Free Tibet

Evidence Of Chinese Torture Presented To UN

by
Chinese Torture
Share this
Share

“They would pour boiling hot water on us” — Free Tibet submits torture evidence as China reviewed at UN Director meets Committee Against Torture

Campaign group Free Tibet and its research partner Tibet Watch provided oral evidence to the United Nations’ Committee Against Torture Monday, following up their written submission detailing the continued use of torture across Tibet. The groups’ report “Torture in Tibet” contains graphic testimonies from torture survivors, records deaths in custody as a result of torture and details how Tibetan prisoners continue to face degradation, abuse and mental and physical torture.

The submission and presentation form part of the Committee Against Torture’s (CAT) review of China’s compliance with the International Convention Against Torture which the PRC ratified in 1988. China was last reviewed by the committee in 2008, when it found torture across China and Tibet to be “widespread” and “routine” and expressed “great concern” about reported torture and state violence in Tibet.

“Torture in Tibet” (co-authored with Tibetan political prisoner association Gu Chu Sum) records the testimony of Gonpo Thinley, jailed following the 2008 Uprising in Tibet:

“They tortured us using electric batons, metallic water pipes and handcuffs. If our answers didn’t satisfy the interrogator, they would pour boiling hot water on us. They also tied both hands up on the ceiling and beat us on our feet with batons. We were hanging above the ground. Sometimes they also used electric batons in our mouth, which caused us to lose consciousness. During cold days or winter, we were put in cold water.”

A monk who wished to remain anonymous reported:

“They made us stand up in the sun for hours, even for the whole day following every interrogation, because we didn’t say anything. One of my friends was tied to the flagpole in the centre of the government campus for two days and two nights without food and water. They shoved me down over pieces of broken glass spread on the ground and beat me a lot with batons after I’d refused to confess. They said we were like animals because we said nothing in between beatings.”

In February, the three Tibet organisations submitted an initial joint report to CAT, providing case studies of tortured prisoners and those at risk of torture and detailing breaches of the Convention’s requirements. The committee subsequently raised these issues and cases with China as part of the preliminaries to the review. China’s delegation will be questioned by the committee on Tuesday and CAT’s final report will be issued early in 2016.

Free Tibet and Tibet Watch director Eleanor Byrne-Rosengren said:

“In their responses so far, China would have us believe that there is no torture in Tibet and our evidence is false. Today we will be urging the Committee Against Torture to press for answers on the questions China would rather avoid. If the Committee’s past performance is anything to go by then tomorrow we’ll see China squirm under international scrutiny and be asked to account for the Tibetans who have been convicted on the basis of confessions extracted by supposedly illegal torture and those who have left Chinese prisons either dead or permanently injured by years of torture and abuse.”

By Alistair Currie

With days to go, human rights groups question whether China should be awarded another Olympic Games

by
Olympic Games
Share this
Share

The International Olympic Committee will make its decision about which nation will host the 2022 Games July 31, and rights groups are questioning — and petitioning — the committee about China’s bid, referring to China’s ongoing human rights abuses and claims the committee made last time around that awarding China the Games would improve human rights in the Asian nation.

Awarding China again, rights groups like Free Tibet say, would in effect be supporting China’s human rights abuses.

“Giving the Games to Beijing again when we know it won’t alter their policies is sending the message to China that their human rights abuses are no obstacle to prestige on the world stage,” Alistair Currie, Campaigns and Media Manager at Free Tibet, told The Speaker.

Read more: Repression in China has increased – Freedom House Report

Alistair Currie
Alistair Currie

“The human rights situation in China and Tibet is getting worse not better — within the last week China has been jailing Chinese human rights lawyers in large numbers, for instance.

“Unlike in 2001, when China was an unknown quantity when it came to the Olympics, we now know how it responds to being awarded them. The IOC had hopes that the award may improve human rights in China. In reality, it did no such thing. Continued repression in China culminated in the brutal suppression of the March 2008 Uprising in Tibet, just a few months before the Games.

Read more: Sentencing of Christians in China increases 10,000% in less than a decade, rights group reports

“China is far more confident on the world stage than it was 14 years ago but is on a backwards path when it comes to respect for human and civil rights. Now couldn’t be a worse time for giving China a gift like the Olympics Games.”

“Unlike in 2001, when China was an unknown quantity when it came to the Olympics, we now know how it responds to being awarded them.”

Currie elaborated on a focal area of ongoing human rights abuses in China, Tibet:

“In Tibet now, Tibetans face more intensive surveillance than ever before and China will use any indication of Tibetan pride and resistance to Beijing’s policies as a pretext for repression — including arbitrary detention and punitive sentences. Tibetans can be imprisoned for simply singing a song or peacefully protesting to protect their environment. Entire communities can be punished for the acts of one person and China doesn’t hesitate to use force — just last week, they fired upon a demonstration, leading to 25 people being admitted to hospital. China’s grip on Tibet is tightening. What we know for sure is that Tibetans will continue to resist China’s rule — and that means things could be worse by 2022.”

In addition to an online petition that has reached almost 10,000 signatures, Free Tibet recently joined 174 other rights groups and communicated with the Olympic Committee to question the propriety of awarding China another Olympics. Currie referred to the return letter from the IOC, in which the Olympic board stated, “Choosing the host city of the Olympic Games does not mean that the IOC necessarily agrees with the political and/or the legal system in the host country.”

“We must acknowledge that we have neither the mandate nor the capability to change the laws or the political system of a sovereign country,” the letter continued. “The IOC is neither a world government, nor a superior world parliament.”

However, Currie noted recent changes in Olympic policy following the Sochi Games in Russia last year. He also commented on a distinction he saw between the two 2022 candidates — both of which raise questions about human rights abuses and Olympic hosting rights.

“Now couldn’t be a worse time for giving China a gift like the Olympics Games.”

“Interestingly, they do say they should be aware of the “political implications” of their choice but the remainder of the letter suggests that that level of “consideration” is very limited. After Sochi, the IOC introduced measures in the Host City contracts to ensure no discrimination or, for instance, environmental destruction accompanies the Games themselves. These requirements don’t apply to the political system overall, however.

“The IOC is trying to insulate itself from any criticism or fallout from giving the Games to countries with political and human rights problems and there’s no surprise in that when both candidates for 2022 – Beijing and Almaty – fall into that category. One distinction with Almaty, however, is that it’s a small country and it remains possible that the award of the Games may bring about some positive change. That may not be the case of course, but in Beijing’s case, we know it won’t bring about positive change.”