Human Rights in China - Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions

The record of correspondence for 2007 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, A/HRC/4/20/Add.1.

China: Death Sentences of Two Nepalese Men

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided by the Government of China and welcomes the information that the death sentence of Ishori Kumar Shrestha has been commuted and that the death sentence of Ravi Dahal has been suspended.

The Special Rapporteur would request that he be informed should, for whatever reason, the sentence of Ravi Dahal not be commuted upon the expiration of the two year period.

Two Nepalese citizens, Ishwori Kumar Shrestha and Rabi Dahal, were sentenced to death in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), People’s Republic of China, on 30 May 2004, on drug-related charges and could face execution at any time. The two men were appointed a lawyer, but it is not clear whether a Nepali-Chinese interpreter was provided, or whether the two were able to fully understand the process of their charge and trial. It was reported that their families had not heard from them for four months. They were not officially informed of their sentence, but read about it in a Kathmandu newspaper.

Response of the Government of China dated 12 May 2005 to an UA sent on 8 July 2004 relating to two Nepalese citizens sentenced to death on drug-related charges see E/CN.4/2005/7/Add.1, p 49 and E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1 p. 45

Ravi Dahal, aged 38, Nepalese businessman and Ishori Kimar Shrestha, aged 28, nepali businessman, were taken into custody on 8 July 2003.

In May 2003, Ravi Dahal, acting on the invitation of persons outside the country, entered Khasa (Zhangmu Kou'an), in the Tibetan Autonomous Region of China from Nepal and, on many occasions, contacted the receivers of contraband goods to make smuggling arrangements. He requested Ishori Kumar Shrestha to provide samples of contraband merchandise for the purpose of examination. On 28 May, the contact person outside the country smuggled a large quantity of heroin into Khasa, stashed it away in a warehouse which had been rented beforehand by Ishori Kumar Shrestha, and thereupon Ravi Dahal contacted other persons to take possession of thé merchandise. After this, officiels of the local anti-smuggling unit seized 75 bags of heroin in the rented warehouse, totalling 29,850 grams, and arrested Ishori Kumar Shrestha and with his assistance also arrested Ravi Dahal.

On 30 May 2004, the Lhasa city intermediate people's court in the Tibetan Autonomous Region, following public proceedings, passed judgement at frrst instance and found both defendants guilty of the crime of smuggling narcotics. The court sentenced Ravi Dahal to death and Ishori Kumar Shrestha to death with a two-year suspension of the sentence and to the additional penalty of the forfeiture of all their property. Following the judgement, the two defendants refused to accept the verdict and lodged an appeal with the people's high court of the Tibetan Autonomous Region.

The finding of the Tibetan high court was that the conduct of the two defendants had indeed constituted the offence of smuggling narcotics, in that they had smuggled 29,850 grams of heroin, which represented an extremely large quantity, and that the penalty handed down was consistent with the law. Taking into consideration that the défendants had only been responsible for arranging contacts between those providing and those receiving the narcotics and had not themselves carried the contraband narcotics across the State frontier, having responsibility for only one link in the whole criminal process, and furthermore that Ravi Dahal had rendered significant service to the authorities, for that reason, on 21 December 2004, the Tibetan high court made final judgement at second instance that the sentence of death handed down on Ravi Dahal for the offence of smuggling narcotics should be suspended for two years and that the death sentence handed down on Ishori Kumar Shrestha should be commuted to life imprisonment and that both defendants should in addition forfeit all their property. The sentence has already entered into effect.

During the legal proceedings, the legal counsel invited to represent the two defendants conducted their defence in compliance with the law, the two defendants also gave their own individual and separate explanations in their defence, and the court engaged thé services of a Nepalese interpreter. The Tibetan high court promptly notified the Nepalese Consulate General in Lhasa of the circumstances relating to the case and officials from the consulate were able to visit the two defendants. Once the two offenders had been sent to prison to serve their sentence, the Nepalese consulate in Lhasa was promptly notified of the prison.

Throughout the proceedings described above, the Chinese judicial authorities acted in strict compliance with the Chinese Criminal Code, the Chinese Code of Criminal Procedure and other laws and regulations; the rights of the two defendants were fully upheld; and there is no question of anyone being put to death.

Violation alleged: Deaths due to use of excessive force by law enforcement officials

The Special Rapporteur looks forward to receiving a response concerning these allegations.

I would like to bring to your Government’s attention information I have received concerning the recent shooting by police at a crowd in the Southern province of Guangdong. According to the information received, on 6 December 2005, thousands of villagers had gathered in the village of Donghzou to demand the release of three village representatives who had been arrested earlier that day in relation with a dispute over the use of a large power plant which appeared to have coal-fired and wind-driven turbines. The dispute had reportedly been running for five months without any incident until this point. Some residents had complained about the amount of money they received for ceding their land to the Government for the plant, while others said a reclamation project connected with the wind turbines would hurt fishing the area.

Reports indicate that hundreds of officers from the People’s Armed Police, a unit of the People’s Liberation Army, arrived at the village and started shooting at the crowd. Varying estimates of the death toll have been received, some indicating that as many as 20 people had been killed. Some sources still maintain that a number of people remain missing or unaccounted for, alleging that the authorities arrested people for participating in the protest. However the official New China News Agency mentioned that three people had been killed and eight others injured. Local authorities laid blame for the violence exclusively on villagers. They claim that local residents, led by three men, first attacked the power plant at the center of the dispute and then turned on to the police, using weapons including spears, knives and dynamite, compelling security forces to put down the insurrection forcibly.

In this respect, and without pre-judging the accuracy of the various conflicting accounts received, I would note the relevance in such situations of the United Nations Basic principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. These Principles note, inter alia, that law enforcement officials should “as far as possible apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms” and that “in any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life”. I would also like to draw your Excellency’s attention to the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, adopted by the General Assembly resolution 34/169 (1979) which more succinctly stresses the limited role for lethal force in ale enforcement operations.

While I note the recent arrest by civilian local authorities of the commander of the People’s Armed Police reportedly responsible for ordering the shooting, I would like to appeal to your Excellency’s Government to ensure that all deaths that occurred in connection with the operation of 6 December 2005 are promptly, independently and thoroughly investigated in accordance with the United Nations Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on these cases to the Commission, I would by grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

Finally, I would like to appeal to the Government of Your Excellency to make sure that there is full public accountability for the actions of the State and of its security forces by ensuring that the result of your official investigation be made public

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the detailed response provided by the Government of China with respect to the cases of Huang Zhiqiang, Fang Chunping, Cheng Fagen, and Cheng Lihe. The SR also appreciates the efforts made by the Government to investigate allegations that the defendants’ confessions were extracted by torture.

Urgent appeal sent on 10 October 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, reproduced from E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1, pp. 54-55

Urgent appeal sent in relation to four men – Huang Zhiqiang, Fang Chunping, Cheng Fagen, and Cheng Lihe – who we understand are currently held in Leping City Police Detention Centre in the Jiangxi province. We have been informed that they are at imminent risk of execution and the basis for our intervention concerns allegations that they were tortured while in pre-trial detention and that their convictions are therefore unsound.

According to the information received, they were convicted of murder, rape, robbery and extortion in connection with their joint involvement in three separate crimes committed between September 1999 and May 2000. The Jingdezhen Intermediate People’s Court in Jiangxi province first sentenced them to death, a decision which they appealed to the Jiangxi High People’s Court. On 17 January 2004 it ruled that the case should be sent back to the Intermediate Court for re-trial, since the detail of their testimony had changed several times and the evidence was insufficient to convict them. It has been brought to our attention that in their defence statements the four men had also highlighted several contradictions in their testimonies and alleged that they had confessed to the crimes under torture at the hands of the police.

However, the Intermediate Court once again sentenced the men to death on 18 November 2004, reportedly without considering the torture allegations. The four men remain under sentence of death, and it is unclear why their executions have not yet been carried out. It is possible that the Jiangxi High People’s Court is continuing to refuse to approve the verdict.

If these allegations are correct there would be ground for serious concerns. While we acknowledge the serious nature of crimes involved we would recall that “in capital punishment cases, the obligations of States parties to observe rigorously all the guarantees for a fair trial set out in Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights admits of no exception”. (Little v. Jamaica, communication no. 283/1988, Views of Human rights Committee of 19 November 1991, para. 10). This standard embraces the right not to be found guilty on the basis of a forced confession. We would also recall Commission on Human Rights resolution 2005/39 which urges States to ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked in any proceedings. This principle is an essential aspect of the right to physical and mental integrity.

We would further like to draw your Excellency's attention to the Principles on the effective investigation and documentation of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (UN General Assembly resolution 55/89 of 4 December 2000, Doc. A/55/89, Annex), also known as the Istanbul Protocol, which states that "alleged victims of torture, witnesses, those conducting the investigation and their families shall be protected from violence, threats of violence or any form of intimidation that may arise pursuant to the investigation." (Para. 3 (b)). We would urge your Excellency’s Government to take all necessary measures to guarantee that the rights under international law of Huang Zhiqiang, Fang Chunping, Cheng Fagen, and Cheng Lihe are respected. Under the circumstances this would include an official investigation of the allegations before any further action is taken.

In view of the urgency of the matter, we would appreciate a response on the initial steps taken by your Excellency’s Government to safeguard the rights of the abovementioned persons in compliance with the applicable standards of international law.

Response of the Government of China dated 12 January 2006 to an UA sent on 10 October 2005 (see E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1, p. 55)

Receipt is acknowledged of communication UA G/SO 214 (33-23) G/SO 214 (53-20) CHIN 21/2005 from the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. The Chinese Government has carefully examined the matters referred to in the communication and wishes to submit the following response.

Huang Zhiqiang, male, born 4 January 1973, ethnic Han Chinese, from Leping city in Jiangxi province, primary education, farmer, resident in Zhongdian village, Jiyang road, Leping municipality. On 19 June 2002 he was arrested and he is currently being held in custody.

Fang Chunping, male, born 21 December 1977, ethnic Han Chinese, from Leping city in Jiangxi province, primary education, farmer, resident in Zhongdian village, Jiyang road, Leping municipality. On 19 June 2002 he was arrested and he is currently being held in custody.

Cheng Fagen, male, born 11 August 1968, ethnic Han Chinese, from Leping city in Jiangxi province, lower secondary education, farmer, resident in Zhongdian village, Jiyang road, Leping municipality. On 19 June 2002 he was arrested and he is currently being held in custody.

Cheng Lihe, male, born 18 March 1977, ethnic Han Chinese, from Leping city in Jiangxi province, primary education, farmer, resident in Zhongdian village, Jiyang road, Leping municipality. On 19 June 2002 he was arrested and he is currently being held in custody.

In the early morning of 8 September 1999, Huang Zhinqiang and Fang Chunping made their way, bearing knives, together with one Cheng Wencai (whose case is being handled separately), armed with a claw hammer, to Denggao hill in Donghu park, in Leping city, where they lay in wait for an opportunity to rob passers-by. At about 1 a.m. on 9 September, the three men caught sight of a couple, a man by the surname Zou and a woman by the surname Xiong, who had a rendezvous at the kiosk on the badminton court on the left side of Leping television mast on Denggao hill. The three men thereupon surrounded the couple, brandishing their weapons, and set upon Zou, who was taken entirely unawares. They savagely stabbed and kicked him, fracturing his skull and causing him cranial haemorrhage and fatal cranial contusions. The three men then seized hold of Xiong and, after beating her unconscious, gang-raped her. They also pulled off her gold neck-chain.

In the evening of 23 May 2000, Huang Zhiqiang, Fang Chunping, Cheng Fagen, Cheng Lihe and one Wang Shenbing (currently on the run), armed with knives, made their way again to Denggao hill in Donghu Park, in Leping, where they lay in wait for victims. That same evening at about 11 p.m., on a small road on Wutiandi farm in Zhongdian village, the five men came across a man by the surname Jiang, proprietor of the Lübao supermarket, and his wife, who has the surname Hao: they surrounded the couple demanding money. Jiang refused to comply, whereupon Wang Shenbing stabbed him in the head. When she saw what was happening, Hao fled and Wang Shenbing chased after her. The four other men - Huang Zhiqiang, Fang Chunping, Cheng Fagen and Cheng Lihe - threw themselves at Jiang, slashing away at him with their weapons and killing him on the spot. Cheng Fagen removed 5,000 yuan which they found on Jiang’s person and a mobile phone, then they detached a length of rope from Jiang’s motorbike, parked nearby, and with the others took his body and tied it to the back seat of the motorbike in order to get rid of the body and to hide their traces. Because the resulting load made the motorbike unstable, it caused it to topple over into a field on the side of the road, trapping the body beneath the bike, whereupon the four men decided to abandon their plan to move the body. Shortly afterwards, the four men rejoined Wang Shenbing and together they chased and caught Hao, whereupon the five men repeatedly raped her. In order to silence her, Cheng Fagen fetched the length of rope and tied it round her neck while the other men held down her arms and legs: in this way they then strangled her. In order to conceal their traces, the five men took Hao’s body and hauled it into the bushes behind the hill, where they buried it. Later, anxious that the body might be discovered, the five men decided, after a discussion, to cut it into pieces so that it would be easier to conceal, and they then went their separate ways to fetch the tools to cut it up with. At midday on that same day, the five men, as previously arranged, came to the spot where the body was buried and, after drawing lots to decide in what order to proceed, came up one after the other with their knives to cut off pieces of the body. They then took the dismembered body parts, stuffed them into plastic bags, carried them off one by one and scattered them in all directions. The five men then took the 5,000 yuan, the mobile phone which they had stolen and a telephone credit card with a face value of 30 yuan which they had removed from Hao and divided all this loot up among themselves. On 25 June and in the evening of 28 June of that same year, Huang Zhiqiang, Fang Chunping and Chen Fagen used this stolen telephone card to call the Lübao supermarket from a public telephone, demanding a ransom of 100,000 yuan, after which the three men made no further use of it, for fear of being discovered.

In September 2003, the Jingdezhen intermediate level people’s court in Jiangxi province, hearing the trial at first instance, sentenced Huang Zhiqiang, Fang Chunping, Cheng Fagen and Cheng Lihe to death for the offences of murder, robbery with violence, rape and extortion. The four defendants refused to accept the verdict and lodged an appeal. In January 2004, the Jiangxi provincial people’s high court, after considering the case, ruled that, owing to problems with certain details of the case, the investigation had not been sufficiently thorough and further full inquiries should be held. Accordingly, as the facts were not sufficiently clear and the investigation was not sufficiently thorough, it ordered that the case be sent back for retrial. Following a full investigation by the public security and the procuratorial authorities, the Jingdezhen city intermediate level people’s court reconsidered the case and, on 18 November 2004, reached the following new judgement:

For the offence of murder, Huang Zhiqiang was to be put to death and stripped of his political rights in perpetuity, and all his personal property to be confiscated; for the offence of robbery with violence, he was to be put to death and stripped of his political rights in perpetuity and all his personal property to be confiscated; for the offence of rape, he was to serve 15 years’ fixed-term imprisonment and to be stripped of his political rights for five years; for the offence of extortion and blackmail, he was exempted from any criminal penalty; it was therefore ordered that he be put to death, that he should be stripped of his political rights in perpetuity and that all his personal property should be confiscated.

For the offence of murder, Fang Chunping was to be put to death and stripped of his political rights in perpetuity, and all his personal property to be confiscated; for the offence of robbery with violence, he was to be put to death and stripped of his political rights in perpetuity and all his personal property to be confiscated; for the offence of rape, he was to serve 15 years’ fixed-term imprisonment and to be stripped of his political rights for 5 years; for the offence of extortion and blackmail, he was exempted from any criminal penalty; it was therefore ordered that he be put to death, that he should be stripped of his political rights in perpetuity and that all his personal property should be confiscated.

For the offence of murder, Cheng Fagen was to be put to death and stripped of his political rights in perpetuity, and all his personal property to be confiscated; for the offence of robbery with violence, he was to be put to death and stripped of his political rights in perpetuity and all his personal property to be confiscated; for the offence of rape, he was to serve 15 years’ fixed-term imprisonment and to be stripped of his political rights for five years; for the offence of extortion and blackmail, he was exempted from any criminal penalty; it was therefore ordered that he be put to death, that he should be stripped of his political rights in perpetuity and that all his personal property should be confiscated.

For the offence of murder, Cheng Lihe was to be put to death and stripped of his political rights in perpetuity, and all his personal property to be confiscated; for the offence of robbery with violence, he was to be put to death and stripped of his political rights in perpetuity and all his personal property to be confiscated; for the offence of rape, he was to serve 15 years’ fixed-term imprisonment and to be stripped of his political rights for 5 years; for the offence of extortion and blackmail, he was exempted from any criminal penalty; it was therefore ordered that he be put to death, that he should be stripped of his political rights in perpetuity and that all his personal property should be confiscated.

After the court had passed judgement, the four defendants refused to accept the verdict and lodged an appeal. The Jiangxi people’s high court is currently considering the case.

II. Concerning the allegation that the four persons have been subjected to torture

Because the matters involved in this case were particularly serious, the Leping people’s procurator’s office assigned two procuratorial officials to make a careful study of the case. These officials were present on numerous occasions when the suspects made statements and identified the scene of the crimes and they found no evidence at all that the investigating officers had employed any unlawful methods in their handling of the case, such as extorting confessions by torture, etc.

Throughout the course of the investigation, the officials handling the case made sound and video recordings of the questioning of the defendants and the identification of the scene of the crime. The disc containing the sound and video recordings of the questioning of the four defendants and the identification of the scene of the crime was carefully studied and the recordings showed no evidence that the police had used beatings, verbal abuse, or threats; the criminal suspects were seen to be in a stable and calm state of mind and no harsh treatment was used against them: they showed no signs of fear or having been intimidated and freely confessed their crimes.

The criminal suspects Huang Zhiqiang and Cheng Lihe are able to correspond with their families while being held in preventive detention and they have freely admitted that they had committed serious offences, and have shown themselves to be extremely repentant. Over this period, in his letters home, Huang has written that he “committed a serious crime”; he writes “I myself perpetrated a disgraceful deed, I have the blood and lives of three people on my hands, and now I deeply regret what I did.”

When the procurator’s office commenced its examination of the appeal stage of the proceedings, the suspects Huang Zhiqiang, Fang Chunping, Cheng Fagen and Cheng Lihe complained to the procuratorial authorities that the investigative officers had extorted confessions from them by the use of torture and showed abrasions on their wrists to prove it. The oversight division of the Leping people’s security bureau conducted a special investigation, but did not find any evidence that the investigating officers had extorted confessions by torture. An examination of the criminal suspects revealed that the abrasions on their wrists had been caused by pressure from the clasps of their handcuffs and the resulting bruising (because of the gravity of the offences committed by the four offenders, the investigating officers had put handcuffs on them, as provided for by law).

The Chinese Government respectfully requests that the content of the above response be incorporated in full in a relevant document of the United Nations.

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of the death penalty

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided by the Government of China that the case of Ismail Semed remains under ongoing consideration. The Special Rapporteur would suggest that such consideration should include the thorough investigation of allegations that the confessions on which charges were brought were extracted with torture.

Urgent appeal dated 13 April 2006 sent with the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture and Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism

We would like to draw the attention of your Government to information we have received regarding Ismail Semed, an ethnic Uighur from Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region (XUAR) in northwest China who is believed to be at imminent risk of execution.

According to the information received, Ismail Semed was convicted by the Urumqi Intermediate People’s Court on 31 October 2005 for “attempting to split the motherland” and other charges related to possession of firearms and explosives. The possession of firearms charges against Ismail Semed appear to have been based on old testimonies taken from other Uighurs, some of whom were reportedly executed in 1999. According to reports, those testimonies might have been extracted through torture. The charge of “splittism” was based on second-hand testimony which stated that Ismail Semed was a member of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), an organisation qualified as “terrorist” by the Chinese authorities, and attended one ETIM meeting in 1997 in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. However, his alleged membership of ETIM and attendance at that meeting have reportedly been disputed by people who were present at the meeting.

Concern has been expressed that he reportedly confessed to the terrorism-related charges under torture and subsequently denied them during his trial.

We have received information indicating that his appeal might have already been heard in a closed session. If rejected, Ismail Semed could have been executed, as sentences are usually carried out soon after the appeal hearing is concluded. However, given the political nature of the charges brought against Ismail Semed, his death sentence should be reviewed by China’s Supreme People’s Court.

While we do not wish to prejudge the accuracy of these allegations, we would like to respectfully remind your Excellency that according to the well-established international standard in capital punishment cases, the obligation of states to observe rigorously all the guarantees for a fair trial admits no exception. (See, Little v. Jamaica, communication no. 283/1988, Views of the Human Rights Committee of 19 November 1991, para. 10). Relevant to the case at issue, this guarantee includes the right not to be compelled to confess guilt.

We also recall that Commission on Human Rights resolution 2005/39 urges States to ensure that any statement, which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made. This principle is an essential aspect of the right to physical and mental integrity set forth, inter alia, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Declaration on the Protection of All persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

We urge your Excellency’s Government to take all necessary measures to guarantee that the rights under international law of Ismail Semed are respected. This can only mean suspension of the capital punishment until the allegations of torture have been thoroughly investigated and all doubts in this respect dispelled. Moreover, international law requires that the accountability of any person guilty of subjecting Ismail Semed to torture is ensured.

In view of the urgency of the matter, we would appreciate a response on the initial steps taken by your Excellency’s Government.

4. Please indicate on the basis of what criteria organizations are qualified as terrorist organizations and whether they can appeal against such qualification. Please provide the relevant legal base.

Receipt is acknowledged of communication UA G/SO 214 (33-23) G/SO 214 (53-20) CHN 12/2006 from the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. The Chinese Government has carefully examined the matters referred to in the communication and wishes to submit the following response.

Ismail Semed, male, ethnic Uighur, born 20 May 1969, without fixed profession.

On 13 August 2004, the Urumchi city procuratorial authorities instituted criminal proceedings against Ismail Semed with the Urumchi city intermediate level people’s court for the offences of separatism, unlawful manufacture of ammunition and the causing of explosions. The precise charges as set out in the bill of indictment are as follows.

In January 1997, Ismail Semed, together with Hasan Mahsum (later shot dead in Pakistan) and Abdukadir Amat (now on the run), slipped out of the country through the city of Xiamen and made their way to Saudi Arabia to meet Kurban Aji and other persons, to propagate the notion of an independent Xinjiang, to carry out separatist activities and to drum up support. Soon after, Semed and the two other men travelled to Rawalpindi in Pakistan, to meet Uighur students and other young Uighurs engaged in business in that city, preaching to them and urging them to form an organization and to go to Afghanistan to receive training, for the purpose of waging a holy war. In March of that same year, Semed and the other men convened a preparatory meeting of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement and, following a division of tasks, Ismail Semed was appointed in charge of military operations. Thereafter, Ismail Semed and the other men continued to develop and expand the organization, establishing military bases, recruiting members, conducting fund-raising and other activities and forging links with Afghan Taliban bases and bases run by Bin Laden, striking an agreement with them on the provision of free training for their jihadists. From May 1997 to January 1998 Semed and his accomplices organized the transport of some 100 Uighur jihadists from Pakistan and the Middle East to the above-mentioned military camps for training. After completing their training, Semed and the others appointed Usman Imat in charge and sent him to take 13 men to Xinjiang to set up workshops to manufacture explosives, to conduct training and to develop jihadist columns. After arriving in Xinjiang, Usman and the others purchased 1,053 boxes of erbium nitrate, for use in preparing chemicals and other reagents for the manufacture of explosives, and set up explosive manufacturing workshops in Turfan, Hotan and other cities. They trained some 100 men in the use of chemicals and reagents for the manufacture of explosive devices, detonators and blasting fuses and in weapons technology.

On 5 December 1997 Semed attended a conference of the formally constituted East Turkestan Islamic Movement, held in Rawalpindi in Pakistan, and was appointed military commander. The conference resolved that the goal of the organization would be to liberate East Turkestan through a holy war and to set in place an Islamic State, and mapped out a strategic plan for the period ahead.

In mid-December 1998, Semed and others organized a meeting in Rawalpindi at which they decided to break away from the East Turkestan Islamic Movement and form a separate grouping. They deposed their former leader, Hasan Mahsum, assumed control of their members and funds in Afghanistan and started to look for ways of illegally entering Xinjiang, so as to prepare for the conduct of military jihadist activities in that region.

On 16 September 2004 the Urumchi intermediate level people’s court commenced hearings on this matter. Given the complexity of this case, it is still under consideration.

The Chinese Government respectfully requests that the content of the above response be incorporated in full in a relevant document of the United Nations.

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of the death penalty

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided by the Government of China regarding the cases of Xu Shuangfu and Li Maoxing. However, the SR remains concerned that they have been sentenced to death despite the apparent absence of an investigation into allegations that their confessions were extracted with torture.

Urgent appeal dated 18 July 2006 sent with the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture

We would like to draw the attention of your Government to information we have received regarding Mr. Xu Shuangfu (also known as Xu Wenku) and Mr. Li Maoxing, two Chinese religious leaders belonging to a group known as “the Three Grades of Servants” who were sentenced to death on 28 June 2006. They were accused of murdering twenty leaders of a religious group known as the Eastern Lightning group. Xu was also accused of defrauding his congregation of over thirty-two million Yuan. According to the information received:

Xu Shuangfu, was kidnapped in April 2004 by gun-wielding men in a police car while visiting congregation members in neighboring Haerbin, Heilongjian Province. Reports indicate that he was held incommunicado for some time before his family was informed of his detention.

Concern has been expressed that Xu Shuangfu and Li Maoxing confessed to their murder charges under torture and subsequently denied their guilt during their trial which was held at the Shuangyashan Intermediate Court, from 28 February to 3 March 2006.

We also recall that Commission on Human Rights resolution 2005/39 urges States to ensure that any statement, which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made. This principle is an essential aspect of the right to physical and mental integrity set forth, inter alia, in article 15 of the Convention against Torture provides that, “Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made.”

In view of the urgency of the matter, we would appreciate a response on the initial steps taken by your Excellency’s Government to safeguard the rights of defendants in compliance with the obligations under international law of your Excellency’s Government, as outlined above. This can only mean suspension of the capital punishment until the allegations of torture have been thoroughly investigated and all doubts in this respect dispelled. Moreover, international law requires that the accountability of any person guilty of subjecting someone to torture is ensured.

It is our responsibility under the mandates provided to us by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all cases brought to our attention. Since we are expected to report on these cases to the Commission, we would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters, when relevant to the case under consideration:

2. Please provide the details, and where available the results, of any investigation, medical examinations, and judicial or other inquiries carried out in relation to the allegations that the defendants were subjected to torture while in pre-trial detention. If no enquiries have taken place, or if they have been inconclusive, please explain why.

3. Please provide the full details of any prosecutions which have been undertaken with regard to the alleged torture of the defendants. Have penal, disciplinary or administrative sanctions been imposed on the perpetrators?

Receipt is hereby acknowledged of the letter addressed jointly by the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture (UA G/SO 214 (33-23) G/SO 214 (53-20) CHN 25/2006). The Chinese Government has carefully investigated the matters referred to in this letter and wishes to make the following reply:

From 28 February to 3 March 2006 the Shuangyashan Intermediate People’s Court in Heilongjiang Province conducted an open trial in the criminal cases brought against Xu Shuangfu and others for a series of killings. As a result of the trial it was determined that from 2002 to 2004 Xu Shuangfu, Li Maoxing and others, seeking to gain control over other people and obtain money by fraudulent means, engaged in such serious criminal activities as ordering, abetting and encouraging others to commit or participate directly in murders, wilful injury, unlawful detention and fraud. Some 17 cases of murder or wilful injury resulting in death were brought; the methods used were cruel, the particulars of the cases were abominable, and in all 21 persons were killed. The defendants also fraudulently obtained “contributions” totalling more than 20 million yuan. The criminal activities of Xu and others extended to various provinces and cities including Liaoning, Jilin, Heilongjiang, Jiangxi, Shandong and Chongqing; they caused severe harm to peoples’ lives, security and physical and mental health, and destroyed the order of normal productive life, causing great public indignation.

On 4 July 2006 the court handed down its sentence: Xu Shuangfu and Li Maoxing were found guilty of the crimes of murder, wilful and malicious injury, unlawful detention and fraud, for which they were sentenced to death, in accordance with the law; they were also deprived of their political rights for life and their personal property was confiscated.

In conducting this trial, the Chinese judicial authorities adhered to the facts of the case, took the law as their criterion, applied the law properly and proceeded in accordance with the law.

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided by the Government of China regarding the circumstances surrounding the death of Xiao Guopeng.

I would like to draw the attention of your Government to information I have received regarding Mr. Xiao Guopeng, a journalist who is alleged to have been beaten to death by a policeman in the province of Guizhou.

According to the information received, on 18 July 2006, Mr. Xiao Guopeng was attacked by police officer Pan Dengfeng outside the offices of the daily newspaper "Anshun". The police officer knocked Mr.Guopeng to the ground and continued to hit him despite the protests of a crowd that gathered. Mr. Guopeng was taken to a hospital where he died as a result of cerebral hemorrhaging. According to our source, this attack is reportedly linked to a recent article in which Mr. Guopeng strongly criticized the local police.

According to the information received, Mr. Xiao Guopeng is the second journalist beaten to death by a police officer in China this year. On February 2006, the deputy editor of the "Taizhou Evening News" in Zhejiang province was killed because of an article in which he criticized the local police.

While I do not wish to prejudge the accuracy of these allegations, I respectfully request that your Government ensures that the death of Mr. Xiao Guopeng is promptly, independently and thoroughly investigated, in accordance with the United Nations principles on the effective prevention and investigation of extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions.

In this connection, I would like to recall the principle whereby all States have “the obligation (…) to conduct exhaustive and impartial investigations into all suspected cases of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions”, as recently reiterated by the 61st Commission on Human Rights in Resolution 2005/34 on “Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions” (OP 4). The Commission added that this obligation includes the obligation “to identify and bring to justice those responsible, (…) to grant adequate compensation within a reasonable time to the victims or their families and to adopt all necessary measures, including legal and judicial measures, in order to (…) prevent the recurrence of such executions”.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on these cases to the Human Rights Council, I would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters in relation to each of the cases referred to above:

3. Please provide the details, and where available the results, of any investigation, medical examinations (autopsy), and judicial or other inquiries which may have been carried out in relation to the death of Mr. Xiao Guopeng. If no inquiries have taken place or if they have been inconclusive please explain why.

4. In the event that the alleged perpetrators are identified, please provide the full details of any prosecutions which have been undertaken; Have penal, disciplinary or administrative sanctions been imposed on the alleged perpetrators?

Response of the Government of China dated 28 November 2006 regarding an urgent appeal sent on 1 September 2006

Receipt is acknowledged of communication UA G/SO 214 (33-24) CHN 36/2006 from the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. The Chinese Government has carefully examined the matters referred to in the communication and wishes to submit the following response.

Victim: Xiao Guopeng, male, head of the editorial office at the Anshun Daily newspaper.

Suspect: Pan Dengfeng, male, formerly chief of the Xinchang office of the Anshun city public security bureau.

Third party to the proceedings: Tang Yunxia, female, employee of Anshun Daily, former wife of Pan Dengfeng.

In May 2006, Pan Dengfeng discovered that his wife Tang Yunxia was involved in a relationship of an irregular nature with Xiao Guopeng. After that discovery, husband and wife started arguing. On 1 June they decided to divorce. Following their divorce, because they were apprehensive about the way both their parents would react and about the effect it would have on the development of their children, they continued living together.

At about 10.20 p.m. on 18 July, Tang received a phone call at home and started preparing to go out. As it was raining heavily at that time, Pan offered to give her a lift, but Tang declined his offer and proceeded to leave the house. After she had gone out, Pan set off in his car to his mother-in-law’s home to visit their daughter. When he had driven some 100 metres from their house along Kuija Street, at the entrance to the Yuanhe food-store, he spotted Tang walking together with Xiao and sharing his umbrella, heading in the direction of Shidong Street. Pan immediately got out of his car and challenged Xiao. He then grabbed hold of him and started pulling and shoving him. During the ensuing scuffle between the two men, Pan punched Xiao and knocked him to the ground. Tang then got between them and tried to stop them from fighting but was pushed aside by Pan. When Xiao tried to get back to his feet he was knocked down again by Pan and struck the ridge between the roadway and the pedestrian footpath with the back of his head. Blood started pouring from his head and he lost consciousness. He was taken to Anshun city hospital No. 73 but efforts to save his life were to no avail and he died at 11.28 p.m. on 19 July. Following the autopsy, the coroner ruled in his report that Xiao’s death had been caused by a serious head wound.

Following this incident, Pan reported at the Dongguan police station to turn himself in. That same day he was taken into police custody and on 21 July he was formally remanded. On 31 July the Xixiu local public security office referred Pan’s case, of the suspected offence of assault and battery, to the Xixiu district people’s procurator’s office for review and prosecution. The Xixiu district people’s procurator’s office referred the case, which involved the suspected offence of murder, to the Anshun procurator’s office for prosecution and on 13 October criminal proceedings were instituted with the Anshun city intermediate level people’s court. Proceedings in the case are currently under way.

Investigation and verification by the police established that the principal cause in this case was the involvement of a third party which led to the break-up of the police officer’s family, and an unexpected and disproportionate reaction by the police officer which resulted in the death of another person, and the case has nothing to do with articles written by Xiao Guopeng criticizing the local police.

The public security authorities at the level both of Anshun city and Xixiu district gave very serious attention to this case and, after the incident itself, immediately set in place the proper working procedures and made the correct arrangements. Even though they were not obliged to accept any responsibility in this matter, the Xixiu public security authorities, acting in a purely charitable spirit, promptly donated the sum of 60,000 yuan to Xiao Guopeng’s family to cover the costs of hospitalization and funeral expenses.

The Chinese Government respectfully requests that the content of the above response be incorporated in full in a relevant document of the United Nations.

Violation alleged: Deaths due to the exceussive use of force by law enforcement officials

Subject(s) of appeal: More than 1 but less than 43 persons exercising their freedom of movement

Character of reply: UN translation awaited for response of the Government of China dated 20 December 2006

I wish to bring to your Excellency’s attention information I have received regarding 43 members of a group of Tibetans that was fired upon while attempting to cross the Nangpa Pass at the border between China and Nepal on 10 October 2006.

According to the information received, a group of 43 Tibetans departed Lhasa by bus on approximately 18 September. They began walking at Sakya, intending to cross into Nepal via the Nangpa Pass near Mt. Everest. Traveling by night and resting during the day, the group walked for 13 nights. On the 13th night, the group was warned by local nomads that a military patrol was in the area and aware of the presence of the group, and was trying to locate them. Over the course of that evening, the group (which included women and small children) became somewhat separated from each other, and frequently called out to each other to locate the proper route, perhaps causing the patrol to locate them.

The group was proceeding up the final ascent of Nangpa La during the morning of 30 September when they were located by 6-7 members of a Chinese patrol. Soldiers called out to the group, ordering them to stop. The stronger Tibetans began to run towards the top of the pass. However, the slower members of the group were unable to run in the deep snow, including approximately 10-12 small children and a number of sick or injured Tibetans.

Shortly after calling out to the Tibetans, two members of the patrol began firing at the fleeing Tibetans. At least two Tibetans were hit, including one nun, Kelsang Nortso, 17, from Nagchu, Kham, Tibet. She was struck in her thigh and in the back, falling into the snow. She called out to the others, who attempted to drag her towards the pass. However, as the gunshots continued, the woman's friends were forced to abandon her unconscious body. Her body was left approximately five minutes' or so walk below the pass (which represents the border between PRC and Nepal). The body remained visible on the Nangpa Pass during the day of 30 September, though it was apparently removed by the following day. A young man, of unknown age, was also hit in the leg; the extent of his injuries is unknown, as is his location.

In this respect, and without pre-judging the accuracy of the information received, I would note the relevance in such situations of the United Nations Basic principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. These Principles note, inter alia, that law enforcement officials should “as far as possible apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms” and that “in any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life”. I would also like to draw your Excellency’s attention to the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, adopted by the General Assembly resolution 34/169 (1979) which more succinctly stresses the limited role for lethal force in all enforcement operations.

While I note that on 6 October the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said that the authorities will investigate claims that the military shot Tibetans attempting to flee the country, I would like to appeal to your Excellency’s Government to ensure that the deaths that occurred on 10 October at the Nagpa pass are promptly, independently and thoroughly investigated in accordance with the United Nations Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly and extended by the Human Rights Council, to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on these cases to the Human Rights Council I would by grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

Finally, I would like to appeal to the Government of Your Excellency to make sure that there is full public accountability for the actions of the State and of its border military patrols by ensuring that the result of your official investigation be made public.

Correspondence from 2006

The record of correspondence for 2006 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1.

China: Death Sentences of Two Nepalese Men

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international norms and standards for the imposition of capital punishment

Subject(s) of appeal: 2 males

Character of reply: UN translation awaited for response of the Government of China received 12 May 2005

Urgent appeal sent on 8 July 2004 reproduced from E/CN.4/2005/7 at par. 82

82. Urgent appeal, 8 July 2004. Two Nepalese citizens, Ishwori Kumar Shrestha and Rabi Dahal, were sentenced to death in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), People�s Republic of China, on 30 May 2004, on drug-related charges and could face execution at any time. The two men were appointed a lawyer, but it is not clear whether a Nepali-Chinese interpreter was provided, or whether the two were able to fully understand the process of their charge and trial. It was reported that their families had not heard from them for four months. They were not officially informed of their sentence, but read about it in a Kathmandu newspaper.

China: Death Sentence of Tenzin Deleg Rinpoche

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international norms and standards for the imposition of capital punishment

Subject(s) of appeal: 1 male (member of ethnic and religious minority)

Character of reply: Largely satisfactory response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided and would appreciate updated information on the situation of Tenzin Deleg Rinpoche.

Urgent appeal sent on 19 October 2004 with the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, and the Special Rapporteur on torture, reproduced from E/CN.4/2005/7, para. 93

Tenzin Deleg Rinpoche, a 54 year old Buddhist religious leader was at imminent risk of execution, following a conviction based on a confession obtained under torture. He was arrested on 7 April 2002 following a bombing incident in Chengdu, Sichuan Province on 3 April 2002. He was found guilty on 29 November 2002 in a secret trial by the Kardze (Ganzi) Intermediate People's Court in the Kardze Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Sichuan Province, for �causing explosions� and �inciting separatism�. On 2 December 2002 he was sentenced to death with a two-year suspension of execution, which was set to expire on 2 December 2004. Tenzin Deleg Rinpoche was reportedly held incommunicado for eight months and was reportedly tortured in detention. His conviction was upheld on 26 January 2003 by the Sichuan High People's Court, and he was moved to a secret location afterwards.

Response of the Government of China dated 31 December 2004

Basic Facts:

A�an Zhaxi (Tenzen Delek Rinpoche) is a Tibetan male born on 22 September 1950; prior to his arrest he was amonk at the Wutuo monastery in Honglong village, Yajian county, Sichuan Province. On 2 December 2002, the Intermdeiate People�s Court of the Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture of Kardze, as court first instance, sentenced him in a open hearing to death, deffered of two years, and deprived him of his polictial rights for life for the crime of causing explosions. He was also sentenced of 14 years of imprisonment and 3 years deprivation of political rights for the crime of separatism. Under the principle of the joinder of punishment for multiples crimes, it was determined that he should receive the death penalty, deferred for two years, and deprivation of political rights. After the sentencing by the court of first instance, A�an Zhaxi rejected the verdict and filed an appeal. On 23 January 2003, the Sichuan Province Supreme People�s Court found that the facts of the original case were clear, the evidence was conclusive and sufficient, the judgment had been accurate, the severity of the penalty was appropriate and the proceedings had been conducted in accordance with the law; accordingly, it upheld the original verdict. A�an Zhaxi is currently serving his sentence in the Chuandong prison in Sichuan Province; the court-ordered deferral of his death sentence expires on 23 January 2005.

Explanatory remarks

(1) Article 50 of the Constitution of the People�s Republic of China stipulates that if a person sentenced to death with a suspension of execution does not intentionally commit a crime during the period of suspension, his sentence shall be reduced to life imprisonment upon the expiration of the two-year period; if he demonstrates meritorious service, his sentence shall be reduced to not less than 15 years and not more than 20 years of fixed-term imprisonment upon the expiration of the 2-year period.� It has in fact been observed in recent years that 99 per cent of all criminals sentenced to death ultimately avoid the death penalty and have their sentences commuted to life or fixed-term imprisonment.� This system significantly reduces the number of persons actually put to death.� In China there are no extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions.

(2) In the course of a trial, particularly in cases in which the death penalty may be imposed, China�s judicial authorities scrupulously respect the defendant�s right to a defence; they ensure that defendants obtain the prompt and effective services of a defence lawyer and fully respect defendants� procedural rights.� Throughout this case all trial-related procedures were conducted in accordance with the law:� during the trial A�an Zhaxi had a lawyer to ensure his defence; after the initial verdict was issued he lodged an appeal, pursuant to the Criminal Appeals Act; after the court of second instance rejected his appeal, he delivered materials relating to his new appeal to the prison authorities, who transmitted them to the Sichuan Supreme People�s Court and the Investigations Office of the Sichuan People�s Procuratorate.� It can thus be seen that there were no legal or procedural irregularities, such as the alleged violation of the defendant�s right to a public trial or his right to have a lawyer of his own choosing.

(3) China was one of the first States to become a party to the Convention against Torture, and the consistent position of the Chinese Government has been to ban torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.� Legislation such as the Criminal Code and the Police Act contain stringent provisions banning torture with a view to preventing and punishing the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment by State employees, particularly those working in the justice system.� While A�an Zhaxing was in prison he was treated fairly; at present his health is excellent, and the allegation that he was tortured while in detention so that a confession could be extracted is groundless.

China: Deaths in Custody of Falun Gong Members

Violation alleged: Deaths in custody

Subject(s) of appeal: Group of persons (members of a religious minority; persons exercising their right to freedom of opinion and expression)

Character of reply: Cooperative but incomplete response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur is not in a position to evaluate the allegations made by the Government in relation to Falun Gong.� He notes, however, that insofar as any individual adherents of that group have been killed, and especially if such deaths have been linked to their exercise of their rights to freedom of expression and belief, a full investigation designed to determine responsibility is required to be undertaken.� The Special Rapporteur regrets that the response provided by the Government does not address that issue.

Allegation letter sent on 15 October 2004 with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on the right to everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, the Special Rapporteur on torture, and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, reproduced from E/CN.4/2005/7 Add. 1, para. 90

The Special Rapporteurs expressed their concern at increasing reports, over the past five years, of systemic repression against the Falun Gong and other �heretical organizations� (�xiejiao zuzhi�). The Special Rapporteurs are concerned that reports of arrest, detention, illtreatment, torture, denial of adequate medical treatment, sexual violence, deaths, and unfair trial of members of so-called �heretical organizations�, in particular Falun Gong practitioners, may reflect a deliberate and institutionalized policy of the authorities to target specific groups such as the Falun Gong.

Response of the Government of China received 31 December 2004

The Chinese Government has carefully investigated the matters referred to in this letter and wishes to make the following reply:

Falun Gong is a cult that developed in various places in China in the early 1990s that has the illegal accumulation of wealth as its objective.� Its founder is Li Hongzhi, who initially claimed that the self possesses a supernatural �energy� and that this �energy� can be used to �heal diseases�; he has used this ruse to fraudulently obtain wealth.� He later claimed that as long as persons practised Falun Gong as invented by him and followed his theories, they would never get sick, and all followers would become �spirits� or �buddhas�.� In order to convince people of his twisted reasoning and heretical talk he has also threatened that the Earth will explode and the world will be destroyed, at which time all those who do not believe his theories, including those who have abandoned Falun Gong, will perish forever.� He requires all Falun Gong practitioners to buy his books, recordings and various kinds of exercise equipment.� Through these methods Li Hongzhi exerts mind control over Falun Gong practitioners and carries out numerous illegal criminal acts in China.

The most outstanding crimes perpetrated by Falun Gong violate human rights and harm lives.� While under the mind control of Li Hongzhi, more than 1,000 Falun Gong practitioners suffering from all types of illness have refused treatment and medicine and even died because they followed Li�s precepts, while hundreds have injured themselves or committed suicide.� More than 30 innocent persons have been killed by Falun Gong fanatics.� Many practitioners run away from home.� For example, one Falun Gong practitioner, Zhang Zhiqin, suffered from diabetes; once she began to practise Falun Gong she refused to take any medication, preferring to rely instead on reading works by Hong Lizhi that were given to her by other practitioners and listening to recordings of lectures by Hong Lizhi on the curing of illnesses.� Her health worsened and in January 1999 she died.� On 23 January 2001 seven Falun Gong members, following Li�s request to �put down life and death� and �attain perfection�, set themselves on fire in Beijing�s Tiananmen Square; two persons died and three were seriously injured.� The two who died were both women and the group included a girl under 12.� In the one-month period from 25 May to 26 June 2003 a Falun Gong member from Zhejiang Province, Chen Fuzhao, poisoned 15 beggars and one Buddhist in an effort to increase the potency of his �vital energy�.� Many Falun Gong victims are women and persons with low levels of education.

Another crime perpetrated by Falun Gong is the serious violation of the public�s rights.� One example of this is the flouting of international standards by attacks on civil communication satellites; according to incomplete statistics, since 23 June 2003 the Falun Gong organization has attacked China�s communications satellites 128 times, causing more than 70 hours� disruption.� A second violation is the damaging of public facilities, illegally interrupting television broadcasts; since 2002 Falun Gong members have cut into television broadcasts on the Chinese mainland some 76 times.� The Falun Gong web site contains many documents relating to the sabotaging of television by Falun Gong members.� A third violation is the carrying out of large‑scale telephone harassment and threats, and the use of the Internet to send junk e-mail.� Falun Gong has set up �telephone groups� for this purpose, and the organization�s web site claims that telephone calls have already been made to more than 10 million residents of mainland China; in January and February 2004 alone they reached 8 million people.� Incomplete statistics indicate that, on average, Falun Gong junk e-mail originating outside China exceeds 30 million messages a month.� One Falun Gong practitioner, Li Xiangchun, an American, was sentenced by the Chinese courts for having engaged in criminal activities that damaged television broadcasting facilities in Yangzhou, Jiangsu Province, in October 2002.� Li Xiangchun confessed his crime in court.

Falun Gong also deliberately attacks any scholars and groups that disagree with its views.� When journalists, scientists, educators and religious leaders in China have exposed both the mind control exercised by Li Hongzhi over Falun Gong practitioners and the cult�s illegal activities after Falun Gong practitioners have met unusual deaths, Falun Gong has slandered, attacked and harassed them.� In the years before Falun Gong was banned, the organization repeatedly targeted the news media all over China.� When attacking the publishers of the Chongqing Daily, Falun Gong went as far as to issue a �warning�:� if an apology was not forthcoming, Falun Gong practitioners would collectively cause the press to be inundated by floods, causing the premature destruction of the Earth.� Today on the Falun Gong web site one can see a long �list of evil persons�, or blacklist, that includes many eminent scholars, including the scientists Zhuang Fenggan, Pan Jiazheng and He Zuoxiu, and religious leaders such as Fu Tieshan and Sheng Hui.� All have had their human rights violated because they criticized Falun Gong:� they have been subjected to telephone harassment and threats and their physical safety has been threatened.

In view of the fact that Falun Gong has carried out many illegal, criminal acts, the Chinese Government has, in accordance with the law and pursuant to the relevant national legislation, sought to protect the basic human rights and freedoms of the masses by banning the Falun Gong cult.� In 2003 China�s Shaanxi Province conducted a one-time survey, which yielded the following results:� 99.39 per cent of those surveyed thought that Falun Gong was a cult and 98.75 per cent supported the banning of the organization.� The Chinese Government shows great concern and care for the vast majority of Falun Gong practitioners; it recognizes that they have been duped and that they, too, are victims.� Its policy toward them has been one of unity, education and assistance.� All of society has shown great patience in helping the vast majority of former Falun Gong practitioners to see that the Falun Gong organization is a cult, to throw off the mind control of Li Hongzhi and to resume normal lives.� As for the extremely small number of Falun Gong diehards who engage in illegal criminal acts, China�s judicial authorities will punish them, in accordance with the law, not because they practise Falun Gong but because they engage in illegal criminal acts that violate criminal law.�

In order to conceal its criminal activities, the Falun Gong organization has fraudulently obtained the sympathy of a number of public figures who are unaware of the truth and has disseminated many untrue allegations abroad, claiming that it is �persecuted� in China.� In order to successfully set off such false alarms, the Falun Gong organization even invents incidents that are not true.� One flagrant example is the allegation that Wei Xingyan, a female researcher at Chongqing University, was raped by the police.� Falun Gong claims that a female researcher at Chongqing University named Wei Xingyan was arrested and then gang-raped by police officers while in detention because she was a Falun Gong practitioner.� In fact, Chongqing University does not have any female researcher named Wei Xingyan, and no so-called gang rape ever occurred.� An investigation has revealed that this incident was made up by several Falun Gong members in Chongqing in response to a request from abroad posted on Falun Gong�s Clear Wisdom web site.� Several Falun Gong members who were under suspicion have in fact confessed.� The Clear Wisdom web site is full of brazen appeals for members to damage public facilities, make up and spread false allegations, collect vast quantities of private information about individuals and reveal it, and use e-mail and the telephone to harass average citizens, all in order to control the execution of criminal activities.� Falun Gong propaganda outside China, in the form of e-mail messages and even letters from eminent persons belonging to international organizations or political circles as well as literary and artistic propaganda such as �torture exhibits� and art exhibits, are all full of such lies.

Today Falun Gong styles itself outside China as a �spiritual movement� that seeks �perfection� and reflects traditional Chinese culture, thus concealing its true nature.� However, this is a case in which facts speak louder than words, and the preachings of Li Hongzhi to his more than 20 million practitioners and criminal acts that are perpetrated by Falun Gong in China cannot be denied.� All countries opposed to prejudice and all upright individuals hold objective facts in esteem and support action taken in accordance with the law to deal with cults that engage in illegal activities and to protect and guarantee human rights.

China: Death Sentence of Kuerban Tudaji

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international norms and standards for the imposition of capital punishment

Subject(s) of appeal: 1 male (ethnic minority)

Character of reply: Largely satisfactory response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided and would appreciate updated information on the situation of Kuerban Tudaji.

Allegation letter sent on 15 July 2004

Kuerban Tudaji, an alleged Uighur "separatist" in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region (XUAR) of China, was sentenced to death on 30 June after being convicted of "manufacturing explosives, firearms and ammunition", "attempting to split the country" and "organising terrorist training" between 1998 and 2000. Reports indicate that he had declared a jihad or "holy war" against China. There is no clarity as to the evidence brought against him or whether he had access to a lawyer.

Response of the Government of China dated 11 November 2004

Basic facts

Kuerban Tudaji is a 26-year-old ethnic Uighur male.� From 1998 to 2002 he belonged to an ethnic separatist organization in Urumqi and took part in the organization�s underground training activities.� He also actively recruited members for the separatist organization, conducted separatist propaganda and advocated violence.� To this end, he trained separatists, dug tunnels and established measures for maintaining secrecy and organizational discipline.� He also purchased firearms from a number of different places, collected instructions for manufacturing explosives, poison gas and toxic substances, purchased the materials needed to make explosives and toxins, and actually made ammunition and toxins.� In all, he purchased a Type 64 pistol, a revolver and 154 rounds of ammunition; he also bought five bombs and made 35 more as well as 40 bomb casings.� He stole a vibration-type bomb and purchased large quantities of materials needed to make ammunition and toxic substances; he also produced three bottles of poison. On 10 June 2003 the People�s Intermediate Court in Kezilesukerkezi Autonomous Prefecture, Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, issued its verdict, sentencing Kuerban Tudaji to life imprisonment and deprivation of political rights for life for the crime of separatism, and sentencing him to death and deprivation of political rights for life for the crime of illegally manufacturing, buying, selling and transporting firearms and ammunition and explosive devices.�� The Court ruled that the death penalty and deprivation of political rights for life should be imposed.� The defendant did not file an appeal or counter-appeal within the time limits prescribed by law.� On 10 June 2004 the Xinjiang Supreme Court issued a ruling approving the imposition of the death sentence in respect of Kuerban Tudaji.

Explanatory remarks

Engaging in ethnic separatist activities and illegally manufacturing, buying, selling and transporting firearms and ammunition are serious crimes that are punishable by law in any country.� Article 103 of the Chinese Criminal Code stipulates that any person who organizes, plots or acts to split the country or undermine national unification shall be sentenced to life imprisonment or not less than 10 years� fixed-term imprisonment if that person is the ringleader or if the crime is grave.� Article 125 of the Code stipulates that any person who illegally manufactures, trades, transports, mails or stockpiles firearms, ammunition or explosives shall be sentenced to not less than three years� but not more than 10 years� imprisonment, or to not less than 10 years� imprisonment, life imprisonment or death if the consequences are serious.� The sentencing of Kuerban Tudaji by China�s judicial authorities was fully consistent with the law.

China�s judicial authorities had abundant evidence with which to convict Kuerban Tudaji, including such material evidence as firearms and ammunition, the conclusions of experts, the report of the crime scene investigation and the testimony of witnesses.� The defendant also confessed his crime.� In the course of the proceedings the People�s Court appointed Saimi Aizimu, a lawyer with the Xiyuan legal services bureau in Xinjiang, as his defence attorney, and counsel�s duties were discharged conscientiously.� Kuerban Tudaji also spoke in his own defence.� One may say that this defendant�s legitimate rights were fully guaranteed in the course of his trial.

China: Death in custody of Jiang Zongxiu

Violation alleged: Death in custody

Subject(s) of appeal: 1 female (member of religious minority; person exercising right to freedom of opinion and expression)

Character of reply: Largely satisfactory response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur notes the information provided by the Government of China.

Allegation letter sent on 26 November 2004 with the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion and belief, reproduced from E/CN.4/2005/7, at para. 94

Ms. Jiang Zongxiu, aged 34, was arrested on 17 June 2004 while she and her mother- in-law were distributing some Christian texts and Bibles in a local market place. Both of them were sentenced to 15 days administrative detention for their suspected activities of �spreading rumours and disturbing the social order.� On 18 June around 2pm at the Public Security Bureau of Tongzi County, in Guizhou province, she was beaten to death during an interrogation. No steps have been taken to investigate the case. An autopsy result issued by the local government claimed that Ms. Jiang died of heart failure.

Response of the Government of China dated 16 June 2005

Receipt is acknowledged of communication AL G/SO 214 (56-18) G/SO 214 (53-19) CHN 54/2004, dated 26 November 2004, from the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression and opinion of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. The Chinese Government has carefully examined the matters referred to in the communication and wishes to submit the following response.

I.�� Basic circumstances

On 17 June 2004,� the villagers Jiang Zongxiu (female, aged 34) and her mother-in-law Tan Dewei (female, aged 61) from Baishi village in Ganshui township, Qijiang county, Chongqing city, were conducting activities in the hawkers� market in Tongzi county, Zunyi city, Guizhou province, which seriously disrupted commercial operations in the market. Acting in accordance with the provisions of article 19, paragraph 2, of the Rules on Penalties for Offences against Law and Order and pursuant to the law, the public security authorities held Tan and Jiang in public order detention for 15 days. On 18 June at 2 p.m. Jiang suddenly fell ill while in the administrative detention facility of the Tongzi county public security bureau and was promptly transferred to a nearby hospital where efforts to save her life failed and she died. On 27 June, the Tongzi county public security bureau, together with members of Jiang Zongxiu�s family, entrusted the Forensic Science Centre of Zunyi Medical School in Guizhou province to carry out a forensic enquiry into the causes of Jiang�s death, to be conducted in the presence of members of the deceased�s family. The conclusions of the forensic enquiry ruled out the possibility of mechanical asphyxia, mechanically induced death or poisoning, and clearly established that the deceased suffered sudden death due to lipocardiac causes (because of the excessive build‑up of fat in her heart, a condition which at any time can cause sudden death).

Following careful investigation it was verified that, at all times throughout the period of Jiang�s administrative detention, the public security authorities had acted in strict compliance with the law, had duly respected all Jiang�s lawful rights, and had never applied any form of torture or other inhuman treatment against her. When Jiang fell ill, she received prompt attention to save her life. The allegations in the communication which we have received that Jiang was beaten to death in the public security bureau during her interrogation is not consistent with the facts.

II.�� Explanatory remarks

(a)�� The Chinese Constitution and Chinese law clearly establish that citizens shall enjoy the freedom of religious belief. Article 36 of the Chinese Constitution stipulates that citizens of the People�s Republic of China enjoy the freedom of religious belief. The measures taken by Chinese judicial authorities against Jiang were consistent with the law and were applied because the latter had conducted activities which seriously disrupted commercial operations in the market and had nothing to do with any issue of freedom of religious belief.

(b)�� China was one of the very first States to ratify the United Nations Convention against Torture, and firmly prohibits torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Chinese law clearly stipulates that persons taken into custody enjoy extensive rights. The Chinese Criminal Code, the Chinese Code of Criminal Procedure and many other laws and statutes clearly stipulate that verbal and physical abuse, corporal punishment and other forms of ill-treatment are strictly forbidden. Confessions which have been obtained through the use of torture, by force, with inducements, by deception or through any other unlawful means, even if they are proved to be true, have no legal force. In China, the moment a case arises where a detainee�s rights have been infringed, the persons responsible are invariably penalized.

The Chinese Government respectfully requests that the content of the above response be incorporated in full in a relevant document of the United Nations.

China: Death Sentences of Four Men

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the application of capital punishment

Subject(s) of appeal: 4 males

Character of reply: UN translation awaited for response of the Government of China dated 12 January 2006

Urgent appeal sent on 10 October 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture

Urgent appeal sent in relation to four men � Huang Zhiqiang, Fang Chunping, Cheng Fagen, and Cheng Lihe � who we understand are currently held in Leping City Police Detention Centre in the Jiangxi province.� We have been informed that they are at imminent risk of execution and the basis for our intervention concerns allegations that they were tortured while in pre-trial detention and that their convictions are therefore unsound.

According to the information received, they were convicted of murder, rape, robbery and extortion in connection with their joint involvement in three separate crimes committed between September 1999 and May 2000. The Jingdezhen Intermediate People�s Court in Jiangxi province first sentenced them to death, a decision which they appealed to the Jiangxi High People�s Court. On 17 January 2004 it ruled that the case should be sent back to the Intermediate Court for re-trial, since the detail of their testimony had changed several times and the evidence was insufficient to convict them. It has been brought to our attention that in their defence statements the four men had also highlighted several contradictions in their testimonies and alleged that they had confessed to the crimes under torture at the hands of the police.

However, the Intermediate Court once again sentenced the men to death on 18 November 2004, reportedly without considering the torture allegations. The four men remain under sentence of death, and it is unclear why their executions have not yet been carried out. It is possible that the Jiangxi High People�s Court is continuing to refuse to approve the verdict.

If these allegations are correct there would be ground for serious concerns. While we acknowledge the serious nature of crimes involved we would recall that �in capital punishment cases, the obligations of States parties to observe rigorously all the guarantees for a fair trial set out in Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights admits of no exception�. (Little v. Jamaica, communication no. 283/1988, Views of Human rights Committee of 19 November 1991, para. 10). This standard embraces the right not to be found guilty on the basis of a forced confession.

We would also recall Commission on Human Rights resolution 2005/39 which urges States to ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked in any proceedings. This principle is an essential aspect of the right to physical and mental integrity.

We would urge your Excellency�s Government to take all necessary measures to guarantee that the rights under international law of Huang Zhiqiang, Fang Chunping, Cheng Fagen, and Cheng Lihe are respected. Under the circumstances this would include an official investigation of the allegations before any further action is taken.

In view of the urgency of the matter, we would appreciate a response on the initial steps taken by your Excellency�s Government to safeguard the rights of the above-mentioned persons in compliance with the applicable standards of international law.

Correspondence from 2005

The record of correspondence for 2005 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2005/7/Add.1.

Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation, 3 February 2004. Zhao Lin was reportedly executed at the age of eighteen in January 2003 for a murder which allegedly took place in Funing County, Jiangsu Province in May 2000. According to the information received, Zhao Lin was sixteen years old when he allegedly committed the crime.

Government reply: Response dated 21 May 2004. The Chinese Government has made numerous enquiries into the murder case involving Zhao Lin. The Government quotes, as explanatory remarks, that "article 17 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that a person who has reached the age of 16 who commits a crime shall bear criminal responsibility...a person who has reached the age of 14 but not the age of 18 who commits a crime shall be given a lesser punishment or a mitigated punishment. Article 49 stipulates that the death penalty is not to be applied to persons who have not reached the age of 18 at the time the crime is committed or to women who are pregnant at the time of adjudication. According to the Government, Chinese courts exercise strict control over the use of death penalty; in sentencing cases they always seek to protect the procedural rights of defendants who are minors, and the death penalty is never given to any defendant under the age of 18".

Observation of the Special Rapporteur: The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply. However, he would appreciate receiving clearer explanation in relation to the implementation in the case of Zhao Lin of article 49 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China according to which the death penalty is not to be applied to persons who have not reached the age of 18 at the time the crime was committed.

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent Appeal sent with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders, 16 March 2004. According to the information received, on 28 February 2004, Jiang Meili, who had traveled to Beijing to petition the National People�s Congress on behalf of her husband, the human rights defender Zheng Enchong, was reportedly detained by officials of the Shanghai Representative Office in Beijing, the Shanghai Letters and Petitions Office and the Shanghai Municipal Public Security Bureau (PSB), without being presented with an arrest warrant. She was allegedly released on 1 March. It is reported that since then she has been under police surveillance and on 4 March was prevented from leaving her home to visit her husband. When she protested, she was allegedly taken to the Guoquing Lu Public Security Bureau and was released later that day. Shen Ting�s mother, Mo Zhujie, was reportedly abducted on 5 March 2004 by individuals, some wearing police uniforms -one of them reportedly identified himself as a member of the Shimen Erlu Public Security Bureau- and allegedly threatened to kill her. She was released later that night. Fears have been expressed for the life and physical integrity of the above mentioned individuals who may have been targeted for their human rights work and in particular for campaigning against the reportedly arbitrary imprisonment of Zheng Enchong.

Government reply: Reply dated 26 May 04. According to the Government, since Jiang Meili was displeased that the law enforcement authorities had punished her husband for vilifying the Chinese authorities in contravention of Chinese criminal law, the Shanghai municipal petitions department engaged with her in some educative mediation, on the basis of relevant laws. In doing so, the public security organs did not apply any kind of coercion to her. The accounts given in the communication does not tally with the facts. Mo Zhujie and her daughter, Shen Ting, have repeatedly spread rumours, influencing the foreign media and putting pressure on the Government in order to maximize their interests in a dispute over the demolition of their home. From March 2004 onwards, Mo has deliberately gone into hiding. On investigation, it turns out that the claim that Mo was bundled by 11 individuals into a police vehicle does not tally with the facts. The rumours spread by Jian, Mo and Shen have nothing to do with freedom of speech and opinion. The Chinese Ministry of Justice took no coercive action against the three women, and their personal rights and other legitimate rights and interests were effectively guaranteed. The Chinese Government guarantees citizens� freedom of speech in accordance with the law and the constitution. There are petition offices at the National People�s congress to deal with citizens criticisms and appeals to the Government and give the general public an unobstructed channel for making their views known. At the same time, Chinese law stipulates that in exercising their freedom of speech, citizens must not harm the legitimate rights and interest of the State.

Observation of the Special Rapporteur: The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of China for its reply and observes that freedom of speech is a right to be protected in accordance with both applicable international standards and with national law. The SR�s concern related primarily to the alleged risk to the life of the complainant.

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent appeal, 14 May-04. Lu Wangli was reportedly sentenced to death on or around 10 May 2004 by a Chinese court for taking 25,59 million yuan (3.1 million dollars) in bribes.This put him at risk of imminent execution. According to the information received, Lu Wangli was convicted at the Intermediate People's Court in Guiyang, capital of Guizhou province, where he was previously the top official in charge of traffic management. He reportedly committed his crimes between 1998 and 2001, when he realized he was being investigated and fled the country. It is reported that he was detained in Fiji and repatriated in April 2002.

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent appeal, 28 June 2004. Dozens of people sentenced for drug-related crimes were to be executed �to mark� the United Nations-designated International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking on 26 June. In this regard, the SR expressed concerns at the reported executions of Mr. Laifu Yang (a Honk Kong citizen) and Mr. Zhiyuan Du, on 20 June 2004 on charges of drug smuggling following a trial which took place at the Shenzhen City Intermediate People's Court, in the province of Guangdong. Likewise, Mr. Fei Guo, Mr. Zhuan Yu, and Mr. Hancheng Zhang were also sentenced to death for drug-related crimes and executed on charges of drug smuggling following two separate trials at the Zhengzhou Railway Transport Intermediate Court, in the Province of Hubei on 24 June. Relatedly, the SR has brought to the attention of the Government information according to which death sentences handed down in the provinces of Sishuan and Yunnan, where problems relating to drug trafficking are said to be particularly acute, do not have to be reviewed by the central Supreme People�s Court in Beijing, thereby allowing the possibility of provincial level courts to review cases on appeal and to order the execution of a death sentence.

Gou Fei, male, born on 6 December 1964, Han Chinese, from Pingyu County, Henan Province, a teacher. Arrested on 5 February 2002 for smuggling large quantities of drugs.

Yu Zhuan, female, born on 10 November 1964, ethnic Dai from the Dai-Va Autonomous County of Gengma in Yunnan Province, a peasant. Sentenced to life imprisonment and stripped of political rights for life on 27 December 1998 for drug smuggling. Released on parole to seek medical attention on 9 June 1999; arrested in connection with the current case on 5 February 2002.

In judgement No. 23, delivered in first instance on 7 November 2002, the Zhangzhou Rail Transport Intermediate People�s Court found Guo guilty of drug smuggling and sentenced him to death, deprivation of his political rights for life and confiscation of all his property; it found Yu Zhuan guilty of drug smuggling and sentenced her to death and deprivation of her political rights for life, but since she had yet to serve her full sentence for her previous offence it decided to carry out the death sentence, strip her of her political rights for life and confiscate all her personal property. Guo and Yu both appealed. Their appeals were rejected and the original verdicts upheld by the Henan Province Higher People�s Court on 10 November 2003. Once the case had been reviewed by the Supreme People�s Court, which approved the death sentences on both individuals, the sentences were carried out on 24 June 2004.

Yang Laifu, male, born on 8 November 1970, Han Chinese, a Hong Kong resident. Death sentence already put into effect.

In judgement No. 4 (2002), delivered in first instance on 29 January 2002, the Shenzhen Municipal Intermediate People�s Court found the two men guilty of drug trafficking. It sentenced Yang to death, deprivation of his political rights for life, and confiscation of all his personal property; to Du, it gave a death sentence suspended for two years, stripped him of his political rights for life and confiscated all his personal property. Both men appealed, Yang on the grounds that he was an accessory to the crime, Du on the grounds that the crime was broken off. In criminal judgement No. 96 (2002), delivered in second and final instance on 14 October 2003, the Guangdong Province Higher People�s Court rejected the appeals and upheld the original verdicts. The case was reviewed by the Supreme People�s Court, which found that the conduct of Yang et al. did constitute drug trafficking; the facts established in the first and second hearings were clear and the evidence was reliable and plentiful; the court proceedings had been lawful. Yang had trafficked large quantities of drugs and was a principal in the offence. By ruling No. 65 (2004) delivered on review on 14 May 2004, the Court approved the death sentence passed on Yang for drug trafficking. As Du had been given a suspended sentence which the higher court had upheld, the death penalty has not been carried out on him.

Zhang Hancheng -- we presume Zhang Hanchen is meant, -- male, born on 9 February 1961, Han Chinese from Wuhan, Hubei Province, unemployed. The Zhengzhou Rail Transport Division of the Hunan People�s Procuratorate brought proceedings against Zhang for transporting drugs and illegal drug possession. By criminal judgement No. 12 (2003) delivered in first instance on 6 June 2003, the Zhengzhou Rail Transport Intermediate People�s Court found Zhang guilty of transporting drugs and gave him a death sentence suspended for two years, stripped him of his political rights for life and confiscated all his personal property; for illegal possession of drugs it sentenced him to 15 years� imprisonment and a fine of 10,000 yuan. The court therefore resolved to carry out the death penalty, strip Zhang of his political rights for life and confiscate all his personal property. Zhang appealed on the grounds that he had not been involved in transporting drugs. By local ruling No. 511 (2003) issued in final instance on 29 November 2003, the Henan Province Higher People�s Court rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgement. The case was reviewed by the Supreme People�s Court, which found that Zhang�s conduct, in organizing for other people to transport 4.6766 kg of heroin, did constitute the offence of transporting drugs. The facts established in the first and second hearings were clear and the evidence was reliable and plentiful; the court proceedings had been lawful. Zhang�s conduct in transporting 229.8 g of heroin in a rented car also amounted to the offence of transporting drugs, but the lower and higher courts had differed as to whether Zhang had been guilty of illegal possession. The quantity of drugs Zhang had been transporting was large and he was a principal in the crime, so by law he must be severely punished. By ruling No. 91 (2004) delivered on review on 14 May 2004, the Court approved the death sentence passed on Zhang for transporting drugs, and the sentence was carried out on 24 June 2004.

China is at present a strong adherent of the death penalty, but its ultimate objective is gradually to diminish its use and eventually to eliminate it. The Criminal Code limits the scope of its application and imposes a strict procedure for its application. The death penalty is applied only to exceptionally grave offenders. Procedurally, the people�s courts are especially cautious about imposing it. Capital offenders whose sentences are not for immediate execution can be accorded a two-year suspension of sentence. At the same time, the Chinese law enforcement authorities are constantly reforming the way in which death sentences are carried out to show steadily more humanitarian concern, and are supported in this by all strata of society including criminals themselves and their families.

The Chinese Code of Criminal Procedure establishes a special review procedure for capital cases whereby, after final judgement by the court of second instance, cases must be referred to the Supreme People�s Court, which conducts a thorough review of the facts, the evidence, the verdict, the punishment ordered and the trial procedure; sentences become legally enforceable only with the Supreme Court�s approval. All the cases referred to above were reviewed by the Supreme People�s Court. There is no basis for the Rapporteur�s conjectures about the review procedure.

Observation of the Special Rapporteur: The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply.

Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation sent with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and Special Rapporteur on torture, 8 July 2004. The Special Rapporteurs brought to the attention of the Chinese Government cases relating to the arrest, detention, ill treatement and torture resulting in the deaths of 28 persons persecuted by the authorities solely because of their belonging to the Falun Gong movement. The victims are: Sun Yanying, Chen Aizhong, Zhu Yourong, Fan Yaxiong, Zhang Zhigen, Jiang Shuhua, Shen Lizhi, Liu Haibo, Liu Yuqing, Song Cuiling, Yin Ling, Xue Xia, Chen Hongping, Yu Yongquan, Chen Xiangrui, Gao Shuhua, Li Jianhou, Li Ying, Zhao Chunying, Yang Yufang, Sui Guangxi, Cao Ping, Bai Xiaojun, Tan Chengqiang, Tian Junlong, Lu Bingshen, Yan Hai, Zhang Changming.

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent appeal, 8 July 2004. Two Nepalese citizens, Ishwori Kumar Shrestha and Rabi Dahal, were sentenced to death in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), People�s Republic of China, on 30 May 2004, on drug-related charges and could face execution at any time. The two men were appointed a lawyer, but it is not clear whether a Nepali-Chinese interpreter was provided, or whether the two were able to fully understand the process of their charge and trial. It was reported that their families had not heard from them for four months. They were not officially informed of their sentence, but read about it in a Kathmandu newspaper.

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent appeal, sent with the Special Rapporteur on torture, 20 September 2004. 50 persons, whose names have not been made public, were reportedly sentenced to death over the past eight months for �separatist� and �terrorist� activities, in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region (XUAR), northwest China and were at risk of imminent execution. According to the information received, on 13 September 2004, the Secretary of the Regional Communist Party Committee, Mr. Wang Lequan, stated that none of these people sentenced had yet been executed. He allegedly claimed that the 50 persons were detained in the context of a security crackdown on 22 groups involved in �separatist and terrorist� activities. Reports indicate that Uighurs detained on suspicion of �separatist� or �terrorist� offences are often detained without access to lawyers and are at high risk of torture or ill-treatment while in custody. It has been brought to my attention that, earlier this year, four Uighurs, namely Aihe Maititashi, Luoheman Maimaiti, Idris Kadir and Kuerban Tudaji, had been executed in June and July 2004, all for political offences related to �separatist� activities or �trying to split the country�.

Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation sent with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Special Rapporteur on the right to everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Special Rapporteur on torture, and Special Rapporteur on violence against women, 15 October 2004. The Special Rapporteurs expressed their concern at increasing reports, over the past five years, of systemic repression against the Falun Gong and other �heretical organizations� (�xiejiao zuzhi�). The Special Rapporteurs are concerned that reports of arrest, detention, ill-treatment, torture, denial of adequate medical treatment, sexual violence, deaths, and unfair trial of members of so-called �heretical organizations�, in particular Falun Gong practitioners, may reflect a deliberate and institutionalized policy of the authorities to target specific groups such as the Falun Gong.

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent Appeal sent with Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and the Special Rapporteur on torture, 19 October 2004. Tenzin Deleg Rinpoche, a 54 year-old Buddhist religious leader was at imminent risk of execution, following a conviction based on a confession obtained under torture. He was arrested on 7 April 2002 following a bombing incident in Chengdu, Sichuan Province on 3 April 2002. He was found guilty on 29 November 2002 in a secret trial by the Kardze (Ganzi) Intermediate People's Court in the Kardze Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Sichuan Province, for "causing explosions" and "inciting separatism". On 2 December 2002 he was sentenced to death with a two-year suspension of execution, which was set to expire on 2 December 2004. Tenzin Deleg Rinpoche was reportedly held incommunicado for eight months and was reportedly tortured in detention. His conviction was upheld on 26 January 2003 by the Sichuan High People's Court, and he was moved to a secret location afterwards.

Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation, sent with the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion and belief, 26 November 2004. Ms. Jiang Zongxiu, aged 34, was arrested on 17 June 2004 while she and her mother- in-law were distributing some Christian texts and Bibles in a local market place. Both of them were sentenced to 15 days administrative detention for their suspected activities of �spreading rumours and disturbing the social order.� On 18 June around 2pm at the Public Security Bureau of Tongzi County, in Guizhou province, she was beaten to death during an interrogation. No steps have been taken to investigate the case. An autopsy result issued by the local government claimed that Ms. Jiang died of heart failure.

Correspondence from 2004

The record of correspondence for 2004 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2004/7/Add.1.

On 9 December 2002, the Special Rapporteur sent a communicaton to the Government of China regarding the cases of Tenzin Deleg Rinpoche (also known as Ngawang Tashi or A An Zha Xi), a Tibetan religious teacher, and his attendant, Lobsang Dhondup (also known as Luo Rang Deng Zhu). The two men were reportedly arrested on 7 April 2002 following a bombing incident in Chengdu, capital of Sichuan province, on 3 April 2002. Tenzin Deleg Rinpoche was reportedly held incommunicado for eight months, from the time of his arrest until the time of the trial. There were concerns that he may have been tortured or ill-treated in detention. On 2 December 2002, the Kardze (Ganzi) Intermediate People�s Court in the Kardze Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture of Sichuan province allegedly sentenced Lobsang Dhondup to death for �inciting separatism�, �causing explosions� and �illegal possession of guns and ammunition�. His sentence was allegedly immediate, subject to appeal by 12 December 2002. Mr. Rinpoche reportedly received a death sentence with a two-year suspension for �causing explosions� and �inciting separatism�. The evidence for these charges was reportedly uncorroborated and mainly comprised �separatist� leaflets calling for the independence of Tibet from China, which were reportedly found at the scene of the blast. The two men allegedly did not have access to a lawyer during the trial.

On 4 June 2003, the Special Rapporteur, jointly with the Special Rapporteur on torture, sent a communication to the Government of China in connection with the following cases of Falun Gong practitionners.

Shu Qunhua, a 40-year-old resident of the third community of Banshan village in Suining city, Sichuan province, was reportedly arrested on 20 July 1999 and detained for two to three months. During her detention, she was allegedly subjected to severe ill-treatment. According to the information received, on 24 January 2000, the local police surrounded her apartment building. Several policemen, including the chief, reportedly rushed her fifth-floor apartment and tried to force her to turn over the Falun Gong materials she had in her possession. She allegedly threw the flyers out of the window, infuriating the police who then reportedly threw her out the window. She died instantly.

Yu Lixin, a woman from Dalian city, Liaoning province, was detained at the Dalian City Detention Centre because she allegedly practised Falun Gong. On 15 April 2001, she was reportedly forced to stand with her hands clasped behind her head while bending at a 90-degree angle while she was allegedly beaten, kicked and hit on the back of her neck with an electric baton. On the following day, she was taken to a room on the fifth floor, apparently to clean it. According to the information received, all the rooms in the detention centre had iron parapets enclosing the windows, except the room the one where she taken. Shortly after having been escorted to the room, she was allegedly seen falling from the window. She reportedly died as a result of the fall.

Li Zetao, a 24-year-old man from Shimo town, Jiangjin county, Chongqing city, Sanxia province, was reportedly sent to team No. 7 of Xishanping Labour Camp on 8 September 2000. Camp guards (whose names are known to the Special Rapporteurs) reportedly ordered other inmates to beat him in order to force him to renounce Falun Gong. On 29 May 2001, he was reportedly forced to carry human faeces to a dump site and when he was too tired to move, he was beaten with a pole and force-fed the faeces by the guards. He was also allegedly deprived of rest at night. It was alleged that guards folded a newspaper into a hat and put it on his head, tied his arms to a stick to form a straight line, hung a barrel full of urine on each of his arms and forced him to hold up the barrels for hours. At the same time, they allegedly poked him with a broom in the back. He was also reportedly punched and kicked and a knife was allegedly inserted in his anus. He was allegedly tortured to death on 30 May 2001.

Li Changjun, a 33-year-old Falun Gong practitioner, was reportedly detained on 16 May 2001 for downloading and printing related information from the Internet. Mr. Li had worked at the Wuhan Tax Bureau but was said to have lost his job for refusing to renounce his Falun Gong beliefs. He was reportedly detained many times previously for his Falun Gong activities. According to the information received, on 27 June 2001, the Wuhan police notified his family of his death. It is reported that when he died, his body was skeletal, his face and neck were black and blue, his fists were clenched, his face was distorted and his back looked as if it had been severely burned.

Zhao Zichu, a 51-year-old resident of Longping township, Wuxue city, was reportedly arrested by local police and sent to the Wuxue City No. 1 Detention Centre for having studied and practised Falun Gong. According to the information received, he was released in July 2001, when police saw him spitting up blood. He reportedly died shortly afterwards.

Chen Qiulan, a 47-year-old female Falun Gong practitioner, reportedly died in custody on 24 August 2001 at the Daqing City Detention Centre, Heilongjiang province. Although her death was publicly announced by the police to have been due to a heart attack, other sources allegedly reported that she died from having been severely beaten many times while in detention and denied medical treatment. She was allegedly arrested in July 2001 for posting information about Falun Gong on the Internet.

Shen Deming, a man from Xiantao city, Hubei province, was reportedly arrested while distributing Falun Dafa materials in Shenzhen city, where he was working temporarily. He was allegedly detained for six months in the Jiujiechun Detention Centre. It was reported that due to the severity of the ill-treatment he was subjected to, he suffered a mental breakdown and his health deteriorated. He reportedly died on 8 September 2002.

Li Hongmin, a 50-year-old female Falun Gong practitioner from Mudanjiang city, Heilongjiang province, was reportedly arrested by city police on the morning of 16 September 2002 and was allegedly beaten to death. It was reported that the police dropped her corpse from a building and then claimed that she committed. Her body was allegedly cremated on 19 September 2002. The police department allegedly threatened her family members not to make the case public.

Wang Jingyi, a 56-year-old man from Dong-xi-zhen-li village in Zhao township, Wafangdian city, Liaoning province, was reportedly arrested by police in February 2002 for producing Falun Fong materials. He was allegedly taken to Wafangdian City Detention Centre and in September 2002, he was sentenced to a five-year jail term. On 21 September 2002, 18 days after he was transferred to Huazi jail in Liaoyang city, Liaoning province, he was reportedly tortured to death. The details of his death were reportedly still under investigation at the time of the communication.

Wei Ouyang, a 32-year-old resident of Lanzhou city, was reportedly detained by three police officers from the Lanzhou city, Anling district police station National Security Squad on 16 October 2002 and sent on the following day to the Gansu province First Labour (Ping�antai) Camp to serve a one-year sentence. He allegedly died two days later. Before his death, he reportedly told his family that �criminals�� beat his head severely. It was also alleged that there were needle marks on both of his wrists where an unknown drug was allegedly injected

Xiong Fengxia, a 56-year-old woman from Gucheng town, Hebei province, reportedly died on 13 October 2002 while detained at the Liyhuzhuang town detention centre. She was allegedly arrested on 1 October 2002 with some 18 other Falun Gong practitioners from Gucheng. At the detention centre, she was allegedly hung from the ceiling and beaten with rubber hoses, wooden clubs and other articles. During the night of 13 October 2002, she was allegedly force-fed until she died. Her family allegedly asked, unsuccessfully, for an autopsy report.

Xing Xiuqin, a 61-year-old resident of Beima village, Songlingdian town, Zhuozhou city, Hebei province

China: Visits & Communications

Correspondence from 2007

China: Death Sentences of Two Nepalese Men

Correspondence from 2006

China: Death Sentences of Two Nepalese Men

China: Death Sentence of Tenzin Deleg Rinpoche

China: Deaths in Custody of Falun Gong Members

China: Death Sentence of Kuerban Tudaji

Basic facts

Explanatory remarks

China: Death in custody of Jiang Zongxiu

China: Death Sentences of Four Men

Correspondence from 2005

Correspondence from 2004