Blogs » Politics » Bold Calls for China to Ratify U.N. Rights Convention, But Some Ask: Will It Matter?

---

• Bold Calls for China to Ratify U.N. Rights Convention, But Some Ask: Will It Matter?
• Three Self-Immolations Amid Crackdown, Debate
• Why Weibo Needs to Win the War with WeChat
• Comparing Asia’s Giants on Rape
• Why China is Sitting on Fashion’s Front Row
• The British and Occupied East Timor: Support for Indonesia Behind a Façade of Neutrality
• Open Letter Calls for Ratification of Human Rights Covenant
• Will Chinese Hospitals Allow Treatment First and Payment Later? Not So Fast
• Open Letter to China on Human Rights
• [Unit] 61398, The New Number of The Beast

Bold Calls for China to Ratify U.N. Rights Convention, But Some Ask: Will It Matter? Posted: 26 Feb 2013 10:09 PM PST An interior image of China's Great Hall of the People, at which the upcoming plenary session of the National People's Congress will meet. (Wikimedia Commons) Yesterday, a group of prominent Chinese citizens issued an open letter to China's government calling on it to sign the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. While open letters are a venerated form of protest and speech, this group made waves when they chose to share their message on Sina Weibo, China's Twitter. As the name suggests, the Covenant recognizes a variety of individual rights including freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and a number of procedural rights. Seven nations have signed but not ratified the Covenant; one of those countries is China. Now, 121 notable signatories have called on China to take the next step. The letter, a full translation of which is available here, notes the "awakening rights consciousness" in China and the "development of Chinese civil society" and urges China's powerful State Council to submit a motion asking the National People's Congress to ratify it at the congress' upcoming meeting. Activism in the digital age The open letter sketches a revealing contrast between the strictures of traditional Chinese state media and the power of Weibo. "Inside sources" told China Media Project that the letter was only released online after censors caught wind of its planned appearance in a prominent Chinese newspaper and quashed it. Indeed, while publication in print media–or even a mainstream Chinese news site–can require layers of approval, online sharing is frictionless and immediate, its imprints almost impossible to obliterate. Enterprising reporters frustrated with censorship have been known to share their findings on Chinese social media, aware that once a sensational item enters the active Chinese blogosphere, the news gallops as fast as a horse leaving a barn. That didn't stop Chinese censors from standing at attention. A number of the letter's signatories apparently posted the letter on their Weibo accounts, only to have it scrubbed. Lawyer Chen Youxi angrily wrote, "Some have sent Weibos asking for the [Communist Party] to ratify the international covenant; Sina screened these posts for no reason. China is a permanent member of the UN Security Council, the Chinese government long ago promised to join the … Covenant but has not brought it up for ratification. This loses the trust of international society and, even more, China's people. Don't do this kind of face-losing thing again." Another user wrote, "Weibo keeps [blocking] my retweets, I can't take it, I can't take it, [so] I'll retweet some news from the grandfather [as opposed to grassroots] level, hopefully this is safe." She then shared a link to a 2005 article in which Chinese authorities assured observers they were going to get the Covenant ratified "as soon as possible." Others who posted a direct link to their personal blog seem to have dodged the censors' knives. Signatory He Weifang's blog still features the letter, with comments appearing on the blog every few minutes. Online support, but also pessimism From comments on Mr. He's blog as well as scattered discussions on Weibo, it is possible to glean a preliminary sense of Chinese Web users' reaction to the bold move. Many wrote quick expressions of their "resolute," "intense," or "eternal" support. Others, however, were more cynical. Although the "awakening rights consciousness" the letter describes is real–one netizen's political manifesto went viral months ago–the phenomenon cuts both ways. As Chinese grow more aware of their legal rights, they also grow more aware of the ways in which those rights are not honored in practice. One commenter wrote, "I think our constitution and our laws aren't bad, but they haven't been well implemented." Another put it less delicately: "Right now, everyone knows that respect for the constitution and protection of individual rights are a joke. " In an environment where laws are often observed in the breach, a number of users cautioned that "Ratifying and then not implementing it is worse than not ratifying it!" In fact, a ratified but ignored Covenant might only sting more. One user asked, "What can we do if it's ratified and not enforced? It's just like Chinese law, just a game with words on paper." One possible reason for the cynicism: Countries that have both signed and ratified the covenant are required periodically to report to the UN's Human Rights Committee on their progress in implementing it. This may explain why one commenter wrote, "This covenant will shake the basic interests of the Party; it won't be ratified." Good things take (a lot of) time If China ever does ratify the Covenant, it will not have been the first to take its time in doing so. As one user correctly wrote, "Some countries took a rather long time between signing and ratification of the covenant, such as Germany (five years), the UK (eight years), Italy (eleven years), and Belgium and the U.S. (fifteen years)." But after fifteen years of waiting, some have begun to suspect that Chinese authorities have no intent to ratify the Covenant, perhaps dangling its passage before the public simply because denying the Covenant's legitimacy would be a hard sell. One user wearily described over a decade of half measures and false starts: China already signed the covenant in 1998, but for a long time it was not submitted to the National People's Congress for ratification. In January 2004, [president] Hu [Jintao] said China was actively looking into the covenant; in May 2005, [premiere] Wen [Jiaobao] stated while in Europe that China was committed to ratifying the convention as soon as possible; in September 2005, [high official] Luo Gan stated at the 22nd World Legal Congress that as soon as the provisions were mature, they would fulfill the relevant legal processes. On March 18th of 2008, Wen [Jiabao] stated at a press conference for foreign and domestic reporters that they were going to ratify the covenant as soon as possible. It remains unclear whether the letter will be heeded, or what will happen to its signatories. At the very least, their collective activism has already taken on a Weibo twist. Five years ago, Nobel Peace laureate (and now Chinese prisoner) Liu Xiaobo was one of hundreds to sign Charter 08, a bold reformist manifesto whose mindshare among the Chinese populace was nonetheless limited. Now, such declarations remain risky, but are harder to erase–as one user commented, "Whoa, another signed [letter], [but] this time there's Weibo, can it have more of an impact? I'll try to re-tweet." The Weibo age also means that Web users can add their own humorous policy suggestions with greater alacrity. One suggested, "Have a few more drinks with the legislators and then you can get it passed…except big man Xi [Jinping, who has cracked down on ostentatious feasts and gifts by Party apparatchiks] won't allow public drinking now. What can you do?"

Three Self-Immolations Amid Crackdown, Debate Posted: 26 Feb 2013 02:49 PM PST Three Tibetan self-immolations have taken place in recent days, according to exile media, amid vigorous discussion of the protests and a continued crackdown by Chinese authorities. From Dharamsala-based Phayul.com: Tsezung Kyab, 27, torched himself in front of the main prayer hall of the Shitsang Monastery in Luchu region of eastern Tibet at around 1:30 pm (local time). He passed away at his protest site, the same place where his cousin Pema Dorjee, 23, passed away in his self-immolation protest on December 8, 2012. […] This is the second self-immolation protest in Tibet in as many days. [On Sunday], Phagmo Dhondup, a Tibetan in his 20's set himself ablaze near the Jhakhyung Monastery in Palung region of eastern Tibet. His condition and whereabouts are not known. On Tuesday, news emerged of another case on Monday, in Ngaba. From Phayul: Sangdag, a monk of the Dhiphu Monastery, set himself ablaze on a main road in Ngaba district at around 10 am (local time). According to the exile base of Kirti Monastery in Dharamshala, Sangdag's present condition is unknown. "Soon after Sangdag carried out his fiery protest, Chinese security personnel arrived at the scene and doused the flames on his body," Kirti Monastery said in a release today. "He was taken a hospital in Ngaba but shortly after that the Chinese police bundled him away to another place." These protests brought the total number of Tibetan self-immolations within China to 107 since the start of 2009. Six other cases have occurred in India and Nepal, while two further incidents in Sichuan province are disputed on the grounds that they may have been accidental. The International Campaign for Tibet publishes perhaps the clearest and most comprehensive list of Tibetan self-immolations, though at time of writing it has not yet been updated to include Sangdag's. On NPR's All Things Considered, Louisa Lim described the difficulties of gaining access to many Tibetan areas: Visiting Tibetan areas nowadays is a risky venture. There is nothing in the Chinese regulations explicitly forbidding journalists, but the unspoken dangers deter many. One colleague told me it wasn't worth bothering; the monasteries are full of spies, he said, you won't get anything anyway. Many have tried, nonetheless, hiding in the back of vans, under piles of clothes, in questionable disguises. If you do get caught, you might get detained and questioned, but eventually you'll get sent home. At worst, you might get beaten up. The dangers are far worse for those who help us and talk to us. Another report from Phayul last week illustrated the risks faced by anyone suspected of sharing information about the protests. A 20 year Tibetan old man was reportedly sentenced to two years in prison after two photographs of self-immolations were found on his phone, along with other images: "He was apprehended by Chinese security personnel during a routine check near the city mosque," the release cited a Tibetan source as saying. "Upon checking his mobile phone, the Chinese police found two photos of self-immolation protests, images of Tibetan national flag, and other photos showing Chinese atrocities on Tibetans." The release added that he was kept in various prisons for over a week during which he was constantly interrogated. Topden was later sentenced to two years in prison on charges of being a "reactionary, inciting the public, and threatening social stability." He is currently being kept in a prison in Toelung region. […] In December last, four Tibetans were arrested in Rebkong region of eastern Tibet on similar charges of storing "reactionary" materials in the phone after they were found keeping photos of His Holiness the Dalai Lama in their phones. This is just the latest in a string of sentences passed on people accused of involvement in the protests. The crackdown is also said to have included confiscation of TV equipment, restrictions on travel, withdrawal of government benefits from families of self-immolators, and beatings and arrests. Over the longer term, China has attempted to secure its rule over Tibetan areas with economic development. Xinhua's China View reported the official removal of 130,000 people from poverty in the Tibetan Autonomous Region last year, pointing to long-distance trucking as a key driver of prosperity: At The New York Times' Latitude blog, Clarissa Sebag-Montefiore acknowledged that Tibet has seen some material gains. But the settlement of nomadic herders has been a core policy to "raise living standards", and this, she writes, has left many with government stipends and alcohol in place of traditional livelihoods and communities. The Chinese government has […] undermined Tibetan nomads' claim to land by ordering the fencing of private pastures and resettling populations, often forcibly. Since that campaign started in the 1990s — accelerating over the last decade — more than one million Tibetan herders across the Tibetan Autonomous Region and Tibetan-populated regions of western China have been resettled. According to the state-run China Daily, the government spent almost $550 million from 2009 to 2012 on the resettlement of Tibetan nomads in Qinghai. Herders have traded their livestock and their lifestyle for a small annual stipend. They often relocate to compounds in town — like the colorful ones I saw — where local officials can monitor their activities more easily. "People who live in these houses look at it like a jail," one young Tibetan told me. "The community is gone." What's left of it is being turned into a social underclass. Many older Tibetan nomads are illiterate, and aside from irregular construction work there is little they can find to support themselves once their stipend runs out. Those who cannot speak Chinese complain of being treated with contempt; they say shopkeepers of ethnic Han origin order them not to touch produce. NPR's Talk of the Nation (via CDT) recently hosted a discussion of past and present self-immolations with Columbia University's Robert Barnett, Oxford University's Michael Biggs and the International Campaign for Tibet's Bhuchung Tsering. A blog post translated at High Peaks Pure Earth, on the other hand, offers a glimpse of the ongoing debate on the Tibetan web. Its author, Naktsang Nulo, dismisses the accusation that any but the youngest and most impressionable self-immolators could have been fooled into committing such an act, but implores others not to follow their lead and urges the Dalai Lama to issue a similar appeal. What I want to state and request again and again from my heart and mind with deep sadness is that no matter what savage and brutal rule you may have to endure, please do not resort to self-immolation. You may come up with any other methods of resistance and struggle, but please do not set yourself on fire. I want to request again that no matter how pure your aims and hopes are, please do not resort to self-immolation. […] There are many ways to fight for freedom, to fulfill one's aspirations and to struggle against the government. At a time when there is a so-called good leadership of the Communist Party, good governance from the administration, good economic development and good livelihood for the people, it seems that an individual, a group of people or a nationality can demand rights from the government, regional authorities or even the Communist Party by submitting appeals and through legal channels. It appears that one may not necessarily have to resort to self-immolation. Perhaps these are just the words of someone like me who does not know much. But what I want to request again is that no matter what savage and brutal rule you may have to endure, please do not set yourself on fire. Whatever methods of struggle and resistance one must adopt, do not resort to self-immolation. No matter how pure and incomparable your hopes and faiths are please do not set yourself on fire. I particularly want to request our root guru, His Holiness the Dalai Lama, to pray for the sea of suffering in Tibet and kindly make a statement to ask the brave Tibetans not to self-immolate. In an iSunAffairs Weekly article translated and republished at Phayul, New York-based political science professor Ming Xia examined the question of whether such a call would be effective or desirable. Xia's primary focus, however, was the lack of support for Tibetans among Han intellectuals in China, which Andrew Jacobs also examined at The New York Times in November. The two groups face shared obstacles, Xia argued, but many Chinese fail to recognize this because of state propaganda or revulsion at the act of self-immolation viewed from a non-Buddhist perspective. First as intellectuals living in the free world, we must be aware of the fact that the Chinese intellectuals and Tibetans are victims of the same authoritarian rule and that they are both facing a profound identity crisis. It raises a fundamental question for Tibetans, which is whether Tibetans would continue to be Tibetans if there were no Buddhism. And as for the Chinese intellectuals, the question is whether they would still be "intellectuals" if they do not have the right to free and independent thinking and the right to pursue truth. Since the two challenges are closely interlinked, it is therefore incumbent upon the Chinese intellectuals to pay close attention and support the demand of the Tibetan people. […] No doubt, resorting to self-immolation is not a good option. Tibetans today, however, do not have the luxury to choose between "good" and "bad". Tibetans can only chose between "bad" and "worse." Losing their religious faith is worse than self-immolation for Tibetans. The Chinese Communist regime wantonly insult the Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, ban his portrait to be hung in the temples, expel the monks devoted to the Dalai Lama from their monasteries, establish "Temple Management Authority" and "Work Units" in the monasteries, and send millions of copies of the so-called "four leaders" (Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin, and Hu Jintao) to the temples. All of this represents a serious threat to the religious freedom of the Tibetan people. © Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: Dalai Lama, economic development, intellectuals, journalists conditions, Kirti monastery, ngaba, nomads, poverty, poverty alleviation, self-immolations, Tibet, Tibetan protests Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Why Weibo Needs to Win the War with WeChat Posted: 26 Feb 2013 02:45 PM PST At Tech in Asia, Charles Custer surveys the stakes in the brewing battle between between Sina Weibo and Tencent's Weixin (or WeChat). Weibo, he argues, has repeatedly helped local social and environmental issues coalesce into nationwide movements, a trend that the rise of Weixin threatens to unravel. Five years ago, for example, you might think that the pollution of a local river was just a problem with a nearby factory, but thanks to Deng Fei's weibo campaign and others, it's easy to see on Weibo that many rivers nationwide have similar problems. So, what you previously considered a local problem is now a national one, and when that happens, you're more likely to try to push for national changes instead of just complaining about your local authorities. […] That's why Weibo's fight with WeChat is so crucial. WeChat is a totally different service with a very different focus, but the more time users spend on WeChat, the less they're spending on Weibo. And while chatting with your friends and following celebrities is fun, the service just isn't designed for the swift passing-along of information the way that weibo is. WeChat's focus is your circle of friends and your local area, Weibo's focus is far wider. To return to our polluted river analogy, on Weibo you share your photos of the river with your followers all over the country, and they pass it on to theirs; quickly, it can go national. But on WeChat, you bitch with your friends and coworkers about the river and it stays in your (mostly) local social circles. Even if it does spread, that spread isn't easily visible or trackable, which makes it seem like fewer people are talking about it and thus reduces its impact. While Sina Weibo currently has 500 million registered users to Weixin's 300 million, its lead may be less substantial than it appears. Also at Tech in Asia, Steven Millward suggested last week that as many as 95% of all Sina Weibo accounts may be either "zombies" or spammers, and Weixin is likely to reach the half-billion mark within the next twelve months. Whether or not Weixin encourages a narrowly local focus among users, Tencent has global ambitions for the service. Its largest user bases abroad are currently in Malaysia and India, but the company appears intent on conquering America as a springboard to world domination. From Fang Yunyu at Global Times: "We are planning to set up our WeChat office in the US, in a bid to explore opportunities in the US market," Tencent Holdings said in a statement e-mailed to the Global Times. […] "If a foreign product can succeed in the US market, where many excellent IT products and companies were born, it will be relatively easy for the product to go into other markets," Tencent noted. […] Tencent announced last month that the total number of WeChat users had reached 300 million, including over 10 million overseas users, about two years after the Shenzhen-based company launched the mobile application. "The figure may exceed 500 million by the end of this year, which will be equivalent to the number of Internet users in the country. In other words, it means the domestic WeChat market will very soon be saturated," Fang Xingdong, founder of the Beijing-based industry consultancy Internet Laboratory, told the Global Times Monday. International users may be deterred, however, by reports of Weixin actively assisting Chinese authorities with surveillance of political dissidents and censorship even of users outside China. © Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: India, Malaysia, river pollution, sina, sina weibo, social networking, tencent, United States, Weixin Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Comparing Asia’s Giants on Rape Posted: 26 Feb 2013 01:54 PM PST Didi Kirsten Tatlow at The New York Times has compared China and India in terms of rape. China and India are often compared as they are both 'Asia's giants,' with over a billion people each, and are experiencing fast-paced economic growth: In both countries recently, highly publicized gang rapes have dramatically raised public awareness of a hidden problem. Of course, rape is to some extent a hidden issue everywhere, even in societies with efficient legal systems and liberal attitudes toward women. But in China and India, as in other places where traditional notions may judge a raped woman as "ruined," there are especially powerful disincentives to reporting the crime, experts say. Here are the painful stories. On Dec. 16, a 23-year-old student was gang-raped on a bus in New Delhi, the Indian capital, dying of her injuries two weeks later. Few believe that's the full extent of it, but the Chinese conviction figure is apparently higher than India's. Women in China also experience far less sexual harassment in public, or "Eve teasing," as it's known in India. Privately, researchers confide they have no idea what the real number of rapes is. Some estimate that less than one in 10 cases is reported. That might make at least a quarter of a million a year in China, but probably far more. In the United States, with less than a quarter of China's population, Census Bureau figures show a fairly consistent rate of "forcible rape" (excluding statutory rape) of just over 80,000 a year over the last decade. CDT previously reported on the detention of Li Guanfeng, son of People's Liberation Army General and renowned singer, Li Shuangjiang, for his alleged involvement in a gang rape case. In response to this case, the Global Times published two commentaries: Freelance columnist Lian Peng claims there needs to be a fundamental cure for society by strengthening the law, while Xiao Baiyou,  "Wolf Dad," says parents need to be stricter with their children. Lian Peng says: On the one hand, the case mirrors social hatred toward officials and the rich. These deeply rooted social conflicts are worth pondering. There are too many cases in which the privileged are seen to fly above the law. People worry that if they do not strongly condemn this action, Li Tianyi might receive a lighter sentence or even escape legal punishment altogether. If social order and justice are not done and crimes are not punished, the psychology of the people will be gradually distorted and social conflicts and hatred will spread. But the very first step is to practically restore the dignity of the law. Under this circumstance, a spirit of social tolerance, sympathy and understanding can return. While Xiao Baiyou comments on parents' responsibility: This largely relates to poor family education. Because of unreasonable parental discipline, they go astray. Some among these groups despise the law, because they believe they are privileged and can easily escape from legal punishment. I can responsibly say that if I was allowed to teach Li Tianyi from today on, I would return the Li couple a well-disciplined son who would have learned from his crimes. Read more about China-India comparisons, via CDT. © Melissa M. Chan for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: India, India comparison, li shuangjiang, li tianyi, rape Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Why China is Sitting on Fashion’s Front Row Posted: 26 Feb 2013 01:32 PM PST Despite claims that Chinese fashion brands are struggling in the market compared to foreign luxury brands,  CNN reports Chinese designers are on the rise in the style capitals of the world, such as Paris and London. China accounts for more than a quarter of the global luxury market, with men accounting for more than half of the spending on luxury goods in China: One of those hoping to show that the flow of sartorial capital not only goes from West to East, but also vice versa, is Haizhen Wang. Originally from Dalian in northeast China, he trained at Central Saint Martins in London, graduating in 2005. Wang then came to the attention of the fashion world last year after winning the Fashion Fringe Award for young designers and was mentored by Burberry's chief creative officer, Christopher Bailey. Like many of the emerging Chinese-born, Western-educated generation of designers, the influence of Wang's home culture on his work is subtle. While his collection was inspired mainly by gothic architecture, Wang says his Chinese roots underlie everything he produces. "Even if you can't see any obvious Oriental influences, like dragons for example, across my pieces, the man who made this collection — me — is Chinese and that will always be there, even though I was trained in the West." Tom Ford, the designer and film director whose name is almost synonymous with luxury and style, says he is closely watching how Chinese consumers are maturing. Ford observes that — as in other emerging markets — China is moving away from the initial lust for designer logos that tends to characterise the newly rich. "Tastes become quite refined and equalized with the rest of the luxury consumer all over the world … I think that's really starting to happen in China and it's moving very quickly." See also China's Street Fashion, an article profiling the Chinese street fashion brand, Eno, via CDT. © Melissa M. Chan for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: fashion, fashion industry, luxury brands, luxury goods Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

The British and Occupied East Timor: Support for Indonesia Behind a Façade of Neutrality Posted: 26 Feb 2013 10:45 AM PST Memo #204 By Anna Costa – acosta [at] hku.hk As late as 1996, a British National Audit Office Report corroborated the government version of Britain as an honest broker in East Timor's struggle for self-determination under Indonesian occupation, which followed the end of Portuguese colonial rule in 1974 and Indonesia's invasion of the territory in 1975. But recently released archival evidence refutes the claim that Britain was negotiating a diplomatic solution between Indonesia, Portugal, and East Timor. In fact, Britain not only accommodated but also assisted the Indonesian occupation through continued abstention on UN resolutions penalizing Indonesia, through arms sales and development assistance, and by providing advice to Indonesia on how to repair its public image after the exposure of the country's atrocities in Timor. Britain's unwillingness to jeopardize its bilateral relationship with Indonesia was not without controversy. A domestic bureaucratic and political struggle took place between politico-commercial and strategic interests advanced particularly by the Foreign Office, and developmental-humanitarian concerns exemplified by the Overseas Development Ministry. Eventually, the former set of concerns trumped considerations of ethics and even compliance with international law. Although surreptitious, British support of Indonesia was unequivocal. The British policy of abstention at the UN was representative neither of passivity, nor of a desire to find the middle ground between the Portuguese, Indonesian, and East Timorese positions. While indeed a form of mediation, abstention was aimed at reconciling eminently British conflicting imperatives: avoiding imperilling relations with Indonesia while maintaining a rhetorical commitment to self-determination. Studies of the role of the US and Australian governments in the aftermath of the invasion have generally stressed the pre-eminence of Cold War logic. An analysis of British conduct and motives not only provides a missing piece in the puzzle of international liability for one of the bloodiest acts of occupation of the twentieth century, but also sheds light on conflicts of interest and competition within the US-led camp. Economic competition and political regionalization in Europe and Southeast Asia often transcended, and sometimes even contradicted, the Cold War politics of two opposing monolithic "socialist" and "free world" camps. Anna Costa's research centres on Chinese foreign policy and nationalism. She is currently a Hong Kong Fellowship Scheme PhD candidate at the University of Hong Kong. If you enjoyed this memo, subscribe to our e-newsletter for free and receive new memos 2+ times per week via email. In 1991, a massacre by Indonesian forces at a funeral for an independence activist in the Santa Cruz Cemetery in Dili (pictured here) drew attention to the brutal conditions of the Indonesian occupation of East Timor (source: http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2010/01/22/a-genocide-story/book-reviews/ )   Links: Britain in the Aftermath of the Indonesian Invasion of Timor, 1977: The Fiction of Neutrality and the Reality of Silent Help, Pacific Affairs 86, No. 1, 2013. Forthcoming. (By Anna Costa) Chega! a report on human rights violations in Timor produced by the Reconciliation Commission (CAVR), which included representatives from the CNRT (National Council of Timorese Resistance), East Timorese human rights NGOs, women's groups, youth organizations, the Catholic Church, the Association of ex-Political Prisoners (Assepol), Falintil, UNTAET and UNHCR The National Security Archive at George Washington University has made available a series of US and British diplomatic documents on Timor-related issues   Related Memos: See our other memos on Indonesia

Open Letter Calls for Ratification of Human Rights Covenant Posted: 26 Feb 2013 09:27 AM PST Ahead of the National People's Congress annual session next month, during which Xi Jinping is expected to take over as state president, a group of 100 prominent intellectuals, journalists, and lawyers have penned an open letter calling on the NPC to ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The ICCPR is one of the key documents making up the United Nations' international bill of human rights, and signatories who ratify it commit to protecting basic political rights including right to life, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, right to due process and a fair trial, and electoral rights. The full text of the covenant can be found here. China signed the covenant on October 5, 1998. Upon ratification, the Chinese government would be obligated to reform domestic law to ensure the enforcement of the rights named in the covenant. From the China Media Project: The language of the open letter is reasoned and constructive, outlining China's past achievements on human rights, including the Chinese Communist Party's early pledge to "fight for human rights and freedom." We understand from inside sources that this letter was originally intended for a Thursday release through a prominent Chinese newspaper. Authorities, however, learned of the letter by late Monday and the authors had no choice but to release it to the public today. Current signers of the letter include prominent legal scholar He Weifang (贺卫方), economist Mao Yushi (茅于轼), activist and scholar Ran Yunfei (冉云飞), well-known lawyers Pu Zhiqiang (浦志强) and Xu Zhiyong (许志永), investigative reporter Wang Keqin (王克勤), author Wang Lixiong (王力雄) and many, many others. This is a laundry list of some of China's most prominent and influential pro-reform figures. And from CMP's draft translation of the letter: As a Permanent Member of the United Nations Security Council, China has always been an active initiator and participant in the International Bill of Human Rights. China's government played an important role in the formulation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). International human rights standards are therefore not imported products but in fact include the achievements of Chinese culture and the Chinese people. The signing of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 15 years ago demonstrated even more our country's serious commitment to the protection of basic human rights as a responsible world power. Afterwards, both President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao said openly on numerous occasions both at home and overseas that China would immediately take the legal steps to ratify the treaty once the conditions were right. In the beginning of 2008, more than 10,000 Chinese citizens signed a call for the ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. And so there is no longer any need to vacillate. In order to adapt to trends in human rights development, live up to our government's pledges and answer the demands of the people, in order to behave in a manner consistent with a major power, we must join the treaty without hesitation, with a positive and decisive attitude. We will post a link to CMP's full translation once it become available. This is not the first time activists and lawyers in China have called on the government to ratify the ICCPR and the government itself has announced plans for ratification. © Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: He Weifang, human rights activists, human rights policy, ICCPR, pu zhiqiang, Ran Yunfei, U.N. human rights, United Nations, Wang Keqin, Wang Lixiong, Xu Zhiyong Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Will Chinese Hospitals Allow Treatment First and Payment Later? Not So Fast Posted: 26 Feb 2013 07:57 AM PST (Alex E. Proimos/Flickr) It was the best piece of news that many Chinese people had heard in years — they may soon be able to receive medical treatment in hospitals without having to pony up a hefty deposit first. This would have marked a major change from the current, much-maligned system that sometimes denies life-saving treatments to those who cannot cobble together enough cash in time. While most urban residents in major cities are now covered by some form of state-sponsored insurance, they still need to seek reimbursements after paying the full amount, which could run to tens of thousands of renminbi for major surgeries. And everyone had good reason to believe the news. First, it came from one of China's most authoritative sources, China Central Television (CCTV), the state-owned station that carries the Communist Party's official messages. The tweet from CCTV's official account on Sina Weibo, China's Twitter, announcing the plan was retweeted more than 9,700 times. Secondly, the news followed signs that major reforms to the healthcare system are afoot under the new Communist Party leadership, including ambitious expansions of the state-sponsored insurance scheme. Earlier this month, Xinhua News Agency reported that several provinces and municipalities had introduced plans to cover serious illnesses under the state-sponsored insurance scheme. Weibo user @笨笨的傻乐 commented, "I have high hopes. Is it true?" It is not, at least not for most people. One day after the report came out, China's Ministry of Health announced that while a very limited pilot program is underway, there is no timetable for a national rollout of the treat-now-pay-later scheme. Most Internet users declared themselves unsurprised by the reversal. Indeed, many questioned whether the news was an April Fool's joke to begin with. User @Coo刘油茶 tweeted, "They got me once again!" User @辛五爷 commented, "You thought they are for real? It is not realistic and not practical. What would the hospitals do if the patients just refused to pay out of bad faith? These plans are just empty words without a system of personal credit and an improvement of overall trustworthiness of our people." But @雪峰金蟾123 remained hopeful. "It's an improvement. At least it is a proposal."

Open Letter to China on Human Rights Posted: 26 Feb 2013 07:34 AM PST Just prior to China's annual "two meetings" of the NPC and CPPCC, which are scheduled to convene on March 5, more than 100 prominent individuals — including academics, journalists, lawyers and economists signed an open letter calling on China's government to immediately ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The open letter, circulated on Chinese social media on Feb 26, has been translated by CHINA MEDIA PROJECT. Written by Abby · comments (0) Share: Donate · facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

[Unit] 61398, The New Number of The Beast Posted: 26 Feb 2013 01:18 AM PST Earlier Black Phoenix wrote about the problem with Mandiant attributing the Comment Crew hacking to the Chinese military. The recent media frenzy around yet another "China hacking" story focused on a supposedly shadowy PLA military unit in Shanghai, Unit 61398, as the "state actor" behind the cyber attacks. Their primary source, Mandiant APT1 report, even cited the address of Unit 61398 central office as 208 Datong Road in Gaochao, Pudong. Only problem is 208 Datong Raod is the address of a kindergarden run by the not-so-secret military unit, and is open to the public: - Here's Star Baby, a preschool ratings site, giving Unit 61298 Preschool a favorable review: http://www.starbaby.cn/jigou/1368-jieshao - Here's another preschool review site with photos of the potential "hackers": http://www.studyget.com/youeryuan/item-660.html - No, this is not a picture of PLA hackers using children as human shields. The kindergarden was practicing emergency preparedness, probably in response to a school attack that occurred in China: http://www.pudong-edu.sh.cn/web/pd/45322-450000032148.htm Having never been to the place, I would conceed the nursery school COULD be a front for China's premier cyber espionage center – saved the fact the school's online registration information shows it is one of the schools in Pudong that accepts foreign families. I hope cooler heads prevail. While it is reasonable to believe the Chinese probably is doing everything we're doing, to pin this on the Chinese military requires more compelling evidence than bunch of toddlers running around.

You are subscribed to email updates from Update » Blogs » Politics To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610