China (includes Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau)

The security apparatus is made up of the Ministries of State Security and Public Security, the People's Armed Police, the People's Liberation Army (PLA), and the state judicial, procuratorial, and penal systems. Civilian authorities generally maintained effective control of the security forces. Security policy and personnel were responsible for numerous human rights abuses.

The country's transition from a centrally planned economy toward a market based economy continued. Although state-owned industry remained dominant in key sectors, the Government has taken steps to restructure major state-owned enterprises (SOEs), privatized many small and medium SOEs, and allowed private entrepreneurs increasing scope for economic activity. Rising urban living standards; a burgeoning middle class; greater independence for entrepreneurs; the reform of the public sector, including government efforts to increase transparency and eliminate administrative hurdles; and expansion of the private sector, including foreign-invested enterprises, continued to increase workers' employment options and reduce state control over citizens' daily lives.

The country faced many economic challenges, including reform of SOEs and the banking system, growing unemployment and underemployment, an aging population, the need to construct an effective social safety net, and rapidly widening income gaps between coastal and interior regions and between urban and rural areas. In recent years, between 100 and 150 million persons voluntarily left rural areas to search for better jobs and living conditions in cities, where they were often denied access to government-provided economic and social benefits, including education and health care. The Government continued to relax controls over migration from rural to urban areas, and many cities took steps to expand the rights of migrants and their dependents to basic social services. In the industrial sector, continued downsizing of SOEs contributed to rising urban unemployment that was widely believed to be much higher than the officially estimated 4 percent, with many sources estimating the actual figure to be as high as 20 percent. The Government reported that urban per capita disposable income in 2003 was $1,028 and grew by 9 percent over the previous year, while rural per capita cash income was $317 and grew by 4 percent. Official estimates of the percentage of citizens living in absolute poverty showed little change from the previous year. The Government estimated that 30 million persons lived in poverty, and the World Bank estimated the number whose income does not exceed one dollar per day to be 100 to 150 million persons.

The Government's human rights record remained poor, and the Government continued to commit numerous and serious abuses. Citizens did not have the right to change their government, and many who openly expressed dissenting political views were harassed, detained, or imprisoned, particularly in a campaign late in the year against writers, religious activists, dissidents, and petitioners to the Central Government. Authorities were quick to suppress religious, political, and social groups that they perceived as threatening to government authority or national stability, especially before sensitive dates such as the 15th anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre and other significant political and religious occasions. However, the Constitution was amended to mention human rights for the first time.

Abuses included instances of extrajudicial killings; torture and mistreatment of prisoners, leading to numerous deaths in custody; coerced confessions; arbitrary arrest and detention; and incommunicado detention. The judiciary was not independent, and the lack of due process remained a serious problem. The lack of due process was particularly egregious in death penalty cases, and the accused was often denied a meaningful appeal. Executions often took place on the day of conviction or on the denial of an appeal. In Xinjiang, trials and executions of Uighurs charged with separatism continued. Government pressure continued to make it difficult for lawyers to represent criminal defendants. The authorities routinely violated legal protections in the cases of political dissidents and religious figures. They generally attached higher priority to suppressing political opposition and maintaining public order than to enforcing legal norms or protecting individual rights. According to 2003 government statistics, more than 250,000 persons were serving sentences in "reeducation-through-labor" camps and other forms of administrative detention not subject to judicial review. Other experts reported that more than 310,000 persons were serving sentences in these camps in 2003.

Throughout the year, the Government prosecuted individuals for subversion and leaking state secrets as a means to harass and intimidate, while others were detained for relaying facts about Chinese human rights issues to those outside the country. Among those detained or convicted on such charges were Christian activists Zhang Rongliang, Liu Fenggang, Xu Yonghai and Zhang Shengqi, and journalists Zhao Yan, Shi Tao, Li Guozhu and members of the independent PEN Center's China branch. The Government detained individuals administratively to suppress dissent and intimidate others. In April and June, authorities detained many who planned 15th anniversary commemorations of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre, including activist Hu Jia and "Tiananmen Mothers" organization founders. Similarly, military officials detained Dr. Jiang Yanyong because he wrote to government leaders requesting an official reassessment of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre.

The number of individuals serving sentences for the now-repealed crime of counterrevolution was estimated at 500 to 600; many of these persons were imprisoned for the nonviolent expression of their political views. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) estimated that as many as 250 persons remained in prison for political activities connected to the 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations.

The authorities granted early release from prison to Tibetan nun Phuntsog Nyidrol in February and China Democracy Party (CDP) co-founder Wang Youcai in March. Counterrevolutionary prisoners Liu Jingsheng and Chen Gang were also released during the year, after their sentences were reduced. However, many political prisoners, including Internet activists Xu Wei, Yang Zili, and Huang Qi; Uighurs Rebiya Kadeer and Tohti Tunyaz; journalists Zhao Yan and Jiang Weiping; labor activists Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang; civil activist Mao Hengfeng; Catholic Bishop Su Zhimin; Christian activists Zhang Rongliang, Zhang Yinan, Liu Fenggang, and Xu Yonghai; Tibetans Jigme Gyatso, Tenzin Deleg, and Gendun Choekyi Nyima; Inner Mongolian cultural activist Hada; CDP co-founder Qin Yongmin; and political dissident Yang Jianli remained imprisoned or under other forms of detention, some in undisclosed locations.

The Government used the international war on terror as a pretext for cracking down harshly on suspected Uighur separatists expressing peaceful political dissent and on independent Muslim religious leaders. The human rights situation in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and in some Tibetan regions outside the TAR also remained poor (see Tibet Addendum).

The Government maintained tight restrictions on freedom of speech and of the press, and a wave of detentions late in the year signaled a new campaign targeting prominent writers and political commentators. The Government regulated the establishment and management of publications, controlled broadcast and other electronic media, censored some foreign television broadcasts, and jammed some radio signals from abroad. During the year, publications were closed and otherwise disciplined for publishing material deemed objectionable by the Government, and journalists, authors, academics, Internet writers, and researchers were harassed, detained, and arrested by the authorities. Although the scope of permissible private speech has continued to expand in recent years, the Government continued and intensified efforts to monitor and control use of the Internet and other wireless technology, including cellular phones, pagers, and instant messaging devices. During the year, the Government blocked many websites, began monitoring text messages sent by mobile phones, and pressured Internet companies to censor objectionable content. NGOs reported that 43 journalists were imprisoned at year's end.

The Government severely restricted freedom of assembly and association and infringed on individuals' rights to privacy. The authorities harassed and abused many who raised public grievances, including petitioners to the Central Government. The Government outlawed public commemoration of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre. Thousands of individuals protesting forced evictions and workplace and health issues were detained during the year. Petitioner issues were increasingly considered suspect by the Government, and petitioner leader Ye Guozhu was arrested in August while seeking permission to hold a 10,000-person rally against forced eviction.

While the number of religious believers in the country continued to grow, the Government's record on respect for religious freedom remained poor, and repression of members of unregistered religious groups increased in some parts of the country. Members of unregistered Protestant and Catholic congregations, Muslim Uighurs, and Tibetan Buddhists, including those residing within the TAR (see Tibet Addendum) experienced ongoing and, in some cases, increased official interference, harassment, and repression. Government officials increased vigilance against "foreign infiltration under the guise of religion." The Government detained and prosecuted a number of underground religious figures in both the Protestant and Catholic Church. Among them, Protestants Liu Fengang, Xu Yonghai, and Zhang Shengqi were sentenced for sending to overseas organizations information that the Government considered sensitive.

The extent of religious freedom varied significantly from place to place. The Government continued to enforce regulations requiring all places of religious activity to register with the Government. Many provincial authorities required groups seeking to register to come under the supervision of official, "patriotic" religious organizations. Religious worship in many officially registered churches, temples, and mosques occurred without interference, but unregistered churches in some areas were destroyed, religious services were broken up, and church leaders and adherents were harassed, detained, or beaten. At year's end, scores of religious adherents remained in prison because of their religious activities. No visible progress was made in normalizing relations between the official Patriotic Catholic Church and Papal authorities, although both the Government and the Vatican stated that they were ready to resume negotiations aimed at establishing diplomatic relations. The Government continued its crackdown against the Falun Gong spiritual movement, and tens of thousands of practitioners remained incarcerated in prisons, extrajudicial reeducation-through-labor camps, and psychiatric facilities. Several hundred Falun Gong adherents reportedly have died in detention due to torture, abuse, and neglect since the crackdown on Falun Gong began in 1999.

Freedom of movement continued to be restricted. However, the Government continued to relax its residence-based registration requirements. The Government denied the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) permission to operate along its border with North Korea and deported several thousand North Koreans, many of whom faced persecution and some of whom may have been executed upon their return, as provided in North Korean law. Abuse and detention of North Koreans in the country was also reported.

The Government did not permit independent domestic NGOs to monitor human rights conditions. However, in September, the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention visited Beijing, Sichuan, and the TAR and toured 10 detention facilities. Although the Government extended invitations to the U.N. Special Rapporteur for Torture and the U.N. Special Rapporteur for Religious Intolerance, those visits did not occur by year's end. The Government also extended an invitation to the leaders of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, but the visit did not occur due to restrictive conditions that the Government placed on the visit. In December, the Government postponed a planned seminar by the Organization for Economic Cooperation on Socially Responsible Investment, which resulted in the cancellation of a visit by the OECD's Trade Union Advisory Council to discuss labor issues.

Violence against women, including imposition of a coercive birth limitation policy that resulted in instances of forced abortion and forced sterilization, continued to be a problem, as did prostitution. Discrimination against women, persons with disabilities, and minorities persisted. Trafficking in persons continued to be a serious problem.

Labor demonstrations, particularly those protesting nonpayment of back wages, continued. Workplace safety remained a serious problem, particularly in the mining industry. The Government continued to deny internationally recognized worker rights, including freedom of association. Forced labor in prison facilities remained a serious problem.

Significant legal reforms continued during the year, including a Constitutional amendment specifically to include protection of citizens' human rights and legally obtained private property for the first time. In July, the Government enacted the Administrative Procedures Law, which prohibits government agencies from violating citizens' rights or seizing property without clear legal authority. A new infectious disease law was enacted prohibiting discrimination against people with HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis B, and employment discrimination against those with HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis B was outlawed. Treatment of some migrant workers was improved in many major cities through the passage of laws intended to guarantee migrant children access to public education and to protect migrant workers' rights to receive their salary on a regular basis. The Government enacted reforms related to interrogation of detainees, fighting corruption, procedures for requisitioning land, confiscation of personal property, extending social security, regulating religion, and providing legal aid. At year's end, it remained unclear how widely these reforms would be implemented and what effect they would have.

RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom From:

a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life

During the year, politically motivated and other arbitrary and unlawful killings occurred. While no official statistics on deaths in custody were available, state-run media reported that 460 people were killed by law enforcement officials and over 100 seriously injured through abuse or dereliction of duty in 2003. In August, the Sichuan Provincial Procuratorate issued a report stating that, in the first half of the year, 118 individuals in Sichuan Province died and 10 were severely injured due to malfeasance by police and prison officials. In June, state-run media reported that in Guizhou Province police beat Jiang Zongxiu to death after she was detained administratively for distributing Bibles (see Section 2.c.). In April, Gu Xianggao died in police custody in Harbin, Heilongjiang Province. Public security officials offered compensation to his family in connection with his death. In these cases, officials denied that the deaths occurred because of police abuse, but others who viewed the bodies stated that beatings had occurred (see Sections 1.c. and 1.d.).

Several hundred Falun Gong adherents reportedly have died in detention due to torture, abuse, and neglect since the crackdown on Falun Gong began in 1999 (see Section 2.c). Some groups based abroad estimated that as many as 2,000 Falun Gong practictioners have died as a result of official persecution.

Trials involving capital offenses sometimes took place under circumstances involving severe lack of due process and with no meaningful appeal. Executions often took place on the day of conviction or appeal. For example, on international antidrug day, June 26, dozens of prisoners were executed, many within hours of their trial and conviction. In Xinjiang, executions of Uighurs accused by authorities of separatism, which some observers claimed were politically motivated, were reported (see Section 5). The Government regarded the number of death sentences it carried out as a state secret. However, in March, a National People's Congress deputy asserted that nearly 10,000 cases per year "result in immediate execution." The statement sparked calls for reform, including returning the power to issue death sentences from provincial courts to the Supreme People's Court (SPC) and eliminating the death penalty for economic and other nonviolent crimes. Nonetheless, media reports stated that approximately 10 percent of executions were for economic crimes, especially corruption. SPC and Ministry of Justice officials stated that the 10,000 executions per year figure is exaggerated. Amnesty International (AI) reported that China executed more persons than any other country. Some foreign academics estimated that as many as 10,000 to 20,000 persons are executed each year.

b. Disappearance

The Government used incommunicado detention. The law requires notification of family members within 24 hours of detention, but many individuals were held without notification for significantly longer periods, especially in sensitive political cases. Dr. Jiang Yanyong and his wife were detained on June 1 and held incommunicado for several weeks in connection with a letter he wrote to government leaders about the 1989 Tiananmen massacre (see Section 2.d.). New York Times researcher Zhao Yan also was held for several days in September before authorities notified his relatives and employer (see Section 2.a.).

By year's end, the Government had not provided a comprehensive, credible accounting of all those missing or detained in connection with the suppression of the 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations. Public calls for a reassessment of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre increased during the year, especially around the 15th anniversary of the crackdown.

c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

The Prison Law forbids prison guards from extorting confessions by torture, insulting prisoners' dignity, and beating or encouraging others to beat prisoners; however, police and other elements of the security apparatus employed torture and degrading treatment in dealing with some detainees and prisoners. While senior officials acknowledged that torture and coerced confessions were chronic problems, they did not take sufficient measures to end these practices. Former detainees reported credibly that officials used electric shocks, prolonged periods of solitary confinement, incommunicado detention, beatings, shackles, and other forms of abuse.

Since the crackdown on Falun Gong began in 1999, several hundred Falun Gong adherents reportedly died in custody due to torture, abuse, and neglect (see Section 2.c.). During the year, the Government arrested Falun Gong members and formally charged them with manufacturing claims that they were tortured.

During the year, police continued to use torture to coerce confessions from criminal suspects. A Supreme People's Procuratorate (SPP) investigation uncovered more than 4,000 cases of official abuse, including torture and extracting confessions through coercion, from 2001 to 2003. Lawyers and other observers continued to point to the December 2003 conviction and execution of crime syndicate figure Liu Yong on corruption charges as a prominent example of the Government ignoring evidence of torture in the interest of fighting crime. Liu was sentenced to death in 2002, but Beijing-based defense attorneys discovered evidence that a key witness’ confession was coerced through torture. As a result, the Liaoning High Court overturned Liu's death sentence in August 2003. Yielding to public opposition to the ruling, the SPC reinstated the death penalty in December 2003, and Liu was executed the same day.

Mao Hengfeng, a Shanghai housing activist and organizer sentenced to reeducation through labor for staging "disorderly visits" to Government offices, reportedly suffered various forms of torture. She reportedly was held with drug addicts who were allowed to abuse her, was strapped to her bed for hours at time, was force-fed an unidentified medicine that turned her mouth black, and, on one occasion, had her limbs pulled in different directions for a period of 2 days.

The Government made some efforts to address the problem of torture during the year. Some provincial governments issued regulations stipulating that judges and police who used torture to extract confessions from suspects would face dismissal. In May, the SPP announced a 1-year campaign to punish officials who infringed on human rights, including officials who coerced confessions through torture or illegally detained or mistreated prisoners. In August, the Government issued new regulations governing the length and conditions of interrogation for pretrial detainees, including protections for pregnant women, juveniles, and the elderly. Police officers who tortured suspects faced dismissal and criminal prosecution in some cases. For example, in June two police officers in Bazhou, Hebei Province, were sentenced to life in prison and a suspended death sentence after torturing a suspect to death and hiding the body in 2001. In July, two Sichuan Province police officers were sentenced to 12 years and 1 year in prison, respectively, in another case in which a suspect died after being tortured.

During the year, there were reports of persons, including Falun Gong adherents, sentenced to psychiatric hospitals for expressing their political or religious beliefs (see Section 1.d.). Some reportedly were forced to undergo electric shock treatments.

Petitioners and other activists sentenced to administrative detention also reported being tortured. Such reports included being strapped to beds or other devices for days at a time, being beaten, being forcibly injected or fed medications, and being denied food and use of toilet facilities.

The Ministry of Justice administered more than 670 prisons with a population of over 1.5 million inmates, according to official statistics. In addition, 33 jails for juveniles housed over 19,000 juvenile offenders. The country also operated hundreds of administrative detention centers, which were run by security ministries and administered separately from the Ministry of Justice and the formal court system (see Section 2.d.)

Conditions in penal institutions for both political prisoners and common criminals generally were harsh and frequently degrading. Prisoners and detainees often were kept in overcrowded conditions with poor sanitation. Prison capacity became an increasing problem in some areas, including Guangdong Province. Food often was inadequate and of poor quality, and many detainees relied on supplemental food and medicines provided by relatives. Some prominent dissidents were not allowed to receive supplemental food and medicine from relatives. Political prisoners often were kept segregated from each other and placed with common criminals, who sometimes beat political prisoners at the instigation of guards. Xu Guang, a former CDP member released from prison in September, stated that he was beaten and placed in a metal cage for 2 months after he commemorated the anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre while in Qiaoci Prison in Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province. Newly arrived prisoners or those who refused to acknowledge committing crimes were particularly vulnerable to being beaten in prison. In January, political dissident He Depu was reportedly beaten by guards at Beijing No. 2 Prison and made deaf in one ear. Authorities acknowledged He's deafness, but asserted that he was already deaf when he entered prison, a claim denied by his family members. Prolonged use of electric shocks and use of a rack-like disciplinary bed were reported at Inner Mongolia's Chifeng Prison. Inner Mongolian cultural activist Hada was among those tortured, according to credible NGO reports. Chinese prison management relied on the labor of prisoners both as an element of punishment and to fund prison operations (see Section 6.c.).

Adequate, timely medical care for prisoners continued to be a serious problem, despite official assurances that prisoners have the right to prompt medical treatment if they become ill. In August, businessman Wu Daiyou died in a Chongqing prison. His family claimed he contracted tuberculosis in prison and died because authorities denied him needed medical treatment. Political prisoners continued to have difficulties obtaining medical treatment, despite repeated appeals on their behalf by their families and the international community. Foreign citizen Jude Shao suffered a serious heart ailment in a Shanghai prison that authorities were unable to treat. Foreign legal residents Yang Jianli and Wang Bingzhang suffered strokes in prison, but authorities rejected their requests for outside medical care. Others with health concerns included Uighur businesswoman Rebiya Kadeer; democracy activists Qin Yongmin, Hua Di, and He Depu; Internet writers Yang Zili and Luo Yongzhang; labor activists Xiao Yunliang, Yao Fuxin, Hu Shigen, and Zhang Shanguang; civil activist Mao Hengfeng; Inner Mongolian activist Hada; and religious prisoners Zhang Rongliang, Liu Fenggang, Xu Yonghai, Gong Shengliang, Chen Jingmao, and Bishop Su Zhimin. During the year, some political prisoners went on hunger strikes in prison to protest their treatment.

Special prisons to segregate HIV-positive prisoners and provide care to those with HIV/AIDS were established during the year, including facilities in Henan and Zhejiang Provinces. In July, supporters of a Shangqiu, Henan Province AIDS orphanage and school, which the Government claimed was operating illegally, were detained for contesting the closure of the institution. Wang Guofeng and Li Suzhi, who have HIV, claimed they received inadequate treatment while detained and that authorities refused to provide them with test results or allow them to travel to Beijing to see specialists after they were released on bail. The Government stated they were denied imported HIV medications because such medicines likely were smuggled into the country.

Acknowledging guilt was a precondition for receiving certain privileges, including the ability to purchase outside food, make telephone calls, and receive family visits. Prison officials often denied privileges to those, including political prisoners, who refused to acknowledge guilt or obey other prison rules. After CCP activist Wang Bingzhang told jailers he intended to stage a hunger strike, prison staff withheld prison visits, letters, telephone privileges, and other communication for 6 months as punishment. Foreign Falun Gong member Charles Lee staged a hunger strike to protest forced "reeducation" sessions he was given in prison. Some prominent political prisoners, however, received better than standard treatment.

Conditions in administrative detention facilities, such as reeducation-through-labor camps, were similar to those in prisons. Beating deaths occurred in administrative detention. The March 2003 death of university graduate Sun Zhigang in a custody-and-repatriation camp designed to hold illegal migrants focused public attention on abuses in the administrative detention system. Under the custody-and-repatriation system, police detained and forcibly repatriated to their home provinces migrants, petitioners, and political activists caught without an identification card, work permit, or temporary residence permit. Public outcry following Sun's death played an important role in the State Council's decision, in June 2003, to abolish the custody-and-repatriation system and convert custody-and-repatriation camps across the country into voluntary humanitarian aid shelters for the homeless. Initial reports indicated that most current residents of the camps are indeed there voluntarily. In June, a facility employee who urged inmates to beat Sun was sentenced to death. During the year, one inmate was given a suspended death sentence, and 17 others received prison sentences in connection with Sun's death.

Deaths in reeducation-through-labor camps led to calls to reform or abolish that system as well. Reform of the reeducation-through-labor law was placed on the legislative agenda of the National People's Congress (NPC), but no concrete steps were taken to enact a new law during the year. Scholars publicly discussed reforms, including introducing judicial oversight of reeducation-through-labor sentences, allowing lawyers to participate in hearings prior to reeduction sentences, limiting the types of behavior punishable by reeducation, establishing alternatives to incarceration, and shortening the maximum term of reeducation.

Sexual and physical abuse and extortion were reported in some detention centers. Forced labor in prisons and reeducation-through-labor camps was also common.

The Government generally did not permit independent monitoring of prisons or reeducation-through-labor camps, and prisoners remained inaccessible to most international human rights organizations. However, the Government hosted a visit by the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention that included visits to 10 detention facilities in Beijing, Chengdu, and the TAR (see Section 1.d.). The Government also agreed to invite the U.N. Special Rapporteur for Torture, but the visit stalled, in part because of the Government's refusal to allow him to visit prisons without advance notice (see Section 4). By year's end, the Government had not announced any progress in talks with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on an agreement for ICRC access to prisons, although there were several rounds of consultations between the ICRC and the Government about allowing the ICRC to open an office in Beijing. Monthly working level meetings intended to renew cooperation on the U.S.-China Prison Labor Memorandum of Understanding continued during the year, and visits were conducted in July, September, and December (see Section 6.c).

d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention

Arbitrary arrest and detention remained serious problems. The law permits authorities, in some circumstances, to detain persons without arresting or charging them, and persons may be sentenced administratively to up to 3 years in reeducation through-labor camps and other administrative detention facilities without a trial. Because the Government tightly controlled information, it was impossible to determine the total number of persons subjected to new or continued arbitrary arrest or detention. According to 2003 official government statistics, more than 250,000 persons were in reeducation-through-labor camps. Other experts reported that more than 310,000 persons were serving sentences in these camps in 2003. According to published reports of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the country's 340 reeducation-through-labor facilities had a total capacity of about 300,000 people. In addition, special administrative detention facilities existed for drug offenders and prostitutes. In 2002, these facilities held over 130,000 offenders, and the number reportedly has increased. An additional form of administrative detention for migrants and homeless persons, known as custody and repatriation, was abolished in 2003 and converted into a system of over 900 voluntary humanitarian aid shelters (see Section 1.c.). According to official statistics, those facilities had served more than 670,000 people from August 1, 2003 to November 30, 2004. The Government also confined some Falun Gong adherents, petitioners, labor activists, and others to psychiatric hospitals.

Approximately 500 to 600 individuals continued to serve sentences for the now-repealed crime of counterrevolution. Many of these persons were imprisoned for the nonviolent expression of their political views (see Section 1.e.).

The Ministry of Public Security (MPS) coordinates the country's law enforcement, which is administratively organized into local, county, provincial, and specialized police agencies. Recent efforts have been made to strengthen historically weak regulation and management of law enforcement agencies; however, judicial oversight is limited and checks and balances are absent. Corruption at the local level was widespread. Police officers reportedly coerced victims of crimes, took individuals into custody without due cause, arbitrarily collected fees from individuals charged with crimes, and mentally and physically abused victims and perpetrators. The SPP investigated approximately 1,980 police officials for dereliction of duty in the period from January to September. Among them was a Hunan Province police official who was sentenced to 6 months in prison for failing to investigate the abduction and rape of a 9-year-old girl. Public interest lawyers also sued police in a Hunan Province village for failing to investigate the murder of a young woman, allegedly committed by her police officer boyfriend. Through September, the SPP filed 938 corruption cases against 1,078 officials working in prisons, jails, and other detention facilities.

Extended, unlawful detention by security officials remained a serious problem. The SPP reported that from 1998 through 2002 there were 308,182 persons detained for periods longer than permitted by law. In 2003, the Government initiated a campaign to resolve cases of extended, unlawful detention. According to state media, 7,064 criminal suspects endured extended unlawful detention during the year (including some whose detention was prolonged from 2003). Courts reviewed and resolved 6,775 of those cases from January to October 2004, leaving only 289 cases unresolved, the Government stated. In March, the SPC and SPP reported to the National People's Congress that they had reviewed nearly 30,000 extended detention cases in 2003, including many that dated back several years, and resolved nearly all. In most cases, those detained unlawfully were formally charged or convicted, but a few, including Internet writer Liu Di, were released. Procuratorates in Hainan and Guizhou Provinces formally punished local police officers who unlawfully extended a suspect's term in custody.

According to the Criminal Procedure Law, police may unilaterally detain a person for up to 37 days before releasing him or formally placing him under arrest. After a suspect is arrested, the law allows police and prosecutors to detain him for up to 6 and one-half months before trial while a case is being further investigated. In practice, pretrial detention in some cases lasted for a year or longer. Dissident Yang Jianli was held without conviction for more than 2 years before his verdict and 5-year sentence on espionage and illegal entry charges was announced in May. Originally detained in April 2002, he was not tried until August 2003. The U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found that the country's pretrial detention of Yang Jianli violated the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The law stipulates that authorities must notify a detainee's family or work unit of his detention within 24 hours. However, in practice, failure to provide timely notification remained a serious problem, particularly in sensitive political cases. Under a sweeping exception, officials are not required to provide notification if doing so would "hinder the investigation" of a case. In some cases, police treated those with no immediate family more severely. Police continued to hold individuals without granting access to family members or lawyers, and trials continued to be conducted in secret. Detained criminal suspects, defendants, their legal representatives, and close relatives were entitled to apply for bail, but, in practice, few suspects were released pending trial.

The Criminal Procedure Law does not address the reeducation-through-labor system, which allows non-judicial panels of police and local authorities, called Labor Reeducation Committees, to sentence persons to up to 3 years in prison-like facilities. The committees can also extend an inmate's sentence for an additional year. Defendants legally were entitled to challenge reeducation-through-labor sentences under the Administrative Litigation Law. They could appeal for a reduction in, or suspension of, their sentences; however, appeals rarely were successful. Many other persons were detained in similar forms of administrative detention, known as "custody and education" (for example, for prostitutes and their clients) and "custody and training" (for minors who committed crimes). A special form of reeducation center was used to detain Falun Gong practitioners who had completed terms in reeducation through labor, but whom authorities decided to detain further.

According to foreign researchers, the country had 20 "ankang" institutions (high-security psychiatric hospitals for the criminally insane) directly administered by the Ministry of Public Security. Some dissidents, persistent petitioners, and others were housed with mentally ill patients in these institutions. "Patients" in these hospitals were reportedly given medicine against their will and forcibly subjected to electric shock treatment. The regulations for committing a person into an ankang facility were not clear. Credible reports indicated that a number of political and trade union activists, "underground" religious believers, persons who repeatedly petitioned the Government, members of the banned China Democratic Party, and Falun Gong adherents were incarcerated in such facilities during the year. These included Wang Miaogen, Wang Chanhao, Pan Zhiming, and Li Da, who were reportedly held in an ankang facility run by the Shanghai Public Security Bureau. The Government negotiated with the World Psychiatric Association to resolve a motion pending in previous years that would have expelled the country from the organization for using psychiatric facilities to incarcerate political prisoners, but a planned WPA visit to the country did not take place.

Administrative detention was frequently used as a vehicle to intimidate political activists and prevent public demonstrations (see Section 2.b.). For example, authorities detained several persons in the period before the April "Qingming" memorial holiday as a means to prevent public commemoration of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre. Tiananmen Mothers organization co-founders Ding Zilin, Jiang Xianling, and Huang Jinping were detained at separate locations in late March. AIDS activist Hu Jia also was detained after he stated his intention to commemorate the anniversary on their behalf. All were released eventually, but some were prevented from returning to Beijing until after the holiday was over. On June 1, military officials detained retired PLA doctor Jiang Yanyong, who in 2003 had helped focus international attention on the spread of Severe Acquired Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in Beijing, because he wrote to government leaders requesting a reassessment of the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown. The 72-year-old Jiang and his wife, Hua Zhongwei, were interrogated in an undisclosed location. Hua was released on June 15. Jiang was released without charges on July 20, but he was forbidden to speak with journalists or foreigners, and he remained in a form of house arrest. Dr. Jiang also was pressured not to leave the country to accept an award (see Section 2.d.).

Arrests on charges of revealing state secrets, subversion, and common crimes were used during the year by authorities to suppress political dissent and social advocacy. Citizens were detained and prosecuted during the year under broad and ambiguous state secrets laws for, among other actions, disclosing information on criminal trials, meetings, and government activity. The number of persons executed each year has been deemed by the Government to be a state secret. Information could retroactively be classified a state secret by the Government. Dozens of citizens writing on the Internet or engaging in on-line chat about political topics were detained on state secrets and subversion charges during the year (see Section 2.a.). More than 100 intellectuals signed a petition urging the Government to revise the subversion law because its use in the prosecution of Internet writer Du Daobin contradicted the constitutional guarantee of free speech.

In September, the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention visited detention facilities in Beijing, Sichuan Province, and the TAR. Although satisfied with its access, the Working Group noted that all four recommendations from its 1997 visit to China still had not been implemented and continued to be serious problems. First, the law lacks a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Second, it fails to define "endangering national security" so that overly broad prosecutions can and do occur. Third, the law includes no protection for those peacefully exercising rights protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Fourth, no "real judicial control" exists over the reeducation-through-labor system. The Working Group noted the Government's announced plan to adopt legislation that would address deficiencies in reeducation through labor and regulate the use of psychiatric institutions in administrative detention.

Police sometimes harassed and detained relatives of dissidents. Journalists also were detained or threatened during the year, often when their reporting met with the Government's or local authorities' disapproval (see Section 2.a.). For example, New York Times researcher Zhao Yan was detained in September shortly after the newspaper published an article correctly predicting the resignation of Jiang Zemin as chairman of the Central Military Commission. The newspaper denied that Zhao had any involvement with the story, and prosecutors did not disclose the basis for the charges, citing state secrets laws (see Section 2.a.). In December, farmers' advocate and writer Li Boguang and three members of the independent PEN Center promoting writers' freedoms were among those detained in what appeared to be a campaign targeting writers (see Section 2.a.). Local authorities used the Government's campaign against cults to detain and arrest large numbers of religious practitioners and members of spiritual groups, including Christian leader Zhang Rongliang (see Section 2.c.).

The campaign that began in 1998 against the China Democracy Party (CDP), an opposition party, continued during the year. Dozens of CDP leaders, activists, and members have been arrested, detained, or confined as a result of this campaign. Since December 1998, over 40 core leaders of the CDP have been given severe punishments on subversion charges. Xu Wenli, Wang Youcai, and Qin Yongmin were sentenced in 1998 to prison terms of 13, 12, and 11 years, respectively. Xu Wenli and Wang Youcai were released on medical parole to the United States in December 2002 and March 2004, respectively. Qin remained in prison at year’s end. During the year, Sang Jiancheng was sentenced to a 3-year prison term in connection with an open letter calling for political reform and a reappraisal of the official verdict on the 1989 Tiananmen massacre signed by 192 activists, including former CDP members, prior to the 16th Party Congress in November 2002. Internet writer Ouyang Yi, one of the signers of the open letter, was released after serving a 2-year prison sentence in December, but other signers of the letter remained jailed.

Since the Government banned the Falun Gong spiritual group in 1999, criminal proceedings involving accused Falun Gong activists were held almost entirely outside the formal court system. In December, a Beijing attorney sent an open letter to the National People's Congress highlighting issues of arbitrary detention and unlawful process in cases involving Falun Gong. The letter focused on the April detention and subsequent administrative sentencing of his client, Huang Wei of Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, who was released in 2002 from a 3-year reeducation sentence for Falun Gong activities. On April 13, Huang was detained again, his home was searched, and a security official signed Huang's name on a confession, according to the open letter. Huang was sentenced on June 3 to three more years of reeducation in connection with Falun Gong. When Huang tried to sue the Government in protest, his attorney was denied permission to see his client. According to the letter, court and prison authorities told the attorney that only the "610 Office" of the Ministry of Justice could address Falun Gong matters. In the process, the letter described how judges explained that courts are under strict orders not to accept Falun Gong cases and that, in such cases, the courts do not follow normal pretrial procedures. The attorney's letter concluded that such treatment of accused Falun Gong adherents was unlawful.

The campaign against separatism in Xinjiang specifically targeted the "three evils" of extremism, splittism, and terrorism as the major threats to Xinjiang's social stability. Because authorities in Xinjiang regularly failed to distinguish carefully among those involved in peaceful activities in support of independence, "illegal" religious activities, and violent terrorism, it was often difficult to determine whether particular raids, detentions, arrests, or judicial punishments targeted those seeking to worship, those peacefully seeking political goals, or those engaged in violence (see Section 5).

e. Denial of Fair Public Trial

The Constitution states that the courts shall, in accordance with the law, exercise judicial power independently, without interference from administrative organs, social organizations, and individuals. However, in practice, the judiciary was not independent. It received policy guidance from both the Government and the Party, whose leaders used a variety of means to direct courts on verdicts and sentences, particularly in politically sensitive cases. At both the central and local levels, the Government frequently interfered in the judicial system and dictated court decisions. Trial judges decide individual cases under the direction of the trial committee in each court. In addition, the Communist Party's Law and Politics Committee, which includes representatives of the police, security, procuratorate, and courts, has authority to review and influence court operations at all levels of the judiciary; the Committee, in some cases, altered decisions. People's Congresses also had authority to alter court decisions, but this happened rarely. Corruption and conflicts of interest also affected judicial decision-making. Judges were appointed by the People's Congresses at the corresponding level of the judicial structure and received their court finances and salaries from those government bodies. This sometimes resulted in local authorities exerting undue influence over the judges they appointed and financed.

The Supreme People's Court (SPC) is the highest court, followed in descending order by the higher, intermediate, and basic people's courts. These courts handle criminal, civil, and administrative cases, including appeals of decisions by police and security officials to use reeducation through labor and other forms of administrative detention. There were special courts for handling military, maritime, and railway transport cases.

Corruption and inefficiency were serious problems in the judiciary as in other areas (see Section 3). Safeguards against corruption were vague and poorly enforced.

In recent years, the Government has taken steps to address systemic weaknesses in the judicial system and to make the system more transparent and accountable to public scrutiny. In 2003, the SPP prosecuted 9,720 officials involved in investigating, prosecuting, or adjudicating criminal cases. In its March report to the National People's Congress (NPC), the SPC reported that 794 judges were investigated for corruption in 2003, and 52 faced criminal prosecution. SPC regulations require all trials to be open to the public, with certain exceptions, such as cases involving state secrets, privacy, and minors. The legal exception for cases involving state secrets was used to keep politically sensitive proceedings closed to the public and even to family members in some cases. Under the regulations, "foreigners with valid identification" are to be allowed the same access to trials as citizens. As in past years, foreign diplomats and journalists sought permission to attend a number of trials only to have court officials reclassify them as "state secrets" cases, thus closing them to the public. Some trials were broadcast, and court proceedings were a regular television feature. A few courts published their verdicts on the Internet.

Citizens continued to use the court system to seek legal redress against government malfeasance. According to official statistics, 110,199 administrative lawsuits were filed against the Government in 2002, slightly fewer than in the previous year. Administrative actions were affirmed 18 percent of the time, transferred 23 percent of the time, and dismissed or rejected 59 percent of the time, according to those 2002 statistics. Decisions of any kind in favor of dissidents remained rare.

Court officials continued efforts to enable the poor to afford litigation by exempting, reducing, or postponing court fees. During the year, new regulations went into effect requiring law firms and private attorneys to provide some legal aid. Criminal and administrative cases remained eligible for legal aid, although the vast majority of defendants still went to trial without a lawyer. During the year, courts waived over $128 million (RMB 1.057 billion) in litigation costs. Legal aid to migrant workers accounted for 137,656 cases; in most cases, migrant workers sued for unpaid wages. State media claimed that the number of attorneys in the country increased to 102,000, but the supply of legal aid attorneys remained inadequate to meet demand. For example, the number of registered legal aid attorneys in Guangdong Province dropped 25 percent in 2003, and no legal aid agency existed in 45 counties in Guangxi Province. Nonattorney legal advisors and government employees provided the only legal aid options in many areas.

During the year, the conviction rate in criminal cases remained over 95 percent. In 2003, 730,355 of the 747,096 persons (97.7 percent) whose criminal cases were resolved at trial were found guilty and received criminal punishment. Of this number 158,562 (21.2 percent) were sentenced to terms of imprisonment of 5 years or greater. In practice, criminal defendants often were not assigned an attorney until a case was brought to court. In many politically sensitive trials, which rarely lasted more than several hours, the courts handed down guilty verdicts immediately following proceedings. Defendants who refused to acknowledge guilt often received harsher sentences than those who confessed. There was an appeals process, but appeals rarely resulted in reversals.

Police and prosecutorial officials often ignored the due process provisions of the law and of the Constitution. The lack of due process was particularly egregious in death penalty cases. There were over 60 capital offenses, including nonviolent financial crimes such as counterfeiting currency, embezzlement, and corruption. Executions were often carried out on the date of conviction (see Section 1.a.). The SPC reported that, in 2003, it reviewed 300 serious criminal cases, including capital cases, and affirmed 182 of them. Tibetan Lobsang Dondrub was executed in January 2003 for his alleged connection to a series of bombings in 2002. His execution occurred despite government assurances that he would be afforded full due process and that the national-level Supreme People’s Court would review his sentence (see Tibet Addendum). The Government regarded the number of death sentences it carried out as a state secret. Minors and pregnant women were expressly exempt from the death sentence, although AI reported that a few criminals who were under age 18 at the time they committed an offense were executed as a result of courts' failure properly to determine their age. On March 8, Gao Pan was allegedly executed for a murder committed in August 2001, when he was not yet 18 years old.

The Criminal Procedure Law falls short of international standards in many respects. For example, it has insufficient safeguards against the use of evidence gathered through illegal means, such as torture, and it does not prevent extended pre- and posttrial detention (see Sections 1.c. and 1.d.). Appeals processes failed to provide sufficient avenue for review, and there were inadequate remedies for violations of defendants' rights. Furthermore, under the law, there is no right to remain silent, no protection against double jeopardy, and no law governing the type of evidence that may be introduced. The mechanism that allows defendants to confront their accusers was inadequate; according to one expert, only 1 to 5 percent of trials involved witnesses. Accordingly, most criminal "trials" consisted of the procurator reading statements of witnesses whom neither the defendant nor his lawyer ever had an opportunity to question. Defense attorneys have no authority to compel witnesses to testify. Anecdotal evidence indicated that implementation of the Criminal Procedure Law remained uneven and far from complete, particularly in politically sensitive cases.

The Criminal Procedure Law gives most suspects the right to seek legal counsel shortly after their initial detention and interrogation; however, police often used loopholes in the law to circumvent defendants' right to seek counsel. Defendants in politically sensitive cases frequently found it difficult to find an attorney. In some sensitive cases, lawyers had no pretrial access to their clients, and defendants and lawyers were not allowed to speak during trials. Even in nonsensitive trials, criminal defense lawyers frequently had little access to their clients or to evidence to be presented during the trial. Defendants in only one of every seven criminal cases had legal representation, according to credible reports citing internal government statistics. Government-employed lawyers often were reluctant to represent defendants in politically sensitive cases. The percentage of lawyers in the criminal bar reportedly declined from 3 percent in 1997 to 1 percent in 2001.

Defense attorneys rarely entered not guilty pleas on behalf of their clients, choosing instead to argue only for mitigation of the sentence. In June, a Hubei Intermediate Court scheduled the trial of Internet dissident Du Daobin on less than a week's notice, in part to prevent Du's Beijing-based defense counsel from appearing in court and presenting a not guilty plea. The local attorney who defended Du declined to submit a not guilty plea, citing fear of pressure by local authorities.

Some lawyers who tried to defend their clients aggressively continued to face serious intimidation and abuse by police and prosecutors, and some were detained. According to Article 306 of the Criminal Law, defense attorneys could be held responsible if their clients commit perjury, and prosecutors and judges in such cases have wide discretion in determining what constitutes perjury. In May, prominent Beijing defense attorney Zhang Jianzhong was released after serving a 2-year sentence under Article 306. Chinese legal scholars claimed he was singled out for being too effective at representing criminal defendants, and approximately 600 lawyers signed a petition demanding that Zhang be found not guilty. According to the All-China Lawyers Association, since 1997 more than 400 defense attorneys have been detained on similar charges, and such cases continued during the year.

During the year, Chinese and foreign lawyers, law professors, legal journals, and jurists held seminars and publicly debated systemic legal reform. Among the suggested reforms were the introduction of a more transparent system of discovery, the abolition of coerced confessions, abolition of all forms of administrative detention, a legal presumption of innocence, an independent judiciary, improved administrative laws, restriction on use of the death penalty, reform of the media's interaction with the court system, and adoption of a plea bargaining system.

Government officials continued to deny holding any political prisoners, asserting that authorities detained persons not for their political or religious views, but because they violated the law; however, the authorities continued to confine citizens for reasons related to politics and religion. Tens of thousands of political prisoners remained incarcerated, some in prisons and others in labor camps. The Government did not grant international humanitarian organizations access to political prisoners.

Western NGOs estimated that approximately 500 to 600 persons remained in prison for the repealed crime of "counterrevolution," and thousands of others were serving sentences under the State Security Law, which Chinese authorities stated covers crimes similar to counterrevolution. Persons detained for counterrevolutionary offenses included labor activist Hu Shigen; writer Chen Yanbin; Inner Mongolian activist Hada; and dissidents Yu Dongyue, Zhang Jingsheng, and Sun Xiongying. Foreign governments urged the Government to review the cases of those charged before 1997 with counterrevolution and to release those who had been jailed for nonviolent offenses under the old statute. During the year, the Government held expert-level discussions with foreign officials on conducting such a review, but no formal review was initiated. However, a number of "counterrevolutionary" prisoners were released during the year, some after receiving sentence reductions, including Liu Jingsheng in November and Chen Gang in April.

Amnesty International has identified more than 80 persons by name who remained imprisoned or on medical parole for their participation in the 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations; other NGOs estimated that as many as 250 persons remained in prison for political activities connected to the 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations.

The authorities granted early release from prison to Tibetan nun Phuntsog Nyidrol in February and CDP co-founder Wang Youcai in March. In March, Uighur businesswoman Rebiya Kadeer received a 1-year sentence reduction on her 8-year sentence for supplying state secrets to foreigners, but she was scheduled to remain in prison until August 2006. Many others, including Internet activists Xu Wei, Yang Zili, and Huang Qi; journalists Zhao Yan and Jiang Weiping; labor activists Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang; Catholic Bishop Su Zhimin; Christian activists Zhang Rongliang, Zhang Yinan, Liu Fenggang, and Xu Yonghai; Tibetans Jigme Gyatso, Tenzin Deleg, and Gendun Choekyi Nyima; Uighur writer Tohti Tunyaz; CDP co-founder Qin Yongmin; and political dissident Yang Jianli remained imprisoned or under other forms of detention during the year. Political prisoners generally benefited from parole and sentence reduction at significantly lower rates than ordinary prisoners.

Criminal punishments could include "deprivation of political rights" for a fixed period after release from prison, during which the individual is denied the limited rights of free speech and association granted to other citizens. Former prisoners also sometimes found their status in society, ability to find employment, freedom to travel, and access to residence permits and social services severely restricted. Former political prisoners and their families frequently were subjected to police surveillance, telephone wiretaps, searches, and other forms of harassment, and some encountered difficulty in obtaining or keeping employment and housing.

Officials confirmed that executed prisoners were among the sources of organs for transplant. Transplant doctors stated publicly in September 2003 that "the main source [of organ donations] is voluntary donations from condemned prisoners," but serious questions remained concerning whether meaningful or voluntary consent from the prisoners or their relatives was obtained. There was no national law governing organ donations, but a draft law was under consideration during the year. A Ministry of Health directive explicitly states that buying and selling human organs and tissues is not allowed. In 2003, the first local law regulating organ donation was passed in Shenzhen, prohibiting the sale or trade of human organs. The impact of this law in practice remained unclear. As of year’s end, there were no reports of other localities passing a similar law. There were no reliable statistics on how many organ transplants occurred using organs from executed prisoners.

f. Arbitrary Interference With Privacy, Family, Home, Correspondence

The Constitution states that the "freedom and privacy of correspondence of citizens are protected by law"; however, the authorities often did not respect the privacy of citizens in practice. Although the law requires warrants before law enforcement officials can search premises, this provision frequently was ignored; moreover, the Public Security Bureau and the Procuratorate could issue search warrants on their own authority. Cases of forced entry by police officers continued to be reported.

During the year, authorities monitored telephone conversations, facsimile transmissions, e-mail, text-messaging, and Internet communications. Authorities also opened and censored domestic and international mail. The security services routinely monitored and entered residences and offices to gain access to computers, telephones, and fax machines. All major hotels had a sizable internal security presence, and hotel guestrooms were sometimes bugged and searched for sensitive or proprietary materials.

Some dissidents were under heavy surveillance and routinely had their telephone calls monitored or telephone service disrupted. The authorities frequently warned some dissidents and activists not to meet with foreigners. During the year, police in Beijing ordered several dissidents not to meet with Western journalists or foreign diplomats, especially before sensitive anniversaries, at the time of important Government or Party meetings, and during the visits of high-level foreign officials. These events also sparked greater surveillance, short-term detention, and harassment of dissidents. The authorities also confiscated money sent from abroad that was intended to help dissidents and their families.

Security personnel monitored and harrassed relatives of prominent dissidents, particularly during sensitive periods. For example, security personnel followed the family members of political prisoners to meetings with Western reporters and diplomats. Dissidents and their family members routinely were warned not to speak with the foreign press. Police sometimes detained the relatives of dissidents.

Official poverty alleviation programs and major state projects have included forced relocation of persons to new residences. The Government estimated that at least 1.2 million persons have been relocated for the Three Gorges Dam project on the Yangtze River.

Forced relocation because of urban development continued and, in some locations, increased during the year. Protests, some of which included thousands of participants, over relocation terms or compensation were common, and some protest leaders were prosecuted during the year (see Sections 2.b. and 3). Some evictions in Beijing were linked to construction for the 2008 Olympics.

In urban areas, many persons historically depended on government-linked work units for housing, healthcare, and other aspects of ordinary life. With the increase in market activities and private business, these benefits have changed so that newer employees at some government-linked work units no longer enjoy all of these benefits. For example, most work units now provide housing subsidies to employees, instead of directly alloting housing. Similarly, the work unit and the neighborhood committee have become less important as means of social and political control. Government interference in daily personal and family life continued to decline for most citizens. For example, work unit permission is no longer required before obtaining a divorce.

Under the country's family planning law and policies, citizens in 6 of the country's 31 provinces still were required to apply for government permission before having a first child, and the Government continued to restrict the number of births. Penalties for out-of-plan births still included social compensation fees and other coercive measures.

The Population and Family Planning Law, the country's first formal law on the subject, entered into force in 2002. The National Population and Family Planning Commission (NPFPC) enforces the law and formulates and implements policies with assistance from the China Family Planning Association, which had 1 million branches nationwide. The law is intended to standardize the implementation of the Government's birth limitation policies; however, enforcement continued to vary from place to place. The law grants married couples the right to have one child and allows eligible couples to apply for permission to have a second child if they meet conditions stipulated in local and provincial regulations. Many provincial regulations require women to wait 4 years or more after their first birth before making such an application. According to the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA), the spacing requirement was removed in 5 and relaxed in 10 of the 30 counties across 30 provinces participating in UNFPA's "Country Program V." The NPFPC reported that the spacing requirement was removed in the provincial regulations of Hainan, Jilin, and Shanghai, and UNFPA reported that the requirement was relaxed by 15 other provincial-level governments.

The law requires counties to use specific measures to limit the total number of births in each county. Both the Constitution and the family planning law further require couples to employ birth control measures. According to a September 2002 U.N. survey, the percentage of women who select their own birth control method grew from 53 percent in 1998 to 83 percent in UNFPA-assisted counties in 2000. The law requires couples who have an unapproved child to pay a "social compensation fee," which sometimes reached 10 times a person's annual income, and grants preferential treatment to couples who abide by the birth limits. Officials often strongly encouraged women with multiple children to undergo sterilization, such as tubal ligation, according to multiple reports. Although the law states that officials should not violate citizens' rights, neither those rights nor the penalties for violating them are defined. The law provides significant and detailed sanctions for officials who help persons evade the birth limitations.

The law delegates to the provinces the responsibility for drafting implementing regulations, including establishing a scale for assessment of social compensation fees. The National Population and Family Planning Law requires family planning officials to obtain court approval for taking "forcible" action, such as confiscation of property, against families that refuse to pay social compensation fees.

The one-child limit was more strictly applied in the cities, where only couples meeting certain conditions (e.g., both parents are only children) were permitted to have a second child. In most rural areas (including towns of under 200,000 persons), where approximately two-thirds of citizens lived, the policy was more relaxed, generally allowing couples to have a second child if the first was a girl or disabled. Local officials, caught between pressures from superiors to show declining birth rates, and from local citizens to allow them to have more than one child, frequently made false reports. Ethnic minorities, such as Muslim Uighurs and Tibetans, were subject to much less stringent population controls (see Tibet Addendum). In remote areas, limits often were not enforced, except on government employees and Party members.

The 2000 census enumerated the fertility rate at 1.3 births per woman, but later the Government adjusted the figure upward to 1.8 births per woman. According to the U.N., the fertility rate does not exceed 1.7. According to Chinese census authorities, the yearly growth rate of the population is 0.7 percent per year. Media reports indicated that some parts of the country had zero or even negative population growth, while the growth rate continued to increase elsewhere.

Authorities continued to reduce the use of targets and quotas. Authorities who still used the target and quota system required each eligible married couple to obtain government permission before the woman became pregnant. In some counties, only a limited number of such permits were made available each year, so couples who did not receive a permit were required to wait at least a year before obtaining permission. Counties that did not employ targets and quotas allowed married women to have a first child without prior permission. UNFPA research showed, and the NPFPC confirmed, that 25 of China's 31 provincial-level governments had done away with the requirement for birth permits before conceiving a first child, the principal mechanism for enforcing targets and quotas. Some targets remained, such as in Liaoning Province which continues to set provincial targets in its 5-year plan, despite having abolished birth permits four years ago and having eliminated target-setting at the city, county and township levels. UNFPA reports that only Fujian, Henan, Jiangxi, and Yunnan Provinces and the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region still required birth permits.

The country's population control policy relied on education, propaganda, and economic incentives, as well as on more coercive measures such as the threat of job loss or demotion and social compensation fees. Psychological and economic pressure were very common; during unauthorized pregnancies, women sometimes were visited by birth planning workers who used threats, including that of social compensation fees, to pressure women to terminate their pregnancies. The fees were assessed at widely varying levels and were generally extremely high. According to provincial regulations, the fees ranged from one-half to 10 times the average worker's annual disposable income. Local officials have authority to adjust the fees downward and did so in many cases. Additional disciplinary measures against those who violated the child limit policy by having an unapproved child or helping another to do so included job loss or demotion, loss of promotion opportunity, expulsion from the Party (membership in which was an unofficial requirement for certain jobs), and other administrative punishments, including, in some cases, the destruction of property. In the cases of families that already had two children, one parent was often pressured to undergo sterilization, according to reliable reports. These penalties sometimes left women little practical choice but to undergo abortion or sterilization. Rewards for couples who adhered to birth limitation laws and policies included monthly stipends and preferential medical and educational benefits. During the year, the NPFPC began a number of programs to encourage smaller families. For example, new pension benefits were made available for those who adhered to birth limitation laws.

Seven provinces--Anhui, Hebei, Heilongjiang, Hubei, Hunan, Jilin, and Ningxia--require "termination of pregnancy" if the pregnancy violates provincial family planning regulations. An additional 10 provinces--Fujian, Guizhou, Guangdong, Gansu, Jiangxi, Qinghai, Sichuan Shanxi, Shannxi, and Yunnan--require unspecified "remedial measures" to deal with out-of-plan pregnancies. Article 33 of the 2002 law states that family planning bureaus will conduct pregnancy tests and follow-up on married women. Some provincial regulations provide for fines if women do not undergo periodic pregnancy tests. For example, in Hebei the range was $24 to $60 (RMB 200 to 500), and in Henan it was $6 to $60 (RMB 50 to 500).

At the same time, because of economic development and other factors, such as limited housing size, both parents working full-time, and high education expenses, couples in major urban centers often voluntarily limited their families to one child.

The Population and Family Planning Law delegates to the provinces the responsibility for implementing appropriate regulations to enforce the law. By year's end, all provincial-level governments except the TAR had amended their regulations to conform with the new law. Anhui Province, for example, passed a law permitting 13 categories of couples, including coal miners, some remarried divorcees, and some farm couples, to have a second child. The law does not require such amendments, however, unless existing regulations conflict with it. Existing regulations requiring sterilization in certain cases are not contradicted by the new law, which says simply that compliance with the birth limits should "mainly" be achieved through the use of contraception.

Central Government policy formally prohibits the use of physical coercion to compel persons to submit to abortion or sterilization. Because it is illegal, the use of physical coercion was difficult to document. A few cases were reported during the year. In June, officials in Jieshou City, Anhui Province, forced a woman to be sterilized, and state media reported that the woman was injured when she jumped out of a window in the operating room in an attempt to avoid the procedure. In the same city, another woman committed suicide when her relatives were detained in population schools, facilities designed to provide reeducation to those who violate family planning guidelines. The use of population schools as detention centers was condemned by Central Government officials. According to state-media reports, the local officials responsible for the detentions were fired or sanctioned administratively. In response, NPFPC officials ordered an investigation, sent a letter to each province condemning the actions in Anhui Province, and called on all provincial-level family planning officials to focus on "implementing the rule of law." Earlier in the year, media reports noted that a drug offender in Gansu Province was forced to have an abortion before her trial on charges punishable by the death sentence.

Senior officials stated repeatedly that the Government "made it a principle to ban coercion at any level," and the NPFPC has issued circulars nationwide prohibiting birth planning officials from coercing women to undergo abortions or sterilization. However, the Government does not consider social compensation fees and other administrative punishments to be coercive. Under the State Compensation Law, citizens also may sue officials who exceed their authority in implementing birth planning policy, and, in a few instances, individuals have exercised this right. The NPFPC has set up a hotline for use by UNFPA project county residents to lodge complaints against local officials.

Corruption related to social compensation fees reportedly decreased after the 2002 passage of State Council Decree 357, which established that collected "social compensation fees" must be submitted directly to the National Treasury rather than retained by local birth planning authorities. NPFPC officials reported in 2002 that they responded to more than 10,000 complaints against local officials.

In order to delay childbearing, the Marriage Law sets the minimum marriage age for women at 20 years and for men at 22 years. It continued to be illegal in almost all provinces for a single woman to bear a child, and social compensation fees have been levied on unwed mothers. The Government stated that the practice of levying social compensation fees for "pre-marriage" births was abolished on an experimental basis in some counties during the year and was relaxed in cases where couples promptly registered their marriages. In 2002, Jilin Province passed a law making it legal, within the limits of the birth limitation law, for an unmarried woman who "intends to remain single for life" to have a child.

Laws and regulations forbid the termination of pregnancies based on the sex of the fetus, but because of the intersection of birth limitations with the traditional preference for male children, particularly in rural areas, many families used ultrasound technology to identify female fetuses and terminate these pregnancies (see Section 5). The use of ultrasound for this purpose is prohibited specifically by the Population Law and by the Maternal and Child Health Care Law, both of which mandate punishment of medical practitioners who violate the provision. According to the NPFPC, few doctors have been charged under these laws. The most recent official figures, from November 2000, put the overall male to female sex ratio at birth at 116.9 to 100 (as compared to the statistical norm of 106 to 100), and, in some parts of the country, the ratio was even more skewed. For second births, the national ratio was 151.9 to 100. Several localities experimented with new measures to address the sex ratio imbalance. These included restricting promotions for officials in extremely unbalanced areas of Shaanxi Province and limiting abortions after 14 weeks for pregnancies that were authorized by a birth or family planning permit in Guiyang. During the year, the NPFPC launched a "Care for the Girl Child" initiative in 11 pilot counties to raise awareness of the sex ratio imbalance and to improve protection of the rights of girls.

In 2003, a new Marriage Law abolished a requirement that couples have premarital examinations to determine if they were at risk for passing on debilitating genetic diseases. In addressing the risk of genetic disease, the Maternal and Child Health Care Law continued to recommend abortion or sterilization in some cases. In practice, however, most regions of the country still did not have the medical capacity to determine accurately the likelihood of passing on debilitating genetic diseases.

Lack of informed consent was a general problem in the practice of medicine throughout the country.

Section 2 Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:

a. Freedom of Speech and Press

The Constitution states that freedom of speech and freedom of the press are fundamental rights to be enjoyed by all citizens; however, the Government tightly restricted these rights in practice. The Government interpreted the Party's "leading role," as mandated in the preamble to the Constitution, as circumscribing these rights. The Government continued to threaten, arrest, and imprison many individuals for exercising free speech. A wave of detentions late in the year appeared to signal a new campaign against writers. Internet essayists in particular were targeted. The Government strictly regulated the establishment and management of publications. The Government did not permit citizens to publish or broadcast criticisms of senior leaders or opinions that directly challenged Communist Party rule. The Party and Government continued to control print, broadcast, and electronic media tightly and used them to propagate Government views and Party ideology. All media employees were under explicit, public orders to follow CCP directives and "guide public opinion," as directed by political authorities. Formal and informal guidelines continued to require journalists to avoid coverage of many politically sensitive topics. These public orders, guidelines, and statutes greatly restricted the freedom of broadcast journalists and newspapers to report the news and led to a high degree of self-censorship. The Government continued an intense propaganda campaign against the Falun Gong.

Journalists who reported on topics that met with the Government's or local authorities' disapproval continued to suffer harassment, detention, and imprisonment. In January, the chief editor and six staff members of Guangdong Province's Southern Metropolitan Daily newspaper were detained for alleged economic crimes. Three of the editors were prosecuted in March on corruption charges that many observers viewed as retaliation for the newspaper's muckraking coverage of stories such as the emergence of SARS in 2003, its brief recurrence in 2004, and the 2003 beating death of college graduate Sun Zhigang in a custody and repatriation camp (see Section 1.c). The news group's general manager Yu Huafeng was sentenced to 12 years inprisonment for embezzlement, and former editor Li Minying received an 11-year sentence for taking bribes. In June, their sentences were reduced on appeal to 8 and 6 years, respectively. Current editor-in-chief Cheng Yizhong was released in August after charges against him were dropped. In September, New York Times employee Zhao Yan was detained and later formally charged with leaking state secrets shortly after the newspaper published an article correctly predicting the resignation of Jiang Zemin as chairman of the Central Military Commission. The newspaper denied that Zhao had any involvement with the story, and prosecutors did not disclose the basis for the charges, citing state secrets laws. Zhao Yan had previously published several articles on rural protests for China Reform magazine. Another farmers’ advocate who had also worked with Zhao Yan, Li Boguang, was detained December 14. In addition, Liaoning Province anti-corruption reporter Jiang Weiping remained jailed, as did Sichuan local official Li Zhi, who was convicted in 2003 of "subverting state power" after writing on the Internet to expose official corruption. The Committee to Protect Journalists again assessed China as "the world's leading jailer of journalists," with 43 journalists imprisoned at year's end.

A wave of detentions late in the year appeared to signal a new campaign targeting writers, political commentators, and academics. In November, Li Guozhu was detained for passing to foreign journalists information and photographs about ethnic violence in Henan Province (see Section 5). On November 24, Hunan Province journalist Shi Tao was detained under suspicion of leaking state secrets. On December 13, organizers of the independent PEN Center, which defends writers' freedoms, were detained and later released. Those detained included Yu Jie, Liu Xiaobo, and Zhang Zuhua. They had previously published articles in defense of Shi Tao and held an awards ceremony honoring the author of a banned book on the 1950s. Editor Wang Guangze of the 21st Century Business Herald was dismissed from his job, editor Chen Min of China Reform magazine was temporarily detained, and the New Weekly newspaper in Wuhan was ordered closed during this period. The week of December 6, People's Daily twice published editorials urging authorities to silence speech that provokes trouble and to provide greater control over the Internet.

In addition to criminal prosecution of writers, some government officials used civil lawsuits to block controversial writings. In August, the Fuyang Intermediate People's Court in Anhui Province heard a libel action against authors Chen Guidi and Wu Chuntao over their book "China Peasant Survey" (Nongmin Diaocha). The book, which was a best-seller until it was banned from further distribution in the spring, describes abuse and extortion of farmers by officials. One official named in the book, former Linquan County Communist Party secretary Zhang Xide, sued the authors and publishing house for libel. Scholars and attorneys stated that the lawsuit and high damages sought of approximately $25,000 (RMB 200,000) were intended to intimidate the publisher and inhibit criticism.

Newspapers could not report on corruption without government and party approval, and publishers published such material at their own risk. During the year, journalists and editors who exposed corruption scandals frequently faced problems with the authorities, and the Government continued to close publications and punish journalists for printing material deemed too sensitive. The State Press and Publication Administration ordered the influential bimonthly journal "Strategy and Management" closed indefinitely during the year, although the Government claimed that business reasons, not editorial ones, were behind the closure.

In August, authorities detained and deported two foreign individuals and two journalists for displaying a banner in Beijing reading "No Olympics for China until Tibet is Free."

Some citizens continued to speak out and publish on controversial topics, despite the Government's restrictions on freedom of speech and the press. For example, scholar Cao Siyuan, who convened a symposium on constitutionalism, freedom of speech, and direct elections in 2003 that attracted government attention, continued to publish but remained under surveillance by authorities. Huang Jingao, Party Secretary of Lianjiang County, Fujian Province, wrote an open letter critical of endemic corruption that was published on websites and in the People's Daily in August. Following the publication of the letter, he was sanctioned, and his duties were restricted by party officials in Fujian.

The scope of permissible private speech continued to expand. Controversial political topics could be discussed privately and in small groups without punishment, so long as the speaker did not publish controversial views or disseminate them to overseas audiences.

Censorship related to health issues continued. In early 2003, Government censorship of news concerning SARS was largely responsible for slowing the public health response to the disease. But after May 2003, when the Government publicly acknowledged the spread of the disease, the Government permitted greater reporting about SARS and other infectious diseases. As a result of lessons learned during the SARS epidemic, the Shanghai Municipal Government named its first public spokesperson. Nonetheless, in January, when Guangdong Province's Southern Metropolitan Daily newspaper reported on the reemergence of SARS cases, an editor and six journalists working for the newspaper were temporarily detained. Three of them later faced criminal corruption charges. Also, Dr. Jiang Yanyong, who exposed the spread of SARS in Beijing in April 2003, was detained for 45 days in June and July. Dr. Jiang's detention likely was a response to his open letter on the 1989 Tiananmen massacre (see Section 1.d.), rather than a direct reaction to his writings about SARS. Government restrictions on the press and the free flow of information also affected accurate reporting on HIV/AIDS. Those seeking to bring attention to the plight of AIDS orphans in Henan Province faced continued pressure to remain silent and were warned against speaking to journalists. However, in April, Vice Premier Wu Yi stated that the Government "would strictly investigate and affix responsibility" for those who hide, delay, or fail to report HIV/AIDS. In August, concerns were raised that the country failed to report outbreaks of avian influenza in poultry. Reporting on outbreaks of the disease in bird and animal populations was inconsistent, but there were no reports that media coverage of the outbreak was suppressed.

In 2003, the Government ended the practice of requiring government work units to subscribe to official newspapers, forcing many official newspapers to compete for readership or face insolvency. As a result, 677 newspapers were closed between September 2003 and March 2004. Journalists noted that the pressure to expand circulation sometimes conflicted with state control and censorship dictates because one way to expand readership was to provide accurate reporting about controversial topics.

There were a few privately owned print publications, but they were subject to pre- and post-publication censorship. There were no privately owned television or radio stations, and the Government had authority to approve all programming, although it occasionally did not preview all programs.

The publishing industry consists of three kinds of book businesses: Approximately 560 government-sanctioned publishing houses, smaller independent publishers that cooperated with official publishing houses to put out more daring publications, and an underground (illicit) press. Government-approved publishing houses were the only organizations legally permitted to print books. No newspaper, periodical, book, audio, video, or electronic publication may be printed or distributed without the printer and distributor being approved by the relevant provincial publishing authorities and the State Press and Publications Administration (PPA). The Communist Party exerted control over the publishing industry by preemptively classifying certain topics as off-limits; selectively rewarding with promotions and perks those publishers, editors, and writers who adhered to Party guidelines; and punishing those who did not adhere to Party guidelines with administrative sanctions and blacklisting. Some independent publishers took advantage of a loophole in the law to sign contracts with government publishing houses to publish politically sensitive works. These works generally were not subject to the same multi-layered review process as official publications of the publishing houses.

Underground printing houses have been targets of periodic campaigns to stop all illegal publications (including pornography and pirated computer software and audiovisual products). These campaigns sometimes had the effect of restricting the availability of politically sensitive books.

Many intellectuals and scholars, anticipating that books or papers on political topics would be deemed too sensitive to be published, exercised self-censorship. Overt intervention by the PPA, responsible for all printing and distribution in the country, and by the Party Central Propaganda Department, which provides editorial guidelines for all media, mostly occurred after publication. In areas such as economic policy or legal reform, there was far greater official tolerance for comment and debate. Criticism of Central Government authorities continued to remain largely off-limits.

Among books banned during the year were "China Peasant Survey," and "The Past Does Not Go Up In Smoke," a collection of essays dealing with the effect of political tumult in the 1950s and 1960s on the lives of prominent Chinese intellectuals. In January, authorities issued regulations restricting publication of books on constitutional reform to three official publishing houses. In 2002, the Department of Cultural Affairs in Urumqi, Xinjiang, ordered the destruction of thousands of books on Uighur history and culture. The books detailing and documenting Uighur history originally had been published with the approval of the authorities.

The authorities continued to jam, with varying degrees of success, Chinese-, Uighur-, and Tibetan-language broadcasts of the Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Asia (RFA) and the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). English-language broadcasts on VOA generally were not jammed, unless they immediately followed Chinese-language broadcasts, in which case portions of the English-language broadcasts were sometimes jammed. Government jamming of RFA and BBC appeared to be more frequent and effective. Internet distribution of "streaming radio" news from these sources often was blocked. Despite jamming, in the absence of an independent press, overseas broadcasts such as VOA, BBC, RFA, and Radio France International had a large audience, including activists, ordinary citizens, and even government officials.

The Government prohibited some foreign and domestic films from appearing in the country. Television broadcasts of foreign programming, which were restricted largely to hotel and foreign residence compounds, also suffered from occasional censorship of topics including sensitive political issues. In southern China, where television programming from Hong Kong was available, "public service announcements" frequently interrupted news items critical of the Government.

The Government continued to encourage expanded use of the Internet; however, it also took steps to increase monitoring of the Internet and continued to place restrictions on the information available. Over 80 million persons regularly used the Internet, including those in urban and rural areas, according to surveys conducted during the year. In July, the Government began implementing new measures to monitor and filter text-messaging. The measures were designed to control for politically sensitive content and to stop the spread of pornography.

The country's Internet control system employed more than 30,000 persons and was allegedly the largest in the world. According to a 2002 Harvard University report, the Government blocked at least 19,000 sites during a 6-month period and may have blocked as many as 50,000. At times, the Government blocked the sites of some major foreign news organizations, health organizations, educational institutions, Taiwanese and Tibetan businesses and organizations, religious and spiritual organizations, democracy activists, and sites discussing the 1989 Tiananmen massacre. The number of blocked sites appeared to increase around major political events and sensitive dates. The authorities reportedly began to employ more sophisticated technology enabling the selective blocking of specific content rather than entire websites in some cases. Such technology was also used to block e-mails containing sensitive content. The Government generally did not prosecute citizens who received dissident e mail publications, but forwarding such messages to others sometimes did result in detention. Internet usage reportedly was monitored at all terminals in public libraries.

The Ministry of Information Industry regulated access to the Internet while the Ministries of Public and State Security monitored its use. Regulations prohibit a broad range of activities that authorities have interpreted as subversive or as slanderous to the state, including the dissemination of any information that might harm unification of the country or endanger national security. Promoting "evil cults" was banned, as was providing information that "disturbs social order or undermines social stability." Internet service providers (ISPs) were instructed to use only domestic media news postings, record information useful for tracking users and their viewing habits, install software capable of copying e-mails, and immediately end transmission of so-called subversive material. Many ISPs practiced extensive self-censorship to avoid violating very broadly worded regulations. A study released in 2003 by Reporters Without Borders reported that only 30 percent of messages with "controversial content" were allowed onto Chinese "chatroom" websites. The remaining 70 percent of messages were filtered out by censors or removed by the site host.

Several individuals were jailed for their Internet publications during the year. On March 16, Shanghai resident Ma Yalian was sentenced to 18 months’ reeducation through labor for posting articles on legal websites about her attempts to stop destruction of her home. Ma's web postings described police harassment of petitioners and suicide attempts outside government offices. In May, freelance journalist Liu Shui was sentenced to 2 years’ administrative detention in Shenzhen in what NGOs claimed was retaliation for essays about reassessing the 1989 Tiananmen massacre and political reform that he wrote and posted on the Internet. Former Hubei Province civil servant Du Daobin was convicted of inciting subversion in June for his Internet writings about democracy. Du's prison sentence was suspended, but he appealed his conviction, arguing that his trial was unfair and that his writings did not incite subversion and were protected free speech (see Section 1.e.). In August, house Christians Liu Fenggang, Xu Yonghai, and Zhang Shengqi were convicted of disclosing state intelligence after using the Internet to send reports about the abuse of house Christians to overseas organizations. They were sentenced to 1 to 3 years in prison (see Section 2.c.). In September, Shenyang Internet writers Kong Youping and Ning Xianhua were sentenced, respectively, to 15 and 12 years in prison on charges of "subversion of state power" for posting articles and poems in support of the CDP. In November, Hunan Province journalist Shi Tao was detained, reportedly on state secrets charges. Shi had previously written for Contemporary Trade News and published an on-line article in April opposing the detention of Tiananmen Mothers' organization co-founder Ding Zilin. The NGO Reporters Without Borders called China "the biggest jail in the world for cyberdissidents." The Committee for the Protection of Journalists reported that the country had 43 journalists jailed at year's end.

In addition to imprisoning several persons during the year for disseminating information through the Internet, the Government detained several individuals for using the Internet to express support for other detained Internet activists. Liu Di was detained for a year after she expressed sympathy for Sichuan website manager Huang Qi and wrote pro-reform articles on-line. Huang ran a website that contained postings discussing the June 4, 1989 Tiananmen massacre until it was closed down, and he was detained on June 3, 2000. In November 2003, Liu Di was released after a court found that the evidence against her was insufficient; however, some persons detained for supporting her remained in custody at year's end. Among them, Kong Youping was sentenced to 15 years in prison in September for political writings, including many that expressed support for Liu Di.

The Government's "Public Pledge on Self Discipline for China's Internet Industry" continued during the year. More than 300 companies signed the pledge, including the popular Sina.com and Sohu.com, as well as foreign-based Yahoo!'s China division. Those who signed the pledge agreed not to spread information that "breaks laws or spreads superstition or obscenity." They also promised to refrain from "producing, posting, or disseminating pernicious information that may jeopardize state security and disrupt social stability." The China Internet Association adopted a "self-regulatory pledge" for search engine services during the year that was viewed by many as even stricter than the Government's self discipline pledge.

As of July, the China Internet Network Information Center said there were 87 million Internet users, 22 percent of whom access the web at Internet cafes. As of 2002, the country had more than 200,000 licensed Internet cafes, and a number of unlicensed ones as well. During the year, state media reported that several municipalities cracked down on illegal Internet cafes, including over 2,000 illegal cafes in Shenzhen. On April 27, the Ministry of Culture announced that, by the end of the year, all Internet cafes must install software that allows Government officials to monitor customers’ web usage. Internet users at the cafes often are subject to surveillance. A May 24 China Newsweek article reported that at one popular Beijing Internet cafe with 320 computers, eight employees served as Internet monitors, while 10 other staff members walked around the room to check if customers were accessing "illegal" websites. Patrons caught entering such sites were given warnings. Most places sporadically enforced regulations requiring patrons to provide identification when using Internet cafes. In response to the health crisis caused by SARS, the authorities closed all the nation's Internet cafes in April 2003. Beijing cafes stayed closed until August 2003, while cafes in Shanghai and Sichuan reopened sooner.

In February, the Government announced that it would invest nearly $6 million (RMB 49.8 million) to create a new system to control political publication on the Internet. Monitoring and censorship of Internet bulletin boards and chatrooms was especially strict at the time of sensitive anniversaries or key political meetings. For example, in September, a popular bulletin board at Beijing University was closed in the period before the Fourth Party Plenum meeting, and Internet censorship also increased before the March NPC session. In September, a local newspaper reported that authorities in Liaoning Province shut down an Internet website devoted to exposing official corruption, even though the website's administrator had obtained prior official approval.

In July, the Government began censoring text messages distributed by mobile telephone. According to state media, the campaign was designed to stop the spread of pornographic messages by phone, as well as to block circulation of illicit news and information. All text messaging service providers were required to install filtering equipment to monitor and delete messages deemed offensive by authorities. In the first week of the campaign's operation, the Government reportedly fined 10 companies and forced 20 others to close for failure to comply. As with print, broadcast, and Internet media, the Propaganda Department determined banned topics. In 2003, mobile phone users sent approximately 220 billion text messages, according to China Telecom.

The Government did not respect academic freedom and continued to impose ideological controls on political discourse at colleges, universities, and research institutes. Scholars and researchers reported varying degrees of control regarding issues they could examine and conclusions they could draw. For example, several professors were warned against calling for abolition of reeducation through labor. In March, Beijing University professor Jiao Guobiao published a criticism of Chinese censorship, listing his "14 Evils of the Central Propaganda Department." In August, his university threatened him with dismissal and indefinitely suspended him from teaching. Guangxi Normal University Professor Chen Qin reportedly suffered a stroke in July while being interrogated by security officials concerning his on-line essays criticizing political and social institutions. Scholar Xu Zerong remained in prison for "illegally providing state secrets" by sending sensitive reference materials on the Korean War to a contact in Hong Kong. Scholars studying religion reported that, during the year, the official Protestant church blocked some publications it found objectionable.

The Government continued to use political attitudes as criteria for selecting persons for the few government-sponsored study abroad programs, but did not impose such restrictions on privately sponsored students. More than 7,200 students studied abroad, a record according to the China Scholarship Council.

Researchers residing abroad also were subject to sanctions from the authorities when their work did not meet with official approval. In July, a Chinese-born overseas scholar was detained in Shanghai for 2 weeks and then forced to leave the country after being charged with disclosing state secrets in the course of his academic research on reform of the household registration system.

b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association

The Constitution provides for freedom of peaceful assembly; however, the Government severely restricted this right in practice. The Constitution stipulates that such activities may not challenge "Party leadership" or infringe upon the "interests of the State." Protests against the political system or national leaders were prohibited. Authorities denied permits and quickly moved to suppress demonstrations involving expression of dissenting political views.

At times, police used excessive force against demonstrators. Demonstrations with political or social themes were often broken up quickly and violently. The vast majority of demonstrations during the year concerned economic and social issues such as land, housing, health, and welfare. Land disputes, industrial disputes, and anti-government protests were the three main causes of civil disturbances, according to a 2004 study of publicly reported protests. Citing government statistics, government-run Outlook magazine reported that over 58,000 "mass incidents" took place during 2003, more than 6 times the number reported 10 years earlier. Some of these demonstrations included thousands of participants. According to government statistics reported in Hong Kong, more than 2.3 million people took part in petitions, marches, and sit-ins in urban areas in 2003, while over 8 million participated in demonstrations in rural areas. Ministry of Public Security publications indicated that the number of demonstrations continued to grow and that protesters were becoming more organized.

Authorities detained potential protesters before the anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre and other sensitive events to head off public demonstrations (see Section 1.d.). In the period before the April "Qingming" holiday, which has often served as a time of public commemoration of the 1989 Tiananmen events, regulations were passed outlawing Tiananmen commemorative activities. In late March, "Tiananmen Mothers" organization co-founders Ding Zilin, Jiang Xianling, and Huang Jinping were confined in separate locations to prevent them from meeting with other victims' family members to commemorate the death of their relatives in the June 4, 1989 violence. In early April, when AIDS activist Hu Jia stated his intention to commemorate the anniversary in their absence, he was also detained. All were released but some were prevented from returning to Beijing until after the holiday was over. On June 1, retired PLA doctor Jiang Yanyong and his wife were also detained in the period before the anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre (see Section 2.d.). Western media reported that approximately 20 people were detained and taken away from Tiananmen Square on June 4 for attempting to commemorate the 1989 events.

Labor protests over restructuring of SOEs and resulting unemployment continued, and the number of such protests increased slightly over 2003, although they remained smaller in scale than the large labor protests which occurred in 2002. In February, a protest by some 2,000 workers seeking severance benefits from Hubei Province's bankrupt, state-owned Tieshu textile factory was suppressed by force. Nine workers were detained, and four faced criminal charges. In July, 23 laid-off coal miners from Heilongjiang Province threated a mass suicide from the roof of a building near the Supreme People's Court when their petitions for compensation went unanswered. They were detained, and miners traveling to Beijing to support them were stopped by police. Protests by migrant laborers and construction workers, who demonstrated when employers withheld their salaries or underpaid them, continued. The Government passed legislation requiring that companies pay such workers and stepped up enforcement measures against some delinquent employers during the year (see Section 6.b.).

Protests, some of which included thousands of participants, concerning land, housing, and forced evictions were also widespread. The jailing of former Shanghai housing lawyer Zheng Enchong in October 2003, after his advocacy for hundreds of Shanghai residents displaced in a controversial urban redevelopment project, prompted demonstrations by his supporters in March. Similarly, Beijing and Tianjin-based housing petitioners and victims of forced eviction policies were detained in August and September to prevent them from holding a planned 10,000-person rally (see Section 3). On August 1, in Fujian Province's Wanli village, police officers beat hundreds of farmers who protested government land seizures.

The Government continued to wage a severe political, propaganda, and police campaign against the Falun Gong movement. The sustained government crackdown against the movement, which the Government banned in 1999, continued, and there were no reports of public protests during the year. In many cases, Falun Gong practitioners were subject to close scrutiny by local security personnel, and their personal mobility was tightly restricted, particularly at times when the Government believed public protests were likely.

Activist Li Dan was beaten and Pan Zhongfeng was detained in Shangqiu, Henan Province, during a July demonstration protesting closure of an AIDS orphanage and school.

The Constitution provides for freedom of association; however, the Government restricted this right in practice. Communist Party policy and government regulations require that all professional, social, and economic organizations officially register with, and be approved by, the Government. Ostensibly aimed at restricting secret societies and criminal gangs, these regulations also prevented the formation of truly autonomous political, human rights, religious, spiritual, environmental, social, labor, and youth organizations that might challenge government authority. Since 1999, all concerts, sports events, exercise classes, or other meet