Criminal Justice in China and the Extinction of Free Speech

Nov 7

Nov 7 Criminal Justice in China and the Extinction of Free Speech

In the recent decade, China’s record of human rights abuses has proven problematic to say the least. Such recent atrocities most notably include the widespread persecution and forced detention of the Uighur ethnic group in western China and the routine aggressive censorship of any form of speech that criticizes either the Chinese Communist Party or President Xi Jinping. The censorship of free speech in China serves to silence talk about other abuses such as the persecution of Uighur people. As long as speech remains stifled in China, abuses of human dignity will remain.

Since the rise of President Xi Jinping, China has further restricted free speech within its borders. In the last year alone, two high profile cases have come forth with regards to aggressive censorship and forcible detention without trial. The first case concerns real estate tycoon and Communist Party member Ren Zhiqiang, and the second Yang Hengjun, a Chinese-Australian writer and blogger.

Ren Zhiqiang was essentially born into the Chinese Communist Party as the son of revolutionary parents. He then went on to become the head of a state-owned real estate company. However, he has been consistently outspoken about his criticisms of President Xi Jinping, especially the president’s handling of Covid-19. Furthermore, he held public forum sessions in which he promoted independent thought and a consideration of western thought. In an essay in March, he referenced the possibility of a cover-up of the virus and indicated that President Xi was responsible. It is worth noting that Zhiqiang is not an anti-communist, nor was he advocating for democracy. He simply aimed at criticizing the party and current administration with the intention to point out its flaws, and thus improve. After this essay, Zhiqiang went missing until September when it was revealed he was sentenced to 18 years in prison on charges of corruption. It was also revealed that, instead of undergoing a trial, he fully confessed to his crimes.

Yang Hengjun was detained in January of 2019 in the Guangzhou Airport after arriving from the United States. Since his detention, he has been held in captivity for the last 21 months and is charged with espionage. Furthermore, his wife is not being held in captivity, but she is not allowed to leave China and remains under strict surveillance. Since January of last year, Yang has claimed that he has undergone over 300 interrogations all with the purpose of having him confess to his charges. However, he has not confessed to any crimes that he is being charged with. In the last 21 months, he has demanded legal counsel, and more recently in September, he was allowed to speak to his lawyers.

Within these two cases runs an alarming thread. Both men were detained for long periods of time without undergoing a proper trial and both were aggressively interrogated in order to force a confession. This occurrence is not wholly uncommon within China, which has a criminal conviction rate of 99%. Instead of proving the defendant guilty or innocent through a fair trial, the Chinese criminal justice system largely relies on the confession of guilt from the accused party. In order to obtain such confessions, authorities resort to prolonged periods of ethically dubious interrogations as seen in the case of both Ren Zhiqiang and Yang Hengjun. However, in the case of Hengjun he is set to receive a trial, whereas in Zhiqiang’s situation, it is unclear that he ever received a trial at all. Once forced to confess, the trial becomes more of a general formality rather than an actual judicial process.

The arduousness of China’s criminal justice system and, to the same extent, freedom of speech within China is directly tied to and monitored by the Communist Party. The justice system of China is rooted very firmly in Marxist ideology shaped by both Lenin and Mao Zedong. In a sense, the criminal justice system is viewed as a method in which the Communist Party upholds the revolution and principles established by the revolution. Therefore, any dissenting opinion or any opinion, in Zhiqiang’s case, that seeks to criticize the current government is viewed as a threat to the social and political stability of China.

Considering their legal inability to openly criticize their own government, the people of China, even the senior officials and foreign writers within it, do not possess freedom of speech in any sense of the word. Furthermore, the criminal justice system is not operating to maintain the common welfare of the people. Instead, the system acts as a proxy of the Communist Party’s surveillance. Instead of upholding the rights and accountabilities of the citizens of China, it serves as a method to keep the ruling party in command and silence any persons that may attempt to criticize, even out of good will, the government. This phenomenon has been ever present in China, however, and since the beginning of Xi Jinping’s presidency such restrictions on speech have increased.

It is worth noting that no criminal justice system is perfect. For instance, much of the American public along with high profile U.S politicians are now actively seeking criminal justice reform. However, citizens of the United States, and many other countries around the world, have the ability to reasonably speak out against their government without fear of being detained and interrogated for months on end. This right to seek change on the public level does not exist in China and in fact many other countries around the world. Such a right, the right to openly advocate for change, remains enshrined in Article 19 in the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but is being attacked by governments around the world and specifically in China. Currently, numerous non-governmental organisations such as Amnesty International, Global Voices Advocacy, and Article 19 along with many more are fighting to establish the freedom of speech for every global citizen. Furthermore, it is imperative that we, as citizens of a new globally connected age, support the endeavour to make this right available to all people.