Informe provisional - Informe núm. 310, Junio 1998

1. 271. In a communication dated 4 June 1997, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) submitted a complaint of violations of freedom of association against the Government of China.
2. 272. The Government sent its observations in a communication dated 15 January 1998.
3. 273. China has not ratified either the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 274. In its communication of 4 June 1997, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) alleges that, within the general context in which workers and independent labour activists attempt to establish and/or join organizations of their own choosing, independent trade unions are suppressed by the Government and their leaders are imprisoned.
   • National legislation
2. 275. The 1992 Trade Union Act says the aim of trade unions is to regulate labour so as to improve labour productivity and economic efficiency, and to play an active role in socialist modernization under the Chinese Communist Party. Unions are to act as intermediaries between workers and management if a dispute occurs. The 1993 revision of the All China Confederation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) constitution defined unions as "the link and bridge between the Chinese Communist Party and the working masses, and the representative of the interests of union members and non-union members".
3. 276. China's first national Labour Code (hereinafter, "Labour Law" in accordance with Government official translation) which entered into force in January 1995 aimed to standardize employment principles and requirements in all types of enterprises, although over 150 million rural and industrial workers were excluded from its scope. Furthermore, the Labour Law does not protect the right to collective bargaining and does not mention the right to strike.
4. 277. Under the Labour Law, collective contracts can be concluded through negotiation between enterprise management and enterprise union officials or, in the absence of a union, elected worker representatives. The contracts can relate to wages, working hours and rest days and must be approved by the local government within 15 days. In reality, collective bargaining does not take place. Employment contracts are drawn up by employers who set wages and conditions, in cases where they are not set by law. There is ample evidence that enterprise managers ignore the new law and that enforcement is minimal.
5. 278. The National Security Law, the Regulations on Re-education through Labour, and the Regulations on Reform through Labour, allow the detention of activists who attempt to organize independent labour action. According to the complainant, re-education through labour (laojiao) is being increasingly used as a form of administrative detention because it avoids the need for a trial and allows local police to hand out sentences of up to three years in a forced labour camp, which in practice may be further increased at will by the authorities, as demonstrated by several cases raised in the complaint.
6. 279. As concerns the right to strike, this right was removed from the Chinese Constitution in 1982 on the grounds that the political system had "eradicated problems between the proletariat and enterprise owners". According to the complainant, the authorities repress any strikes, though many take place over issues such as the non-implementation of the labour law; low wages; poor working conditions; low health and safety standards; long hours and forced overtime; unreasonable management discipline; and sometimes physical abuse.
   • Right to strike in practice
7. 280. The complainant further alleges that the ACFTU unions do not initiate strikes and are often called in by employers and local authorities to get strikers back to work. The Labour Bureaux also give preferential treatment to employers during mediation of labour disputes, as often there is an overlap between enterprise management, local party and government personnel.
8. 281. In Guangdong province, the provincial Labour Bureau passed a strike policy in 1994 saying that a strike with 30 or more participants must be reported to the provincial labour bureau by its local branches within four hours, followed by a detailed report in eight hours. In "serious cases and threats to stability", local government officials should be at the scene within two hours to prevent an escalation of the strike. If necessary, the authorities can use force or threats to make workers resume production. In many medium and large enterprises, the complainant alleges that detention facilities exist and security officials can detain and sentence protesting workers to three years in a labour camp (laogai).
9. 282. In June 1996, a Communist Party circular called on party officials to be on their guard against illegal unions which, it said, could have anti-government and anti-socialist tendencies. It said that since the spring they had been responsible for hundreds of strikes demanding jobs, more pay and more decision-making powers for workers. In early 1997, a document issued by the CCP Central Committee noted an increase in organized demonstrations, riots and petitions against local authorities in local areas. Shortly, thereafter, the Head of the Public Security Bureau (PSB), delivered an internal speech to PSB staff. According to the complainant's sources, he warned that strikes, collective protests, petitions and demonstrations were gravely disrupting public order and demanded that the Party, Government and PSB cooperate in eliminating all factors that could lead to "social instability". He was quoted as stressing that "all disturbances, no matter what the cause, were to be handled firmly and that there could be no compromise with people who organized or led any form of collective protest".
10. 283. Repression of strikes and other collective workers' action continues unabated. On 10 March 1997, workers struck at Xing Bao Electronics, a Hong-Kong-China joint venture factory producing video tapes, televisions and audio recorders in Zhongshan in the southern province of Guangdong. The protest was directed against management's refusal to pay the workers their annual bonus, meant to be paid after the Chinese New Year holiday. As soon as the strike started, at 7.30 a.m., the management called in the local labour bureau and the police. About 20 officials rushed to the scene. During the ensuing negotiation, and after workers refused management's symbolic offer of compensation (i.e. one month's salary instead of the yearly bonus of 1,200 yuan, as stipulated in the contract), the manager threatened to dismiss any workers who failed to show up for work the next morning.
    • Detention of trade unionists
11. 284. The complainant also alleges that the large numbers of independent labour activists, sentenced to long prison terms in the wake of the repression of China's pro-democracy movement of May-June 1989, have remained in jail or forced labour camp, despite repeated demands by the Committee on Freedom of Association for their sentences to be re-examined and the prisoners to be released.
12. 285. In its two earlier complaints to the Committee on Freedom of Association (Cases Nos. 1500 and 1652), the ICFTU had indicated the circumstances under which a number of independent trade union leaders and activists were detained and sentenced by the authorities in retaliation for their role in the Workers' Autonomous Federations (WAF), which were established in several Chinese cities during the May-June 1989 democracy movement. The ICFTU points out that, in spite of repeated appeals by the international community, including the ILO, the majority either remain in detention or have not been satisfactorily accounted for by the Chinese Government. (The list of detained unionists is set out in Appendix I).
13. 286. As concerns Tang Yuanjuan, Leng Wanbao and Li Wei, who were also specifically the subject of a previous complaint (Case No. 1652), the complainant states that they were reported to have been severely beaten and abused by prison guards in the Lingyuan Prison on many occasions. It was further reported in 1995 that Tang had been diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis and hepatitis, which he had contracted in detention. Despite repeated appeals, his family had not been informed by the end of 1995 of the results of his medical tests or what treatment he was receiving. Leng Wanbao was released on medical grounds in 1994 and at some point thereafter appealed to the Chairman of the National People's Congress in order to obtain the release of his two detained colleagues. Moreover, Tang Yuanjuan himself was reported in April 1997 to have lodged an appeal against his sentence before the Changchun Supreme People's Court, requesting that his sentence be overturned. At the same time, Tang's father urged authorities to grant his son medical parole on account of his disastrous state of health. On 29 May 1997, the court reportedly reduced Tang's sentence from 20 to eight years, Leng Wanbao's sentence from 13 to five years and Li Wei's from 13 to eight years. Detained for over two years without trial in the same case, Li Zhongmin was formally declared innocent.
14. 287. The complainant also recalls the case of Wang Miaogen, Chairman of WAF, who was the subject of a previous complaint (Case No. 1500). After having been set free upon completion of sentence, Wang was beaten up on several occasions by the police, for what the complainant believes was his continuous advocacy of independent trade unions. In April 1993, Wang was forcibly committed to a psychiatric institution, a method of repression which the complainant states is intended to silence democratic opposition activists, including independent trade unionists. Wang's internment gave rise to local-scale protests in Shanghai and a number of individuals were harassed by public security organs as a result.
15. 288. The complainant also provides a list of individuals whom it claims were arrested in 1989 for having organized workers' demonstrations or strikes (see Appendix II).
16. 289. Finally, the complainant expresses its concern at the serious discrepancies which have existed between the complainant's understanding of the detention of certain trade unionists and the Government's presentation of the situation, as can be seen, in particular, in its previous complaints (see Annex to Case No. 1652, 286th Report). It therefore requests that the Government be asked to provide complete and verifiable information about the individuals concerned and, in the event that they have been released, to provide information as to the absence of any discrimination in employment subsequent to their release.
17. 290. The complainant further states that, ever since the crushing of the pro-democracy movement and, more specifically, of independent workers' organizations in June 1989, the authorities have continued to detain arbitrarily, arrest and sentence numerous workers who attempted to establish and/or to join organizations of their own choosing, in flagrant violation of Article 2 of Convention No. 87. The complainant identifies numerous such detainees, including 15 who have been sentenced to a total of at least 100 years in prison, and 14 who jointly total over 30 years already spent in secret detention without trial. Many have been condemned by administrative bodies to up to three years' "re-education through labour" sentences against which no appeal is allowed.
18. 291. According to the complainant, the mere expression of an intention to advise, let alone organize, workers leads to arrest upon discovery. Occasionally, however, groups of workers succeed in carrying out limited activities for a time, as long as they remain informal. The threshold of official tolerance seems to be any attempt to obtain formal registration for independent workers' organizations. This is clearly the case in respect of the Beijing-based League for the Protection of the Rights of Working People, disbanded in 1994, once it applied for official registration, and the Shenzhen-based Workers' Forum, whose members attempted to advise and assist migrant workers in the Special Economic Zone of Shenzhen on the establishment of independent trade unions. These groups apparently benefited in the beginning from a limited, tacit tolerance by the authorities. However, at least 12 members and activists are reported to have been detained in 1994 as the group was about to formally apply for registration.
    • The Free Labour Union of China (FLUC)
19. 292. As concerns the repression of further independent trade union activities, the complainant refers to Liu Jingsheng, a chemical plant worker, who was detained in 1992 for organizing the Free Labour Union of China (FLUC), as well as for his involvement in other organizations dedicated to promoting the social, economic and political rights of Chinese workers and people. He was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment in 1994 and deprived of his political rights for four years. Fifteen others, including workers' rights activists Hu Shigen, Kang Yuchun, Wang Guoqi, Lu Zhigang, Wang Tiancheng, Chen Wei, Zhang Chunzhu, Rui Chaohuai and Li Quanli, were also sentenced to terms of between two and 20 years' imprisonment: in particular, Hu Shigen and Kang Yuchun received sentences of 20 and 17 years' imprisonment respectively. The following year, these detainees appealed against their sentences. Their appeals were rejected in July 1995 by the Beijing High People's Court.
20. 293. In respect of the more recent detentions of independent labour activists generally, the complainant expresses its utmost concern at the increasing use by the authorities of prolonged, unacknowledged imprisonment and secret detention. In several cases, this "re-education through labour", imposed for nearly three years by a mere administrative decision, was followed by abrupt sentencing without warning to long terms of forced labour. In all cases known in any detail, elementary standards of fair judicial process, including access to counsel, were blatantly disregarded by the authorities.
21. 294. Several cases confirm that independent labour activists, like political prisoners, are singled out for particular harsh treatment in detention. This includes direct physical violence inflicted by prison staff, as well as organized victimization, such as collective beatings by fellow inmates in exchange for favours awarded by the authorities. This physical repression is combined with a consistent pattern of confinement of labour activists to prison sections reserved for inmates carrying infectious and viral diseases. An aggravating factor is that prisoners' requests for proper information about their own health, let alone proper medical care, are systematically turned down by prison or judicial authorities.
22. 295. The complaint further highlights systematic harassment of relatives of imprisoned labour activists. Initially, family members of union detainees are consistently denied any information about, let alone access to, their jailed relatives. At a latter stage, when trial and sentencing is imminent, often after years of secret detention, every available method is used to minimize potential assistance to the prisoners from their relatives. This includes contradictory information about and last-minute changes in timing and location of trials and, even more significantly, the hearing of appeals.
23. 296. More gravely, relatives acting on behalf of union prisoners are on occasion themselves detained without due process, often for long periods. They themselves are in turn unable to inform their close ones about their own whereabouts, which constitutes a further violation of their rights as "untried prisoners". Finally, some of them have been severely beaten in jail. Following their release, some family members of jailed unionists have been forcibly displaced from their usual area of residence in order to prevent further contacts with, assistance to or involvement on behalf of their relatives.
24. 297. To illustrate the nature of severe treatment meted out against trade unionists and their relatives, the complainant cites the case of Zhou Guoqiang, legal adviser to the Beijing Acoustical Equipment Company, who was arrested by the Beijing Public Security Bureau (PSB) even before June 1989 and spent eight months in jail for his involvement with the Beijing WAF. He later served as a legal adviser and counsel for the Beijing WAF leader, Han Dongfang, while Han himself was detained in 1989-92.
25. 298. Zhou was rearrested and sentenced to three years of "re-education through labour" by the Beijing Municipal Government Labour Re-education Administrative Committee in September 1994, for alleged offences that included printing and attempting to distribute T-shirts carrying "inciteful" slogans. The complainant states, however, that these shirts exclusively carried calls for the respect of internationally recognized trade union rights. It therefore considers that Zhou has been imprisoned for the legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of association.
26. 299. Zhou was also accused of "owning an unregistered fax machine", which he allegedly used to correspond with Han Dongfang. The complainant firmly believes that Zhou's alleged contacts and cooperation with Han, who is recognized internationally as a leading figure in the struggle for trade union rights in China, were and continue to be an important additional motive for the particularly harsh treatment to which he is subjected by the authorities.
27. 300. In November 1994, Zhou filed a litigation suit against the PSB for unlawful detention. The case was heard in March 1995 in the forced labour Shuang He farm, in the north-eastern province of Heilongjiang, where he was detained. The camp is located in a remote place, highly inaccessible to Zhou's wife and lawyer. The original verdict was upheld. In July 1995, Zhou was sentenced to one more year in the labour camp for allegedly attempting to escape. The complainant asserts, however, that according to its sources, his "attempted escape" was merely a set-up. Furthermore, in March 1997 the Shuang He authorities again arbitrarily extended his sentence by deducting points from Zhou's "ideological training record". Furthermore, independent labour activists Liu Nianchun and Gao Feng, detained like Zhou in the Shuang He forced labour farm, similarly received additional terms, of 156 and 72 days, respectively.
28. 301. The authorities' March 1995 rejection of Zhou Guoqiang's latest legal appeal on the basis of lack of jurisdiction is, according to the complainant, equally indicative of the intrinsically arbitrary nature of the country's legal system.
29. 302. Moreover, Zhou's rights as a prisoner are systematically violated by the prison farm authorities. Hence, in spite of the tuberculosis which he has contracted while in prison, the authorities have consistently denied him access to doctors and medicines. The complainant also notes that Zhou's rights to correspondence, religious faith, home leave and co-habitation facilities with family members are also systematically denied. Conversations with relatives during family visits are attended and noted in writing by two prison officials, who limit the time and content of the conversations. Zhou is not allowed the statutory marital privacy periods with his spouse. Letters exchanged with his wife have been confiscated, as were his Bible, other reading books and the notebook in which he writes poems.
30. 303. Furthermore, the complainant expresses its outrage at the appallingly cruel, unnecessary and illegal punishment imposed by the authorities on Zhou's wife, Wang Hui, who has been the object of repeated detentions (27 days in May and June 1996, then detained again on 20 September and held for several days before being released) and was beaten up at least twice by public security officials while protesting her husband's imprisonment. Such treatment vividly illustrates the dangers faced, not only by those attempting to organize independent workers' unions or activities, but also by their relatives. Ill-treatment or outright torture of relatives appears to be the highest form of dissuasion meted out to trade unionists. The free exercise of trade union rights is severely restricted, if not impossible, in a climate where human rights are systematically violated.
    • The League for the Protection of the Rights of Working People
31. 304. The complainant also raises the case of Liu Nianchun who was a spokesperson for the League for the Protection of the Rights of Working People (LPRWP), which announced its formation in March 1994, simultaneously petitioning the National People's Congress to improve labour rights. The organizers tried to register the League with the Government, but the request was rejected. Liu and a number of his colleagues were arrested in May 1994. Liu was held in secret for five months, then released. He was rearrested in May 1995 and sentenced to a three-year "re-education through labour" administrative sentence in the remote north-eastern Province of Heilongjiang. An appeal, filed with the courts in July 1996 was turned down. The situation of his colleagues in the LPRWP, Yuan Hongbin, Zhang Lin and Xiao Biguang, detained in the 1994 case under various charges amounting to "aiding and abetting a crime", is as follows: Yuan Hongbin was last heard of confined to a library in Guizhou Province. Zhang Lin and Xiao Biguang were reportedly sentenced to three years' reform through labour at a coalmine in Anhui.
32. 305. After his second arrest in May 1995, the authorities refused for over a year to give Liu's family and friends any reason for his detention or say where he was being held. On 16 July Chu Hailan finally saw her husband, who was being made to share a 150-square-foot cell with 15 other people.
33. 306. Furthermore, the complainant expresses its great concern over Liu's grave medical condition and the fact that he has been refused medical treatment despite the fact that medical personnel at the prison had said he should be moved to a hospital.
34. 307. Furthermore, the complainant states that Liu is still forced to work a half day in the fields as part of his ideological re-education. The fact that Liu is sometimes unable to complete his work quota, as a result of his illnesses, is interpreted by the authorities as his poor attitude to the concept of recognizing one's crimes and mistakes. As a result, in March this year, his sentence was arbitrarily extended by six months. Furthermore, from February this year up until the time of writing, the authorities at the centre have denied Liu's wife her statutory right to visit her husband and have not allowed Liu to write to his family to notify them of his medical condition.
35. 308. Finally, the complainant alleges that Liu Nianchun had been tortured with electric shocks and water deprivation after he went on a hunger strike to protest against his jail sentence.
36. 309. The complainant thus considers that Liu Nianchun is detained under life-threatening conditions and that in the light of this and other examples, including that of Zhou Guoqiang, the denial of medical treatment appears to be part and parcel of the punishment inflicted by China's authorities on detained trade union activists.
    • The "Workers' Forum" in Shenzhen
37. 310. In early November 1996, the complainant was informed that two independent labour activists, Li Wenming and Guo Baosheng, were to go on trial in the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen under the charge of alleged "conspiracy to subvert the Government". Their trial represented the first major criminal proceedings known to have been taken by the Chinese Government against independent union activists since the imposition, in December 1994, of prison terms of up to 20 years in the case of the Free Labour Union of China.
38. 311. Li and others began their activities after discovering the total lack of protection and rights for migrant workers in the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone in 1993. Their group established a workers' night school and drafted a charter of aims and a set of rules of conduct for the establishment of two groups, the "Federation of Hired-Hand Workers" (Dagongzhe Lianhehui) and the "Joint Association of Hired-Hand Workers" (Dagongzhe Lianyi Xiehui), and intended to try to register both bodies with the local civil affairs bureau. They began enlisting local temporary workers to take part in informal discussions. Subjects discussed included the benefits of collective bargaining, the notion of free trade unions and international trade union rights, as described by the relevant ILO Conventions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
39. 312. The Shenzhen police began drawing a tight security net around the activities of all those involved in the group. By late September 1993, the fledgling workers' discussion groups could no longer meet in safety and had to be temporarily abandoned. Li was dismissed from his job and all the fellow activists he had hired were left jobless. Li's dismissal and the ensuing employment loss suffered by his colleagues may pose additional problems as regards respect by the Chinese Government of the right to organize, as guaranteed under the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).
40. 313. Li's group reformed and began to publish and distribute a short unofficial bulletin called Dagong Guangchang, which loosely translates into "Workers' Forum". The "Workers' Forum" consists overwhelmingly of reprints or explanatory accounts of major international trade union rights standards, including those mentioned in the relevant ILO Conventions; reprints of articles on labour rights problems and abuses in Chinese factories that had already been published in the official Chinese press; brief interviews with, or descriptive reports on, the daily lives of Chinese migrant workers who had come to Shenzhen in search of employment; and poems commemorating, among other things, the deaths of migrant workers in factory disasters. (The complainant annexed a copy of an article from "Workers' Forum" to its complaint.)
41. 314. The complainant considers that the publication of such materials vividly conveys the trade union nature of the group's activities. Conversely, the fact that publishing such materials could earn their authors any judicial problems at all clearly demonstrates the extent to which Chinese authorities are determined to prevent any free labour activities whatsoever from taking place in the country.
42. 315. Li was picked up by the police in May 1994, then kept for 30 months in secret, illegal detention. At the same time, 12 other members and activists of the group, including Kuang Lezhuang and Liu Hutang, were also detained. All are believed to have been administratively sentenced to "re-education through labour" terms of up to three years. Near the end of their administrative sentences, Li and Guo were charged with "subversion endangering state security", a capital offence under which the defendants faced from a minimum of ten years' imprisonment to the death penalty. Their trial began at the Shenzhen Intermediate Court on 8 November 1996 and on 29 May 1997, Li Wenming and Guo Baosheng had each been sentenced to three-and-a-half years in prison.
43. 316. According to the prosecution indictment, fellow activists from the Shenzhen labour rights group Kuang Lezhuang, Fang Yiping, He Fei, Zeng Jiecheng, Lan Chunquan, Wu Chun, Liu Hutang, Zheng Wuyan and Wan Xiaoying have already "all been dealt with separately" (jun ling zuo chuli) by the authorities. The complainant is convinced, both on legal grounds and in view of factual evidence, that this means that they were sentenced without trial to various terms of re-education through labour of up to three years.
44. 317. In January 1997, Li's health was reported to have seriously deteriorated in detention. He suffered from nephritis and dropsy. Moreover, during his trial in Shenzhen two months earlier, Li had informed judges that he suffered from a serious kidney disease and requested to be provided proper medical treatment, failing which he ran the risk of part of one kidney being removed. The court did not reply to his request nor to that of Li's relatives, who had applied for a temporary release on bail in order to seek medical treatment. In March, the complainant was informed that Li had been allowed to see a doctor and moved to a somewhat less cramped prison cell. By June 1997, however, it had been informed that Li suffered from acute kidney damage and was in severe pain. According to medical sources who spoke to his family, he risked losing at least one kidney unless he obtained immediate specialized treatment. Such treatment, however, continued to be refused by the Shenzhen municipal prison authorities.
    • China's criminal law
45. 318. The complainant also refers to a draft revision of the country's 17-year old criminal law, submitted to the National People's Congress (NPC) on 8 March 1997 and adopted during the same session. The law entered into force on 1 October 1997. Presented as "permeating the whole ... legislation with the concept of safeguarding people's rights", the 258 articles added to the Criminal Code are designed to "protect people and punish criminals". Protection of citizens' rights to safety, health, personal freedom, work, election, religious freedom, marriage and rights of family is to be notably improved. Freedom of association is conspicuously absent from this list. The press despatch indicates that forced labour, which has "emerged of late", would be punished with a jail sentence of up to three years. Nothing suggests, however, that there is any connection between this measure and the institutionalized system of "re-education through labour". It can therefore be assumed that the revised law shall do nothing to protect would-be union organizers from prosecution. It may however be noted that the press release reported "the establishment ... of a major principle of criminal justice, that crimes and punishment must be judged and meted out in accordance with specific provisions of the law", which would "ensure that criminals be punished while the innocent be free from prosecution". "Behaviours that are not crimes must not be punished."
46. 319. The complainant argues that free labour activists are consistently subjected to long terms of forced labour imposed without trial, for acts which cannot possibly be qualified as crimes. The announced changes in China's criminal law, if implemented, should logically open the way for a revision of their sentences or, at the very least, their appeals should be heard in full fairness.
47. 320. Finally, the complainant refers to two taxi drivers, Zheng Shaoqing and Chen Rongyan, each of whom received administrative sentences of two years' "re-education through labour". In January 1996, they had organized a half-day taxi strike in Zhuhai, a Special Economic Zone (SEZ). Their strike was in protest at severe penalties, including high fines and the impoundment of their vehicles against drivers accused of minor traffic violations. Zheng's and Chen's place of detention is unknown at the time of writing.
48. 321. In conclusion, the complainant considers these cases to illustrate perfectly the comprehensive pattern of repression exerted by the authorities against any independent trade union activists, as soon as they are uncovered by the public security system. This pattern includes:
    • -- an extended period of arbitrary detention, ranging from a few months to over two years;
    • -- subjection to up to three years of "re-education through labour", imposed by minor security or administration officials and against which there is no appeal;
    • -- mistreatment of and refusal of medical care to detainees performing forced labour;
    • -- near to or upon completion of administratively imposed forced labour terms, the upgrading of charges from "counter-revolutionary propaganda and incitement" to "conspiracy to subvert the government", the most serious offence in the Chinese Criminal Code, which carries sentences of up to life imprisonment with forced labour.
49. 322. The complainant concludes by recalling that over six years after the events of Tiananmen Square, the Government of the People's Republic of China keeps in jail a number of prisoners whom the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association has already found to have been detained and sentenced in retribution for their exercise of internationally guaranteed trade union rights and whose release it has repeatedly requested. Most of them were leaders of the Workers' Autonomous Federations in their respective regions, for which they serve terms of three to 13 years or life imprisonment. The persistent criminalization of legitimate union activity in the Shenzhen case, through requalification of charges from "counter-revolution" to "subversion endangering state security" confirms the authorities' long-standing policy of stamping out any independent trade union activity.
50. 323. Finally, the complainant regrets the Government's refusal to ratify the fundamental ILO Conventions, in particular those concerning freedom of association and considers this indicative of the Government's intent to continue to refuse to abide by international labour standards.

B. The Government's reply

1. 324. In its communication dated 15 January 1998, the Government states that there has been continuous, rapid and healthy development of democracy and legislation in China over the last 20 years. The standard of living has risen significantly and fundamental rights and working conditions have improved considerably. The Trade Union Act was promulgated in 1992 and the first Labour Law was adopted in 1994, ensuring legal protection of workers' rights and interests. Given these circumstances, the Government finds it incomprehensible and strongly regrets the submission of the present complaint.
2. 325. The Government has nevertheless undertaken vast inquiries in respect of the allegations made with the Minister of Public Security and the Minister of Justice, as well as with the All China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) and the cities and provinces of Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong, Hunan and others.
3. 326. As concerns the legal protection of workers' rights and interests, the Government claims that the allegations that the right to organize for workers is not ensured, that there is no collective bargaining, that employment contracts are set unilaterally by the employer and that strike action is repressed are all arbitrary. The Government then cites a number of sections of the Labour Law which it considers demonstrates that the rights and legitimate interests of workers are protected.
4. 327. As concerns the allegations in respect of collective bargaining and the unilateral drawing up of employment contracts, the Government first points out that the Labour Law provides that, in order to establish labour relations, an employment contract must be concluded, the text of which may be furnished either by the employer's unit or by the worker, or fixed jointly by the two parties. In any event, the principles of equality and consultation must be respected when drawing up a contract. The Law also sets forth specific matters which must be included in a contract, such as any amendments made to it, denunciation, length and duration. The fact that isolated employers may not respect the Law is inevitable, but this should not justify reproaching a government for isolated events. Inspection mechanisms exist under the Ministry of Labour and labour bodies within employer units and unions at different levels can also supervise the application of the legislation. Violations of the Law are severely punished.
5. 328. The Government also refers to the sections of the Labour Law concerning collective bargaining which, it concludes, demonstrate that collective bargaining has been given legal form in China. Moreover, the Ministry of Labour has issued two publications entitled "Rules governing collective agreements" and "Instructions on the pilot projects of the conclusion of collective agreements through collective bargaining". According to available statistics, collective bargaining is practised in over 90,000 enterprises covering over 40 million employees. While machinery for collective bargaining is in its initial stage in China, the Government asserts that, as the policy of reform and opening develops and the work system revision intensifies, collective bargaining and collective agreements will be more fully regulated, on the basis of acquired experience, with the establishment of an Act on collective agreements.
6. 329. As concerns the Trade Union Act, the Government indicates that the information collected from the Minister of Public Security and the ACFTU contradict the allegations made by the complainant. According to a high-level official of the ACFTU, this Act grants unions the right to correct any act in violation of the Labour Law and the rights and legitimate interests of workers. Moreover, this Act also provides that unions can assist and guide employees in the conclusion of employment contracts and collective agreements and that they may also participate in mediation and arbitration of disputes. Indeed, Chinese legislation acts as a fundamental guarantee enabling unions to defend the legitimate rights and interests of workers which, according to the Government, is a more efficient and effective way to equitably resolve problems than having recourse to strike or other forms of confrontation. As concerns the complainant's criticism that the ACFTU does not initiate strike action, the Government considers that this reproach is contrary to the objectives of international labour standards which are aimed at the promotion of social peace and justice.
7. 330. As concerns the status of the ACFTU, the Government further indicates that the head of this mass organization has emphasized that it regroups employees on a voluntary basis and carries out its activities in an independent and autonomous manner through various means for the defence of the legitimate rights and interests of employees. No one is either prohibited or obliged to join the ACFTU. The ACFTU has been promoting unionization in all types of enterprises for the defence of workers' rights and interests. The 1995 statistics show that the unionization rate of enterprise employees has reached 80 per cent, thus demonstrating the increasing realization of the right to organize of Chinese workers.
8. 331. As concerns the allegations referring to independent organizations of workers, the Government indicates that these organizations are not actually unions, but rather groups of individuals who, instead of defending workers' interests, are devoted to illegal activities endangering state security. The prohibition of such groups, therefore, ensures a better defence of workers' fundamental interests.
9. 332. Furthermore, the allegation referring to a statement made by the Minister of Public Security is pure invention. The Minister did take certain necessary preventive measures to ensure that the return of Hong Kong and the XVth Congress of the Chinese Communist Party took place successfully.
   • Individual cases
10. 333. As concerns the specific allegations of trade union rights violations, the Government asserts that the complainant has persistently confused criminal acts with freedom of association. The Government reaffirms the particular importance it accords to democratic rights, including freedom of association and refers to the consecration of this right in its Constitution and laws. In practice, workers are enjoying ever greater democratic rights and civil liberties. Yet, as is true elsewhere, Chinese workers must respect state laws in exercising the right to organize and trade union activity.
11. 334. As concerns Hu Nianyou and Yao Guisheng, the Government indicates that its inquiries and verification with the Hunan Peoples' Tribunal have revealed that Hu and Yao were sentenced to ten and 15 years in prison for committing the crime of pillaging in 1989. Hu was released in 1993 for good behaviour, whereas Yao remains in detention.
12. 335. Chen Gang, Peng Shi and Liu Zhihua were condemned to death and to life imprisonment, respectively, in 1989 for the crime of "hooliganism". Chen's punishment was reduced twice and he is presently serving a sentence of 11 years' imprisonment. Peng's punishment was reduced to ten years and Liu's punishment was reduced to 11 years; both are still in detention.
13. 336. As concerns the League for the Protection of the Rights of Working People (LPRWP), the Beijing Commission for re-education through labour has indicated that Liu Nianchun has been given three years' re-education for the misdemeanour of disturbing the social order and accepting financing from a hostile organization outside China. Zhang Lin, who was serving three years' re-education for "hooliganism" was released in May 1997 and has gone to the United States.
14. 337. As concerns the Workers' Forum of Shenzhen, the Shenzhen Peoples' Tribunal has indicated that Li Wenming and Guo Baosheng were sentenced in May 1997 to three years and six months' imprisonment respectively for activities endangering state security. Kuang Lezhuang was sentenced in August 1994 to 18 months re-education and has already been released.
15. 338. As concerns the Free Labour Unions of China (FLUC), the Government indicates that the Beijing Peoples' Court has proven with incontestable facts that Hu Shigen, Liu Jingsheng, Kang Yuchun, Wang Guoqi, Lu Zhigang, Wang Tiancheng, Chen Wei, Zhang Chunzhu and Li Quanli were sentenced to prison for carrying out activities constituting crimes endangering state security and in violation of the Penal Code. As for Rui Chaohuai, the Government states that he does not exist.
16. 339. In conclusion, the Government states that no one on the list was punished for carrying out legitimate or legal trade union activity and it therefore considers the allegations unfounded. Normal trade union activity should be carried out within the legal framework fixed by the State with the singular goal of defending workers' legitimate rights and interests. Anyone, whether worker or member of a workers' organization, should be sanctioned and subdued for committing crimes of pillage, "hooliganism", disturbance of the social order and conspiracy against the Government.
17. 340. As concerns standard-setting activities in China, the Government asserts that the competent authorities take sufficiently into account the principles and provisions contained in relevant standards (whether or not ratified) when drafting and revising legislation so that Chinese legislation is in harmony with international standards and common practice. For developing countries, including China, the constraints resulting from historical factors and present conditions dictate that the ratification of Conventions be a gradual process. The Government therefore considers that the ILO should take sufficiently into account the history, social regime, cultural tradition and level of economic development in each country, fully respect the autonomy of each country to ratify Conventions and provide the measures of active assistance in its competence to help member States to increase their capacity to ratify and apply Conventions.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 341. The Committee notes that the allegations in this case concern violations of freedom of association in national legislation, the persistent recourse to arbitrary, and sometimes secret, detention for trade unionists, the repeated use of "re-education through labour" sentences against workers for carrying out legitimate trade union activities, the torture of and denial of necessary medical treatment to detained unionists, the harassment and, in some cases detention, of unionists' family members and the dismissal of workers for legitimate trade union activity.
2. 342. The Committee first notes with great concern the particular gravity of all the allegations presented and deeply regrets that the Government has only provided partial information.
   • National legislation
3. 343. The Committee notes the allegations made in the complaint to the effect that the 1992 Trade Union Act effectively suppresses the establishment of independent trade union organizations. The Committee recalls that it has been called upon to examine the conformity of the Trade Union Act with freedom of association principles in a previous case (Case No. 1652, 286th Report). At that time, the Committee had concluded that the obligations set forth in sections 5, 8 and 9 of that Act concerning trade union activity prevented the establishment of trade union organizations that are independent of the public authorities and of the ruling party, and whose mission should be to defend and promote interests of their constituents and not to reinforce the country's political and economic system. The Committee had further noted that sections 4, 11 and 13 resulted in the imposition of a trade union monopoly and that the requirement that grass-roots organizations be controlled by higher-level trade unions and that their constitutions should be established by the National Congress of Trade Union Members constituted major constraints on the right of unions to establish their own constitutions, organize their activities and formulate programmes. (See 286th Report, paras. 713-717.)
4. 344. At that time, the Committee had concluded that many provisions of the Trade Union Act were contrary to the fundamental principles of freedom of association and requested the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the provisions in question were modified. (See 286th Report, para. 728(a).) The Committee notes with deep regret that it appears that no action has been taken to amend the legislation in this regard and urges the Government to take the necessary steps to bring the Trade Union Act into conformity with the principles of freedom of association in the very near future.
5. 345. The Committee also notes the allegations in the complaint concerning the absence of protection for collective bargaining and the right to strike in the 1995 Labour Law and the Government's assertion that, to the contrary, legal form has been given to collective bargaining through the provisions of the Law and that it is practised in over 90,000 enterprises. The Committee further notes the Government's statement that, while collective bargaining is still in its initial stage, it will be more fully regulated in the future with the establishment of an Act on collective agreements.
6. 346. Turning to the Labour Law, the Committee notes that certain provisions would appear to restrict the freedom of workers and employers when bargaining collectively. For example, section 34 of the Law provides that a collective contract must be submitted to the labour administrative department and shall go into effect immediately, if no objections are raised by the department within 15 days. No further indication is made in the Law as to the type of objections which might be made by the department, but section 46 provides that the level of wages shall be gradually raised on the basis of economic development and that the State shall exercise macro-regulations and control over the total payroll. The Committee recalls in this regard that the requirement of previous approval by a government authority to make an agreement valid might discourage the use of voluntary collective bargaining between employers and workers for the settlement of conditions of employment. Even though a refusal by the authorities to give their approval may sometimes be the subject of an appeal to the courts, the system of previous administrative authorization in itself is contrary to the whole system of voluntary negotiation. Furthermore, legislative provisions prohibiting the negotiation of wage increases beyond the level of the increase in the cost of living are contrary to the principle of voluntary collective bargaining embodied in Convention No. 98. (See Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, paras. 871 and 891.) The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary steps so that these sections of the Labour Law are amended in order to ensure the autonomy of the parties in collective bargaining and to ensure that any requirement for prior authorization of collective agreements be limited to procedural flaws or the violation of minimum labour standards established in the legislation.
7. 347. As concerns the allegations concerning the lack of protection for the right to strike, the Committee notes that it has already been called upon to examine legislation concerning the settlement of labour disputes and its effect upon the right to strike (Case No. 1652). The Committee noted at that time that neither the Chinese Constitution nor the Trade Union Act dealt with the issue of the right to strike and neither authorized it nor banned it. It did note, however, the existence of certain regulations concerning labour disputes which introduced a conciliation and arbitration procedure which allowed no possibility of resorting to strike action and requested the Government to take the necessary measures for workers and their organizations to be able to exercise the right to strike when they considered it necessary to support their claims. (See 286th Report, paras. 719 and 720 and 292nd Report, para. 391.)
8. 348. The Committee now notes that sections 79 to 83 of the Labour Law appears to codify exactly the same type of mediation and arbitration system as the regulations which the Committee had previously criticized. Section 79 provides that, if mediation fails, one party may apply for arbitration. In the event of an objection to the arbitration award, the dissatisfied party may appeal to the people's court whose decision is binding. Recalling that provisions which permit either party unilaterally to request the intervention of the labour authority for the settlement of the dispute may effectively undermine the right of workers to call a strike and does not promote voluntary collective bargaining, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to amend the legislation so as to ensure that workers and their organizations are able to exercise the right to strike in defence of their social and economic interests. (See Digest, op. cit., para. 519.)
9. 349. The Committee recalls to the Government that the technical assistance of the ILO is available in order to facilitate a review and revision of the above-mentioned legislation should the Government so desire.
10. 350. As concerns the right to strike in practice, the Committee notes the complainant's allegations concerning a 1994 strike policy in Guangdong, the suppression of a strike in 1997 in Xing Bao Electronics and a speech made by the head of the Public Security Bureau (PSB) threatening firm action against anyone involved in a strike. While not replying to these first two allegations, the Government asserts that the reported speech by the head of the PSB is pure invention. It does admit however that the Minister of Public Security did have to take certain necessary preventive measures to ensure that the return of Hong Kong and the XVth Congress of the Chinese Communist Party took place successfully. The Committee must recall in this respect that the right to strike is one of the essential means through which workers and their organizations may promote and defend their economic and social interests and it therefore requests the Government to take all necessary measures in the future to ensure that this right is protected both in law and in practice.
    • Detention of trade unionists
    • Previously examined cases
11. 351. The Committee first notes from the complaint that a number of detained trade unionists who were the subject of earlier complaints have still not been released. It notes with regret that the Government has not replied to the allegations made in respect of Tang Yuanjuan, Leng Wanbao and Li Wei, who were specifically the subject of Case No. 1652. At that time, the Committee had expressed the view that the observations made by the Government did not establish in a sufficiently exact and detailed manner that the heavy sentences against these individuals were not due to activities of a trade union kind. (See 286th Report, para. 399.) The Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures for a re-examination of all the cases mentioned by the complainant organization with a view to their release (286th Report, para. 400). The complainant now alleges that Tang, Leng and Li were subjected to ill-treatment and abuse by prison guards and that Tang has been refused medical parole, despite the disastrous state of his health. While the complainant states that the prison sentences of all three were reduced on appeal and that Leng has since been released, Tang and Li are apparently still serving eight year prison sentences.
12. 352. The Committee further notes with concern that the Government has not replied to the allegations that Wang Miaogen, who was also the subject of a previous complaint (Case No. 1500), was beaten upon his release from prison and was forcibly committed to a psychiatric institution in 1993. The Committee would recall in this respect that it has already been called upon to examine allegations relating to the commitment of individuals attempting to establish independent trade unions to psychiatric hospitals (see Case No. 905, 207th Report, para. 129). At that time, the Committee stressed that all necessary safeguards should be provided to prevent such measures from being taken as sanctions or as means of pressure against persons who wish to establish a new organization independent of the existing trade union structure (ibid.).
13. 353. The Committee notes with great regret that, despite its previous recommendations to the Government to review the situation of detainees with a view to their release, many appear still to be detained and subjected to physical abuse. In the absence of any further information from the Government, the Committee cannot but conclude that the individuals concerned have been detained and sentenced for having carried out legitimate trade union activities. Furthermore, given the allegations of beatings and ill treatment while in detention, the Committee recalls that governments, in such cases, should carry out inquiries into complaints of this kind so that appropriate measures, including compensation for damages suffered and sanctioning of those responsible, are taken to ensure that no detainee is subjected to such treatment. (See Digest, op. cit., para. 57.) The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures immediately to ensure the release of all those trade unionists who were the subject of earlier complaints before the Committee and who, according to the present complaint, have not yet been released (Appendix I), including the immediate release of Tang Yuanjuan and of Wang Miaogen from a psychiatric institution, and to set up an independent investigation into the alleged acts of ill treatment carried out in detention against Tang Yuanjuan, Leng Wanbao and Li Wei. The Government is requested to keep the Committee informed of the outcome of the investigation and the measures taken for the release of these detainees.
14. 354. The complainant further provides a list of individuals whom it alleges were arrested in 1989 for having organized workers' demonstrations and strikes (see Appendix II). The Committee would recall in this respect that penal sanctions should only be imposed as regards strikes where there are violations of strike prohibitions which are themselves in conformity with the principles of freedom of association. All penalties in respect of illegitimate actions linked to strikes should be proportionate to the offence or fault committed and the authorities should not have recourse to measures of imprisonment for the mere fact of organizing or participating in a peaceful strike. (See Digest, op. cit., para. 599.) In the absence of any further information from the Government, the Committee cannot but conclude that the individuals concerned have been detained and sentenced for having carried out legitimate trade union activities. It therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the immediate release of those individuals listed in Appendix II.
15. 355. The Committee also notes the complainant's request that, in the light of the contradictions between its own understanding and that of the Government in respect of a number of individuals figuring in Case No. 1652 (see appendix to the 286th Report), the Government should now be asked to supply complete and verifiable information on these individuals, whether they have been released and, if so, whether they have suffered any discrimination in employment. Given that the individuals in question were not the subject of any follow-up in the previous complaint, and in the absence of any additional specific information from the complainant concerning their persecution, the Committee is not in a position to examine this matter further.
    • Recently detained trade unionists
    • The Free Labour Union of China
16. 356. The Committee notes the allegations concerning the sentencing of Liu Jingsheng for his attempts to organize the Free Labour Union of China (FLUC), along with 15 others, including workers' rights activists, Hu Shigen, Kang Yuchun, Wang Guoqi, Lu Zhigang, Wang Tiancheng, Chen Wei, Zhang Chunzu, Rui Chaohuai and Li Quanli to from two to 20 years' imprisonment. The Committee also notes the Government's assertion that these individuals were sentenced to prison for having carried out activities constituting crimes endangering state security and in violation of the Penal Code and its indication that Rui Chaohuai does not exist. The Committee recalls however the allegations concerning the FLUC made in a previous complaint that there was a Communist Party directive calling for an investigation to track down the union and the Government's apparently contradictory reply at the time, both denying and admitting the existence of this organization. (See 286th Report, para. 727 and 292nd Report, para. 388.) Furthermore, the Committee must express its deep concern at the harshness of the sanctions and the apparent link between the creation of the FLUC and the sanctioning of its leaders. It therefore requests the Government to provide specific and detailed information on the charges brought against the members of the FLUC cited in Appendix III, including copies of any relevant court judgements.
    • Beijing Workers' Autonomous Federation
17. 357. The Committee notes the allegations in respect of Zhou Guoqiang who was reportedly rearrested in September 1994 and sentenced to three years' of re-education through labour for printing and attempting to distribute T-shirts carrying "inciteful slogans" which the complainant asserts simply called for the respect of internationally recognized trade union rights. The complainant further reports that Zhou was falsely accused of an attempted escape and consequently sentenced to an additional year, with additional extensions imposed due to deductions from his "ideological training record". Moreover, the complainant alleges that Zhou's basic rights as a detainee have been denied, including access to necessary medical treatment. The Committee also notes the complainant's conviction that Zhou's contacts with Han Dongfang, leader of the Beijing Workers' Autonomous Federation (WAF), have been an important additional motive for the particularly harsh treatment to which Zhou has been subjected by the authorities. Finally, the complainant states that Zhou's wife has been harassed, repeatedly detained and beaten up by public security officials.
18. 358. Firstly, the Committee must recall that it has already considered that the "system of education through labour" with regard to persons who have already been released, constitutes a form of forced labour and administrative detention of people who have not been convicted by the courts and who, in some cases, are not even liable to sanctions imposed by the judicial authorities. This form of detention and forced labour constitutes without any doubt a violation of basic ILO standards which guarantee compliance with human rights and, when applied to people who have engaged in trade union activities, a blatant violation of the principles of freedom of association. (See Digest, op. cit., para. 67.) Noting with deep regret that the Government does not reply to the very specific allegations made in respect of Zhou Guoqiang and his wife, Wang Hui, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information in this respect.
    • The League for the Protection of the Rights of Working People
19. 359. As concerns the allegations of the sentencing to re-education through labour of Liu Nianchun, Zhang Lin and Xiao Biguang, as well as the detention of Yuan Hongbin, the Committee notes the Government's indication that Liu was sentenced to three years' re-education for disturbing the social order and accepting financing from a hostile organization outside China, whereas Zhang who was serving three years for delinquency was released in May 1997 and has gone to the United States.
20. 360. Recalling generally the above conclusion that the system of education through labour when applied to people who have engaged in trade union activities is a blatant violation of the principles of freedom of association, the Committee notes that the crimes mentioned by the Government are of a very vague and general nature and, as such, cannot but lead the Committee to conclude that these individuals were actually sentenced for their trade union activity. Furthermore, as concerns the Government's indication that Liu Nianchun was sentenced for accepting financing from a hostile organization outside China, the Committee would recall that it has always considered that all national organizations of workers and employers should have the right to receive financial assistance from international organizations of workers and employers respectively, whether or not they are affiliated to the latter (see 305th Report, para. 380). Therefore, the sanctioning of any such acceptance as a crime is considered to be an infringement of the principles of freedom of association.
21. 361. The Committee further notes with great concern the allegations concerning the state of Liu Nianchun's health, the refusal of medical treatment, the arbitrary extension of his sentence and the very grave allegations of torture with electric shocks and water deprivation. The Committee must recall in this respect that, where allegations of torture and ill-treatment exist, governments should give precise instructions and apply effective sanctions where such cases are found, so as to ensure that no detainee is subjected to such treatment. It has also emphasized the importance that should be attached to the principle laid down in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights according to which all persons deprived of their liberty must be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. The Committee therefore insists that the Government take the necessary measures to ensure Liu's immediate release and to provide him with the necessary medical treatment. It further calls upon the Government to establish an independent investigation into these serious allegations in order to determine and punish those responsible. The Committee also insists upon the immediate release of Yuan Hongbin, Xiao Biguang and Gao Feng. The Government is requested to indicate the measures taken to ensure the release of these individuals and to keep the Committee informed on the outcome of the investigation into the serious allegations of torture and ill-treatment in detention of Liu Nianchun.
    • The "Workers' Forum" in Shenzhen
22. 362. The Committee notes the allegations and the confirmation by the Government in respect of the trial and sentencing to three-and-a-half years' imprisonment of Li Wenming and Guo Baosheng for subversion. According to the complainant, Li, Kuang Lezhuang and Liao Hetang and ten others were detained in May 1994 after having published and distributed a bulletin entitled "Workers' Forum" containing information relevant to workers' rights. Li was kept for 30 months in secret detention and sentenced, along with Guo, in May 1997. Li is reportedly suffering from acute kidney damage and denied the immediate specialized treatment necessary. The complainant further believes that Li's colleagues who were detained in 1994 have been sentenced to up to three years' re-education through labour.
23. 363. While the Government asserts generally that all those imprisoned were sentenced for having committed sanctionable crimes, such as, in this case conspiracy against the State, the Government does not provide any specific information as to the exact nature of the alleged activities nor in reply to the very detailed indications concerning the trade union nature of the publication "Workers' Forum" and of the activities carried out by the group. The Committee must, in this respect, recall that the International Labour Conference has pointed out that the right of assembly, freedom of opinion and expression and, in particular, freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media constitute civil liberties which are essential for the normal exercise of trade union rights (resolution concerning trade union rights and their relation to civil liberties, adopted at the 54th Session, 1970). (See Digest, op. cit., para. 39.) The Committee is, therefore, of the opinion that Li and Guo have been sentenced for exercising legitimate trade union activity and therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure their immediate release and, especially, the provision of the necessary medical treatment to Li. As concerns the other individuals linked to the Workers' Forum, the Committee notes that the Government has only indicated that Kuang Lezhuang was released after having served 18 months' re-education, but has not indicated the status of the others (see list in Appendix IV). The Government is therefore requested to take the necessary measures for their immediate release, if they are still being detained, and to provide the Committee with information on their status.
24. 364. Furthermore, noting the allegations that Li and his colleagues were dismissed following their attempts to register the Federation of Hired-Hand Workers and the Joint Association of Hired-Hand Workers, the Committee would recall that no person shall be prejudiced in his employment by reason of his trade union membership or legitimate trade union activities, whether past or present. (See Digest, op. cit., para. 690.) The Committee therefore requests the Government to investigate the dismissals of Li and his colleagues in 1993 and, if it appears that they were dismissed for their trade union activity, to take the necessary measures to ensure their reinstatement in their posts should they so desire.
25. 365. The Committee notes with regret that the Government has not replied to the allegations concerning the sentencing of two taxi drivers, Zheng Shaoqing and Chen Rongyan, to two years' re-education through labour for participation in a half-day strike in Zhuhai, a special economic zone. It requests the Government to provide information in response to these allegations.
26. 366. Finally, in light of the above, the Committee cannot but observe that efforts to establish an independent workers' organization, such as the FLUC, the LPRWP, the various WAFs, and the "Workers' Forum" group, results in extremely serious sanctions for the leaders of these groups. The Committee recalls that the right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing implies, in particular, the effective possibility of forming, in a climate of full security, organizations independent both of those which exist already and of any political party. (See 207th Report, para. 124.) The Committee strongly condemns the fact that, immediately following their attempts to formally establish workers' organizations, the leaders of these groups have been arrested and detained and it considers this to be a serious violation of the principles of freedom of association. The Committee must express its firm hope that the Government will immediately take all necessary measures to ensure the full application of these fundamental principles in practice.

Appendix I

1. Workers' Autonomous Federation (WAF) leaders and militants arrested and
2. subject of previous complaints
3. =================================================================
4. Name Complainant's Government's
5. latest allegation reply
6. =================================================================
7. Tang Yuanjuan 8 years' imprisonment
8. Leng Wanbao Released
9. Li Wei 8 years' imprisonment
10. Wang Miaogen Forcibly committed to
11. a psychiatric institution
12. Hu Nianyou Life imprisonment Released
13. Yao Guisheng 15 years' imprisonment 15 years'
14. imprisonment
15. for pillage
16. Zhang Jingsheng 13 years' imprisonment
17. Wang Changhuai 13 years' imprisonment
18. Li Wangyang 13 years' imprisonment
19. =================================================================
20. Appendix II
21. Additional list of 1989 detainees
22. =================================================================
23. Name Complainant's Government's
24. latest allegation reply
25. =================================================================
26. Chen Gang Life imprisonment Death sentence
27. reduced to 11
28. years'imprisonment
29. Peng Shi Life imprisonment Life sentence
30. reduced to 10
31. years'imprisonment
32. Liu Zhihua Life imprisonment Life sentence
33. reduced to 11
34. years'imprisonment
35. Guo Yunqiao Death sentence
36. Mao Yuejin 15 years' imprisonment
37. Hu Min 15 years' imprisonment
38. Wang Zhaobo 7-15 years' imprisonment
39. Hunag Lixin 7-15 years' imprisonment
40. Huang Fan 7-15 years' imprisonment
41. Wan Yuewang 7-15 years' imprisonment
42. Pan Quibao 7-15 years' imprisonment
43. Yuan Shuzhu 7-15 years' imprisonment
44. =================================================================
45. Appendix III
46. Free Labour Union of China detainees
47. =================================================================
48. Name Complainant's Government's
49. allegation reply
50. =================================================================
51. Liu Jingsheng 15 years' imprisonment Imprisonment
52. for endangering
53. state security
54. Hu Shigen 20 years' imprisonment Imprisonment
55. for endangering
56. state security
57. Kang Yuchun 17 years' imprisonment Imprisonment
58. for endangering
59. state security
60. Wang Guoqi 2-20 years' imprisonment Imprisonment
61. for endangering
62. state security
63. Lu Zhigang 2-20 years' imprisonment Imprisonment
64. for endangering
65. state security
66. Wang Tiancheng 2-20 years' imprisonment Imprisonment
67. for endangering
68. state security
69. Chen Wei 2-20 years' imprisonment Imprisonment
70. for endangering
71. state security
72. Zhang Chunzhu 2-20 years' imprisonment Imprisonment
73. for endangering
74. state security
75. Rui Chaohuai 2-20 years' imprisonment Does not exist
76. Li Quanli 2-20 years' imprisonment Imprisonment
77. for endangering
78. state security
79. =================================================================
80. Appendix IV
81. The "Workers' Forum" in Shenzhen detainees
82. =================================================================
83. Name Complainant's Government's
84. allegation reply
85. =================================================================
86. Li Wenming 3.5 years' imprisonment 3.5 years'
87. imprisonment
88. Guo Baosheng 3.5 years' imprisonment 3.5 years'
89. imprisonment
90. Kuang Lezhuang Up to 3 years' re-education 18 months'
91. through labour re-education
92. -- released
93. Liao Hetang Up to 3 years' re-education
94. through labour
95. Fang Yiping Up to 3 years' re-education
96. through labour
97. He Fei Up to 3 years' re-education
98. through labour
99. Zeng Jiecheng Up to 3 years' re-education
100. through labour
101. Lan Chunquan Up to 3 years' re-education
102. through labour
103. Wu Chun Up to 3 years' re-education
104. through labour
105. Liu Hutang Up to 3 years' re-education
106. through labour
107. Zheng Wuyan Up to 3 years' re-education
108. through labour
109. Wan Xiaoying Up to 3 years' re-education
110. through labour
111. Song Xianke Up to 3 years' re-education
112. through labour
113. Huang Zhong Up to 3 years' re-education
114. through labour
115. =================================================================
116. Appendix V
117. Other labour activists figuring in the complaint
118. =================================================================
119. Name Complainant's Government's
120. allegation reply
121. =================================================================
122. Gao Feng Re-education through labour
123. Zhou Guoqiang 3 years' re-education
124. through labour and 1 year
125. for "attempt to escape"
126. Liu Nianchun 3 years' re-education 3 years'
127. through labour re-education
128. through labour
129. Yuan Hongbin Confined to a library
130. in Guiyang
131. Zhang Lin 3 years' re-education 3 years'
132. through labour re-education
133. through labour;
134. released May 1997
135. Xiao Biguang 3 years' re-education
136. through labour
137. Zheng Shaoqing 2 years' re-education
138. through labour
139. Chen Rongyan 2 years' re-education
140. through labour
141. Li Zhongmin Detained for 2 years without
142. trial, then formally declared
143. innocent
144. =================================================================