http://www.chrlcg-hk.org/?p=442
By Albert Ho and Patrick Poon
Translated from the original Chinese article published in the “Forum” section of Mingpao on 25 June 2009
At the 20th anniversary of the 4 June Massacre, at least about 20 mainland human rights lawyers could not pass the annual “assessment and registration”. Some lawyers even revealed that about 90 law firms and a thousand lawyers in Beijing had not yet passed the “assessment and registration”, which meant that they could not get their practising license renewed. They believed that their failure to pass the “assessment” was due to their representation in human rights cases. Meanwhile, several Beijing human rights lawyers who did not pass the “assessment”, including Tang Jitian (唐吉田), Li Xiongbing (黎雄兵) and Jiang Tianyong (江天勇), were unreasonably detained or under surveillance in a few days. These lawyers were seemingly regarded as “undesirable elements” against the government.
Lawyers play an important role in advancing the rule of law; this is particularly true for lawyers who are concerned about human rights cases and public interests. They often represent peasants who lose their lands without reasonable compensation, petitioners, workers, dissident writers, Falun Gong members, Tibetans and other human rights defenders who are involved in “politically sensitive” cases. They also provide legal support to parents of victims in the tainted milk powder scandals, and to families of victims in Sichuan Earthquake. Furthermore, they requested a direct election in the Beijing Lawyers Association, as they felt that the association has not fulfilled its duty in protecting its members’ rights. In April this year, Beijing lawyers Cheng Hai (程海), Li Chunfu (李春富) and Zhang Kai (张凯) were beaten up by local public security officers when they were working on their cases. These lawyers were deprived of their right to practice because they were involved in right defense activities. They were currently in very dangerous situations. Yet, the Chinese government turned a blind eye to the situation, and let local officials suppress these lawyers. The authorities even marginalized them by consolidating other lawyers who had closer relationships with the government.
According to Beijing lawyer Jiang Tianyong, there were more than 20 lawyers who were affected by the “annual assessment”, and a few Beijing law firms were also under rectification. It was estimated that more than a hundred lawyers were affected, although the deadline of passing the “annual assessment”, 31 May, had passed, they were still demanding the authority to renew their practicing licence. Facing such unreasonable suppression, lawyers showed great self-restraint, and had been taking lawful means to urge the authorities to respect their rights, and to support other lawyers who were affected. Although the executive committee of the Beijing Lawyers Association was not elected by the lawyers, the lawyers still tried to lobby the committee, hoping that the committee could persuade the judicial authorities to let them pass the “annual assessment”.
“Annual Assessment” Fails to Protect Lawyers’ Right to Practice
According to Section One of Article 46 of the Law on Lawyers of the People’s Republic of China and Article 1 of the Constitution of the All-China Lawyers Association, which were about the duties and responsibilities of the Lawyers Association, the Lawyers Association should protect the lawyers in performing their duties according to law, and protect lawyers’ lawful rights; but it seemed that the judicial authorities had never listened to the lawyers’ requests and totally ignored their lawful rights. This fully reflected that the so-called “annual assessment and registration” scheme only restrained lawyers, but completely failed to protect lawyers’ right to practice, and was wholly against the spirit of the rule of law.
The more worrying fact was that, according to an article entitled “Re-forging Millions of Chinese Officials, Training Crucial Positions in Beijing” (Zhongguo Baiwan Guanyuan “Zaiduanzao”, Yaohai Gangwei Kuaji Jiniing Shouxun) published in the Southern Weekend in Guangzhou on 4 June, only about half of mainland law firms had party branch secretaries last year, but the figure suddenly increased to over ninety per cent this year. The party cadres received a so-called “training” from 12 to 26 May in the Central Institute for Judicial Police in Baoding, Hebei Province. The report said that this was the first time that the Ministry of Justice trained the party branch secretaries in law firms. Most surprisingly, in a speech that he gave during the training sessions, Zhao Dacheng, the Vice-Minister of the Ministry of Justice, quoted from Mao Zedong’s speech which summarized the experience of the “Struggle in Jinggang Shan”. “Building party branches on the company level is an important reason for the Red Army to be able to defy hardship and danger instead of disperse in defeat,” he said. In the era that China stressed reform and opening-up, the Vice-Minister’s “Red Education” signified the authorities’ increasing control over lawyers, which was definitely a great regression of China’s rule of law development.
The constraint on lawyers’ practice reflected the threat to rule of law. China needs an independent legal profession to protect the integrity of the legal system, and to develop the rule of law. Since 2000, in each year there were thousands of collective actions like petitions, strikes, and protests against expropriation of land. Lawyers can actually play the role of helping citizens to solve such problems through lawsuits, and this will in turn help relieve the problem of social instability by preventing the explosion of civil discontents. But if lawyers are severely suppressed, social stability would be less guaranteed, let alone the advancement of rule of law and democracy.
Albert Ho is the Chairman of the China Human Rights Lawyers Concern Group; Patrick Poon is the Executive Secretary of the China Human Rights Lawyers Concern Group.