cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/58092995

Archived

Held in a Hong Kong prison without trial for the past five years, Chow Hang-tung has had few ways to communicate with the outside world. So when her partner, the Chinese dissident Ye Du, proposed to her by writing a letter, she was forced to respond in kind. “We really need to speed up the process of ending this dictatorship, otherwise when will we ever see each other again?” she wrote.

In 2021, Chow was charged with “inciting subversion” under a Beijing-imposed national security law, which also makes the promotion of Hong Kong’s secession from China a crime. On 21st August this year, she was convicted. She now faces up to ten years in prison.

[...]

Chow’s verdict comes amid an accelerating crackdown in Hong Kong, as authorities recently expanded the reach of the national security law, giving the region’s chief executive expanded powers to reclassify any criminal case as a matter of national security. While most of the democracy movement within Hong Kong has been dismantled or driven underground, Chow has remained a rare voice of open defiance.

When she was a child, her mother would take her to vigils in Hong Kong’s Victoria Park marking the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. Later in life, organising this annual vigil would land her and two fellow activists in detention.

[...]

In 2007, Chow received a postgraduate scholarship to study geophysics at Cambridge university, specialising in seismology. When an earthquake hit the Chinese region of Sichuan in 2008, she was frustrated by what she saw as the government’s role in worsening the impact of the natural disaster. It was then that Chow turned her attention to human rights, retraining and qualifying as a barrister in the mid-2010s.

Back in Hong Kong, she advocated for labourers in mainland China and built connections with Chinese dissidents.

[...]

She was sometimes criticised by fellow activists in the Hong Kong democracy movement for focusing on the rights of mainland dissidents over issues closer to home. But according to her friend, the activist Patrick Poon, Chow was “prophetic” in seeing how the experience of dissidents in China foreshadowed what was to happen in Hong Kong. While many of the movement’s leaders had fled abroad, he says Chow was determined to remain inside the region.

“What she saw and heard in mainland China made her realise more deeply that whether a society has freedom, rule of law and civil rights is not an abstract political concept, but directly affects the lives of every ordinary person,” her fiancé Ye Du tells me. He is barred from leaving China and has been placed under strict surveillance. The couple have not been able to communicate with each other since February last year.

One early morning in June 2021, police smashed down the door to her barrister’s chambers and arrested Chow. Despite the significant constraints of her detention, including limited access to legal resources, she chose to represent herself in court, sometimes using court submissions to turn the table on the legal system itself.

[...]

Chow, 41, sees few reasons to feel optimistic about the future of Hong Kong right now, she refuses to give up hope.

“No one can predict the future, but we should not lose our confidence in the people, who are where hope lies”, she says. “We should not underestimate the people’s resilience.”

[...]

The UN General Assembly recently voted to reappoint Volker Türk as High Commissioner for Human Rights, making him the first person to serve two terms since the post was created in 1993. The 144 votes in favour marked a clear victory for human rights. But the 10 votes against, including by the USA, along with 13 abstentions and 26 no-shows, demonstrate the fragility of a system that depends on states cooperating and providing funding. At a time when major powers are attacking the international system, states that voted in favour of Türk’s second term must give the UN’s human rights functions their political and financial support.

...

Some states that might have been expected to vote against Türk, however, supported him. Among the 144 who backed his reappointment were the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan and Syria, all states subject to active UN scrutiny. This suggested that hostility to a specific human rights mandate doesn’t necessarily extend to the whole system, and even heavily scrutinised states may see value in a working relationship with the OHCHR.

...

Among the smaller states that ducked a decision, some likely faced economic or political pressure from the most powerful states to stay quiet, while others may have judged themselves insufficiently protected from the consequences of taking a visible position. This means the vote may reflect vulnerability as much as it measures support for the High Commissioner. As the most powerful states increasingly throw their weight around in the international system, smaller states may have to make calculations about when they can afford to take a position and when they need to stay quiet.

...

Institutional continuity is the immediate outcome, and Türk has signalled what he intends to do with it. In a June speech, he described an ‘unprecedented, shameless onslaught against international law’ that’s causing appalling human suffering, insisted the international community must stay focused on fundamentals and declared the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the core treaties ‘ever more important’. His message to the G7, meeting nearby, was blunt: put human rights at the centre of discussions as a force for stability, not an afterthought.

Legitimacy and moral authority, however, won’t pay the OHCHR’s bills. Over the next four years, Türk must resist China, Russia and the USA as they work to undermine the UN bodies that protect human rights. The 144 states that backed Türk now carry the responsibility of turning their votes into action. They should ensure the OHCHR is adequately funded and work to bring on board states that abstained, particularly if they did so out of fear. They must show that collective commitment to human rights still counts for something.

...

Web Archive link

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/57844000

For decades, the West assumed that economic growth would turn China into a more open, liberal society, much as it did Taiwan and South Korea. Instead, China’s totalitarian institutions proved remarkably resilient, surviving decades of reform and reasserting themselves under Xi Jinping.

[Op-ed by Chenggang Xu, senior research fellow at the Stanford Center on China’s Economy and Institutions at Stanford University, and the author of "Institutional Genes: Origins of China’s Institutions and Totalitarianism".]

Archived

[...]

“Totalitarian,” it is important to note, is not a pejorative label. It describes a distinct institutional structure. If China is seen merely as a rising power, the challenge appears to be one of great-power competition, inviting accommodation and compromise. If it is viewed as a strictly authoritarian regime, the problem is one of political repression, with gradual reform offering a possible remedy. However, if China is a communist totalitarian system, then its domestic institutional structure necessarily shapes its external behavior, with profound implications for its role within the international order.

The distinction between totalitarianism and authoritarianism is not just semantic. A totalitarian party is not a political party in the conventional sense. It is an organization designed to penetrate and control the state, the bureaucracy, the economy, the media, (coercive) institutions, personnel, ideology, social organizations and even private life.

By contrast, authoritarian regimes try to monopolize political power, suppress opposition and restrict civil liberties, but might leave significant parts of society relatively autonomous. This limited pluralism can foster economic growth and an expanding middle class, which can in turn lead to liberalization and, eventually, democracy. South Korea and Taiwan are prime examples.

[...]

What accounts for the remarkable persistence of Chinese totalitarianism? The answer lies in “institutional genes”: recurring institutional elements that enable a political system to reproduce itself over time. The most important of these elements concern the distribution of power and property rights, and the prevailing social consensus that legitimizes this distribution. Because these elements sustain the larger structure of power, those who benefit from it have strong incentives to preserve and reproduce them.

[...]

The critical question is not who owns a particular asset, but who ultimately controls land, capital, labor and information. Such arrangements are reproduced through incentives, coercion, ideology and organizational power. While they can and do change, new policies or reformist declarations alone are rarely enough to dislodge them.

Taiwan offers the clearest example. It is an ethnically Chinese society with deep historical and cultural ties to mainland China, yet it became a constitutional democracy ... Its continued development contributed to the emergence of civil society and growing demands for political reform.

[...]

By framing China as a normal rising power and the US as a nervous incumbent, he [Xi Jinping] seeks to focus global attention on preventing a great-power conflict, rather than on harder questions about the nature of China’s totalitarian system and what its ascendancy would mean for the world.

How democracies understand China determines how they deal with it. Misreading the nature of the regime can lead them to treat China as an ordinary great power, mistake tactical accommodation for genuine liberalization and confuse economic integration with political moderation.

[...]

China’s experience shows why the origins and resilience of political systems matter — and why even far-reaching reforms might fail to transform them. However, history is not destiny. Institutions change when the forces that reinforce them change. Although China is not condemned by its past, its future depends on whether the institutions that have defined its political order for generations finally give way to something new. **The first step is to recognize its totalitarian regime for what it is. **

Late last year, the United Kingdom, France, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and dozens more nations signed the United Nations Convention Against Cybercrime, a treaty ostensibly intended to improve global cooperation to fight crimes taking place over computer systems. Canada joined them this summer. The United States remains a notable exception and says it is still reviewing the treaty.

Three nations have since ratified it, and the treaty will enter into force 90 days after 40 states do so. As FIRE has long warned, the treaty opens the door to greater violations of free expression online — and new cybercrime bills popping up around the world show why.

...

The treaty purports to improve international cooperation in addressing crimes taking place using computer systems — but cooperation is not limited to specific online criminal acts like fraud or phishing. Instead, the treaty pushes nations to share personal data that other nations request about individuals accused of committing “serious” crimes.

But there’s an important question here. What constitutes a “serious” crime? The treaty does little to define it other than clarifying that it’s a crime carrying at least a four-year prison sentence as a punishment. For billions of people around the world, speech is a crime that warrants a long prison term.

...

The likely outcome here is obvious: The treaty will streamline unfree countries’ involvement with other unfree countries’ repression and pressure freer ones into helping, too. And it can all take place confidentially, without the knowledge of the public or even those being targeted . . .

And as though existing national laws punishing political expression aren’t enough, the treaty could even incentivize governments to enact harsher penalties on expressive acts. After all, if you’d like other nations to assist you in punishing your critics on the internet, you’ll want to ensure their expression qualifies for inclusion under the treaty’s definition of “serious crimes.”

...

There are, no doubt, serious transnational crimes taking place on the internet that require international cooperation. And there are ways we can improve cross-border collaboration to fight actual crime. But this treaty risks emboldening states that already seek to crush out online dissent, giving them more tools to do so, and enlisting freer states in this campaign.

And, perhaps most concerningly, this treaty may exacerbate what is already a uniquely dangerous era for free speech online. Every day it seems nations are pursuing new limitations on people’s ability to express themselves online, passing privacy-threatening age-gating restrictions, and seeking to gut government critics’ ability to speak anonymously. It’s more urgent than ever that democratic nations seek to reverse this corrosive trend rather than deepen it.

...

Web Archive link

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/56823374

It is now five years since the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan – the second time they seized power in the country. Since August 2021, the de facto authorities (DFA) have issued more than 100 decrees affecting women and girls, stripping them of their rights and institutionalizing discrimination against them.

...

Half of Afghan women interviewed leave home only once or twice a month because of the severe restrictions on their movement and access to public spaces, according to UN Women.

...

As of 2026, an estimated 2.4 million girls remain excluded from secondary education, with restrictions reversing two decades of progress in expanding access to education.

...

“Afghanistan is the only country in the world to formally prohibit access to education for girls and women beyond the primary level,” UNESCO said in a statement.

...

Barred from secondary school and university and excluded from most paid work, women also face legal barriers to protect them against all forms of violence, UNESCO said.

“Women have been erased from public life,” the UN agency said. “As a new generation of girls grows without an education, their future becomes increasingly dark.”

UNESCO called for the full restoration of the right to education for Afghan girls and women, echoing entreaties from many UN agencies and leaders to protect and promote their human rights.

...

Key 2026 Taliban decrees restricting the rights and equality of women and girls

• Decree No. 12 removes equality between men and women before the law, placing husbands in a position of legal authority over their wives and limiting women's access to justice. It only criminalizes violence within marriage when it causes severe and visible physical injuries.
• Decree No. 18 makes it significantly harder for women to leave a marriage while preserving men's unilateral right to divorce. It also implicitly permits child marriage, further eroding the rights of women and girls.
• Enforcement of these and other restrictions has intensified under the Law for the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (PVPV), with thousands of officials granted broad powers of detention and surveillance.

...

Increased risk of violence and less access to justice

Since the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, economic hardship, restrictions on girls’ education, and the dismantling of laws and services to prevent and respond to violence have increased the risk of violence against women and girls.

At the same time, women in Afghanistan are nearly four times less likely than men to have access to formal justice mechanisms, highlighting a widening justice gap that is leaving many women without safe avenues to assert their rights, seek protection, or challenge abuse.

Rates of early, forced, and child marriage remain high – and are rising. In 2023, nearly 30 per cent of Afghan girls under 18 were married, including 10 per cent under the age of 15. Some families, facing poverty, marry off daughters as a survival strategy. Image

...

Worsening maternal health

Growing shortages of women health workers, global aid cuts, and limited access to essential medicines are contributing to preventable maternal and neonatal deaths. Afghanistan already has one of the world’s highest maternal mortality rates, with an estimated 638 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births in 2024 – the seventh highest globally.

...

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/57662436

Archived

“When evil-doing comes like falling rain, nobody calls out ‘stop!’ When crimes begin to pile up they become invisible.”

German playwright Bertolt Brecht’s observation on the political apathy that engulfed Germany in the 1930s resonates with 21st century survivors of the Chinese state’s war against Uyghurs in its northwestern heartland, known by exiles as East Turkestan.

Germany’s slide into fascism brought book burnings and arrests of “undesirables.” It lead step by step to antisemitism, concentration camps, torture, and death. That brutal history echoes today in Beijing’s campaign against the Turkic peoples of its western regions – and in the silence of a deaf world. Only those who have experienced the terror first-hand and survived to tell the tale can hope to describe its full horrors.

Kalbinur Sidik (formerly Romanized as Qelbinur Sidik) is one such rare eyewitness to what many nations have termed a genocide. Her ordeal as a teacher inside the camps drove her to the brink of collapse. She escaped in 2019 ostensibly for medical treatment, hoping to reunite with her daughter in the Netherlands and seek asylum. Speaking out became her path to healing.

She told The Diplomat that “silence is not an option.” The faces of captives in her class have haunted her to this day. Since leaving, her mission has been to give voice to their silent cries.

[...]

Her memoir, “Heart Full of Light” – a title reflecting the meaning of her name, Kalbinur – is full of horror and sadness but also memory, dignity and resistance. It is a cry against erasure and a wake-up call to a world that has not been listening.

[...]

Every inch of the compound was monitored. If someone moved, a screen flashed red and zoomed in. “It was impossible not to compare them to animals in cages,” Sidik wrote of her students. “There was nowhere to hide. For them, or for me.”

The specter of organ harvesting hung over everything. Healthy young prisoners disappeared. Across Xinjiang authorities collected biodata from everyone aged 16-65. Mandatory DNA tests, bloods, iris scans, voice and gait recordings filled vast data banks, many believed for organ matching. Research later identified Saudis and Gulf Arabs traveling to eastern China for halal organs.

“Alive we were worthless, dead, and cut up, our organs were worth a ransom,” Sidik wrote.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/57485851

Archived

The Human Rights Foundation’s Toolkit to Counter the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) Transnational Repression (TNR) is a direct outcome of HRF’s 2026 Beyond Borders workshop, which brought together young activists from Uyghur, Hong Konger, Tibetan, Chinese, and Southern Mongolian diasporas and Taiwan.

Built from workshop discussions, participant reflections, facilitator guidance, and additional research, this toolkit attempts to fill a gap of practical resources for activists and diaspora communities navigating and responding to CCP-linked TNR.

[...]

HRF classifies China as ruled by a fully authoritarian regime, with the CCP being the sole ruling party retaining absolute control over all branches of government. While freedoms are enshrined in the Constitution of the PRC, in practice, the CCP monitors all aspects of daily life to actively suppress any criticism of its rule and ideologies.

Under General Secretary and President Xi Jinping, the CCP’s desire for control — both domestically and beyond its borders — has tightened. Xi’s unprecedented continued tenure is largely characterized by repressive government policies to consolidate power under the guise of fostering harmony and state security. His political and ideological vision, dubbed the “Chinese Dream,” centers on making China a global powerhouse and revitalizing a homogenous nation-state. As a result, the regime has dramatically scaled up its repression of dissenting voices while exporting the party’s narrative overseas.

As the world’s leading perpetrator of TNR, Beijing almost indiscriminately targets diaspora members of ethnic-national groups7, religious groups, and Chinese dissidents, as their ethnic or religious identities and political existence itself are viewed as a threat to the CCP’s authority and ambitions.

[...]

China’s operationalization of TNR involves numerous party-state organs, including public security and intelligence organs, United Front networks, and diplomatic outposts, such as embassies and consulates. In practice, the Chinese government conducts TNR through a wide ecosystem including student and business associations, overseas community organizations, as well as co-opted actors, including members of ethnic-national diasporas, foreign nationals, or institutions, that are incentivized, pressured, or coerced into assisting state surveillance, intimidation, or information-gathering. The blurred boundary between state and non-state actors makes clear attribution harder, as it may be carried out directly by state agencies or indirectly through intermediaries or through co-opted actors whose relationship to the state is harder to trace.

[...]

...

To outsiders, some of Russia’s actions can be difficult to recognize because they are often described in official language that sounds humanitarian or routine.

During the first months of the invasion, Russian forces removed many children from orphanages, residential institutions and other forms of state care, transferring many into Russia or Russian-controlled territory.

Other children were separated from parents or relatives during attacks on their communities, chaotic evacuations and Russia’s “filtration” process – a system of screenings and interrogations used to control civilians fleeing occupied areas.

Once under Russian control, many Ukrainian children were transferred into Russian institutions or placed under guardianship or adopted, making reunification with their families increasingly difficult.

Words used by Russia to describe its actions, such as “evacuation,” “child protection,” “recreation camp,” “guardianship,” “foster care” and “adoption,” usually suggest that adults are protecting children.

In occupied Ukraine, these terms cannot be taken at face value. They must be understood within a system of coercion designed to separate children from their families, communities and Ukrainian identity.

The language of rescue can conceal the reality of coercion.

...

Russia’s strategy extends beyond physically removing children from Ukraine. It also seeks to reshape the lives of those who remain under occupation.

Over time, Russian schools, laws and public institutions reinforce the message that these children are Russian rather than Ukrainian, making that identity feel normal and permanent. Children sent to so-called “recreation,” “health” or educational camps inside Russia often experience the same process, as temporary stays are extended and return becomes increasingly difficult.

The goal is not simply to control territory but to influence how children understand themselves.

Russian authorities have portrayed Ukraine as an artificial nation and Ukrainians and Russians as “one people.” Children are especially important to that project of erasing Ukrainians’ independent identity because they carry a nation’s language, family history, citizenship and future. As they grow older, many are also pulled into an expanding system of military-patriotic education that presents service to Russia as a civic duty.

...

Oleksandra Matviichuk, chair of Ukraine’s Center for Civil Liberties, which was awarded the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize, [said] that one obstacle to an effective international response is a “lack of imagination.” People living in stable societies can find it difficult to believe that a government could invade another country, occupy its territory and attempt to erase the identity of its children.

But that is happening now.

...

Web Archive link

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/57036724

Archived

[...]

The law was designed to create a "shared" national identity among China's 56 ethnic groups.

"A law that brazenly pushes non-Han ethnic groups including Tibetans, Uyghurs and Mongolians toward a single, state-defined national identity rather than protecting their distinct cultures and languages," [Amnesty International's deputy regional director Sarah] Brooks said.

[...]

The Han Chinese are China's largest and most dominant ethnic group, accounting for 17 per cent of the world's population.

But 125 million Chinese citizens belong to 55 non-Han ethnic groups, including the Zhuang, Uyghur, Hui, Manchu, Yi, Tibetans and Mongolians.

Parts of China's history were dominated by non-Han Dynasties: the Manchu Qing (1644–1912) and the Mongol Yuan (1271–1368).

[...]

The Chinese government insists the new laws are not being implemented to suppress ethnic groups or languages, but to prevent separatism.

Following the 1911 revolution in which the Manchu Qing dynasty was overthrown, Mongolia, followed shortly afterwards by Tibet, declared independence from China.

Outer Mongolia became a communist nation in the 1920s, remaining so until the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s.

Inner Mongolia has remained a part of China, while the independent state of Tibet was annexed by the Chinese in 1951.

[...]

Life under Communist China

Initially, Inner Mongolia was organised into an autonomous region with greater political rights.

What followed was decades of persecution.

Mr Togochog said government crackdowns started in the 1950s, when tens of thousands of Mongolian elites were accused of being national separatists, suffering politic persecution and imprisonment.

This was just a taste of what came when Chairman Mao declared his decade-long "Cultural Revolution", which saw the destruction of cultural artefacts, societal upheaval and the persecution, imprisonment or death of millions.

[...]

According to a study published by the University of Cambridge, more than 16,000 Mongols were killed and five times that many were maimed.

Mr Togochog said the Mongolian population was "completely devastated by this large-scale genocide campaign".

According to a 2020 census, Mongols have now become a minority within Inner Mongolia, representing just 18 per cent of the total population.

[...]

Amnesty international's Tibetan advocate, Kyinzom Dhongdue, said the new ethnic unity law "unambiguously promotes and reinforces China's long-running policies that have already devastated the rights of Uyghurs, Tibetans and other non-Han ethnic groups".

"The Chinese government is pursuing a long-term project of forced assimilation. Or, as described by Tibetans, a cultural genocide.

"It seeks to fundamentally reshape how Tibetans, Uyghurs and other peoples, including Southern Mongolians speak, learn, worship and, ultimately, understand who they are."

Ms Allen said Chinese President Xi Jinping was pushing China towards a sort of monoculture.

"The very heavy-handed push towards assimilation should be seen through the lens of control and Xi Jinping's paranoia."

[...]

In 2020, protests rocked the region of Inner Mongolia after the Chinese government ordered an end to Mongolian-language classes for first-year primary students, in favour of Mandarin.

[...]

Authorities also began a region-wide censorship campaign, shutting down Mongolian WeChat groups and removing Mongolian-language books from the shelves of retail outlets.

"Southern Mongolians know that this is the last chance to stand as Mongolian People … if you lose your language, you lose everything," Mr Togochog said.

"What is remaining is the language, that's the last defence of the Mongolian national identity … what we call the 'final solution' to the Mongolia question."

[...]

"This is nothing but cultural genocide … they want to make you directly Chinese," Mr Togochog said.

[...]

Ms Allen said the new laws made her "really sad" and she said for many of the ethnic groups inside China, there was no diaspora for them to look to for cultural and linguistic preservation.

"I think it's such a shame for China to be heading in this direction when many other similarly situated countries are working very, very hard to preserve and revive their minority languages."

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/50287614

Video Source

I transcribed the speech as best as I could. Please note that the names were spelled phonetically, and might not be accurate.

Information about the concentration camp:

• https://www.geogroup.com/facilities/south-louisiana-ice-processing-center/
• https://www.ice.gov/detain/detention-facilities/south-louisiana-ice-processing-center

Related Article

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/50192805

I translated and added English subtitles to the original video. Please tell me if I made a mistake, I can fix it, I'm still learning Spanish.

Multiple woman report physical & sexual assault by officers.
Children taken away from mothers.
Officers expose detainees' private info so they can be trafficked.
Amputated toes off woman & didn't tell her why.
Woman with only 1 kidney suffering renal failure given no medication.
3 month pregnant mother had a miscarriage in cell but received no medical attention.
Officers are raping the detainees.
Multiple women show bruises & and other injuries on camera caused by excessive force in ICE detention.

Video Source https://www.tiktok.com/@dana.latoya/video/7667288809368800526

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/56178607

Archived

Report downloads in English (pdf) and in Chinese (pdf).

This publication is a sister report to Behind Bars: A Survey on Detention Centre Conditions in China (in English, pdf), which follows the same survey, interview and case study format to look at human rights failings in the country’s detention system.

[...]

To mark Mandela Day this weekend, Safeguard Defenders is releasing a new study that reveals exploitative working conditions, political coercion and physical and psychological abuse in China’s sprawling prison system.

Behind Bars: a survey on prison conditions in China, based on a survey of 59 former prisoners, paints a grim picture with respondents describing abuses and violations of both international law and Chinese law and regulations. Its findings should be a stark reminder for foreign governments considering security agreements or extradition arrangements with Beijing that such cooperation is incompatible with fundamental human rights principles.

Mandela Day, held on 18 July (on Nelson Mandela’s birthday) honours his life’s work fighting for social justice and human rights. The day is also an important date for prisoner rights—Mandela spent 27 years as a political prisoner in South Africa during the Apartheid years, and the key UN document on the treatment of prisoners was officially renamed the Nelson Mandela Rules in 2015.

[...]

In addition to the survey, Behind Bars also draws on a longform interview with former Australian detainee Matthew Radalj, a comparative analysis of domestic and international law and a case study of a large prison in central China that has been at the heart of recent international allegations of forced labour.

“The truth is that xxx prison is not a prison with factories, but factories with a prison,” one survey respondent wrote, adding, “ In Chinese prisons, guilty and innocent are treated just like animals, with not even basic rights.”

[...]

At a time when China’s authoritarian surveillance state has been deleting sources of public data and made it more dangerous for people to share their testimony, Behind Bars shines a light on what really goes on in Chinese prisons. It is an important addition to the body of research on the widespread rights violations perpetrated on those incarcerated in the country.

With China typically sentencing around 850,000 people to prison time every year in one of their 680+ prisons, the scale of abuse is potentially massive. Estimates put the number of people serving time in China at around 2.34 million, likely making China the country with the largest number of prisoners serving time in the world.

[...]

One respondent wrote, “I was not treated like a human being at all.”

Radalj said that when he was in solitary confinement, he was Tasered “almost on a daily basis” and that he was “chained for the entire 194 days” around his leg.

[...]

The Chinese prison system heavily emphasizes ideological education and expects prisoners to produce thought reports, such as letters of repentance, statements of confession and essays outlining support and praise for the CCP.

More than three quarters of respondents said they had to write thought reports when they were in prison. Education provided for prisoners was more often propaganda in nature and focused on CCP ideological education rather than being vocational in nature and helping them develop skills so they can find work upon release.

Prisoners who refused to write thought reports or whose written works were not deemed sufficiently “politically correct” or remorseful were typically punished, for example by not being able to apply for sentence commutation, having their shopping quota cut, the cancellation or reduction of time for a family visit or phone call and even physical punishment and/or solitary confinement. One respondent said they were denied medical attention because they did not write a confession letter.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/55343816

A new report by the Network of Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) exposes how vocational programs have turned minors into expendable labor under the guise of “training,” revealing a system where exploitation thrives behind censorship.

Archived

Here is the report: Genuine free choice? - Child labour and mandatory student internships in China (pdf)

“Child labor persists because authorities fail to consistently enforce protections, putting children at risk,” said Shane Yi, researcher at CHRD. “Instead of enjoying their rights to education, health, and development, some children are working long hours in unsafe or inappropriate conditions, sometimes with grim disregard for their wellbeing.”

CHRD drew on government penalty notices, online databases, court documents, and Chinese-language media reports, among other sources, documenting rights abuses in 11 provinces between 2019 and 2025.

Some vocational students’ internships involved working 10–12-hour shifts—including night work—performing tasks unrelated to their studies.

Other internships put students at risk of physical harm. Three student interns died—two by suicide, one after being denied adequate medical care—and another harmed himself; all had expressed distress to teachers or managers. Schools and companies engaged intermediary agencies to arrange internships while taking “commissions” from student wages despite explicit legal prohibitions on both practices.

[...]

The violations documented in this report call into question Chinese authorities’ willingness to enforce domestic laws, including the Law on the Protection of Minors and the Regulations on the Management of Vocational School Student Internships, to protect children. The violations also reflect disdain for the human rights guaranteed through the Chinese government’s ratifications of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and ILO conventions.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/55297044

Archived

On 26 June 2026, to mark International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, The Rights Practice - a charity in the UK focused on human rights in China - published an important new report, "Beyond Prison. Mapping Deprivation of Liberty in China". This report is an attempt to map the multiple ways in which the Chinese state may deprive someone of their liberty. A confusing array of practices and nomenclature can obfuscate the nature and purpose of each type of detention. In this report we disentangle criminal, administrative and extra-legal measures, explaining the legal basis and highlighting issues of concern.

Here is the full report: Beyond Prison - Mapping Deprivation of Liberty in China (pdf)

China uses the deprivation of liberty for investigations and to punish offenders, but also as a tool for repression. The use and threat of detention serve to silence critics and maintain social stability.

Following the high profile detention of several foreigners, the risk of detention is now a factor in decisions to visit China by researchers, critics and the international business community.

This report has been written to help inform anyone visiting or engaging with China including diplomats, officials, journalists, NGOs and the business community.

Informed by China’s obligations under international law, the report highlights two key areas of concern: the risks of arbitrary detention and ill treatment.

With the deprivation of liberty casting a long shadow over all human rights violations in China the report describes the multiple forms of detention used, including their alleged purpose and basis in Chinese law. How China categorises types of detention is important to understand when questioning its use.

The report distinguishes three broad categories of detention in China: criminal, administrative and extra-legal.

The three categories are not mutually exclusive. In several instances, administrative or extra-legal detention is a pathway to detention as part of criminal proceedings which may serve to give the deprivation of liberty quasi legitimacy.

To help readers understand the Chinese context we describe the political legal basis of different types of detention and introduce the main institutions in the administration of justice (the gongjianfa). While the police enjoy substantial discretionary powers to authorise detention, their authority is rooted in the Chinese Communist Party acting through the zhengfawei (Political and Legal Commission) or CCP appointees within the gongjianfa.

The legal basis and procedures governing decisions to detain in China are inadequate. Political interests frequently influence decision making resulting in a high risk of arbitrary detention. China does not have an independent judiciary, and the courts play no role in authorising pretrial detention.

[...]

The lack of judicial transparency is an obstacle to monitoring the law in practice. The education label has been applied to many types of detention in China. This helps officials obfuscate their identity as detention facilities. The label also signals that the main purpose of these facilities is political.

The intent is to remould and transform those who dissent from CCP orthodoxy. Police pressures to secure a confession, the lack of preventive monitoring, weak regulations, risk of arbitrary detention and restrictions on access by lawyers all contribute to the risk of ill treatment and torture.

The report also provides recommendations for other governments in the face of severe human rights violations by the Chinese government.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/55198015

Beijing, Moscow Targeting Key UN Posts.

Archived

[...]

Some of the funding China is opposing for 2026-2027 is for the UN support office to assist the Gang Suppression Force. It is a non-UN security force that a small group of countries established to work with the Haitian National Police and armed forces to counter criminal groups that have taken control of much of Haiti.

[...]

Since 2017, Human Rights Watch has documented how China and Russia—two countries with abysmal human rights records—have led a sustained push to cut as many UN human rights posts as possible. Backed by Egypt, Iran, North Korea, and others, they have also sought to defund multiple UN rights investigations around the world.

In addition to Haiti, China is currently seeking to defund UN human rights posts in Syria, South Sudan, and Democratic Republic of Congo. Russia is supporting China’s efforts in the peacekeeping budget negotiations, which are scheduled to conclude this week.

[...]

China’s defunding efforts come after the UN leadership was forced to slash UN spending due to a liquidity crisis largely caused by the US withholding billions of dollars of obligatory UN dues and China paying late.

Delegations from Europe, Latin America, and elsewhere are resisting China’s efforts.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/55007534

Archived

The Tibet Aid Program (TAP), also known as Pairing up Assistance for Tibet (对口援藏) for China’s Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) was officially launched following the Third National Tibet Work Forum in 1994. Originally it was designed to boost the TAR’s economy, with wealthy provinces from China’s eastern regions funding the new roads, buildings, and power grids. Eventually the program started to include other sectors such as healthcare and education.

Under Xi Jinping, the focus emphasized assertion of soft power with infrastructure developments. This transaction moved the program from simple economic aid to intensification of cultural and political control. The program functions through three interconnected pillars: the institutionalization of the 15th Five Year Plan (2026-2030), the deployment of “group style” aid cohorts, and the exploitation of frontier governance as a career launching pad for Han Chinese cadres.

[...]

By replacing local Tibetan personnel with pre-assembled, insulated Han Chinese professional teams, the state creates institutional “Chinese bubbles” that systematically marginalize Tibetan staff and enforce state sanctioned linguistic and ideological uniformity. Successful compliance with these assimilation directives creates a robust “political apprenticeship.” This bureaucratic incentive loop directly rewards Han Chinese cadres with accelerated promotions into elite national Communist Party roles, as demonstrated by the career trajectory of Lhasa Mayor Wang Qiang.

The structural transformation of the TAP is explicitly codified within the 15th Five Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development of the Tibet Autonomous Region.

[...]

Crucially, the long-term success of this assimilation strategy relies on a highly effective bureaucratic incentive loop. Historically, Han Chinese cadres were deeply reluctant to relocate to Tibet due to its harsh, high-altitude weather and unforgiving geographic environment. Today, however, external administrators eagerly compete for these deployments because a successful tenure in the region has become a vital political apprenticeship and a shortcut for rapid promotion into elite positions within the CCP hierarchy. By weaponizing the career ambitions of outside political elites, the state secures a steady, highly motivated stream of administrators who are legally and politically incentivized to ensure long-term control over Tibet.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/54869465

Archived

The United Nations Human Rights Office has reiterated its concerns over what it describes as “severe” human rights violations against the Uyghur population in Xinjiang, also known as East Turkestan, despite ongoing international scrutiny of the region.

In an interview, UN Human Rights Office spokesperson Liz Throssell said the Office continues to monitor developments in Xinjiang and stands by the findings of its 2022 assessment, which documented widespread violations that may constitute crimes against humanity. She noted that the UN’s most recent visit to the region took place in 2022 and that concerns remain regarding limited access and the risk of reprisals against individuals who engage with the organization.

Throssell said several laws and policies identified as problematic remain in effect, while reports of arbitrary detention and large-scale incarceration continue to emerge. She added that many families still lack information about the fate and whereabouts of detained relatives.

According to Throssell, the last official visit to Xinjiang was conducted in 2022 by former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet.

[...]

In recent years, Xinjiang has drawn significant international attention amid allegations of mass detention, forced assimilation, cultural suppression, and widespread human rights violations. The United Nations and several human rights organizations have reported evidence of arbitrary detention and systemic abuses, with some assessments suggesting the situation may amount to crimes against humanity.

[...]

[Arslan Hidayat is an Australian-born Uyghur activist whose roots trace back to East Turkestan – a region internationally recognized as the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in northwestern China] describes the situation in Xinjiang as deeply systemic. During a 2014 visit, he says he witnessed forced relocations tied to residence permit issues. He refers to China’s Hukou system, which restricts where people can live, work, and access services.

He describes widespread surveillance, including monitoring of electricity usage, CCTV facial recognition, and household movement patterns. According to him, even small actions, such as using a VPN, growing a beard, wearing a hijab, having relatives abroad, or receiving religious messages can lead to arrest.

He says detentions have affected not only political or religious figures but also ordinary civilians, including teachers, athletes, scholars, and even Communist Party members. Many were labeled “extremists” without evidence and sent to so-called “re-education centers,” which human rights groups describe as detention and indoctrination facilities.

Hidayat says communication with the outside world is extremely limited. Access to platforms such as Google, YouTube, and Instagram is blocked, and online accounts are tied to personal identification systems.

[...]

He argues that the international community often underestimates the situation, viewing Xinjiang as a “black box.” According to him, this silence enables continued repression.

[...]

cross-posted from : https://lemmy.zip/post/66336282

The European Parliament approved on Wednesday an overhaul of migration policy aimed at ramping up deportations and ​allowing member states to set up detention centres abroad, in what critics describe as a cruel system that weakens ‌safeguards for asylum seekers.

"The dehumanization of migrants and refugees, including in the UK, US, and many EU countries, is appalling, often leading also to the denial of their rights," Volker Turk, the United Nations' human rights chief, said on Monday in the United Nations ​Human Rights Council.

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/53751698

The report was adopted on Tuesday by 434 votes in favour, 128 against and 104 abstentions, the parliamentary press service announced.

Transnational repression was described in the text as deliberate acts or threats by states and authoritarian regimes — or state-linked entities and proxies — to threaten, silence, coerce or harm people living abroad, as well as their support networks and family members.

MEPs said these actions pose a threat to democracy and the protection of human rights, and amount to foreign interference.

...

Targets can include dissidents, journalists, activists, academics and members of diaspora communities, as well as their families, according to the European Parliament.

...

They also called for measures to share best practice between member states and floated the appointment of an EU coordinator to help develop a wider strategy, including action against digital threats, abusive Interpol “red notices” — requests to locate and provisionally arrest people pending extradition — and “consular coercion”, which the report described as pressure from embassies and consulates.

“For many people living in exile in Europe, distance doesn't guarantee safety. Authoritarian regimes actively seek to silence critics beyond their own borders,” the report’s rapporteur, Hannah Neumann, said in the statement published by the European Parliament.

...

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/54775349

Archived

Report in English (pdf) and Chinese (pdf)

Police torture, violent cell mates, denied lawyer meetings, overcrowded cells and little to no outdoor time are common experiences for those locked up in China’s detention centres, according to a new report out today by Safeguard Defenders.

Behind Bars: a survey on detention centre conditions in China, based on a survey of 84 former detainees, paints a grim picture with respondents reporting widespread abuses and violations of both international law and Chinese law and regulations. Its findings should be a stark reminder for foreign governments considering security agreements or extradition arrangements with Beijing that such cooperation is incompatible with fundamental human rights principles.

[...]

The report’s primary research findings are:

1. Detention centres routinely violate domestic regulations and international standards leading to problems such as overcrowding, inadequate medical care and exposure to violence.
2. Detainees’ rights to legal counsel are routinely obstructed with lawyer meetings blocked and inmates pressured to hire a pliant duty lawyer.
3. Regulatory shortfalls and the widespread occurrence of abuses indicate structural weaknesses in oversight.
4. Of particular concern is the phenomenon of “cell bosses”, who are often authorized or tolerated by detention officers to maintain discipline among inmates through intimidation and abuse

[...]

The report was officially released on 16 June at an event organized by Safeguard Defenders in Lisbon, Portugal on the risks of hostage diplomacy and arbitrary detention in China. Speaking at the event were Peter Humphrey from the UK, a former corporate fraud investigator who was imprisoned in China and now volunteers to help the families of foreigners arrested or sentenced in China and Canadian Grace Chen, an international human rights lawyer and former legal advisor to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture.

In the days leading up to the event, China tried to cancel it by writing a letter to the venue urging them not to offer a "platform for actions that vilify China." Also, an X account that impersonates Safeguard Defenders and is likely linked to Beijing posted our event announcement but changed the date, time and location.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/54690450

China has witnessed the greatest stretch of sustained growth and poverty alleviation in human history, made possible by the brutal exploitation of millions workers. A new book recounts the life of one of them offering a glimpse into the dark side of China’s success.

Archived

Behind the broader narrative of [China's] marvelous macroeconomic success lie the stories of hundreds of millions of exploited Chinese workers thrust into a new capitalist paradigm. Inseparable from China’s growth was the largest urbanization project in world history. As China developed its manufacturing ecosystem, hundreds of millions of rural peasants flooded into coastal cities, chasing the economic opportunities brought by new factory jobs. In the cities, they searched for an escape from rural poverty but encountered the horrors of industrial capitalism.

[...]

A drift in the South is the memoir of one of these workers, Xiao Hai, a poet who has spent much of his adolescence and twenties toiling in the harshest jobs available to Chinese workers.

Like many rural Chinese, his parents covertly circumvented the one-child policy, making him an “over-quota child.” This meant that he would have to be given away to another family for five years to avoid harsh government punishment for having multiple children. While his parents managed to avoid being reprimanded, the cost of supporting two children to study past working age was too heavy to bear, so at fifteen, Xiao left school to become a child laborer.

[...]

Appropriately, Xiao’s journey through the South begins there. His first job is at a large factory on an assembly line putting together battery boxes with a screwdriver. There he works fifteen hours a day and takes one day off each month. For his long hours, he enjoys a meager monthly salary of ¥400, approximately $48. One day, exhausted at work, he dozes off during an overnight shift and is woken by a blade that slices open his index finger, creating a painful wound that gushes blood. His manager comes over, wraps his finger with gauze, and tells him to finish his shift.

At the end of his day, he notices that a fragment of poisonous plastic from the blade has gone into his bleeding wound and has created an infection. Without access to medical services, Xiao must rely on makeshift treatment from a coworker who disinfects the wound with a lighter and a sewing needle.

[...]

Stories like this are often lost in breathless accounts of China’s development that rightly point out how extraordinarily successful Shenzhen and other manufacturing hubs have been. Xiao reminds us that this success was built on the backs of millions of workers who felt the worst of capitalist exploitation.

[...]

Commentators on China often reject comparisons between China and the West by pointing to cultural differences like those between Confucian thought and Protestantism. But Xiao’s autobiography shows that, under capitalism, our cultures are increasingly similar. Xiao’s accounts of factory life tap into something universal within capitalism: the degradation and alienation of work. But alongside universal suffering there is, Xiao insists, also the universal desire for freedom from exploitation. The book ends with these lines: “I have but one humble wish: to live like a human, with dignity. That’s all I can ask for. That’s all.” In a better world beyond capitalism, Xiao’s wish wouldn’t be “humble,” but a basic right guaranteed for everyone.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/54688484

Archived

On June 16, between 18:00 and 21:00, the rights organization Safeguard Defenders (SD) releases its latest report: Behind Bars - A Survey on Detention Centre Conditions in China.

[...]

The event, at Grémio Literário in Chiado, Lisbon, features direct testimony from two former European detainees: Peter Dahlin (Sweden) and Peter Humphrey (United Kingdom). Joining them is Grace Chen (Canada), former legal adviser to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture.

In recent days, there have been at least two attempts to cancel or disrupt the Lisbon event.

In a letter dated June 5, the Embassy urged the American Club of Lisbon to reconsider "offering a platform for actions that vilify China".

[...]

Days later, on June 12, one of the many X accounts impersonating Safeguard Defenders posted a doctored copy of the event poster. The fake changed the date, time, venue and location to mislead potential attendees. The same account pushed the false details to other users in the China human rights space by direct message.

[...]

The move against the Lisbon event is only the latest in a long line of PRC attempts - many of them successful - to suppress information that exposes widespread, systematic human rights abuse in China. Recent examples include pressure on German cities to drop their support for Tibet, and the cancellation of RightsCon in Zambia after sustained PRC pressure on the local government.

The CCP's "red line" on any public discussion of its rights record - anywhere - is the flip side of its propaganda and influence machine. To advance an increasingly aggressive agenda at home and abroad, the Party works to set and police every narrative about China. Anything that contradicts it must be silenced.

These efforts violate fundamental rights and freedoms enshrined in international treaties, regional instruments, and democratic constitutions. When the PRC suppresses those rights on foreign soil, it commits transnational repression and an unacceptable breach of sovereignty.

[...]

The report

Behind Bars - A Survey on Detention Conditions in China draws on interviews with 84 former detainees. It finds that shocking abuses continue without relent across the country's 2,600-plus facilities, set for release June 16.

These include police beatings, the illegal denial of access to lawyers, and the use of inmate enforcers to keep order through intimidation and violence.

The report also compares domestic and international law and reviews legal commentary, tracing these abuses to the absence of clear protections for detention centers, exploitable legal loopholes, and weak oversight of detention-center police and practices.

As China's surveillance state shrinks the pool of public data and makes speaking out riskier, Behind Bars is a vital addition to the evidence on the systematic abuse of detainees - Chinese and foreign alike.

It is the first of two reports. A companion survey on prison conditions in China follows July 18.

[...]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/54557065

Op-ed by Tommaso Franco, geopolitical analyst, member of the IISS and Chatham House, and a Junior Fellow at the Swiss Institute for Global Affairs (SIGA).

Archived

[...]

Under the pretext of fighting terrorism, the CCP pursues a policy of “sinicization,” a systematic strategy to forcibly assimilate the Uyghur population. What was once a peripheral province is today China’s most militarized zone: a veritable open-air prison. Michelle Bachelet, the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, recently acknowledged “serious human rights violations” committed in Xinjiang that could constitute “crimes against humanity.” As early as 2005, Human Rights Watch raised the alarm, claiming that the systematic repression of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang is a deliberate political strategy that ultimately benefits the state of China.

Most importantly, what happens in the Xinjiang re-education camps extends beyond China’s borders and encroaches on the international community. China is demonstrating to the world that cultural and religious identity can be rewritten or erased in the name of state stability and economic development. If the “Great Wall of Iron” system prevails without meeting cohesive global resistance, the risk is that the Xinjiang model will become an export product: a world where technology serves not to liberate humanity, but to perfect its imprisonment.

[...]

The heart of the Xinjiang system is “grid-style social management.” This massive control apparatus rests on a sophisticated digital surveillance system and predictive policing. Through a massive database called the Integrated Joint Operations Platform (IJOP), the state used AI to cross-reference personal information data such as private messages and spending habits in order to create lists of “suspicious” people. Cities are fragmented into zones, each monitored by a pervasive network of facial recognition technology and police stations. Big data, smart cameras and biometric databases track every breath of daily life.

[...]

One example of how Beijing is isolating the Uyghurs is China’s relationship with Afghanistan. Following the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan and the subsequent fall of Kabul in 2021, China has taken a proactive turn in its Afghanistan policy. Beijing is moving to fill the strategic vacuum left by Washington. For China, Afghanistan is a fundamental piece in stabilizing the Xinjiang border and for securing BRI trade corridors. China had already woven a dense diplomatic network with the Taliban. This is evidenced by over 140 diplomatic meetings between Afghanistan and China and the welcoming of Chinese Ambassador Zhao Sheng in Kabul.

The pact is clear: oil, humanitarian and technological investments in exchange for security and silence. China has eliminated tariffs on Afghan goods, signed a $540 million oil contract (which has since been broken) and pledged $13 million in humanitarian aid. This support is the price for a guarantee of vital importance: the Taliban have ensured that Afghan territory will never serve as a base for Uyghur militants of the ETIM [The separatist group East Turkestan Islamic Movement fighting for the independence of East Turkestan, called Xinjiang in China]. It is a game Beijing knows well, having already woven similar threads with Mullah Omar, ex-supreme leader of the Taliban, in 2000.

[...]

The Taliban, while presenting themselves as defenders of the faith, have cynically sacrificed the Uyghur cause in exchange for economic oxygen and international legitimacy. This collaboration allows both regimes to proceed with internal repression without interference. Beijing offers Kabul a crucial lifeline to mitigate UN sanctions while the Taliban grant China privileged access to Afghanistan’s vast and unexplored mineral resources.

[...]

The use of security rhetoric to justify the destruction of an identity creates a disturbing bridge between Beijing’s strategies and other dark pages of history and recent events. Xinjiang was made to be a model of digital authoritarianism, and now that model is being exported. China is challenging the foundations of international coexistence. The immense scale of the repressive operation in Xinjiang rules out the possibility that this is an isolated case of abuse. Absolute stability has been prioritized over fundamental rights, and such a strategy will not stop at Chinese borders.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/54504338

Archived

In our human rights work on China’s black jails, it has been extremely difficult to obtain photos or video of the facilities. These are secret places. No phones, no lawyer, no journalists, no family are allowed inside. Even the locations are kept hidden—typically a bag is placed over a prisoner’s head when they are moved in or out.

So far, we have relied on first person testimony to understand what these black jails are like.

But then we searched Douyin, China’s Tiktok (both developed by Beijing-based ByteDance) and we found something very surprising.

B2B companies that make equipment for China’s security services are advertising their suicide-proofed apparatus on the platform. For the first time, we can see up close what a brand-new Liuzhi cell probably looks like. We searched for the terms “留置” (Liuzhi, one of CCP’s two types of secret jail) and words related to suicide-proofing, such as”软包墙面” (ruanbao qiangmian, padded walls).

What we saw was just as horrifying as we’ve been told.

Welcome to the insane asylum

We found videos by three companies on Douyin showcasing their suicide-padded furniture and fittings, such as tables, chairs and walls, marketed specifically for Liuzhi.

The images produce an unsettling sense of being in an insane asylum. The scripts are chilling; they seem to take delight in point out the capacity for torture their products offer.

And, ironically, they do a much better job of describing Liuzhi than we ever could.

The basic facts of inhumane treatment we have heard about are confirmed in the videos:

• the isolation,
• the 24-hour surveillance by two guards,
• the always on lights, and,
• the need to ask for permission for everything, even the slightest movement.

The videos’ voiceovers describe how:

• Liuzhi cells are “heavy with the suffocating air of confinement,” the prisoner feels “forgotten by the world”
• Their padded furniture and walls prevent “accidental injuries during interrogation sessions,” hinting at physical torture
• Prisoners’ screams are simply swallowed up by the room
• One video boasts: “Not many people can survive a place like this without losing it.”

[...]

What black jails does China run?

In recent years, China has legalized two black jail systems: (1) Liuzhi or retention in custody, which is focused on CCP members and state workers, and (2) Residential Surveillance at a Designated Location (RSDL) for everyone else (many human rights activists and rights lawyers are locked up here).

Prisoners are kept for months or more, in complete isolation, subjected to extended interrogations and watched 24-hours by two guards. Any windows are blacked out. It’s constant, unending strip lighting. The psychological torture these conditions produce drive some to try to kill themselves. The authorities know this—it’s intentional to coerce a confession—so they suicide-proof the cells.

[...]