CitizenCN
Citizen Journalism

News About Uighur Scholar Ilham Tohti on the Third Anniversary of His Sentencing: No News

CitizenCN阅读(29)评论(0)

China Change, September 22, 2017

We believe that the combination of reduced visits, denial of communication, gag orders, and family reprisals, have been carefully engineered to punish the Uighur scholar with degrading treatment and psychological torture, while at the same time keeping the attention on his plight from the outside world to a minimum.
 

News About Uighur Scholar Ilham Tohti on the Third Anniversary of His Sentencing: No News

On October 10, 2016, Ilham Tohti’s daughter Jewher Ilham received Martin Ennals Human Rights Award from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein on behalf of her father. The HC was later harassed by China for attending the ceremony and presenting the award. Professor Elliot Sperling accompanied Jewher.  Photo: Martin Ennals Foundation.

 

September 23, 2017, marks the 3rd anniversary of the Uighur scholar Ilham Tohti’s sentencing to life in prison for peacefully speaking out for the economic, cultural, political and religious rights of the 10 million Uighur people inhabiting the northwestern region known as Xinjiang.

A Summary of the Case

Ilham Tohti is the most renowned Uighur intellectual in the People’s Republic of China. For over two decades he has worked tirelessly to foster dialogue and understanding between Uighurs and Chinese over the present-day repressive religious, cultural and political conditions exercised against the Uighurs, a Muslim, Turkic people living mostly in modern China’s northwestern Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. As a result of his efforts he was sentenced to life in prison in September 2014 following a two-day show trial. Despite political persecution in the years leading up to his trial, he remained a voice of moderation and reconciliation.

Ilham was born in 1969 in Atush, Xinjiang, and began his studies in 1985 at the institution that is today the Central Minzu University in Beijing, long known for studies of minorities. He eventually became a faculty member at the same university and a recognized expert on economic and social issues pertaining to Xinjiang and Central Asia. As a scholar, he has been forthright about problems and abuses in Xinjiang, and his work led to official surveillance and harassment that began as early as 1994. From time to time he was barred from teaching, and after 1999 he was unable to publish in mainstream venues in China.

In order to make the economic, social, and developmental issues confronting the Uighurs known to China’s wider population, Ilham established the Chinese-language website Uighurbiz.net in 2006 to foster dialogue and understanding between Uighurs and Chinese on the Uighur Issue. Over the course of its existence it was shut down periodically and people writing for it were harassed. Ilham Tohti has adamantly rejected separatism and sought reconciliation by bringing to light Uighur grievances, information the Chinese state has sought to keep behind a veil of enforced silence.

Following massive Chinese repression in Xinjiang in 2009, Professor Tohti was taken into custody for weeks for posting information on Uighurs who had been arrested, killed and “disappeared.” In subsequent years he was subjected to periodic house arrests and barred from leaving the country.

The show trial three years ago convicted Ilham Tohti of the crime of “separatism.” The court decision, which has never been made public in full, cited interviews with overseas Uighur, Chinese and English-language media outlets, his commentaries on events in, or concerning, the Uighurs and Xinjiang, his criticism of Chinese government’s ethnic policies, and his work with his students in founding and running the Chinese-language website Uighurbiz.net, which had been repeatedly suspended and, after its server was moved to overseas, endured denial of service attacks until its complete shutdown in early 2014.

In words and actions, Ilham Tohti has for years promoted peace and dialogue between the Han Chinese and Uighur communities. He opposed separatism, the use of terror to voice grievances, and any acts that fan ethnic animus, as well as government policies that undermine the Uighur language and economically marginalize the Uighur people. As a Uighur intellectual specializing in Xinjiang issues and Central Asian sociology, economics, and geopolitics, he took it upon himself to critique current affairs concerning Xinjiang and its people, faithfully fulfilling the duty of a public intellectual.

Ilham Tohti is the recipient of the Barbara Goldsmith “Freedom to Write” Award from the PEN America Center in 2014, and the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders in 2016. He was one of the four nominees for the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought in 2016. This summer Ilham Tohti received the 2017 Human Rights Award from the city of Weimar in Germany.

Conditions of Imprisonment

Ilham Tohti has been serving life in prison in the First Prison of Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Reginon in Urumqi since December 2014 after his appeal was dismissed and sentence upheld without a court hearing on November 21, 2014.

  • Visits: Since then, he has been allowed to receive only one family visit every three months, whereas Chinese law allows one visit per month. Each visit lasts less than one hour. In meetings, Ilham and relatives are not allowed to speak about anything except “family matters.” We estimate that, from the time he first received family visit in prison in June 2015 to the present, Ilham Tohti has received a total of less than 10 hours visitation over the span of more than two years. This is a calculated and cruel deprivation.
  • Solitary confinement: Until at least early 2016, Ilham Tohti’s wife said he had been held in solitary confinement. Since then there has been no update on whether this is still the case.
  • Right to communication: He has been deprived of the right to communicate with family and friends. Letters sent by his wife have not been received, nor has she ever received letters from him.
  • Gag order: From the first few visits in 2015 and early 2016, we were able to get brief updates on Ilham’s condition by the brothers and wife who visited him. But such updates have since dried up completely. It seems that relatives have received a gag order from the authorities, not even telling intermediaries who could then relay information to media outlets. His wife last spoke to Radio Free Asia in late summer of 2016 and was promptly visited by state agents afterwards. Ilham’s daughter, who currently studies at Indiana University, found herself cut off from family circles on Chinese social media and has been unable to gather information about her father’s condition.
  • Request for retrial (申诉, shen-su) suppressed: In late 2015 and early 2016, Ilham Tohti urged his relatives to apply for a retrial (shen-su). Under Chinese law, such an application can be filed at any stage of the jail term by any prisoner who believes he or she is wrongfully convicted and a victim of a miscarriage of justice. In the summer of 2016, friends learned privately that Ilham Tohti made another attempt to shen-su but was stopped by the authorities who threatened the family that their visitation rights would be revoked if they pressed the matter.
  • Health concerns: The prison provides little Muslim food. After visiting him in prison in July 2016, his wife reported that he had lost a lot of weight. Given the recent death of Liu Xiaobo in prison, the health issue of China’s political prisoners has become an issue of concern. We are deeply worried about the health of Ilham Tohti, both physical and mental.
  • Niece was given a 10-year sentence for possessing photos of Ilham Tohti on her cell phone: Ilham’s niece, a 25-year-old nurse in the city of Atush, was taken away by police in early 2016 for possessing on her cellphone photographs of Ilham Tohti and two articles about him by Radio Free Asia, as she was stopped by police on her way to a shopping mall. Sources told us that she was sentenced to 10 years in prison, and her grieved mother has fallen ill. A search of the website of the city’s court does not yield any information about her case. (In fact the website stopped posting any court decision since January 2015.) We demand to know everything about her case.
  • The seven students of Ilham Tohti: The student volunteers who worked with Ilham Tohti on net have been sentenced to up to eight years in prison, but information about where they are being held and their condition is unavailable despite continuous efforts by multiple parties to find out more about their cases.

We believe that the combination of reduced visits, denial of communication, gag orders, and family reprisals, have been carefully engineered to punish the Uighur scholar with degrading treatment and psychological torture, while at the same time keeping the attention on his plight from the outside world to a minimum.

We ask the UN human rights institutions and governments to:

  1. Make inquiries about the health of Ilham Tohti;
  2. Ensure that Ilham Tohti receives monthly family visit as Chinese law stipulates;
  3. Ensure his right to communication with friends and family is respected;
  4. Ensure that Ilham Tohti be allowed to file a shen-su according to Chinese law, without he or his relatives suffering retaliation;
  5. Make inquiries about Ilham Tohti’s 25-year-old niece in Atush, Xinjiang;
  6. Continue to press for the total freedom of the Uighur scholar and his students.

China must not be given a pass for its human rights atrocities. Not any more.

 

 


Essential Readings on Ilham Tohti:

Ilham Tohti, a 4-minute video http://bit.do/TohtiVideo

Statement to the Uyghur Service, Radio Free Asia before his arrest, July, 2013. http://bit.do/statement-uyghur

My Ideals and the Career Path I Have Chosen by Ilham Tohti. http://bit.do/ideals-career

Present-Day Ethnic Problems in Xinjiang by Ilham Tohti. http://bit.do/xinjiang-analysis

Voice of America Interview with Uyghur Professor Ilham Tohti in 2013 http://bit.do/voa-interview

 

 


Related:

As Liu Xiaobo Dies in Isolation, It’s Time to Abandon ‘Quiet Diplomacy’, Chang Ping, July 18, 2017.

Obama Goes to Hangzhou – The US Has No Human Rights Policy Toward China, China Change, September 1, 2016.

 

 

 

 

Taiwan Out of the UN: Unfair to Taiwan and Harmful to Global Interests

CitizenCN阅读(30)评论(0)

Yang Jianli, September 22, 2017

 

Taiwan Out of the UN: Unfair to Taiwan and Harmful to Global Interests

Taiwanese citizens are required to present ID documents issued by Beijing to enter UN buildings. Taiwanese passport is not recognized. 

 

Recently, the long detained Taiwanese citizen and human rights activist Lee Ming-che appeared in a bogus trial in Chinese courts and was forced to plead guilty to “subverting (Chinese) state power”. Outraged family members and Taiwanese supporters might want to come to the United Nations’ human rights mechanisms for help — but they can’t. This is because they, as citizens of Taiwan, are not represented at the world governing body. With pressure from China, even Taiwanese tourists are routinely excluded from visiting the UN Headquarters with Taiwanese passports. Egregious and ridiculous as such is the reality facing us today.

The only thing preventing Taiwan, a full democracy, from taking its rightful seat in the UN is China, and China’s aggressive posture on the international stage with respect to Taiwan. Allies of Taiwan such as the US and like-minded nations must stand up to China’s bullying and intimidation and advocate for Taiwan to rejoin the UN, or at a minimum as the first step, to ensure that Taiwan is able to participate in a meaningful way in UN-affiliated organizations and meetings. Succumbing to pressure from China to exclude Taiwan from UN-related organizations and activities is tantamount to abandoning the beacon of democracy, human rights, and rule of law in Asia, and to depriving the 23 million citizens of democratic Taiwan their fundamental rights to participate in, and receive protections from, the mechanisms of global governance.  This is as unfair to the people of Taiwan as it is harmful to the interests of the world.

Taiwan’s participation in UN mechanisms not only benefits Taiwan, but also the rest of the international community. Taiwan’s absence, from, for example, the World Health Organization, Interpol, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the International Civil Aviation Organization, creates critical gaps in addressing borderless issues, such as the spread of disease, cross-border crime, counterterrorism efforts and global security, climate change, and aviation safety.

  • For the first time since 2009, as a result of pressure from Beijing, Taiwan was not invited to attend the World Health Assembly, the decision making body of the WHO, which met in Geneva this past May. Beijing insisted that Taiwan publicly accept the “one China” principle as a condition for retaining its observer status.

The importance of Taiwan’s involvement in the WHO cannot be overstated. The SARS outbreak in 2003 is a clear example: WHO’s delays in getting Taiwan critical information and timely assistance (because it wasn’t a member of WHO and China said it would assist Taiwan, and didn’t) contributed to the deaths of over 30 Taiwanese citizens. As a leader in health care in Asia, and a global leader in several medical specialties, Taiwan also has much to contribute to the international community.

  • Also in May, the Chinese delegation to a UN-affiliated conference called the Kimberley Process, which seeks to control the trade in conflict or “blood” diamonds, caused such a raucous scene at the meeting in Australia protesting the presence of delegates from Taiwan that the Taiwanese delegation was eventually asked to leave, even though Taiwan had received a formal invitation.
  • Similarly, due to Chinese pressure, Taiwan continues to be excluded from Interpol, which hampers international efforts to fight cross-border crime and terrorism. In November 2016, Interpol rejected Taiwanese participation in its general assembly.
  • Taiwan unsuccessfully sought observer status with the International Civil Aviation Organization, a UN-affiliated organization. While the ICAO invited Taiwan to attend as an observer in 2013, an invitation from the organization to Taiwan was not forthcoming for its meeting in Montreal in September 2016.  Given Taiwan’s bustling airports, economy, and the growing number of tourists (many of whom are from China), the absence of Taiwan from a key air safety regulatory body poses serious concerns for aviation safety.

China’s relentless and increasingly aggressive tactics to exclude Taiwan from global regulatory bodies has only harmful consequences. Absolutely no benefit comes from Taiwan’s exclusion; China’s political machinations are cynical and detrimental to global interests.

And China’s conduct contravenes the spirit and purpose of the United Nations, which includes:  “to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples” and “to achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all….” UN Charter, Article 1

Taiwan has consistently acted as a responsible member of the international community. To name just a few examples: it was one of the few countries to voluntarily announce targets for reduction of carbon dioxide emissions, and Taiwan voluntarily adopted the two key UN human rights treaties (the ICCPR and ICESCR), incorporated their provisions into Taiwan’s domestic law, and devised its own innovative review process, since it cannot participate in the review process of the UN human rights treaty bodies.

Taiwan has much to contribute to world order, and the UN should open its doors to the vibrant democracy of 23 million people. The world needs Taiwan’s involvement and contributions, and Taiwan’s rights and interests must be protected.

 

 

Yang Jianli is the president of Initiatives for China. Follow him on Twitter @yangjianli001

 

 


Also by Yang Jianli:

Remembering Liu Xiaobo — And What the U. S. Can Do, Yang Jianli, July 22, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

In Search of Better Digital Protection for Human Rights Defenders In China

CitizenCN阅读(39)评论(0)

Safeguard defenders, September 19, 2017

 

 

Among the many revelations into the systematic repression of the human rights community to have come to light since the beginning of the 709 Crackdown have been accounts from those released about the access of police and state security to chat logs and emails, even communications and documents those people thought they had deleted.

This heightened awareness has certainly pushed the idea of taking digital security precautions in how to prevent sensitive information from falling into the hands of police in the event of detention. However, the focus of trainings and guidebooks is often directed in the wrong direction, namely on more advanced hacking and sophisticated intrusion. This continued focus on advanced threats actually has and will continue to harm human rights defenders’ safety. This is because it is not only nearly impossible to defend against such high level threats but that also in almost every case this is not the real threat. In the end, time is consumed trying to defend against a largely non-existent threat.

It is true that the capability of the Chinese Government concerning data forensics and hacking has developed like other aspects of the country, but those often limited resources are used against other bigger, and usually international, targets. On top of that, police and state security know well that the impunity with which they can act means that they have more direct, easier, access to whatever a human rights defenders’ computer or phone might hold; namely the use of direct threats, torture and intimidation against family, friends and loved ones. There are exceptions, but against these tools of repression, few people can stand up for long.

Real security must thus be based on the fact that a defenders’ computer and phone will be taken, and chances are that they will be forced to give up the information the police is after. The threat of torture or disappearance is sadly quite effective against even the best password or encrypted file. Any training and training material must be based on this reality. Digital security requires physical and behavioral changes in addition to passwords and applications.

The reality is also that digital security solutions that decrease the efficiency of our phones and computers are likely to be abandoned after time, regardless of the quality or number of trainings the rights defender or journalist has attended. Security solutions are only solutions if they are actually applied and maintained, something a lot of training material seems to gloss over when they offer solutions that are realistically not feasible for the majority of rights defenders.

Real security, that is sufficient and sustainable, can only come from finding the middle path, by focusing on real threats, while offering solutions that come from basic behavior rather than advanced technological solutions.

The newly released Practical Digital Protection self-study guide has been developed with these considerations in mind. It was developed over 12 months, together with journalists, lawyers, NGO workers and rights defenders across China, looking at their own experiences with security issues, detentions, interrogations and data forensic techniques applied by police and state security. The manual doesn’t only provide behavior-based solutions, but also real-life stories from defenders illustrating how their own best or worst case solutions have had a direct impact on how their technology has either been used against them, their partners, and coworkers, or prevented from being exploited by the State.

The following abridged story is one of several from the Practical Digital Protection manual.

A seasoned rights defense lawyer received a message on Telegram from a trusted colleague that the police had been asking questions about her and that she should expect to be detained or at least questioned. She had at this point already taken on many rights defense cases and worked with many other similar lawyers for several years. She was quite skilled in cybersecurity, having always been afraid police might detain her or take her computer and try to use her information against her. She rarely used WeChat, and never for work. She even knew how to use hidden encryption, not only to protect the data itself, but also to hide its very existence. Police can’t ask about what they don’t know exist she figured, correctly.

The information she had wasn’t just about her, but also about others. If this information fell into the wrong hands it didn’t just mean possible imprisonment for her, but for others. She had already been smart enough to realize that normal encryption would be of little help. If police knew what to ask for, she doubted that she would be able to resist for long, as she as a lawyer was well aware that the legal protections against torture and mistreatment in China are barely worth the paper they are written on.

When the police eventually detained her and placed her alone in a cell, to undergo more than a month of interrogations, they also seized her computer, several phones, and USBs.

After a few days in detention, she was very surprised when the police began to start each new day by showing her documents from her computer. She knew these documents had been stored in a hidden encrypted space that the police did not have access too, or even knew about. She was frantic each time the police produced one of these documents. These documents threatened to expose some of her sensitive rights defense work and provide evidence that would make it easy for the police to go after her clients or other lawyers she had worked with.

Before being detained she had agreed to a cover story with her colleagues who might also be detained. Some of the documents the police produced challenged their cover story, and severely increased hers and their risks.

The documents the police had were very random. Many of them were also just partial, a few pages of a larger document. How did they get these documents, she continued to wonder.

In the end, the police did not find the ‘smoking gun’ they were looking for, and even though she remains to this day under threat, having been released on ‘bail’, with police able to pick her up again any day they wish, the fact that most documents remained protected saved her.

Only after her release, with time and access to information online did she figure out what had gone wrong. File Recovery program it read. With this, she would learn of something that even many of those skilled in Cybersecurity fails to understand, or if they do understand it, fails to realize how big of a threat it is.

Data, she realized, are like memories. They linger for a long time, and even when they begin to fade, it happens slowly, and only parts of it disappear. Data, once ‘deleted,’ she realized, is not actually deleted, but continues to lie on the hard drive, only not visible to the normal user. It’s all still there, until the space holding the data is filled up with something new. The fact that most of data was in an encrypted space didn’t always matter, as many of the documents she had produced over the years had been created on the desktop (outside the encrypted area), before being moved to the encrypted space (which leaves traces of the original). An act of laziness. Many documents had also been deleted over time, she like most thus assumed they were safe. It had been deleted after all.

So what had happened? All those documents that had been on her normal hard drive, once moved to the encrypted storage, were readily available to the police using File Recovery, easy to use programs available for free online. All they had to do was scan her hard drive in detail, and step by step pieces of old data long ago deleted could be put together. This is because the documents weren’t properly erased from her computer. But there are solutions. Programs such as CCleaner for example, securely delete files to make sure nobody can ever recover them. Understanding how data deletion really works, and making secure deletion part of a normal routine will drastically increase security.

Safeguard Defenders new practical digital protection manual can be found at practicaldigitalprotection.com. In addition to the current Chinese- and English language editions, other editions are being produced in collaboration with Reporters Without Borders, with a Vietnamese and a Turkish edition coming this fall.

 

[email protected]

 

—————————————————

为中国的人权捍卫者寻找更有力的安全保障

 

随着709大抓捕的开始,中国政府对人权群体的系统性打压正式浮出水面,许多被释放的人权人士透露出警察和国安得以查看那些他们本来以为已经删除的聊天记录、邮件、和文件等。

此安全意识的提高必然衍生出当面临拘留时如何防止敏感的信息落入警方手中的数字安全预防措施。但是往往很多的培训和手册都将焦点放在错误的方向,换句话说就是更多的在介绍一些更高阶的破解或尖端的技术方案,这种持续将焦点放在高阶威胁的方式实际上对人权捍卫者的安全有害。不仅仅因为他们不太会面临到如此高级别的威胁,也在于大部分所列举的高阶威胁其实并不是真正的威胁。到最后,时间都耗在了和大量不存在的威胁上较劲。

确实,中国政府在数据取证和破解上就如这个国家其他方面的能力般得到了很大的进步,但是这些有限的资源通常都用在其他更大、更国际化的目标上。更重要的是,警察和国安有更好的办法对付,也就是更直接和容易的办法—-进入一个他们已经拿到手上的人权捍卫者的电脑或手机,用直接的威胁、酷刑或对朋友和爱人进行恐吓。有人能够撑住,但面临这些压迫的手段,很少人能够支撑很长时间。

真正的数字安全应该是基于人权捍卫者的电脑或手机被没收后,当面临被警察强迫交出密码或信息的情况。很不幸就算是设置了最强的密码并且加密了文件,用酷刑和强迫失踪的威胁手段通常都能轻易破解掉。任何培训或培训手册也必须基于这个现实。数字安全除了必要的强力密码和程序外,还要有操作习惯和行为的改变。

另一个现实是降低我们使用电脑和手机效率的数字安全解决方案往往可能随着时间的推移而被放弃,不管这些人权捍卫者或律师们参加过的培训次数和质量。安全解决方案只有在被真正用到和持续的情况下才能被叫做解决方案,但很多的解决方案对于多数的维权人士来说都并不实用也不具备可持续性。

内容充分且具有可持续性的真正的数字安全,只可能来自于找到中间点,通过将焦点放在真正的安全威胁上,然后基于基础的操作行为来提供解决方案,而不是高阶的技术性解决方案。

最新发布的数字安全自学式实用手册就是基于这些考量而制作的。这本手册的制作花费了12个月,结集了来自中国各地的记者、律师、NGO工作者和人权捍卫者,通过深入他们自身面临的安全问题、被拘留、审讯和被警察和国安用到数据取证的技术而来的经验。这本手册不仅仅提供基于操作行为的解决方案,同时也加入了来自捍卫者们的真实故事,描述他们在数字安全的技术操作中做出的最正确或糟糕的解决方案是如何对他们自己或同事造成直接的正面或负面影响的。

下面的节选故事就来自数字安全实用手册中的多个故事之一。

一位经验丰富的维权律师收到她信任的同事的Telegram消息,提到警方盘问了很多与她有关的问题,同时提醒她可能会被拘留或至少被讯问。她接手过许多维权案件,也和很多其他类似的律师合作过多年。她对于数字安全非常在行,因为总是在担心警方可能将她拘留,或是没收她的电脑而试图从中找到一些对她不利的信息,所以她几乎不用微信,至少是从不会在工作中用到。她还知道如何使用隐藏加密,不仅仅用来保护数据,更是隐藏这个加密盘本身的存在。她认为这样警察就无从问起他们根本都不知道是否存在的程序。

她所掌握的不仅仅只有她自己的信息,也有他人的。如果这些信息落入错误的人手里,就意味着不仅仅她自己可能入狱,也包括其他人。她非常清楚的知道普通的加密根本起不到多大作用,一旦警方找到讯问的入口,她无法确定自己能够坚持抵抗多长时间,她自己就是一名律师,太清楚在中国对禁止酷刑和虐待的法律保护远远不及条款上所写的那样有价值。

当这一天终于来了,警察来带走了她,将她单独关押在某个地方,进行长达一个多月的审讯,他们同时也没收了她的电脑、手机和USB。

在几天的关押后,她非常讶异于警察开始每天向她出示一点从她的电脑里面找到的文件,她记得这些文件都被存在硬盘的加密空间内,而且警方也完全没有进入硬盘的密码,每一次当警察拿出一份新的文件时她都感到焦虑,这些文件危及到她做过的一些敏感案件的曝光,也相当于给警方提供更便利的打击她的客户和其他一起工作的律师的证据。

在被带走之前,她已经和其他可能会被带走的同事协商了好了掩饰说辞,其中一些被警方找到的文件和她的说辞背道而驰,大大的增大了他们的风险。

警方找到的文件都很随机,多数的文件都只有一部分,比如来自大word文档中的几页,她始终想不通,他们到底是怎么得到这些文件的。

后来,因为警方并没有找到他们想要找到的“确凿证据”,尽管这样,她也没有获得真正的自由,她被取保候审,也就是警方可以在任何他们想要的时候再次带走她。不过总的来说还是因为大部分被保护的文件没被找到的情况救了她。

在她被释放之后的日子,通过在网上搜索信息,最后才终于弄清到底是哪里出了问题。是文件恢复程序让警方能够时不时的找到一些零碎的文件。因为自己的亲身经历,使得她又如狼似虎的去学习这个连很多在数字安全方面很厉害的人都不明白的东西,或者说就算他们明白,但也忽略了这能带来多大的威胁。

她后来了解到,数据就如记忆,它们停留的时间很长,甚至在它们开始消失时,也消失的很慢,只有其中的一部分消失掉。数据一旦被“删除”,并不意味着被真正的删除了,它会继续躺在硬盘里,只是不会出现在一般的用户眼前。但它一直都在那儿,一直到这个数据所在的位置被新的东西填满。事实上光是将大部分的数据都存在加密空间内其实还不够,因为过去的多年里她的很多文件都是先创建在了桌面(也就是在加密空间之外),后续才将它们转移到加密空间的(这样原来的文件则会留下痕迹)。这其实是一种偷懒行为,一直以来删除的很多文件,她如其他的很多人一样以为会安全,以为它们都已经被删掉了。

所以会怎么样呢?所有那些在普通硬盘内存在过的文档,一旦被转移到加密空间,就意味着准备好被警方用网上随便都能免费下载的文件恢复程序,他们只需要用程序仔细扫描硬盘,一步步的找出删除的旧数据,然后将他们拼凑起来。这是因为那些文件并没有完全的从她的电脑中被清除。不过对此是有解决方案的。如程序CCleaner,可以安全的删除文件,并确保他人无法恢复已删除的文件。了解数据删除的运行原理,确保删除成为工作的常规动作将大大的提升安全性。

Safeguard Defenders 的最新数字安全实用手册可以在网站practicaldigitalprotection.com 下载。除了目前的中文和英文版手册之外,其他的版本由无国界记者与Safeguard Defenders联合制作,越南版和土耳其版将在今年秋天面世。

 

[email protected]

 

 

———————————————–

Also from Safeguard Defenders:

What to Make of the Explosive New WeChat and QQ Spying Revelations? September 10, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

From Dr Wang Bingzhang, a Special Prayer on the 15th Anniversary of His Abduction by the Chinese Government

CitizenCN阅读(9)评论(0)

Yaxue Cao, September 18, 2017

 

Last Friday, Dr. Wang Bingzhang’s family – his wife, children and siblings in Canada and the U. S. – received a letter from him in Shaoguan Prison (韶关监狱), Guangdong. He shared “a special prayer” with them on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of his kidnapping:

From Dr Wang Bingzhang, a Special Prayer on the 15th Anniversary of His Abduction by the Chinese Government

My loved ones, June 27, 2017 is the 15th anniversary of when I was abducted and imprisoned. On this special day, I’ve made a special prayer that I’d like to share with all of you:

To my Holy Creator, my Lord in Heaven, God, Heavenly Father, Holy Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit:

Your servant Wang Bingzhang (王炳章) prays to you. On June 27, 2002, 15 years ago now, I was abducted and from that day on have been imprisoned in solitary confinement.

I thank you for staying by my side for these 15 years, offering me support and guidance. I thank you for making use of me, and for giving me a special mission: from the time you created humankind, setting out that it was my mission to help promulgate the natural laws, norms, standards, and truths you established for man to live by, as shown in ancient civilization, the classic texts of the world, and in the works of our ancestors. I have come to realize that you have a grand plan for the salvation of the world and humankind; to make this mad world return once more to norms you established, and to help the lost world of man return to your embrace. I feel greatly honored that I can make a small contribution to the grand plan you have laid out. I know that everything of mine was given by you, and that all glory belongs to you.

I will absolutely not fail in the mission you gave me. I’ll continue to cherish myself, I’ll keep my mind and body in good order, and live the years you allotted me. Under your teaching, inspiration, and guidance, I do your work every day. I guarantee that your selection of me, your deep love, your accompaniment, your divine inspiration, and your grace encourages me to be braver and work without fear, even if I have to spend another 15 years in jail. I will redouble my efforts and leave behind a record that renders glory to your sacred name.

Amen.

I love you all,

Wang Bingzhang
From solitary confinement in Shaoguan Prison
June 27, 2017

 

Dr. Wang Bingzhang was among the first Chinese students sent overseas to study science and technology by the Chinese government when Deng Xiaoping opened up the country in 1977. He studied medicine at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, from 1979 to 1982, and became the first Chinese from the mainland to receive an overseas Ph.D. after the Cultural Revolution. He was the pride of China and a source of inspiration; his success was reported in the Chinese-language newspapers, both inside and outside China. But no sooner had he completed his degree than he abandoned a medical career for something uncharted and illusive: starting a movement to transform China into a democracy.

In November, 1982, he founded the China Spring magazine and made an announcement in the World Journal (《世界日报》), the largest Chinese newspaper in America: “The new emerging democratic movement in contemporary China needs activists. From now on… I will lay down the cherished scalpels of a surgeon and pick up those of a social reformer to remove the ulcers and tumors of Chinese society. The road ahead will be thorny and arduous, but it will be the road to light and hope.”

The magazine laid out five goals for political reform in China at the time when Brezhnev was the head of the USSR and Taiwan would not be lifting its ban on a free press and other political parties for another five years:

  • Abolition of one-party rule;
  • Separation of party from the  government, military and judiciary;
  • Separation of the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary;
  • Direct election of national leaders; and
  • Federalism.

It also laid out five goals for economic reform:

  • Establishment of a market economy;
  • The co-existence of multiple economic systems;
  • Protection of private property;
  • Independent unions; and
  • Farmers’ land ownership and usage rights.

In the next two decades, Dr. Wang Bingzhang moved between United States, Canada, Hong Kong and Taiwan, and founded and led the Chinese Alliance for Democracy (中国民主团结联盟) in the 1980s. He also snuck back to China to form a clandestine opposition party – the Democracy Party of China. Their activities were little known to the English-speaking world. The New York Times only found out in May 1987, with its story “China Opposition Thrives in Queens,” after Beijing denounced the activities of Dr. Wang and colleagues.

Dr. Wang published a pamphlet titled The Path to China’s Democratic Revolution (《中国民主革命之路》), also known as the Handbook of the Democratic Movement (《民运手册──中国民主化运动百题问答》), answering 120 questions having to do with China’s democratic transformation. His essay Rebuilding the Republic of China (《重建中华民国》) advocated “uniting China with democracy” and restoring the Republic of China as a simple and convenient replacement for the CCP regime.

 

From Dr Wang Bingzhang, a Special Prayer on the 15th Anniversary of His Abduction by the Chinese Government

 

On June 27, 2002, while near China’s border with Vietnam with two others, Dr. Wang was kidnapped, according to accounts by his companions, and taken to China. On December 20 of that year, the official Xinhua News Agency announced his arrest, giving few details of Dr. Wang’s supposed crimes, “other than to say that he had passed state secrets to Taiwan and posted essays on the Internet related to terrorist acts, which threatened state security.”

On February 2003, Dr. Wang was given a one-day trial held behind closed doors, during which he was not allowed to speak, no evidence was presented, and no witnesses were called. He was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by the Shenzhen People’s Intermediate Court, the harshest sentence handed out to a political prisoner since 1978.

On February 28, 2003, Guangdong Supreme People’s Court maintained the sentence by the first trial court. When the verdict was read, Dr. Wang Bingzhang shouted, “I was kidnapped! I protest the illegal trial!” His youngest sister, allowed to attend the trial, met with him, and he asked for a copy of the Bible. Since then he has been imprisoned in Shaoguan, Guangdong province.

 

From Dr Wang Bingzhang, a Special Prayer on the 15th Anniversary of His Abduction by the Chinese Government

Shaoguan Prison, Guangdong. For more photos of Dr. Wang Bingzhang and his communications, visit: https://twitter.com/Free_WangBZ/media

 

Over the past 15 years, Dr. Wang’s siblings and grown children visited him a couple of times every year from North America for a 30-minutes meeting. The most outspoken among them have been denied visas over the years. He has been able to write letters home, and each one evinces a heart-wrenching longing for the day when he can walk out of China’s prison, alive and free.

The loved ones of Dr. Wang sometimes wonders if it’s all been worth it: 35 years after he and his colleagues laid out the goals for political and economic reform, none of them has been realized under communist rule. And now, those in power are richer than kings. Meanwhile, with money, the state-capitalist China has been exporting corruption, censorship, and political influence that undermines democracy.

Dr. Wang is 69 years old. He has been treated for cardiovascular and gastroenterological conditions while in custody. Relatives described symptoms of a mental condition, too. Years of campaigning and diplomatic efforts have not availed. It was an illegal act by a state actor to kidnap Dr. Wang in Vietnam, and the trial has no legitimacy by international standards, or even by China’s own procedural and criminal laws. Fifteen years of solitary confinement is beyond the pale by any humanitarian standard.

China must free Dr. Wang Bingzhang, and governments around the world, the Canadian government in particular, must renew their efforts to bring Dr. Wang out of jail and out of China.

 

 


Related:

In the Prison of China – The Journey of Dr. Wang Bingzhang (1)

In the Prison of China – The Journey of Dr. Wang Bingzhang (2)

In the Prison of China – The Journey of Dr. Wang Bingzhang (3)

 

Inside These Walls, a CBC documentary, August 6, 2017.

 

 

 

 

From Sea to a Sea of Words: Poet Ensnared as China Shuts Down Commemoration of Liu Xiaobo

CitizenCN阅读(10)评论(0)

Yaxue Cao, September 14, 2017

 

From Sea to a Sea of Words: Poet Ensnared as China Shuts Down Commemoration of Liu Xiaobo

 

It’s said that when Liu Xiaobo (刘晓波) won the Nobel Peace Prize in October 2010, one of his friends wept. But he wasn’t shedding tears of joy. “He will never get out alive,” the friend said. At the time, the 55-year-old Liu had just begun his 11-year sentence at the Jinzhou Prison in Liaoning Province. The prediction that he won’t make it out alive was a difficult one to credit even for the most pessimistic observers of China’s political system (of which, in China, there is no shortage). Anything can happen in 11 years. Many more people — in particular Liu’s large group of friends — were able to bite their tongues until the day Liu was to be released, and the day on which a page in Chinese politics might, just might, be turned.

On July 13, 2017, the omen became reality.

Chinese internet users have employed the term “crush the bones and toss the ashes” (挫骨扬灰) to describe what was done to the remains of Liu Xiaobo. This phrase both expresses the sequence of events, and also most imaginatively captures the hatred and belligerence the Chinese Communist Party has toward Liu Xiaobo the person and Liu Xiaobo the symbol. As far as the Party is concerned, not only must Liu die, but he must also not leave behind anything that people can gather around and commemorate.

The Chinese authorities perhaps thought that a sea burial would be the most thorough method of expunging all traces of Liu Xiaobo — but not so, as memories are more about hearts and minds than materiality. “Wherever the ocean is, there is Liu Xiaobo.” The ocean itself became Liu Xiaobo’s tomb. From Dalian to Guangdong, the Chinese government has spared no effort to detain supporters who went to the coast to hold memorials for Liu. The signalling by the authorities is clear: no commemoration of Liu Xiaobo is permitted.

From when Liu Xiaobo was suddenly admitted to hospital with liver cancer on June 26, to when he died three weeks later, numerous social media users composed poems to express their shock and grief. Poet Meng Lang (孟浪) said: “On July 13, the night of Xiaobo’s death, poems of memory and dirges flooded forth from the internet. WeChat groups and public accounts widely spread many moving poems.” The poems, of course, were pounced upon and deleted by China’s armies of censors working overtime.

“The authors that made up this literary whirlwind,” Meng Lang said, “knew that when they read the news they were reading history; they were reaching through to history as they touched the present.” Editors and publishers had the same idea and reached out to Meng Lang: they invited him to pull the poems together to form a compilation.

The 49-year-old Guangzhou poet Langzi (浪子, real name Wu Mingliang 吴明良) and Meng Lang in Taiwan got to work editing the anthology. Meng Lang told China Change that the selection and editing of about 200 poems is already done. Authors range from anonymous internet users to famous poets; from the youngest, at 20 years old, to the oldest, at over 80.

On August 18, the Guangzhou police came for Langzi with an arrest warrant.

The anthology was originally scheduled to be published in September, but Langzi’s detention has put those plans on hold.

The Chinese authorities seem determined to find a couple of “criminals” among all who have commemorated Liu Xiaobo, thus “killing a chicken to scare the monkeys.” On June 26, after the news emerged that Liu Xiaobo was in hospital, Langzi added his name to a declaration calling for Liu’s release, and gave an interview to Hong Kong’s TVB. Shortly afterwards, police set up a surveillance camera outside his apartment entrance, then on June 30 summoned him for an interrogation. On July 1, Guangzhou police detained him for 10 days on the charges of “damaging a police bicycle.” Langzi explained to his lawyer that all he did was shove away a bicycle the police left blocking his doorway.

The police also wanted to know whether the poet was behind a group called Freedom for Liu Xiaobo Action Group (自由劉曉波工作組) that emerged soon after the news of Liu Xiaobo’s terminal illness.

 

From Sea to a Sea of Words: Poet Ensnared as China Shuts Down Commemoration of Liu Xiaobo

The scene of the “illegal business operation” in September, 2017, in Guangzhou.  Photo: http://www.gznf.net/article-4117-1.html

 

If he wasn’t involved in editing the anthology of poetry, Langzi’s troubles might have ended there. But on August 8, personnel from the Administration of Press, Publication, Radio and Television of Guangzhou Municipality raided Langzi’s apartment. Last year the poet had published a personal collection titled “A Lost Map” (《走失的地图》), and going with it a collection of visual artwork from Chinese painters of various styles, “A Form of Beginning” (《一种开端》), and held a public exhibition locally. A year ago this wasn’t a problem, but all of a sudden it was an “illegal business operation” punishable by the law.

It merely illustrates, as countless cases do every day, how law can be gratuitously utilized for political persecution or personal vendettas in China.

From Sea to a Sea of Words: Poet Ensnared as China Shuts Down Commemoration of Liu Xiaobo

Langzi speaking at the exhibition.  Photo: http://www.gznf.net/article-4117-1.html

On August 29 Langzi’s friend Peng Heping (彭和平), who had helped him print the catalog for the 2016 exhibition, was also criminally detained. It appears as though the authorities are doing their utmost to find a crime for the poet they have determined to punish.

On September 17, Langzi will have been detained for 30 days. According to Chinese law, the authorities must decide whether they’re formally arresting him or releasing him.

Liu Xiaobo’s thoughts have their roots in his training in literature and poetry. While he was better known for his commentary and politics, he was also a poet. He published an anthology in Hong Kong together with Liu Xia in 2000. In the 1980s he was closely associated with the rebellious poetry experiments that began in his days as a literature student at Jilin University.

In 2010, in “I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement,” Liu Xiaobo wrote: “I hope that I will be the last victim of China’s endless literary inquisitions and that from now on no one will be incriminated because of speech.” It now appears that in China, the threshold for speech crimes is being constantly lowered, and the charges leveled in an increasingly arbitrary manner.

This much is for certain: in a calendar that is being filled with an ever growing list of “politically sensitive dates,” July 13 will be added, and in China’s practiced criminal code, there will be the “crime for commemorating Liu Xiaobo.”

A friend of Langzi’s worried on Twitter:  “If I don’t finish my tea in the morning, I don’t feel at ease the entire day; in the evening, if I don’t finish my wine, I feel that life is unbearable. Langzi has the same habits, and I can’t begin imagining how he will get by in a prison cell.”

 

 


我們從來不怕道路黑暗漫長

浪 子

我們從來不怕道路黑暗漫長
微笑著出發,哪怕兩手空空
一去不返。在未知的城市
我們像人群一樣孤立,散播
走失的消息,森林被砍伐
荒原被耕種,熾熱的心靈
一再被冰封。冒著無端的青春
或毀滅的危險,我們擁有
另外的一些,卻彷如負傷的大雁
從不知往何處飛翔
那些輪回所映照的,自由的歌聲
成為可能的歸途,在黑暗中升騰
徜徉,發出含糊的夢囈:我們
從來不怕道路黑暗漫長

 

We Are Never Afraid of the Road Being Dark and Endlessly Long

by Langzi

We are never afraid of the road being dark and endlessly long
To set off smiling, even if empty-handed
Once gone, never returns. In the unknown city
We are as alone as the crowds, spreading
The leaked information, forests are chopped down
Wasteland is cultivated, the fiery heart and soul
Is once again sealed in ice. Braving with the wild youth
Or against the risk of being ruined, we possess
Something otherwise, but like a wounded wild goose
Who never knows where to fly and soar
What those incarnations reflect is, the song of freedom
Turning into a possible homebound journey, which in the darkness rises
And roams, letting out obscure somniloquism: We
Are never afraid of the road being dark and endlessly long

 

Translated by Chris Z.

 

無 題

孟浪

直播一個民族的死亡
直播一個國家的死亡
哈利路亞,只有他一個人在復活中。

誰直接掐斷了他的復活
這個民族沒有凶手
這個國家沒有血跡。

現場是做了手腳的
那些醫生的手腳,充滿了仁慈
充滿了這個民族、這個國家。

能瘦一點嗎?能再瘦一點嗎?
就像他,一個人,他最後的消瘦
一副骨架也撐起整座人類博物館。

直播一個民族的死亡
直播一個國家的死亡
哈利路亞,只有他一個人在復活中。

2017年7月11日凌晨0時58分

 

Untitled

by Meng Lang

Broadcast the death of a nation
Broadcast the death of a country
Hallelujah, only he is coming back to life.

Who stopped his resurrection
This nation has no murderer
This country has no bloodstain.

They did a sleight of hand at the scene,
Those doctors, a sleight of hand, benevolent
and full of this nation, this country.

Can you lose some weight? A little more?
Like him, alone, thinned down to bones
still buttressing the museum of mankind.

Broadcast the death of a nation
Broadcast the death of a country
Hallelujah, only he is coming back to life.

 

Translated by Anne Henochowicz

 

 

 

 

‘Riding on a Dream, We Push Forward’: A Statement on the Fourth Anniversary of the China Human Rights Lawyers Group

CitizenCN阅读(13)评论(0)

The China Human Rights Lawyers Group, September 13, 2017

 

‘Riding on a Dream, We Push Forward’: A Statement on the Fourth Anniversary of the China Human Rights Lawyers Group

 

Today, September 13, 2017, marks the fourth anniversary of the founding of the China Human Rights Lawyers Group.

Even though it is the obligation of government to respect and safeguard human rights based on international treaties and the Constitution, it is also the natural and professional duty of lawyers. Four years ago today, the China Human Rights Lawyers Group was founded to provide an open platform for professional cooperation.

Over the past four years, we have set foot across the country and worked tirelessly against constant obstacles to protect freedom of expression, freedom of belief and other basic civil and political rights. Among us, some have lost their freedom and even their lives.

Since the 709 Crackdown on human rights lawyers in 2015, the authorities have among other things unscrupulously employed TV confessions and imposed officially-designated defense lawyers against the wishes of family members. We embraced those who had come back after unspeakable ordeals, and we remain deeply worried about lawyer Wang Quanzhang, Wu Gan, lawyer Jiang Tianyong, and Li Yanjun, who are still in custody.

We pay close attention to judicial reforms, but the gratuitous use of Residential Surveillance at a Designated Location has led to countless cases of arbitrary detention and enforced disappearances, during which horrific torture and other forms of inhumane treatment have occurred. The reality is that Chinese law does not apply to certain enforcers, and the so-called judicial reforms are little more than a joke.

We are concerned with the promulgation of various laws. Over the past two years China has passed or amended the Cybersecurity Law, Anti-terrorism Law, National Security Law, National Intelligence Law, the Management of Foreign NGO Law, Charity Law, Regulations on Religious Affairs, and other laws and regulations. These laws are brutal and coarse in terms of their legislative purpose, procedure, and techniques; they do nothing more than provide legal cover for the ugly policies of the day. In implementing them, law enforcement authorities trample over human rights at will in the name of “anti-terrorism” and “public security,” and the tendency to do this is now spreading.

We are concerned that lawyers retain the right to do their jobs. This right is being undermined by government agencies in charge of the judiciary, who are manipulating lawyer associations — which by definition should be independent, professional organizations — to retaliate against and remove human rights lawyers at the forefront of defending human rights.

In today’s China, human rights lawyers are esteemed by many but also scrutinized by some, and it requires courage and a sense of responsibility for us to persevere. We might be limited in our strength, but we must do what we can to stop this long-suffering country from sliding ever deeper and further into a dictatorial and totalitarian quagmire.

The fall brings cold air and perilous waves. We hope that, as lawyers who take defending human rights as a personal duty, we have answered the call of our time; we hope that the country will prosper and the people will enjoy peace and happiness. Moreover, we hope that the flowers of human rights will flourish across China.

 

The China Human Rights Lawyers Group

September 13, 2017

 

 

The China Human Rights Lawyers Group was founded on September 13, 2013. It is an open platform for cooperation. Since its founding, members of the group have worked together to protect human rights and promote the rule of law in China through issuing joint statements and representing human rights cases. Any Chinese lawyer who shares our human rights principles and is willing to defend the basic rights of citizens is welcome to join. We look forward to working with you.

Chang Boyang (常伯阳) 18837183338
Liu Shihui (刘士辉) 18516638964
Lin Qilei (蔺其磊) 18639228639
Tang Jitian (唐吉田) 13161302848
Yu Wensheng (余文生) 13910033651

 

Translated from Chinese by China Change.

 

 

 

 

 

What to Make of the Explosive New WeChat and QQ Spying Revelations?

CitizenCN阅读(14)评论(0)

Safeguard Defenders, September 10, 2017

 

What to Make of the Explosive New WeChat and QQ Spying Revelations?

 

A new report by a Lookout, a Cybersecurity company, has generated renewed interest in the security, or lack thereof, of WeChat and QQ (https://blog.lookout.com/xrat-mobile-threat). Despite this, there has been limited attention paid to this explosive new revelation.

It has long been known that due to WeChat keeping its servers inside China, the lack of legal protection of privacy data, and the control over companies by police, that WeChat data is not safe, and can, without protection, be accessed by police or other state actors more or less at will. This has naturally made people shy away from using WeChat for any more serious or political discussions. More and more court cases of people being prosecuted simply based on private chat messages to friends have further illustration this. At the same time, at the time of the Occupy Central movement in Hong Kong, it was shown that a ‘Trojan’ virus was being employed to surveil users remotely.

xRAT. That’s the name of the new discovery. Like the earlier virus found, it’s a ‘Trojan’ virus, meaning it masks itself as something else, for example a PDF file, and you will be unaware of if you have it on your phone by now. It specifically targets you through your WeChat or QQ account.

So what’s the big deal?

The ‘Trojan’ operates with administrator privileges. It means it can access and control any and all aspects of your phone. It also means it can do so without you noticing. In fact, it can remotely get ‘full control’. If you want to understand what this means it is this: it has as much access to your phone as if you were to give it to someone, and then tell them your PIN code. Full control.

This means that not only your WeChat or QQ use is exposed. All of your phone is exposed. Photos stored, downloads, documents, any Apps to other services installed, chat logs, phone records, contact lists, and of course, your browser and its entire browsing history, which may include credit card and password and login information to other service, for example encrypted emailing you use.

In short, any phone that has WeChat on it, and is also used to access work emails, or secure chat programs like Telegram or Signal, can now be in the hands of Chinese police or state security. For the community of supporters of human rights in China it moves from bad to terrible. You can now, if you communicate with human rights defenders in China through secure Apps or emailing on a phone that has WeChat or QQ installed, inadvertently be giving the Chinese police material that will incriminate those human rights defenders and land them in prison.

To make matters worse, administrator privilege means you microphone can be turned on, and stream whatever is heard to the Chinese police. Same with video camera and camera. It is a most sophisticated spying tool with far-reaching consequences. It can, it goes without saying, read you location, as well as the specific meta-data of your phone.

If that wasn’t enough, there is one last thing, which makes it such a sophisticated virus. It can auto destruct itself. And when doing so, it can not only delete itself from your phone, but wipe much of your phone log data, making it hard even for technically skilled people to know that the virus was ever there. In short, you might never know if your phone, your use, is the reason someone has landed in prison.

A number of control centers in China has been identified to where such data and traffic goes. The code is such that there is little doubt that this ‘Trojan’ comes from the same people behind the earlier ‘Trojan’ targeting Hong Kong Occupy Central people, just much more sophisticated.

Should I worry? What to do?

First off, there is still some lack of understanding how the infection spreads to your phone. At the same time, there is little reason to think resources would be spent to develop such a tool, and then not try to use it. An earlier, much less sophisticated version, was used extensively during the Occupy Central movement. Why would the police and state security organs not use a tool if it’s already been developed, and if it’s this powerful? It should go without saying that you need to operate as if it’s being used widely, and as if you were a target.

Most people with risk awareness will already have made sure to not use WeChat or QQ, or if they felt a strong need to have it, have it installed on a second phone which is not used for anything else. If you need WeChat, like many unfortunately feel they do, at the very least, install it on a blank, factory-reset second phone, like a super cheap android phone. Due to microphone remote control, make sure to never have it in your office or at any discussions.

Secondly, your current phone, if infected, will not be secure just by uninstalling WeChat and QQ. You will have no choice but to do a factory reset. This may be an inconvenience, but it is the only way. It goes without saying that any existing PIN codes, passwords to work emails, etc., will need be changed after you have done this factory reset.

 

[email protected]

 

 


如何应对微信和QQ的爆炸性新型间谍软件?

 

网络安全公司Lookout在对微信和QQ的安全性(或者缺乏安全性)进行了研究后,最近发布了一份新的报告(https://blog.lookout.com/xrat-mobile-threat)。尽管研究结论十分惊人,但却没有能够引起足够的注意。

微信的服务器在中国大陆,那里缺少对私人数据的法律保障,公司处于公安的控制下,所以微信的数据没有安全保障,随时可以被警方或其他政府部门监控以及浏览。这是早已为人所知的事实。因此很多人在进行政治或比较严肃的讨论时都不再使用微信。在越来越多的法庭案件中,一个人被起诉仅仅是基于和朋友的私密聊天记录,这也证实了微信是不安全的。与此同时,在香港占中运动期间,一种 “特洛伊”木马病毒被用来远程监视用户。

这次研究发现的新病毒名叫xRAT。和早期发现的病毒一样,这也是一个特洛伊病毒,这意味着它会伪装成别的软件,比如一个PDF文档,就算你的手机内现在已经有了这个病毒,你也无从得知。这个病毒通过你的微信和QQ账户而将你作为目标。

它的威胁是什么?

特洛伊病毒具有管理员的运行权限,也就是说它可以进入和控制手机内的方方面面,而且能在你不知情的情况下操作。实际上它还可以远程对你的手机实行“完全监控”。简单来说,它所具有的权限就好比你直接将手机交给某人,然后告诉他你的手机密码。那人想干什么干什么。

也就是说不仅仅是你的微信和QQ的信息被曝光,手机所有的操作都会被曝光。存储的照片、下载的东西、文档、已安装的应用和服务、聊天记录、手机历史记录、通讯录,当然,还包括你的浏览器和整个浏览器历史记录,这可能包括你的信用卡号和密码以及任何其他服务的登录信息,比如你使用的加密邮箱。

换句话说就是任何手机只要是有安装了微信,同时也在用这个手机登录工作邮箱,或是安全的聊天软件比如Telegram或Signal,就很有可能已经被中国警方或国安掌控了。对于中国的人权支持者群体来说,这比糟糕还要糟糕。如果你用已安装了微信和QQ的手机与其他的中国维权人士用安全软件沟通或发邮件,相当于无意间给警方提供了将那些人权捍卫者送进监狱的支持材料。

更糟糕的是,病毒拥有管理员权限意味着你的麦克风可以被启用,你发出的任何声音都可能流向监视中的中国警方,被他们听到。这同样地适用于照相机和摄像机。这是一个能造成巨大后果的最先进间谍工具,它根本不需要读取你的地理位置,也不需要你手机的具体元数据就能照常工作。

如果这些还不够,再列出一件事,也是为什么它是如此先进的病毒的原因。那就是它可以自动销毁。当它自动销毁的时候,不仅仅是将自己从你的手机中删除,并且会尽可能的删除你手机内的脚本信息,这令很多的技术高超的人都无从得知这个病毒曾经在手机内存在过。也就是说,你也许永远不会知道你的手机和你操作手机的方式是将其他人权捍卫者送去监狱的原因。

在中国大陆,这些数据最终所流向的控制中心已经被识别出好几个,而且毫无疑问这个“特洛伊”与早前攻击香港占中人群的背后是同一批人,只不过这一次的要更先进得多。

我应该担心吗? 我该怎么做?

首先,我们还不太明白这种病毒是如何传染到你的手机的。同时,他们既然开发了这么高端的软件,就不可能不派上用场。早前,一个更简单的版本广泛地用到了占中运动的人群身上。警方和国安机关有什么理由不使用这个他们已经开发好的、如此强大的软件呢?所以几乎毫无疑问的是,你需要假设他们已经广泛的使用上了,并且你自己已经成为目标之一。

很多有风险意识的人都已经放弃了微信和QQ的使用,就算如果他们实在有使用的必要,也会用另一个什么都不用的手机专门安装微信使用,如果你很不幸的与其他很多人一样在使用微信,请至少安装到了一个有进行了出厂设置的备用手机,比如一个超级便宜的安卓手机。关于避免麦克风远程控制的问题,要确保不要将备用(安装了微信的手机)手机带到办公室或在进行任何谈话的时候。

其次,如果你目前的手机被感染了,仅仅卸载掉微信或QQ并不能解决问题,你别无选择,只能进行出厂设置。也许这样并不是很方便,但这是仅有的办法。另外,毫无疑问的是之前工作邮箱所用到的密码等等,在完成出厂设置后都需要被更换。

 

[email protected]

 

 

 

 

A Comprehensive Bibliography of Liu Xiaobo’s Writings

CitizenCN阅读(64)评论(0)

Hermann Aubié, September 5, 2017

 

A Comprehensive Bibliography of Liu Xiaobo’s Writings

 

 

During the eight and a half years that Liu Xiaobo spent in Jinzhou prison, only intermittent attention to both his fate and Liu Xia’s detention kept him from becoming gradually invisible, despite being the world’s only imprisoned Peace Nobel laureate. Now that Liu Xiaobo has passed away of liver cancer on July 13, 2017, there is an even greater danger that what he expressed and stood for will be either poorly remembered or completely forgotten.

In the absence of a comprehensive bibliography of his writings, I compiled this list of Liu Xiaobo’s texts that were found on various Chinese websites, magazines, journals and books that had mostly been published in Hong Kong and Taiwan, as part of my dissertation that provides the first comprehensive academic study in English of Liu Xiaobo’s human rights struggle from a socio-historical perspective. In addition to several interviews with foreign media, Liu published eleven books and about one thousand articles covering an impressive range of topics. After translating all the titles of his texts into English, I added brief annotations and footnotes about the general topic of each text when the titles did not provide any obvious indication on their own.

Because only a few translations of Liu Xiaobo’s writings are available in English (in total less than 1% of all his writings), the discussion of Liu Xiaobo’s struggle for human rights in Western media and academia has often been limited to a small set of quotes that are not representative of what he stood for as a whole. As a result, there is still a gap of understanding between Chinese and foreign writings on Liu Xiaobo. Hopefully, this bibliography will inspire future researchers to look deeper into his work to improve the public knowledge and understanding of what Liu Xiaobo gave his life for.

A note on the hyperlinks: All the text that is hyperlinked in blue was originally linking up to the text of his articles or translations, but many of them might have changed since then. If the URL is no longer functional, a simple Google search will turn up valid substitutes.

 

A Comprehensive Bibliography of Liu Xiaobo’s Writings (Chinese and English)

 

 

A Comprehensive Bibliography of Liu Xiaobo’s WritingsAbout the author:

Hermann Aubié is a lecturer in sociology and policy at Aston University in Birmingham, England; he completed his PhD at the Centre for East Asian Studies of the University of Turku (Finland) in 2016 with a dissertation titled “Liu Xiaobo’s Struggle for Human rights: A Contextual Analysis from a Historical Perspective” which is forthcoming as a book.

After doing his BA and MA at the University of Western Brittany in France and the University of Glasgow, he spent five years working in China as a teacher, researcher and consultant for the EU-China Civil Society Dialogue.

Hi research focus is on contemporary politics, human rights, and civil society transformations in China and East Asia, with particular attention on how citizens use the law and media to promote socio-political change, and to redress injustice for individuals/groups who are persecuted and discriminated against.

 


Related:

From Brittany, in Memory of Liu Xiaobo’s Spirit and Voice of Conscience, Hermann Aubié, August 9, 2017

Liu Xiaobo: The Founder of China’s Political Opposition Movements, Wu Qiang, June 30, 2017.

The Path Forward in the Wake of Liu Xiaobo’s Passing, Yaxue Cao, July 16, 2017.

As Liu Xiaobo Dies in Isolation, It’s Time to Abandon ‘Quiet Diplomacy’, Chang Ping, July 18, 2017.

 

 

 

 

 

Tulip for Wang Quanzhang

CitizenCN阅读(45)评论(0)

Safeguard Defenders, August 28, 2017

 

Tulip for Wang Quanzhang

Poster by @badiucao

 

The Human Rights Tulip is an award by the Dutch government for courageous human rights defenders.

Wang Quanzhang (CHINA) is a lawyer, father and husband whose work to defend and protect persecuted religious groups, especially Christians and Falun Gong practitioners, has made him a target himself. He is also a defender who understands that broader change in China must come from developing a wider movement of rights defenders.

Since 2008, Wang has worked to develop institutions and mechanisms to train, teach, and offer support to the greater rights defense community, from other rights defense lawyers, “barefoot” lawyers working locally, or victims themselves. Wang is the co-founder of an NGO that established training programs, training many hundreds of lawyers and rights defenders around China. Wang has likewise led the development of several innovative guides and training manuals to assist the rights defense movement to achieve greater success in their work.

By the time Wang was kidnapped by Chinese police on August 5, 2015, he was one of the few remaining lawyers in the whole of China who continued to provide legal aid to those most in need and has continued his work despite threats, beatings and attacks. No one has heard, seen or spoken with Wang for over 700 days. Reliable sources have claimed that he has been subjected to electro-shock torture, amongst other forms of torture. Wang has refused to admit guilt or incriminate others. Wang’s defiance and refusal to disavow his beliefs, friends and other lawyers, has made him a target in the eyes of the Chinese communist party and their “war on lawyers.”

Wang needs your support and your vote. Public voting is open between August 28 and September 6. Go to:

https://www.humanrightstulip.nl/candidates-and-voting/wang-quanzhang and follow the steps.

The winner will be selected from the top 3 candidates by the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Tulip for Wang QuanzhangTwitter hashtag #Tulip4Wang

 

 


投709律师王全璋一票

 

Tulip for Wang Quanzhang

 

人权捍卫者郁金香奖是荷兰政府为具有超人勇气的人权捍卫者设立的奖项。

王全璋(中国)是一位致力于为被迫害的信仰群体做辩护和维权的律师,同时也是一位父亲和丈夫。特别是为基督徒和法轮功练习者的代理,使他自身成为了被打击目标。同时他也是一位深知在中国要有广泛的改变必须要发展更广阔的维权运动的人权人士。

自2008年以来,王全璋就开始致力于发展为更大的维权社区提供培训、教学、支持的机构和机制,受益人的范围包括其他的人权律师、在本地工作的“赤脚”律师、以及那些受害者们。王全璋也是一位开展法律培训项目的NGO联合创始人,在中国各地培训了几百名律师和人权捍卫者。而且王还主导开创了多本创新性的指南和培训手册以帮助促使在维权活动中达到更大的成功率。

在2015年8月5日王全璋被带走之前的日子,随着越来越多的人权律师渐渐暂停代理敏感案件,王全璋是少数的虽然面临着威胁、殴打或打击,却仍然继续为有需要的群体提供法律援助的律师之一。自从被官方带走后,王全璋与外界失联已经超过700天,没有任何人得以与王通话或见面。据可靠的消息来源指称王在被关押期间遭受电击的酷刑,王坚持着拒绝认罪或归罪他人。王就否认自己的信念、归罪朋友和其他律师的抵抗和拒绝,让他成为了中国共产党眼中以及“对律师之战”的目标。

王全璋需要你的帮助和投票。公开投票会在8月28日至9月6日之间开放。请到下列网址,按照上图显示的中文指示投票:

https://www.humanrightstulip.nl/candidates-and-voting/wang-quanzhang 

获奖人会由外交部长从三位最高票候选人中选出。

Tulip for Wang Quanzhang推特标签 #Tulip4Wang

 

Tulip for Wang Quanzhang

[email protected]

 

 

 

 

 

Why Is Wu Gan ‘The Butcher’ So Important?

CitizenCN阅读(64)评论(0)

Mo Zhixu, August 16, 2017

The Chinese original was first published in December, 2015.

 

Why Is Wu Gan ‘The Butcher’ So Important?

 

 

The importance of Wu Gan “the Super Vulgar Butcher” has been widely recognized for some time, and the most direct testament to his importance comes from none other than the party-state itself.  

On May 18, 2015, Wu Gan left for Nanchang, the capital of Jiangxi, to support lawyers in the Leping wrongful conviction case.* That evening, he joined the lawyers’ sit-in at the gate to the Jiangxi High Court, demanding the lawyers’ right to access the case files. On May 19, in a performance typical of Wu Gan, he set two roll-up signs in front of the court calling out court president Zhang Zhonghou (张忠厚). Soon after, Nanchang police picked up Wu Gan, placing him under administrative detention for ten days.

On May 25, Xinhua published the story “Netizen ‘Super Vulgar Butcher’ Wu Gan Put Under Administrative Detention by Nanchang Police.” Official websites across the board republished the article soon after. The next day, CCTV’s “Live News” (新闻直播间) aired a five-and-a-half-minute segment on “The Truth Behind the Detention of Netizen ‘Super Vulgar Butcher’ Wu Gan.” This distorted report on the events at the Jiangxi High Court augured in the campaign to defame Wu Gan.

On May 27, Wu Gan was put under criminal detention and charged with slander and “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.” On May 28, Xinhua published “Uncovering the Real ‘Super Vulgar Butcher’—Wu Gan Criminally Detained on Suspicion of Picking Quarrels and Provoking Trouble, Slander.” This was printed on page 11 of the People’s Daily—in the politics section. The same day, CCTV’s “Morning News” (朝闻天) and “Live News” devoted over 5 minutes and 12 minutes respectively to the details of Wu Gan’s detention, while the China Police Daily led with Wu Gan’s story on page 1. These articles and videos were circulated all over the internet. For a time, Wu Gan the Butcher took over computer screens. Some people joked that only a few people had received this much attention since the Chinese Communist Party took power in 1949.

People can’t help but ask, what’s so important about Wu Gan the Butcher?

Wu Gan is from Fuqing, Fujian Province. He formerly served in the border security force at the Xiamen airport. For family reasons, he settled in Yangshuo, Guangxi Province. He’s an avid internet user, posting mainly on the KDnet forums. “Super Vulgar Butcher” is his KDnet screen name.

When the Deng Yujiao (邓玉娇) case shook the nation in May 2009, Wu Gan went on his own to the scene in Badong, Hubei Province. He managed to visit Deng in a mental institution where she was being held for stabbing to death an official who tried to sexually assault her at a public bath where she was a waitress. Working with lawyers, Wu Gan launched an online support campaign that was crucial to Deng’s release and the dropping of her murder charge.

At the same time, Wu Gan raised funds online for his trip to Badong. He was challenged on this, but also gained a great deal of support. As he rose to prominence in the rights defense community, fellow activists copied and improved upon his method of crowdfunding. It increasingly became common practice among human rights defenders and resisters in mainland China.

On March 19, 2010, as netizens around the country “surrounded and watched” (围观, a way of demonstration) the trial of the three netizens from Fujian, the authorities abruptly changed the date, followed by a few clashes near the court. The date of the trial was then officially set for April 16, 2010. About a week prior, Wu Gan set up a tent outside the gates of the Fuzhou No. 1 Detention Center and reported from the scene, stoking the fire of online excitement.

On April 16, more than 100 netizens from all over China managed to demonstrate at the Fuzhou Mawei Court. The success of the 416 demonstration in support of the three netizens tried for internet expressions marked a new high point for crowdfunding, online-offline activism, cross-regional networking, and frontal resistance. It was a breakthrough in both the scale and substance of resistance in mainland China, reaching a level that has not yet been surpassed.

The inspiration for and implementation of crowdfunding for the 416 demonstration came directly from Wu Gan. He also played a key role in the campaign from beginning to end.

On October 8, 2010, Wu Gan, Xu Zhiyong (许志永), Wang Lihong (王荔蕻), and Zhao Changqing (赵常青) held up signs at the east gate of the Temple of Earth in Beijing to congratulate Liu Xiaobo on winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Soon after, everyone except for Xu Zhiyong were punished with eight days of administrative detention. Before the Nobel award ceremony, the Fujian police took Wu Gan back. His phone was cut off, and he went missing for over a month.

In October 2011, 30 citizens including Liu Ping (刘萍, a female activist in Jiangxi, now serving a 6 year sentence) decided to stay outside Dongshigu to support Chen Guangcheng. Wu Gan launched a crowdfunding campaign to support their effort, and by then this model of crowdfunding — online-offline, cross-province, frontal resistance — had matured, and it has been imitated by more and more human rights defenders.

Rights defense actions during the past few years — such as the observation of the unusual death of Xue Mingkai’s (薛明凯) father in Qufu, Shandong; of the black jail in Jiansanjiang; and of the congregation outside the Zhengzhou No. 3 Detention Center — all follow the pattern cut by the April 16 demonstration. Even those actions in which Wu Gan had no direct involvement show his influence.

When Yueqing village chief Qian Yunhui (钱云会) was crushed to death under a truck on December 25, 2011, outrage exploded online. Once again, Wu Gan went to the scene, where he managed to obtain relevant video footage. Soon after, Wu Gan experimented to transform himself from the role of the first responder to that of behind-the-scenes operator focusing on gathering resources for the frontline and coordinating public opinion. At the same time, supervision of the crowdfunding account was transferred to Guo Yushan’s (郭玉闪) Transition Institute.

From 2011, Wu Gan introduced his rights defense experiences in a batch of Weibo posts he called “Guide to Butchering Pigs” (《杀猪宝典》). According to the Guide,  the rights defense movement cannot count on an enlightened ruler for its success, nor on positive forces inside the system. Instead, the movement must creatively deploy any and all means by which to plant psychological deterrents against the relevant officials, thereby achieving resolution to the issue at hand. Intrinsic to this view is the pursuit of a beneficial outcome for the party concerned. It was met with praise as the activists took things into their own hands, not waiting for a just official to arrive on the scene to solve their problems.

After 2012, Wu Gan devoted his energy more to the role of a fundraiser and public opinion coordinator.  He raised money for certain rights defenders, victims of rights violations, and political prisoners, including Xiao Yong (肖勇) and Zhao Fengsheng (赵枫生) from Hunan, Fan Mugen (范木根) of Jiangsu, Liu Jiacai (刘家财) of Hubei, and Ren Ziyuan (任自元) of Shandong. Wu Gan kept a low profile, doing good without seeking recognition. A great deal of similar work of his remains unknown.

Starting in 2012, a band of lawyers known as “diehard lawyers” (死磕派) emerged, fighting the judicial system over procedural violations to advance the rule of law. This method resonates with the direct resistance in the Fujian Three Netizen case. Wu Gan started to interact, even cooperate, with the human rights lawyers. He became involved in cases such as the forced demolition in Huaihua, Hunan Province, and the case of wrongful conviction in Leping, Jiangxi. In November 2014, Wu Gan was hired as staff at the Beijing Fengrui Law Firm.

Diehard lawyering emerged from the Weibo era as a form of rights defense. Wu Gan’s transformation signified the infusion of his model of resistance into legal rights defense and diehard lawyering, strengthening the movement’s ability to mobilize, propagate, and sustain itself.

In May 2015, the Qing’an case erupted. At noon on May 2, a peasant named Xu Chunhe (徐纯合) was shot dead by a police officer in the waiting room of a Qing’an County train station in Heilongjiang Province. The incident drew the attention and anger of netizens all over China. Wu Gan immediately started to investigate the truth of the case. On May 7, Wu Gan posted a 10,000 yuan (about $1,500) reward for citizens to collect videos of Xu Chunhe at the train station from eyewitnesses. When the videos were made public, they circulated widely on WeChat, Weibo, online forums, and in overseas media. One after another, rights defense lawyers and citizens from all over the country arrived in Qing’an to offer legal services and take action. Wu Gan’s actions made it harder for the government to manipulate the truth, giving reasons to the authorities to settle accounts with him later.

As you can see, Wu Gan was no superhuman with unusual abilities. His importance, first of all, lay in his place at the convergence of three burgeoning models of resistance: diehard lawyering, citizen and petitioners “surround-and-watch” strategies, online mobilization of public opinion, and online crowdfunding.

Secondly, Wu Gan’s years of activism and exposure turned him into a symbol of popular resistance. This is why, as soon as Wu Gan was detained and the propaganda machine’s smear campaign against him ran in full gear, insightful observers believed that the detention of Wu Gan and the ensuing top-level smear campaign by the state’s propaganda machine was a prelude to a larger attack on the diehard lawyers, human rights activists, and citizen activists. The strike against Wu Gan, they believed, was quite likely just the beginning of something big.

When Wu Gan was criminally detained, I wrote that “The all-out treatment of The Butcher (Wu Gan) by the People’s Daily, Xinhua, and CCTV, a rare occurrence since 1949, is not targeted at Wu Gan himself, but rather is the start of an all-encompassing suppression of the entire model of dieharders (lawyers) + activists (citizens, petitioners) + public opinion mobilizers (online). Their next targets are human rights lawyers and the community of activists. With such a forceful start, the attack to follow could be worse than anyone can imagine.”

And so it went. One and a half months after The Butcher was formally arrested, on July 9, 2015, the all-out attack on human rights lawyers and their activist associates began. Twelve lawyers and similar number of activists were criminally detained and then placed under residential surveillance at a designated place — China’s term for secret detention. Over 250 lawyers were detained, summoned, and subpoenaed. This attack was not just sudden, but irrational and arbitrary. Five months on [this article was written in December 2015 — Editors], no 709 detainees have been allowed to access their defense lawyers. Even more fascinating, the authorities portrayed the Fengrui Law Firm as a criminal gang in order to hide the political objective behind the attack. But in reality, practically everyone can see what this attack is all about!

Nearly every lawyer and activist caught in the 709 crackdown had either worked closely with Wu Gan or was a good friend of his. Seven of the detained lawyers and legal staff worked at Fengrui: Zhou Shifeng (周世锋), Wang Yu (王宇), Bao Longjun (包龙军), Wang Quanzhang (王全璋), Liu Sixin (刘四新), Xie Yuandong (谢远东), and Huang Liqun (黄立群). Others had worked with Wu Gan on the Huaihua forced demolition case: Li Heping (李和平), Xie Yang (谢阳), and Sui Muqing (隋牧青). The citizen activists Monk Wang Yun (Lin Bin 望云和尚,or 林斌), Hu Shigen (胡石根), and Zhao Wei (赵威) all had strong personal relationships with Wu Gan. For this reason, according to his lawyer, Yan Wenxin (燕文薪), Wu Gan’s case has since been merged with the 709 cases, he could no longer visit Wu Gan, and it’s possible that Wu Gan has been moved from Fujian to Tianjin [this turned out to be the case — Editors].

In the few years since May 2009, Wu Gan has transformed from an ordinary netizen to a legal worker and human rights activist. It is no exaggeration to call Wu Gan China’s most prominent activist, and his model of crowdfunding, online-offline activity, cross-regional networking, and direct resistance, combined with new elements like the diehard lawyers, has already reached a new height, and has become the standard for political activism. His “Guide to Slaughtered Pigs” publicized the concept of improving one’s well-being through opposition and resistance. It has spread widely and continued to gain recognition.

It is precisely for these reasons that Wu Gan was targeted by the authorities. To thwart the further influence of his methodology, they did not stint in using their propaganda to defame him. Months have passed without any news from Wu Gan and the many lawyers and activists detained on July 9 and the following days. Their misfortune confirms the righteousness of their cause, and the system’s increasingly arbitrary strategy against them puts into relief the value and importance of people like Wu Gan.

Looking to the future, China is entering an ice age for political activism under a form of money-infused totalitarianism. The government may ruthlessly stifle the resistance model of diehard lawyering + cross-regional networking + online mobilization. Still, the spirit of resistance Wu Gan and others have shown is destined to be passed down, and to become the fundamental strength in China’s transition to a democracy.

 

* The Leping case took place in Leping of Jiangxi Province (江西乐平) in 2000, with an incident of kidnapping, rape, and a dismembered body. Two years later police arrested four men in Zhongdian village of Leping county: Huang Zhiqiang (黄志强), Fang Chunping (方春平), Cheng Fagen (程发根), and Cheng Li (程立). Under torture, the four of them “confessed” to the crime; by 2015 they had been in prison for over 13 years and had been given death sentences twice. In 2011 local public security officers arrested a man who confessed to murdering and dismembering the victim in 2000. Lawyers representing the four victims then demanded that the authorities re-investigate the case, but the Jiangxi High people’s Court refused the lawyers’ access to the case files. In response, the lawyers protested outside the court for days. Eventually the Jiangxi High Court did retry the Leping case and on December 22, 2016, issued new verdicts: the four defendants were found not guilty and immediately released.

 

Mo Zhixu (莫之许), pen name of Zhao Hui (赵晖), is a Chinese dissident intellectual and a frequent contributor of Chinese-language publications known for his incisive views of Chinese politics and opposition. He is the co-author of “China at the Tipping Point? Authoritarianism and Contestation” in the January, 2013, issue of Journal of Democracy. He currently lives in Guangzhou.

 

 


Related:

The Twelve ‘Crimes’ of Wu Gan the Butcher, China Change, August 13, 2017.

My Pretrial Statement, Wu Gan, August 9, 2017.

Wu Gan the Butcher, a profile by Yaqiu Wang, July, 2015.

Bill of Indictment Against Rights Activist Wu Gan, January 12, 2017.

Activist Who Rejected TV Confession Invites CCTV Interviewer to Be Witness at His Trial, Wu Gan, March 24, 2017.

To All Friends Concerned With the Imprisoned Human Rights Activist Wu Gan and the 709 Case, Xu Xiaoshun, father of Wu Gan, May 22, 2017.

Paying Homage to Liu Xiaobo from Behind Bars, Wu Gan, July 31, 2017.

 

 

Translated from Chinese by China Change 《莫之许:屠夫为什么如此重要?》