(Network of Chinese Human Rights Defenders – February 17, 2015) – Torture and mistreatment of detainees is endemic in China, CHRD has reported to the UN Committee Against Torture (CAT). The Chinese government has taken very few measures that are effective in combating acts of torture and instead provides impunity for alleged perpetrators of torture. CHRD raised these and other concerns in information submitted to CAT prior to its review of China’s implementation of the Convention against Torture, which is set for November.
“The Chinese government now has 10 months to clean up its act and bring its law and practice toward full compliance with its treaty obligations to end torture and impunity for torturers,” said Renee Xia, CHRD’s international director. “With mounting evidence from the past two years alone, it is clear that the Xi Jinping administration has continued to use torture and other mistreatment to suppress dissent of its government policies.”
The Convention against Torture, an international treaty banning torture and other mistreatment that China ratified in 1988, remains “invisible” in Chinese court proceedings and the criminal judicial system. Despite domestic laws banning torture, judges typically ignore or dismiss torture allegations as well as lawyers’ requests to throw out torture-tainted evidence during trials. Channels for victims to seek accountability and compensation are largely obstructed, to the extent that many victims of torture or their families, who tried to get courts to accept their lawsuits against alleged torturers, have been subjected to retaliation.
CHRD has reported many incidents of alleged torture put forth by detainees, their families, or lawyers since President Xi Jinping came to power two years ago, and as he has promoted a hard-line party agenda against “universal values” like human rights. From early 2013 to late 2014, over 250 human rights defenders around China were detained in three successive crackdowns, and over a thousand others deprived of liberty during the same period. Many of them have told of torture and mistreatment in police custody. For instance, activist Liu Ping (刘萍) raised torture allegations during her 2013 trial, but judges refused to order an investigation. Arrested in July 2013, Huang Wenxun (黄文勋) has reported being tortured in detention; he still has not been brought in front of a judge and has had little access to his lawyer. Lawyer Gao Zhisheng (高智盛), who was released from prison and placed under house arrest in August 2014, is in very poor health due to years of abuse. And four rights lawyers were severely beaten in a Heilongjiang Province police station in March 2014 for trying to visit their clients.
Deprivation of medical treatment to detained activists remains both a form of political retaliation and a commonly used form of torture by neglect, even to the point of contributing directly to deaths. In 2014 alone, three activists are known to have died soon after being released after being tortured and deprived medical treatment behind bars. In these cases, the individuals were only let go once it became clear to authorities that they would not survive—suggesting a deliberate tactic by those in charge to avoid any blame. Activist Cao Shunli (曹顺利)died last March after she was denied treatment for multiple medical complications, while authorities rejected family and lawyers’ requests for medical bail, in the course of over five months of her detention. Two Tibetans died soon after being released several years into long prison sentences—Goshul Lobsang (果秀洛桑) in March and Tenzin Choedak (丹增曲扎) in December. Tortured in prison and deprived of medical treatment, the men had been jailed after the March 2008 protests in the Tibet Autonomous Region.
In its 2008 review of China, CAT raised serious concerns about deaths in police custody, which remains a problem. More such deaths have occurred since 2009, but there have been very few known criminal punishments for alleged perpetrators. Authorities overseeing detention facilities have stood by “explanations” that lack credibility, claiming that detainees died of “natural” causes or “suicide,” even after autopsies and further investigation found physical evidence of violent assault of the victims.
Today, a dozen or so prisoners, such as Chen Xi (陈西), Xie Fulin (谢福林), Wang Yonghang (王永航) andIlham Tohti (伊力哈木.土赫提), and several detainees, including Pu Zhiqiang (浦志强) and Tie Liu (铁流), are known to be subjected to mistreatment and are in very poor health. Some of these individuals’ family members fear they may die while incarcerated, and after being denied medical parole numerous times.
Violence against detained women in China has persisted. CHRD has reported in detail on abuses against women in black jails, which are run beyond the bounds of Chinese law. And although the “re-education through labor” (RTL) system of administrative detention has been abolished, some torture victims once held at the notorious Masanjia Women’s RTL camp have been retaliated against for seeking compensation; eight former detainees who had endured forced injections of medication, solitary confinement, and many forms of sexual violence were sent to prison in 2014 for terms of 12 to 18 months.
For the Chinese government to demonstrate any credibility in its international commitment, made more than 25 years ago, to eradicate torture and other inhumane treatment or punishment, it must take necessary legislative, law-enforcement, and judicial measures in full compliance with the Convention against Torture. Some recently proposed regulations concerning torture have such shortcomings that, once adopted or implemented, they would have little impact on combating the practice. For instance, the Supreme People’s Court began drafting updated guidelines in December 2014 to exclude “illegally obtained evidence.” But these guidelines, like all others before them, fail to adopt a definition of “torture” that is in line with the Convention. China’s Criminal Procedure Law, which was amended in 2012, included provisions to ban evidence gained from torture, but very few police officers or judicial officials who have violated the law have been investigated or brought to justice. In addition, the country’s first Mental Health Law, which took effect in May 2013, has left loopholes that allow a litany of abuses in psychiatric facilities, including forced medication and injection of drugs, involuntary commitment by police or government officials, and lack of access to appeal for judicial review by those who are forcibly committed.
Though the government has dragged its feet for more than 25 years in complying with its CAT treaty obligations, it still has time in the next 10 months, leading up to the November CAT review, to take concrete and effective measures toward implementing recommendations made by the UN Committee against Torture, in concluding its previous review of China in 2008, including:
  • Adopt in its legislation a definition of torture that covers all the elements contained in Article 1 of the Convention, including discrimination of any kind;
  • Take urgent and immediate steps to prevent acts of torture and ill-treatment throughout the country;
  • Ensure that all allegations of torture and ill-treatment, including deaths in custody, are investigated promptly, effectively, and impartially;
  • Ensure that no one is involuntarily placed in psychiatric institutions for reasons other than medical;
  • Ensure the protection of members of ethnic minority groups, by conducting prompt, impartial, and effective investigations into all ethnically motivated violence and discrimination;
  • Ensure that no one is detained in any secret detention facility, such as “black jails”;
  • Prevent and punish gender-based violence and, in particular, adopt legislation explicitly prohibiting all forms of violence against women;
  • Ensure that all persons, including those monitoring human rights, are protected from any intimidation or violence as a result of their activities and exercise of human rights guarantees;
  • Abolish any legal provisions which undermine the independence of lawyers, and investigate all attacks against lawyers;
  • Ensure that every criminal suspect is afforded the right to have prompt access to an independent lawyer, and of their own choosing where possible, including in cases involving “state secrets”; and
  • Ensure that adequate compensation is provided to victims of torture and ill-treatment, and that appropriate rehabilitation programs are provided to all torture victims.
Click here to read the full report.
中国的问题酷刑和有罪不罚的刑讯2015年2月17日•上午02点48分没有评论（中国维权网 - 2015年2月17日） - 被拘留者的酷刑和虐待是流行在中国，维权网已经上报给联合国人权委员会禁止酷刑（CAT）。中国政府已经采取了很少的措施是有效的制止酷刑行为，而是提供了有罪不罚酷刑指控的肇事者。维权网在之前，中国实施反酷刑公约，这是设置为十一月的审查提交给CAT的信息提出了这些问题和其他问题。“中国政府现在有10个月的清理其行为，并把它的法律和实践走向充分履行其条约义务终止酷刑和有罪不罚的折磨，“蕾妮霞，维权网的国际总监说。 “从过去的两年里越来越多的证据，很显然，在习近平政府继续使用酷刑和其他虐待，以抑制其政府政策的异议。”禁止酷刑公约，国际条约，禁止酷刑和其他虐待的中国批准的1988年，仍然是中国法院诉讼和刑事司法制度“隐形”。尽管国内法律禁止酷刑，法官通常会忽略或者解聘折磨的指控以及律师要求在审判扔出去折磨污染的证据。渠道受害者寻求责任和赔偿在很大程度上阻碍，以至于酷刑或他们的家人，谁试图让法院接受他们的诉讼对涉嫌施加酷刑的许多受害者，遭受了retaliation.CHRD报道所称的许多事件折磨提出的被拘留者，他们的家人，或者律师，因为习近平来到两年前的权力，因为他已经对促进人权等“普世价值”强硬派对议程。从2013年初到2014年底，中国各地的250多名人权捍卫者被关押在三个连续的打击，而在同一时期超过一千人被剥夺自由。他们中许多人都告诉酷刑和虐待的警察拘留。例如，活动家刘辟嗯（刘萍）在她2013年审判提出指控的折磨，但法官拒绝下令调查。被捕2013年7月，黄温训（黄文勋）报告被折磨被拘留;他仍然没有被带到法官面前，已经很少有机会获得他的律师。高智晟律师（高智盛），谁是从监狱释放，并于2014年8月软禁，在身体状况很差由于多年的虐待。四维权律师被毒打了黑龙江省警察局2014年3月因试图前往就医的clients.Deprivati​​on被拘留活动家保持政治上的报复无论形式和酷刑忽视的常用形式，甚至到了点直接造成死亡的。仅在2014年，3活动家已知有被释放被折磨，被剥夺医疗身陷囹圄后不久死亡。在这种情况下，个人只放过一次，很显然，以当局，他们将无法生存，暗示有意战术所看管，以避免任何责任。活动家曹顺利（曹顺利）去年三月份去世，她被拒绝治疗多种并发症后，而当局拒绝了家人和律师的医疗保释请求，在五个多月她被拘留的过程。两名藏人被释放几年进入长期监禁，Goshul洛桑（果秀洛桑）三月和丹增Choedak（丹增曲扎）在12月以后不久就死了。折磨在狱中被剥夺医疗，男子曾在2008年3月的抗议活动在西藏自治区Region.In 2008年检讨后中国被关押，CAT提出了关于警方拘留，这仍然是一个问题的死亡表示严重关切。自2009年以来更多的此类死亡发生，但也出现了极少数已知的刑事处罚涉嫌肇事者。当局监督拘留设施已按“解释”缺乏公信力，声称被拘留者死于“自然”的原因还是“自杀”，甚至在尸体解剖，并进一步调查发现的victims.Today，有十几个的暴力攻击的物证站囚犯，如谌锡（陈西），谢夫鳞（谢福林），汪拥吭（王永航）和伊力哈木·土赫提（伊力哈木。土赫提），和一些被拘留者，包括浦志强（浦志强）和铁流（铁流），已知要进行虐待，并符合卫生很差。有些人的家庭成员担心在监禁期间，他们可能会死，后在中国被拒绝保外就医众多times.Violence对被拘留的女性坚持。维权网曾就对妇女的黑监狱，这是运行超出中国法律允许的范围滥用详细报道。并且，虽然行政拘留（RTL）系统的“劳动教养”已被废除，一些酷刑受害者举行一次，在臭名昭著的马三家女子RTL阵营已经报复寻求补偿;谁曾忍受药物，单独监禁，以及各种形式的性暴力强迫注射8位前被拘留者被送进监狱，2014年为12项至18 months.For中国政府展示其国际承诺，任何信誉，取得了超过25年前，以消除酷刑和其他非人道待遇或处罚，就必须采取必要的立法，执法，司法等措施，完全符合禁止酷刑公约。一些有关对酷刑最近提出的法规有，一旦通过或实施，他们将不得不打击的做法影响不大等缺点。例如，最高人民法院开始起草更新指引2014年12月，以排除“非法获得的证据。”但这些准则，像所有其他人在他们面前，不能采取“折磨”，即在符合公约的定义。中国的刑事诉讼法，这是修正在2012年，包括规定禁止酷刑获得的证据，但很少有警察或谁违反法律的司法官员被调查或归案。此外，该国的第一个精神卫生法，开始生效2013年5月，已经离开的漏洞，允许在精神病院的设施，包括强迫服药和注射毒品，被警察或政府官员预防性拘留虐待的长篇累牍，和缺乏获得那些谁是被迫committed.Though政府已经拖再拖超过25年，其CAT遵守条约义务，呼吁司法审查，但它仍然有时间在未来10个月内，导致该月CAT检讨，采取切实有效的措施对实现联合国禁止酷刑委员会提出的建议，在总结以前的中国审查2008年，包括：在其立法中采用，覆盖了所有包含在公约第1条内容的关于酷刑的定义，包括任何形式的歧视;采取紧急，立即采取措施，防止酷刑和虐待行为在全国各地，确保酷刑和虐待，包括在羁押期间死亡的所有指控，及时调查，有效，公正，确保没有人会不由自主地放置在精神病院以外的原因医疗等;确保少数民族的成员，保护通过开展及时，公正，有效的调查所有种族动机的暴力和歧视;确保没有人被关押在任何秘密拘留设施，如“黑监狱”，防止和惩治基于性别的暴力，特别是，通过立法明确禁止对妇女一切形式的暴力行为;确保所有的人，包括那些监测人权，保护他们不受任何恐吓或暴力活动和锻炼人权保障的结果;废除这有损律师的独立性任何法律规定，并调查对律师的一切攻击;确保每一个犯罪嫌疑人被给予迅速获得一个独立的律师的权利和，自己选择在可能的情况，包括在涉及“国家机密”的案件; andEnsure足够的补偿提供给酷刑和虐待的受害者，以及适当的康复方案提供给所有的折磨victims.Click这里阅读报告全文。