A FORMER senior discipline inspection official in Hunan Province has been expelled from the Communist Party of China after being caught with a prostitute, one of many officials brought down in a campaign against corruption carried out across the central province. Du Xiangcheng, formerly deputy Party secretary of the provincial discipline inspection commission, was found to have made a sexual trade with a prostitute from Belarus at a five-star hotel room in Beijing in December 2005 while on a business trip, the China News Service said yesterday, citing Hunan's discipline watchdog.
Du was caught red-handed when police broke into the room after receiving a tipoff, an earlier media report said...Du made a reputation for himself for his stance against corruption and led the probe against Peng Jinyong, former secretary of the Changde City Committee for Discipline Inspection, in Hunan. Peng was alleged to have acquired more than 770,000 yuan (US$99,670) through corruption in 2004. Du was then quoted as saying, "Cadres are only human and they have desires, so we should all be tested."
Are there people staking out Beijing's 5 star hotels to catch cadres out? Are people like Mr Du really that stupid as to think they can bring a hooker (and all the articles note she is Belarussian, implying I'm not sure what) to their room in a fancy Beijing hotel without being noticed?
the main reasons behind problems in china's agricultural sector is that the growth of the chinese economy is haphazard and unorganized . while , some sectors get too much attention , others are neglected. this lack of balance is dure to poor political planning , and , lack of peoples' initiative.
Move over Hill St Blues. A couple of reports demonstrating how Shenzhen's Public Security Bureau deal with immigration issues promptly and efficiently. These are posted on the Shenzhen PSB website and both involve the Lowu station.
1. The first story is about a 30 year old from Mali (Doucoure Abdoulaye). The PSB report says he came to the Lowu police station on 9 February to deal with his visa, which had expired. He came to counter 205 - Comrade Huang Fengzhu. When Huang input the man's name into the computer system he was found to be an AIDS patient. Huang immediately reported to Comrade Ding Minghua who, upon understanding the situation, told Huang not to act as though anything was out of the ordinary. With a calm demeanour, Huang dealt with the issue. This shows, according to the report, that the police can deal with a foreigner with an infectious disease in a calm and brave manner [as though the officer involved could have caught AIDS in this situation]. They still deported the guy, though the report doesn't say to where (I presume Hong Kong). Along with his name, age, and country of origin, they also felt the need to tell us his skin colour.
2. The second story is about a 76-year-old disabled American (Sommer Herman Benjamin), who visited the Shenzhen police station for help (15 February, again the Lowu station). The man was wheelchair bound, and the report says he seemed to be suffering from mild dementia. He told police he had been cheated by both a Chinese English language centre for which worked and which had not paid him and his intended Chinese fiancee who he had come to marry. As a result did not have enough money. The police told him that in this case he had to leave China before his visa expired. They gave him the contact details of the American embassy and explained that they could offer him water, food and enough money to contact the American embassy. He left Shenzhen the next day for Qingdao. The report has been published to indicate how well they dealt with an issue involving a foreigner (i.e., he left the city and thus didn't cause them any more problems).
Will the Lowu station soon become a tourist attraction in its own right?
I've been spending a lot of time trying to gather my thoughts in order to compose a series of entires reflecting on the 15 months I spent living in various parts of China and just when I thought it impossible to find something positive to say about Chinese law, I discovered a newfound, yet bittersweet sense of appreciation:
POLICE in northeast China have detained a 32-year-old man suspected of sexually assaulting and killing more than 20 children. Gong Runbo is believed to have lured the children to his apartment in Jiamusi city in Heilongjiang province where he carried out the killings and often left the bodies to decompose, reports said.
He was only stopped on February 28, when a boy escaped and managed to alert the police, according to the report in the Beijing News. Officers sent to search Gong's apartment came across a gruesome scene of rotting bodies and scattered bones, it said. Four of the corpses were still in a somewhat intact state and showed signs of having been sexually abused before their deaths, according to the paper. Forensic evidence led police to conclude that perhaps more than 20 children had been killed in the apartment, it said.
The maximum punishment for murder in China is the death penalty.
I refer to my appreciation of Chinese law in this instance as bittersweet because even though it is a demonstration of justice served, the end result is the taking of another life -- a punishment I agree with in this case, but one that is no doubt handed down far too often in China for crimes that are much, much less serious.
Of course, I can also appreciate the fact that this sick imbecile will not spend the next 27 years appealing his sentence from Death Row and nor will his execution be delayed in order to ensure that it is carried out in a humane manner - a consideration his victims were not so fortunate to receive.
China executes about 8,000 people a year, or 22 a day and yet they don't have too many candlelight vigils going on. The judiciary is trying to better regulate executions and bring the system out into the open:
China, which executes more people than any other country, is to hold open hearings for a large number of death penalty appeals in an effort to better regulate executions, a legal scholar said Monday. From the second half of 2006, all death penalty appeals which go to a provincial high court will be heard publicly, a departure from the usual practice of closed reviews and investigations, said Liu Renwen, a scholar at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences...
With the judicial system under scrutiny after a series of widely publicized wrongful convictions, the Supreme Court has also moved to reclaim its right to a final review of death sentences, but Liu said the policy was meeting resistance from lower courts. "When the Supreme Court can take this power back is still a question," Liu told foreign correspondents. "Local governments think it is a good tool to control public security. If they lose such power they think, of course, it would not be good."
This latter part refers to the announcement last October that the Supreme People's Court is struggling to re-assert control over capital punishment in response to widespread outrage at arbitrary sentencing. What is missing from the debate is the pros and cons of capital punishment. The article notes:
Some 68 crimes in China can incur the death penalty, about half of which are non-violent offences, Liu said.
I always think it is quite menaingless to quote the number in absolute values for china
....GDP, #capital punishment, #mobile phone, etc. China is going to top others due to its sheer pop size.
what matters most when one compares China with other countries in the world is 'per capita' measure.
i do not doubt china still ranks among the top group in this case, given that there are 68 crimes that could lead to death penalty. but i would say the "more than any other countries" is pretty meaningless.
what concerns me most is that many innocents were executed (and these are not politically related), because of the incomptence and corruption locally. and this is actually related to your question of whether 'capital punishment' should be abolished. (such cases also happens in even the US, though at a much lower frequency)
p.s. one of the 68 crimes include corruption with bribes over a certain amount of money (1M RMB or so).
of course they don't.
even if you compare it with texas or australia, the rate is higher in china.
but that makes it comparable and helps to set more realistic target for china.
if we are comparing china with iraq, nork or say, italy. we really do not know what those numbers mean.
China's Orwellian named Ministry of Public Security last month announced an almost 7% rise in recorded "disturbances to public order", to 87,000 last year. That's more than 200 riots a day. Even in a country as vast and populous as China, that's a lot of disturbances. But the SCMP reports the Ministry isn't worried...it's all just a phase:
Mainland police have played down the growing wave of social unrest sweeping the country, describing it as a phase common to fast-growing economies worldwide. Ministry of Public Security spokesman Wu Heping said in Beijing yesterday that the rural riot was "a concept that does not exist".
"In the phase [of fast economic development], the interests, relations and positions of different parts [of society] are undergoing adjustment. In the process of adjusting, there will accordingly be an increase in [the number of] common people who, in order to defend their own interests, express their pleas to government and relevant departments through various channels," Mr Wu said.
"And I believe every country has had this process and this phase."
They're not riots, although the spokeman declined to give us the "correct" word for pitchfork wielding peasants. Here's a question for the history buffs - did America's Wild West see anything like this number of disputes?
That aside, the number of "disturbances" has risen from 10,000 a decade ago to 87,000 last year. That's one hell of a phase to be going through.
I've been considering this for a while (as has Roland, we exchanged a few e-mails on it a while back). I'm not really sure what we can conclude from the numbers.
For starters, they aren't necessarily refering to riots. "Mass incidents" can include anything from street protests, petitions, sit-ins or picketing. I'm also very suspicious on the accuracy of the numbers (these are Chinese statistics after all). "Mass incident" reports would be prepared by local officials (who would want to under-report) at the request of the central govt (which also has an agenda, you can speculate away as to what that may be - but Hu/Wen have been pushing a more rural/redistributive agenda so they may actually want to see more riots to support that; or perhaps public security just wants more funding).
If the data do reflect a trend, rather than just a political effort, I was also musing whether more 'mass incidents actually equals more discontent. It could. But in theory, it may also mean that people feel more free to protest. It's possible that better reporting of incidents (via the internet, etc...) has pushed the state to alter its statistics accordingly.
All of that said, even if the 87,000 is accurate, do any of us really trust that the number of incidents was 10,000 a decade ago?
This is an interesting issue. I tend to disagree with Roland's view that incidents such as the one between the two villages in Guangdong have no bearing whatsoever on whether China is becoming a more or less stable country. But aside from that, on the statistics, one has to bear in mind when judging their credibility that for a long time (i.e. all the JZM period) they were not reported openly but were instead for internal reference only. They have only been released publicly since HJT came to power. As you point out myrick that suits his agenda, but it also suggests at minimum a growing concern by party leaders that stability is declining. Speeches by party leaders indicate that also. Now their perception may be wrong - but given the nature of the Chinese political system, that hardly matters.
Chinese citizens are taking their first, tentative steps towards an American-style litigious society - or are they? If so, this example will certainly not set the class-action lawsuit industry ablaze in China. I read today about a female government official from Nanjing whose lap and private parts were badly scalded by a cup of boiling water accidentally spilled on her, apparently by a careless flight attendant on Northwest Airlines.
The captain took note of her injuries and asked two ground staff at Narita to take her to an airport clinic. But the airline would not pay US$200 for her, so she left without treatment, a decision that cost her 3 months of suffering.
What is the unfortunate woman asking in return? US$1, and apologies in major newspapers, a case she is fighting in a higher court in Hawaii. Methinks she may have better luck in getting good lawyers if she upped the ante slightly - by a factor of a hundred million, say. That tends to focus corporate attention.
To be clear, I do not expect tendentious lawsuits dragging their way through China's rickety court system anytime soon.:)
Oh, and if this story was not strange enough, a witness that said that she actually spilled the drink on herself was a Japanese missionary.
Could Muslim extremists be this stupid? Or is it security paranoia ahead of George W. Bush's visit to China? Could elements from Xinjaing be involved? From the American Embassy in Beijing:
The Embassy has learned that Chinese police advised hotels that Islamic extremist elements could be planning to attack four and five star hotels in China sometime over the course of the next week. Chinese authorities have assured the Embassy that they are taking appropriate security measures and investigating the possible threat thoroughly. American citizens visiting Chinese four and five star hotels should review their plans carefully, remain vigilant with regard to their personal security, and exercise caution. Reports should be made to local police if one notices unusual activities in or around these areas.
The SCMP repeats the alert, rings a few people and finds most have no idea what's going on:
The warning did not say if the extremists were from within the mainland or abroad...A police spokesman in Beijing told TVB news last night it was not aware of the threat. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it had not received any notification from police and was trying to understand more about the situation.
Is it likely? Who knows. If extremists really want to drag China further into the war on terror by embarrassing them when hosting President Bush, it would be a monumental tactical and strategic blunder. But since when has logic and strategy been terrorists' strong suit?
The problem with these terror alerts are the danger of the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome. While it is prudent to err on the side of caution, surely there is a balance to be struck between the issuance of these alerts and saving them for when there is a genuine threat. What does it mean to review their plans carefully, remain vigilant with regard to their personal security, and exercise caution? Does the embassy assume that at other times people don't do these things? OK, I've reviewed my plan carefully, now what?
Ah, but if it's viewed as an act of backside-covering, that's a different matter. In that case governments and embassies have a bias to over-issuing alerts. Sometimes alerts are justified: Australian Prime Minister John Howard's alerts came just before police smashed a major pontetial terror event. But in and of themselves, these alerts matter little. They offer little constructive advice and are typically too broad and vague. In the post September 11 world, everyone is more vigilant as they get on with their lives. Crying wolf doesn't help.
In what can only be described as a massive "up yours" to the Americans from the Chinese, Shaky sends this:
The Chinese Ministry of Public Security informed the U.S. Embassy in Beijing on November 10 that Chinese security authorities have determined that the source of a reported threat against four and five star hotels in China is not credible. The United States Government is not aware of any other information of any threat against hotels in China, including Hong Kong. Our warden message(s) of November 9 and 10 on threats to hotels is therefore retracted.
How embarrassing. Who was saying something about wolf?
The Chinese Ministry of Public Security informed the U.S. Embassy in Beijing on November 10 that Chinese security authorities have determined that the source of a reported threat against four and five star hotels in China is not credible. The United States Government is not aware of any other information of any threat against hotels in China, including Hong Kong. Our warden message(s) of November 9 and 10 on threats to hotels is therefore retracted.
From: Shanghai, ACS [mailto:ShanghaiACS@state.gov]
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 2:23 PM
Subject: Warden Message: Terrorist threat in Guangzhou
Warden Message
November 13, 2005
The United States Government has received credible information that a
terrorist threat may exist against official U.S. Government facilities
in
Guangzhou. This threat also may exist for places where Americans are
known
to congregate or visit, including clubs, restaurants, places of worship,
schools or outdoor recreation events.
American citizens in south China are advised to be aware of their
surroundings and remain alert to possible threats. Americans living or
traveling in China are encouraged to register with the U.S. Consulate
General in Guangzhou through the State Department's travel registration
website, . By registering,
American
citizens make it easier for the Consulate to contact them in case of
emergency.
U.S. citizens planning to travel to China should consult the Department
of
State's country-specific Public Announcements, Travel Warnings, Consular
Information Sheets
, the
Worldwide
Caution Public Announcement
and other
information, available at . Up-to-date
information on security conditions can also be obtained by calling
1-888-407-4747 in the U.S. and for callers outside the U.S. and Canada a
regular toll line at 1-202-501-4444.
American Citizen Services Unit
United States Consulate General Shanghai
1038 West Nanjing Road, 8th floor
Shanghai
Tel: (86-21) 3217-4650 ext. 2102, 2103, 2114 Fax: (86-21) 6217-2071
Email: shanghaiACS@state.gov
http://www.usembassy-china.org.cn/shanghai
This message is unclassified based on the provisions of E.O. 12958.
The cliche says life is cheap. However, in an extraordinary story, it turns out in China life can be extremely expensive indeed. Just yesterday the NYT, Forbes and several bloggers were all over the story of American businessman David Ji'skidnapping or arrestin China.
Do you know something or are you just supposing? It could be that he's prepared to flip on a big case, but it certainly seems like the "donation" is what got him off.
Yuan's lawyer said he will testify against a privincial secrtary (who is Liaoning's party sec?) who accepted bribery of 120M RMB. the corruptor also is involved with drug trafficking and conterfeit money.
The reason this was delayed till the last moment was because his wife had to go directly to the central govt (presumable because local govt is also corrupted).
we will know whether this is the true reason if
1) the party sec is tried
2) if his money were donated.
The Supreme Court will no longer permit provincial courts to review death sentences so as to ensure that capital punishment is meted out meticulously and fairly, Chief Justice Xiao Yang, also president of the Supreme People's Court, said Tuesday...China still practices capital punishment as a deterrent to preserve social stability, but "as few executions as possible should be carried out and as cautiously as possible, in order to avoid wrongful executions," the top judge said...
According to the law, executions must be approved by the Supreme Court before being carried out. However, to facilitate swift punishment for criminals captured during the country's 1983 "Strike Hard" anti-crime drives, an exception was made so that violent felons like murderers could be put to death with the approval merely of provincial-level "higher people's courts."
Since 2003, the Supreme Court has rejected 7.21 percent of the death sentences, ordering a retrial for lack of sufficient evidence, and changed 22.03 percent of the death verdicts to deathwith reprieval or life imprisonment, said Xiao, without giving the exact number of such sentences.
Meanwhile, provincial courts have thrown out 4.44 percent of death sentence verdicts for lack of sufficient evidence, and revised 38.14 percent of the verdicts to lesser punishments, he said. But several wrongful death sentences exposed this year has prompted legal professionals to think twice about the death penalty system. Many of them are calling for the Supreme Court to rescind provincial tribunals' right of review. A man convicted of murdering his wife in Hubei Province was very lucky when his "dead" wife emerged. The case prompted a national uproar...
Liu Zuoxiang, an professor with the Law Institute of China Academy of Social Sciences, told Xinhua the major problem with thereviewing system is that different provincial courts have different criteria on what kind of felons should be executed, which is not good for the human rights of the convicted.
While these changes are welcome, the implications are staggering. First and foremost, the implication is there have been potentially many executions in the past that were unjustified. Secondly, the rush to execution of violent criminals has meant the law has been flouted since 1983. So this measure can be seen as a re-assertion of rule of law in China. Or it could be seen as wayward provincial courts being smacked down by the Supreme Court.
Either way, it's a positive step forward. It's a shame so many have had to die to get there.