainees are not counted as official "prisoners" and therefore not subject to international treaties.<ref name="LRF17">"Laogai Handbook," p. 17.</ref> |
||
The facilities have been widely criticized for the physical abuse that is said to go on within them. Torture and physical abuse was thought to be widespread in the facilities, and in April 2003 Zhang Bin, an inmate the re-education facility Huludao City Correctional Camp, was beaten to death, reportedly by other inmates and by the labor supervisor.<ref name="usstate"/> Zhang's death, along with the March 2003 death of inmate Sun Zhigang in a [[custody and repatriation]] prison, sparked calls within China for reform of the system, although reforms were not made immediately.<ref name="usstate"/><ref name="position>{{cite web | url=http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/2005/05_08_18_trade_group_law_postion_paper.htm | date=18 August 2005 | accessdaymonth=17 November | accessyear=2008 | publisher=[http://www.uscc.gov/index.php U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission] | title=A Position Paper | last=Stewart | first=Terence | author2-last=Lighthizer | author2-first=Robert | author3-last=Hartquist | author3-first=David | author4-last=Schagrin | author4-first=Roger | author5-last=Andros | author5-first=Linda}}</ref> |
The facilities have been widely criticized for the physical abuse that is said to go on within them. Torture and physical abuse was thought to be widespread in the facilities, and in April 2003 Zhang Bin, an inmate the re-education facility Huludao City Correctional Camp, was beaten to death, reportedly by other inmates and by the labor supervisor.<ref name="usstate"/> Zhang's death, along with the March 2003 death of inmate Sun Zhigang in a [[custody and repatriation]] prison, sparked calls within China for reform of the system, although reforms were not made immediately.<ref name="usstate"/><ref name="position>{{cite web | url=http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/2005/05_08_18_trade_group_law_postion_paper.htm | date=18 August 2005 | accessdaymonth=17 November | accessyear=2008 | publisher=[http://www.uscc.gov/index.php U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission] | title=A Position Paper | last=Stewart | first=Terence | author2-last=Lighthizer | author2-first=Robert | author3-last=Hartquist | author3-first=David | author4-last=Schagrin | author4-first=Roger | author5-last=Andros | author5-first=Linda}}</ref> |
||
Detainees who are released from re-education through labor camps may still be unable to travel or see other people freely. Individuals who remain in re-education through labor for 5 or more years may not be allowed to return to their homes, and those who do may be closely monitored and not permitted to leave certain areas.<ref name="section2d"> |
Detainees who are released from re-education through labor camps may still be unable to travel or see other people freely. Individuals who remain in re-education through labor for 5 or more years may not be allowed to return to their homes, and those who do may be closely monitored and not permitted to leave certain areas.<ref name="section2d">U.S Department of State, Section 2d: "Freedom of Movement within the Country, Foreign Travel, Emigration and Repatriation."</ref> For example, in July 2003 a priest who had been released from detention was kept under house arrest, and five men who attempted to visit him were detained themselves.<ref name="section2c">U.S Department of State, Section 2c: "Freedom of Religion."</ref> |
||
==Criticism== |
==Criticism== |
||
[[Human Rights Watch]] has stated that the "re-education through labor" system violates international law, specifically Article 9 (4.)of the [[International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights]] (ICCPR), which provides that "Anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that the court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his detention..."<ref name="HRW"/> The Chinese [[Ministry of Justice of the People's Republic of China|Ministry of Justice]], as well, has admitted that the system violated items in the [[Constitution of the People's Republic of China|Chinese constitution]]. Wang Gongyi, vice-director of the Institute of Justice Research affiliated to the Ministry of Justice, said that the current laojiao practice contradicts several items in the Constitution, the Criminal Procedure Law, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights a United Nations human rights treaty China signed in 1998.<ref name="XH abolition"/> Re-education through labor has also been criticized by numerous [[human rights]] groups for not offering procedural guarantees for the accused,<ref name="HRIC">{{cite web | url=http://www.hrichina.org/public/contents/article?revision_id=14287&item_id=14286 | title=Reeducation Through Labor: A Summary of Regulatory Issues and Concerns | date=1 February 2001 | accessdaymonth=18 October | accessyear=2008 | publisher=[[Human Rights in China (organization)|Human Rights in China]]}}</ref><ref name="tables">{{cite web | last=Eckholm | first=Eric | title=Beijing, Turning Tables, Defends its Repression of Sect | url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C03E5DB1738F93BA15751C0A9679C8B63 | work=[[The New York Times]] | date=28 February 2001 | accessdaymonth=18 October | accessyear=2008}}</ref>and for being used to detain [[political dissident]]s, teachers,<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.ahrchk.net/news/mainfile.php/ahrcnews_200509/2888/ | title=School Founder 'Seriously Ill' in Prison and Children Beg in the Streets after Closure of Children's Home in Lhasa: New Information about the Gyatso Arrests | publisher=[[International Campaign for Tibet]] | accessdaymonth=18 October | accessyear=2008 | date=12 September 2005}}</ref><ref name="usstate2"/> [[Chinese house church]] leaders,<ref name="Laogai research"/> and Falun Gong practitioners.<ref name="HRIC"/><ref name="Laogai research"/> Furthermore, even though the law up until 2007 specified a maximum length of detainment of four years, at least one source mentions a "retention for in-camp employment" system that allowed authorities to keep detainees in the camps for longer than their official sentences.<ref name="HRW"/> |
[[Human Rights Watch]] has stated that the "re-education through labor" system violates international law, specifically Article 9 (4.)of the [[International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights]] (ICCPR), which provides that "Anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that the court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his detention..."<ref name="HRW"/> The Chinese [[Ministry of Justice of the People's Republic of China|Ministry of Justice]], as well, has admitted that the system violated items in the [[Constitution of the People's Republic of China|Chinese constitution]]. Wang Gongyi, vice-director of the Institute of Justice Research affiliated to the Ministry of Justice, said that the current laojiao practice contradicts several items in the Constitution, the Criminal Procedure Law, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights a United Nations human rights treaty China signed in 1998.<ref name="XH abolition"/> Re-education through labor has also been criticized by numerous [[human rights]] groups for not offering procedural guarantees for the accused,<ref name="HRIC">{{cite web | url=http://www.hrichina.org/public/contents/article?revision_id=14287&item_id=14286 | title=Reeducation Through Labor: A Summary of Regulatory Issues and Concerns | date=1 February 2001 | accessdaymonth=18 October | accessyear=2008 | publisher=[[Human Rights in China (organization)|Human Rights in China]]}}</ref><ref name="tables">{{cite web | last=Eckholm | first=Eric | title=Beijing, Turning Tables, Defends its Repression of Sect | url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C03E5DB1738F93BA15751C0A9679C8B63 | work=[[The New York Times]] | date=28 February 2001 | accessdaymonth=18 October | accessyear=2008}}</ref>and for being used to detain [[political dissident]]s, teachers,<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.ahrchk.net/news/mainfile.php/ahrcnews_200509/2888/ | title=School Founder 'Seriously Ill' in Prison and Children Beg in the Streets after Closure of Children's Home in Lhasa: New Information about the Gyatso Arrests | publisher=[[International Campaign for Tibet]] | accessdaymonth=18 October | accessyear=2008 | date=12 September 2005}}</ref><ref name="usstate2"/> [[Chinese house church]] leaders,<ref name="Laogai research"/> and Falun Gong practitioners.<ref name="HRIC"/><ref name="Laogai research"/> Furthermore, even though the law up until 2007 specified a maximum length of detainment of four years, at least one source mentions a "retention for in-camp employment" system that allowed authorities to keep detainees in the camps for longer than their official sentences.<ref name="HRW"/> |
||
The system has also attracted criticism for the conditions of the facilities and the physical abuse that is said to go on within them. The United States Department of State called the conditions in prisons "harsh and frequently degrading," and said the conditions in re-education through labor facilities were similar, citing overcrowded living spaces, low-quality food, and poor or absent medical care.<ref name="usstate"> |
The system has also attracted criticism for the conditions of the facilities and the physical abuse that is said to go on within them. The United States Department of State called the conditions in prisons "harsh and frequently degrading," and said the conditions in re-education through labor facilities were similar, citing overcrowded living spaces, low-quality food, and poor or absent medical care.<ref name="usstate">U.S Department of State, Section 1c: "Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ."</ref><!--<ref name="winslow">{{cite web | url=http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/rwinslow/asia_pacific/china.html | work=[http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/rwinslow/index.html Crime and Society: A comparative criminology tour of the world | accessdaymonth=17 November | accessyear=2008 | last=Winslow | first=Robert | author2-last=Cunningham | author2-first=Makini Shani | date=3 October 2005}}</ref>--> Torture and physical abuse was thought to be widespread in the facilities, and in April 2003 Zhang Bin, an inmate the re-education facility Huludao City Correctional Camp, was beaten to death, reportedly by other inmates and by the labor supervisor; Zhang's death, along with the March 2003 death of inmate Sun Zhigang in a [[custody and repatriation]] prison, sparked calls within China for reform of the system, although reforms were not made immediately.<ref name="usstate"/><ref name="position>{{cite web | url=http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/2005/05_08_18_trade_group_law_postion_paper.htm | date=18 August 2005 | accessdaymonth=17 November | accessyear=2008 | publisher=[http://www.uscc.gov/index.php U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission] | title=A Position Paper | last=Stewart | first=Terence | author2-last=Lighthizer | author2-first=Robert | author3-last=Hartquist | author3-first=David | author4-last=Schagrin | author4-first=Roger | author5-last=Andros | author5-first=Linda}}</ref> |
||
Re-education through labor has been a focus of discussion not only among foreign human rights groups, but also among legal scholars in China, some of whom were involved in the drafting of the 2007 laws meant to replace the system.<ref name="HRIC"/> In addition to legal scholars, the [[Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China]] had criticized the system.<ref name="LAT">{{cite web | url=http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/05/world/fg-reeducate5 | title=China thinks of closing its reeducation prisons | date=5 March 2007 | url=http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/05/world/fg-reeducate5 | work=[[Los Angeles Times]] | last=Magnier | first=Mark | accessdaymonth=7 November | accessyear=2008}}</ref> In light of the widespread disapproval of the system, Human Rights in China called in 2001 for the system to be abolished entirely. Among its criticisms it cited the fact that the wording of re-education through labor laws was too loose, allowing authorities to manipulate it; the fact that the punishment given in re-education centers was too severe for the crimes committed; the abusive conditions at re-education centers; and the variation of re-education through labor laws from one province to another.<ref name="HRIC"/> |
Re-education through labor has been a focus of discussion not only among foreign human rights groups, but also among legal scholars in China, some of whom were involved in the drafting of the 2007 laws meant to replace the system.<ref name="HRIC"/> In addition to legal scholars, the [[Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China]] had criticized the system.<ref name="LAT">{{cite web | url=http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/05/world/fg-reeducate5 | title=China thinks of closing its reeducation prisons | date=5 March 2007 | url=http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/05/world/fg-reeducate5 | work=[[Los Angeles Times]] | last=Magnier | first=Mark | accessdaymonth=7 November | accessyear=2008}}</ref> In light of the widespread disapproval of the system, Human Rights in China called in 2001 for the system to be abolished entirely. Among its criticisms it cited the fact that the wording of re-education through labor laws was too loose, allowing authorities to manipulate it; the fact that the punishment given in re-education centers was too severe for the crimes committed; the abusive conditions at re-education centers; and the variation of re-education through labor laws from one province to another.<ref name="HRIC"/> |
||
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
==References== |
==References== |
||
{{reflist|2}} |
{{reflist|2}} |
||
*{{cite web | url=http://www.laogai.org/news2/book/handbook05-06.pdf | title=Laogai Handbook | publisher=[http://www.laogai.org The Laogai Research Foundation] | year=2006 | accessdaymonth=18 October | accessyear=2008}} |
|||
*{{cite web | url=http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2003/27768.htm | publisher=[[United States Department of State]] Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor | title=China (includes Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau) | date=25 February 2004 | accessdaymonth=17 November | accessyear=2008 | work=[http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2003/ 2003 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices]}} |
|||
Revision as of 06:28, 25 November 2008
Template:Contains Chinese text
Re-education through labor (laodong jiaoyang 劳动教养, abbreviated láojiào 劳教) is a system of administrative detentions in the People's Republic of China which is generally used to detain persons for minor crimes such as petty theft, prostitution, and trafficking illegal drugs, as well as crimes against the state such as leading unregistered Chinese house churches, for periods up to four years. The system has been in place since 1957, and was overhauled by the Chinese government in 2007. The China Labor Bulletin estimated in 2007 that there were are over 300,000 detainees at re-education centers. The China Daily estimated that there were a total of 310 re-education centers in China at that time. In 2001, at least 5,000 Falun Gong adherents were thought to be detained in re-education camps.
Laojiao and laogai
The term re-education through labor or laojiao is distinguished from laogai, which denotes Chinese criminal justice and prison system as a whole; while re-education through labor or laojiao refers to detentions for persons who are not considered criminals and have only committed minor offenses, laogai refers to prisons, prison farms, and labor camps for convicted criminals.[1] Persons detained under laojiao are detained in facilities which are separate from the general prison system; furthermore, detainees in these re-education facilities receive a small salary, which laogai detainees do not, and have shorter work hours in theory.[1] The laogai system is much larger than the re-education through labor system, with the Laogai Research Foundation identifying 1,045 laogai camps in 2006 (compared to 346 re-education centers).[2] Both systems, however, involve penal labor and often do not allow trials or judicial hearings for the accused.[3] The Laogai Research Foundation classifies laojiao or re-education through labor as a sub-component under the umbrella of the laogai penal system.[3]
History
A report by Human Rights in China (HRIC) states that re-education through labor was first used by the Communist Party of China in 1955 to punish counter-revolutionaries, and in 1957 was officially adopted into law to be implemented by the Ministry of Public Security.[4] The law allowed police to sentence minor offenders to incarceration in labor camps without the right to a judicial hearing or trial,[1] and did not allow judicial review to take place until after the punishment was being enforced.[5] In the beginning there were no limits to the length for which detainees could be sentenced, and it was not until 1979 that a maximum sentence of four years (three years sentence plus one-year extension) was set.[4] In 1983, the management and implementation of the re-education through labor system was passed from the Ministry of Public Security to the Ministry of Justice.[4]
When Falun Gong was banned in mainland China in 1999, re-education through labor became a common punishment for practitioners.[6][2] Some human rights groups have that as many as 10,000 Falun Gong members were detained in between 1999 and 2002,[6] with as many as 5,000 detained in 2001 alone.[7]
In the past decade there have been numerous calls for the system to be reformed or replaced.[8] As early as 1997, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) called for China to allow judicial control over detentions;[9] in 2000, the UN Committee Against Torture recommended that all forms of administrative detention, including re-education through labor, be abolished;[10] in 2004, the WGAD called for the establishment of rights to due process and counsel for individuals detained;[8] and in 2005, the Special Rapporteur on Torture called for the outright abolition of re-education through labor.[8] The prominent deaths of two inmates in spring 2003 prompted many calls within China for reform of the system, but reform did not happen immediately,[10] though The China Daily reported that there was "general consensus" that reform was needed.[11] In March 2007, however, the Chinese government did announce that it would abolish the re-education through labor system and replace it with a more lenient set of laws.[5] According to the proposal, the maximum sentence would be lowered from four years to 18 months, re-education centers would be renamed "correction centers" and have their fences and gates removed.[5][12] A month later, Chongqing municipality passed a law allowing lawyers to offer legal counsel in re-education through labor cases.[13]
Many human rights groups, however, doubted the efficacy of the proposed reforms, saying that the new laws would only help minor criminals and not help political prisoners, and that the reforms would not actually abolish the laojiao system.[12] The Laogai Research Foundation stated that lowering the maximum length of detention and changing the names of the detention facilities would not constitute a "fundamental change."[14] Nine months after the declaration that the laws would be rewritten, the re-education through labor system had not been abolished; in December 2007, a group of academics drafted an open letter to the government calling for an end to the system.[15][16] During the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, there were reports that some individuals applying for permits to protest were detained without trial;[17] of these, some were sentenced to re-education through labor.[18][19]
Statistics
Reports on re-education through labor have found it difficult to estimate the number of people in laojiao camps,[1] and nationwide statistics are generally unavailable.[4] Reports from HRIC and the United States Department of State estimate that 3.5 million people have been detained in over 300 re-education centers since the system was instated, with some experts claiming that the number is actually higher,[4][20] while in 2007 the China Daily put the number as low as 400,000.[5] In 2003 official statistics claimed that there were 230,000 detainees in re-education through labor facilities during that year, while some NGOs estimated that the number was closer to 310,000.[20] Studies by the Human Rights Watch and HRIC have both placed the number of detainees in a given year at about 200,000 in the late 1990s,[4][1] and 2007, the China Labor Bulletin estimated that there were over 300,000 detainees at re-education centers.[12] One year earlier, however, the Laogai Research Foundation placed the estimate higher, saying the number in prison during that year may have been anywhere between 500,000 and 2 million.[21] Of these detainees, 5 to 10 percent are estimated to be political prisoners, and as many as 40 percent drug offenders.[22]
The China Daily estimated that there were a total of 310 re-education centers in China at in 2007.[5] The 2006 edition the Laogai Research Foundation's biennial report listed exactly 346 re-education centers in China, the provinces with the most centers being Guangdong (31), Heilongjiang (21), and Henan (21).[2]
Conditions
The United States Department of State called the conditions in prisons "harsh and frequently degrading," and said the conditions in re-education through labor facilities were similar, citing overcrowded living spaces, low-quality food, and poor or absent medical care.[10] Detainees in camps are required to work for little or no pay;[23] while Chinese law requires that prison laborers' workday be limited to 12 hours a day, The United States Department of State and the Laogai Research Foundation have speculated that re-education through labor detainees in Tibet are forced to work longer.[24][25] Much of the labor done by re-eduation through labor detainees is geared towards producing goods, many of which are sold internationally, since re-education through labor detainees are not counted as official "prisoners" and therefore not subject to international treaties.[3]
The facilities have been widely criticized for the physical abuse that is said to go on within them. Torture and physical abuse was thought to be widespread in the facilities, and in April 2003 Zhang Bin, an inmate the re-education facility Huludao City Correctional Camp, was beaten to death, reportedly by other inmates and by the labor supervisor.[10] Zhang's death, along with the March 2003 death of inmate Sun Zhigang in a custody and repatriation prison, sparked calls within China for reform of the system, although reforms were not made immediately.[10][26]
Detainees who are released from re-education through labor camps may still be unable to travel or see other people freely. Individuals who remain in re-education through labor for 5 or more years may not be allowed to return to their homes, and those who do may be closely monitored and not permitted to leave certain areas.[27] For example, in July 2003 a priest who had been released from detention was kept under house arrest, and five men who attempted to visit him were detained themselves.[28]
Criticism
Human Rights Watch has stated that the "re-education through labor" system violates international law, specifically Article 9 (4.)of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which provides that "Anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that the court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his detention..."[1] The Chinese Ministry of Justice, as well, has admitted that the system violated items in the Chinese constitution. Wang Gongyi, vice-director of the Institute of Justice Research affiliated to the Ministry of Justice, said that the current laojiao practice contradicts several items in the Constitution, the Criminal Procedure Law, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights a United Nations human rights treaty China signed in 1998.[5] Re-education through labor has also been criticized by numerous human rights groups for not offering procedural guarantees for the accused,[4][7]and for being used to detain political dissidents, teachers,[29][20] Chinese house church leaders,[2] and Falun Gong practitioners.[4][2] Furthermore, even though the law up until 2007 specified a maximum length of detainment of four years, at least one source mentions a "retention for in-camp employment" system that allowed authorities to keep detainees in the camps for longer than their official sentences.[1]
The system has also attracted criticism for the conditions of the facilities and the physical abuse that is said to go on within them. The United States Department of State called the conditions in prisons "harsh and frequently degrading," and said the conditions in re-education through labor facilities were similar, citing overcrowded living spaces, low-quality food, and poor or absent medical care.[10] Torture and physical abuse was thought to be widespread in the facilities, and in April 2003 Zhang Bin, an inmate the re-education facility Huludao City Correctional Camp, was beaten to death, reportedly by other inmates and by the labor supervisor; Zhang's death, along with the March 2003 death of inmate Sun Zhigang in a custody and repatriation prison, sparked calls within China for reform of the system, although reforms were not made immediately.[10][26]
Re-education through labor has been a focus of discussion not only among foreign human rights groups, but also among legal scholars in China, some of whom were involved in the drafting of the 2007 laws meant to replace the system.[4] In addition to legal scholars, the Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China had criticized the system.[30] In light of the widespread disapproval of the system, Human Rights in China called in 2001 for the system to be abolished entirely. Among its criticisms it cited the fact that the wording of re-education through labor laws was too loose, allowing authorities to manipulate it; the fact that the punishment given in re-education centers was too severe for the crimes committed; the abusive conditions at re-education centers; and the variation of re-education through labor laws from one province to another.[4]
Although many human rights groups and legal scholars both within and without China called for the reform or total abolition of re-education through labor, some groups have defended the system. A 1997 report in China's Legal Daily hailed re-education through labor as a means to "maintain social peace and prevent and reduce crime."[1] The Ministry of Public Security stated in 2005 that re-education through labor helped maintain rule of law and was mainly used for "rehabilitating" lawbreakers.[22] In 2007, when new laws were drafted, the Ministry of Public Security was in favor of continuing the practice of not allowing judicial review before punishment was enforced.[5]
See also
- Ankang (asylum)
- Human rights in the People's Republic of China
- List of Re-education Through Labor camps in China
- Persecution of Falun Gong
References
- ^ a b c d e f g h "Reeducation Through Labor in China". Human Rights Watch. 1998.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help); Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)[dead link] (Archived version). - ^ a b c d e "Laogai Handbook" (PDF). The Laogai Research Foundation. 2006.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help); Unknown parameter|publisher=
|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ a b c "Laogai Handbook," p. 17.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j "Reeducation Through Labor: A Summary of Regulatory Issues and Concerns". Human Rights in China. 1 February 2001.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ a b c d e f g Wu, Jiao (1 March 2007). "New law to abolish laojiao system". China Daily.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ a b Spiegel, Mickey (January 2002). "Reeducation through Labor; Transformation Centers". Dangerous Meditation: China's Campaign Against Falun Gong.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help); Unknown parameter|work=
|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ a b Eckholm, Eric (28 February 2001). "Beijing, Turning Tables, Defends its Repression of Sect". The New York Times.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ a b c Wickeri, Elizabeth (2007). "China's Growing Prominence in the Multilateral Human Rights System: an HRIC brief" (PDF). China Rights Forum (1). Human Rights in China: 26.
- ^ "Human Rights Watch World Report 2005: China". 28 January 2005.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ a b c d e f g U.S Department of State, Section 1c: "Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment." Cite error: The named reference "usstate" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
- ^ "End legal black hole". China Daily. 1 March 2007.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ a b c "Human rights groups doubt 'laojiao' abolished"". AsiaNews. 2 March 2007.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help); Unknown parameter|work=
|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ "Chongqing: China allows counsel for reeducation-through-labor cases". Laogai Research Foundation. 4 April 2007.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help); Unknown parameter|publisher=
|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) Translated from Chinese, original source was 海涛 (4 April 2008). "中国重庆允许律师代理劳动教养案". Voice of America.{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help); Unknown parameter|publisher=
|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ "Editorial: China abolishing Laojiao system? Not likely". Laogai Research Foundation. 1 March 2007.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help)|publisher=
- ^ "Academics call for end to China camps". The China Post. 5 December 2007.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ Martinsen, Joel (5 December 2007). "Scholars and peasants vs. re-education through labor". Danwei.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help); Unknown parameter|work=
|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ Drew, Jill (15 August 2008). "No Permits, No Protests In Beijing's Special 'Pens'". The Washington Post.
{{cite news}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help); Unknown parameter|coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (help) - ^ Jacobs, Andrew (20 August 2008). "Too Old and Frail to Re-educate? Not in China". The New York Times.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ Cha, Ariana Eunjung (21 August 2008). "Protest Application Brings Labor-Camp Threat, Woman Says". The Washington Post.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ a b c U.S Department of State, Section 1d: "Arbitrary Arrest, Detention, or Exile."
- ^ "Laogai Handbook," p. 18.
- ^ a b Yardley, Jim (9 May 2005). "Issue in China: Many in Jails Without Trial". New York Times. p. 2.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ U.S Department of State, Section 6c: "Prohibition on Forced or Bonded Labor."
- ^ U.S Department of State, Section Tibet: "Respect for Integrity of the Person."
- ^ "Laogai Handbook," p. 15.
- ^ a b Stewart, Terence; Lighthizer, Robert; Hartquist, David; Schagrin, Roger; Andros, Linda (18 August 2005). "A Position Paper". U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help); Unknown parameter|publisher=
|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ U.S Department of State, Section 2d: "Freedom of Movement within the Country, Foreign Travel, Emigration and Repatriation."
- ^ U.S Department of State, Section 2c: "Freedom of Religion."
- ^ "School Founder 'Seriously Ill' in Prison and Children Beg in the Streets after Closure of Children's Home in Lhasa: New Information about the Gyatso Arrests". International Campaign for Tibet. 12 September 2005.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - ^ Magnier, Mark (5 March 2007). "China thinks of closing its reeducation prisons". Los Angeles Times.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help)
- "Laogai Handbook" (PDF). The Laogai Research Foundation. 2006.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help); Unknown parameter|publisher=
|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help) - "China (includes Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau)". 2003 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. United States Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. 25 February 2004.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help); Unknown parameter|work=
|accessdaymonth=
ignored (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=
ignored (|access-date=
suggested) (help)