Annual Report - TCHRD - 2010

1

HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN TIBET

Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy

Annual Report

20102010201020102010

2

Cover Photo : Iconic images that say it all.

In October 2010, huge demonstration by Tibetan high school students brokeout in Qinghai Province. The demonstrations staged against the proposed reformin education called for “Equality for Nationalities, Freedom for Language”.The Public Security Bureanu arrested around 20 sutdents for their participationin the demonstrations.

3

CONTENTS

Executive Summary 5

Civil and Political Liberties 17

Right to Education 71

Rights to Development 87

Religious Freedom 109

Appendices

1 List of Known Tibetans sentenced 160

2. List of Known Current Political Prisoners 170

3. List of Know Tibetans who were arrested and detained in 2009 192

4. Table Listing Relevant International Human Rights Instruments 196

Signed and/or Ratified by the People’s Republic of China5. Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

Map of Tibet

4

Human Rights Stituation in Tibet: Annual Report 2004

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

History was made this year! Liu Xiaobo, one of theleading intellectual-activist of China was conferredthe 2010 Noble Peace Prize. This might turn to bea watershed year for the People’s Republic of China(PRC). In the decades to come, people of the worldand especially Chinese people will cherish the yearas a turning point in modern Chinese history. Inrecognizing his unrelenting struggle, a strong mes-sage has passed through the hearts and minds of theChinese people that the movement for human rightsand freedom in China is highly respected by the in-ternational community. The Tibetan experience af-ter the 1989 Noble Peace Prize to the Dalai Lamadefinitely shows that the award does bring a tre-mendous impact in the struggle of a people. Withthe rise of China after three decades of economicsuccess, it has been increasingly taking leadership roleson the global stage. In becoming a global power,the nation needs to adopt bold visions and respon-sibilities. The time has come for the state to intro-duce genuine civil and political reforms for a sus-tained rise.

The year 2010 saw severe repression of human rightstaking place in Tibet. There is no let up by the gov-ernment of PRC. As of 30 December 2010, thereare 831 known political prisoners in Tibet out ofwhich 360 are known to have been legally convictedby courts and 12 Tibetans are serving life imprison-ment term. During 2010, 188 known Tibetans havebeen arrested and detained, out of which 71 havealready been sentenced by the courts.The crackdown on intellectuals and cultural figurescontinued to take place this year also. Since 2008,

over 60 Tibetan writers, bloggers, intellectuals andcultural figures have been arrested.1 The cultural andliterary resurgence that has emerged after the pan-Tibet spring 2008 uprising in Tibet is looked uponby the government as its biggest threat. Any expres-sion of Tibetan identity is labeled as separatist andcriminal activities and dealt harshly under the “en-dangering state security” laws. The so-called crimi-nal activities has been largely an exercise of standardhuman rights practices in expressing one’s viewagainst the flawed government policies or reportingand documenting human rights violations occur-ring in Tibet. The arrests and detentions of TashiRabten (pen name Te’urang)2, Druklo (pen nameShokjang), Tragyal (pen name Shogdung) and KalsangTsultrim (pseudonym Gyitsang Takmig)3 etc duringthe year indicate strongly that the authorities viewliterary criticism as serious threat against the rule ofthe Communist Party of China and hence the crack-down.4 The authorities this year also targeted promi-nent Tibetan figures who were earlier looked uponas exemplary individuals. The sentencing of envi-ronment and cultural icon Karma Samdup to 15years in prison5 and Dorjee Tashi, the richest Tibetanwho owns the Yak Hotel in Tibet to 15 years inprison6, environment activists Rinchen Samdrup andChemi Namgyal 7 who were earlier awarded envi-ronment awards and were honored by the govern-ment in international conferences were sentenced tofive years prison term and 21-months of “re-educa-tion through labor” respectively and so were theirtwo other cousins to lengthy prison terms.On 23 August 2010, the Chinese government madean announcement of reforms being carried out in

Human Rights Situation in Tibet: Annual Report 2010

6

the application of death penalty by removing thecapital punishment for financial crimes. 13 out ofthe 68 crimes, all related to economic crimes, whichcarry the punishment were removed.8 Although thisreform is welcome, it does not have any significanteffect in Tibet. Since spring 2008 , nine Tibetanshave been sentenced to death with two already hav-ing been executed. The remaining seven are servingdeath penalty with two years reprieve. This year threeTibetans, Sonam Tsering9, Lama Lhaka and Sodorof Kolu Monastery in Chamdo were given deathsentence with two years reprieve.

In May this year, China issued new regulations say-ing evidence obtained illegally through torture can-not be used in death penalty cases and other crimi-nal prosecutions.10 The regulations came into effectafter the embarrassing high profile case of ZhaoZuohai exposed the corrupt system prevalent inChina. He had spent 11 years in prison after beingmade to confess through torture of murdering a manwho wasn’t even dead. In a rare admission, the gov-ernment admitted in a statement ‘since the systemwas not perfect, the standards on reinforcing the lawwere not unified and the law executors were notequally competent. Problems occurred in the han-dling of cases and they should not be ignored’. Chinatheoretically banned torture in 199611 but evidenceobtained through duress was routinely accepted asthe definition of illegal acts was vague that policeused various techniques to work around the ban. Inrestive regions like Tibet, torture is a regular featurein the detention centres and prisons. The police useinhumane techniques and torture to present evidencebefore the courts. For instance, Karma Samdrup, aTibetan philanthropist and environmentalist wassentenced to 15 years in prison in June 2010 oncharges of grave robbing and dealing in looted an-tiquities. In his statement to the court, he said thatduring months of interrogation, officers beat him,deprived him of sleep for days on end, and druggedhim with a substance that made his eyes and earsbleed, all part of an effort to force him to sign a

confession. His wife estimated he lost at least 40pounds in police custody. 12TCHRD research showsthat some of the commonly used techniques em-ployed by the police in the detention centres andprisons include the use of electric prod, pricking ciga-rettes on the body, beating, hand or thumb cuffs,feet manacles, aerial suspension, exposure to extremetemperature, long periods of solitary confinement,sleep deprivation, violent beating, forced labour andforced exercise drills. Besides the physical wounds,psychological and emotional scars are usually themost devastating and the most difficult to repair.13

On 23rd December this year, the International Con-vention for the Protection of All Persons from En-forced Disappearance entered into force.14 ThePeople’s Republic of China is not amongst the ini-tial ratifying state parties. In a restive region likeTibet, political activists and human rights defend-ers are routinely disappeared by the police and othersecurity agencies. Midnight knocks, arrest withoutwarrant, denial of custody and information are acommon practice. In light of prevalence of rampantpractice of enforced disappearance in Tibet, it is ofutmost importance that the PRC ratify this con-vention in order to curb this heinous practice by thelaw enforcement agencies.

This year the students in Tibet staged protests onseveral occasions in order to put forward their griev-ances and concerns over social and policy issues. TheTibetan medical students in Lhasa staged a sit-in infront of the authorities in Lhasa over the lack ofconcern by the government over traditional studiesand shortage of jobs for the graduates in traditionalfields of study15. Traditional and cultural studiesare being increasingly relegated in an environmentwhere Tibetan language and traditional studies aremarginalized in a market format where knowledgein mandarin and commercial studies are given high-est priorities. Any expression of Tibetan identity ismet with high handedness by the authorities. Marchand April 2010 saw a huge number of detentions

Executive Summary

7

and expulsions of Tibetan students and teachers fromschools and academic institutions in eastern Tibet.16

These incidences took place in Machu Tibetan Na-tionality Middle School, Kanlho Tibetan MiddleSchool no 3, Primary School in Driru county, KharPrimary School in Serthar County, Serthar Bud-dhist Institute, Barkham Teachers Training Insti-tute and Northwest National Minorities’ Univer-sity in Lanzhou. These expulsions and detentionsare characterized by minimal tolerance showed bythe authorities in regard to dissenting voices in aca-demic institutions. In total contradiction of show-ing respect and addressing the grievances, the au-thorities held students as young as between 11 to15 years old in detention and expelled several Ti-betan school teachers from their jobs.17 In some in-stances there has been ethnic discrimination whileimplementing measures. In most of the incidences,the students simply showed their dissent over thegovernment’s portrayal of and dealings with fellowTibetans. For instance, the protest by the Khar Pri-mary School in Serthar County was sparked afterthe government’s parading of two monks in a ve-hicle for propaganda purposes. Such an exercise cre-ates huge resentments in the society and the stu-dents reacted boldly despite their tender age. In someinstances the teachers have been targeted solely foractions by the students of their respective schools inwearing Tibetan national dresses and holding prayersfor the departed in their areas during spring 2008.The teachers have been alleged of brainwashing theyoung in promoting and preserving their Tibetanidentity. The students lighting up of butter lampsfor the dead and wearing Tibetan dresses in theirschools are seen by the authorities as expressions ofdissent and challenging the official view of the eventsof spring 2008. Teachers were alleged of giving en-couragement to the students and hence became natu-ral target of the official crackdown.

On 19 October 2010, thousands of Tibetan studentsfrom six different schools in Rebkong (Ch: Tongren)County, Malho “Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture”

(“TAP”) in Qinghai, took to the streets to protestagainst the proposed changes in education systemwhich intends to drastically sideline Tibetan lan-guage.18 The protests later spread to other areas inTibet and as far away as in the Minzu (Nationali-ties) University in Beijing where around 600 Tibetanstudents on 22 October 2010 demonstrated for theprotection of Tibetan language19. The protests weresparked by an order by the Qinghai government thatall lessons and textbooks should be in Chinese inprimary schools by 2015 except Tibetan and En-glish language classes. The government argued thatthe proposal of enforcing Mandarin in schools willbring the Tibetan students on par with the othercitizens, avail opportunities in the economic life andintegrate into the broader Chinese society. How-ever, the Tibetans have been calling for the preserva-tion of Tibetan language as an identity of the Ti-betan race and the foundation of religion and cul-ture which connects to the wider issue of culturaland ethnic identity. Unfortunately the authoritiessee the assertion and promotion of cultural unique-ness and pride as anti-state. The Tibetans see suchchange and strict enforcement as reminiscent of theCultural Revolution20. The pressure on ethnicgroups to learn Mandarin is part of a wider severaldecade old one-language policy pursued vigorouslyrecently. The enforcement of mandarin as the firstlanguage will soon be applied across Tibet whichwill negatively impact the lives of Tibetans dramati-cally. According to Beijing based Tibetan writer-ac-tivist Woeser, the policies initiated by Qinghai Prov-ince as part of the education system change have anexperimental character and are a little bit like the“patriotic education” advocated in Lhasa’s monas-teries ten years ago, which today have already infil-trated all monasteries in all of Tibet.21

The centuries old Tibetan language is one of theprimary attributes of Tibetans being a distinctpeople. In November 2008, during the eighth roundof talks in the Sino-Tibet dialogue process, the En-voys of the Dalai Lama handed to the Chinese offi-


8

cials a Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy22 forthe Tibetan People. As a basic of the Tibetan people,the memorandum states that language is the mostimportant attribute of the Tibetan people’s iden-tity. Professor of linguistics from the University ofProvence and an expert on the Tibetan language,Nicolas Tournadre, during a US Congressional Ex-ecutive Commission on China roundtable discus-sion23 said: “There is a real threat of extinction orvery serious decline of the Tibetan language and theTibetan culture within two — or at the most three— generations. [...] During the last 15 years, I havepersonally witnessed this decline. [...] Languages arenot neutral. They convey very specific social andcultural behaviors and ways of thinking. So, theextinction of the Tibetan language will have tremen-dous consequences for the Tibetan culture. The cul-ture cannot be preserved without it. […] It is im-portant because the Tibetan language and cultureare extremely original. Forget about linguistics,medicine, or architecture; just take literature. Ti-betan is one of the four oldest and greatest in vol-ume and most original literatures of Asia, along withSanskrit, Chinese, and Japanese literatures. So, thatis a very good reason for the heritage of humanityto keep this culture.”

China’s laws protect and promote the ethnic mi-nority languages, however, the reality suggest other-wise. Article 4 in the Constitution of the PRC guar-antees the freedom of all nationalities “to use anddevelop their own spoken and written languages…”In order to use and develop Tibetan as a language,the Tibetan language must be respected as the mainspoken and written language. The Regional EthnicAutonomy Law (REAL) promulgated in 1984stipulates that ethnic minorities’ languages shouldbe protected and allowed to be freely used and de-veloped. The law states that the language of minori-ties should be used in textbooks and as language ofmedium of instruction. Evidently the proposedchange by the Qinghai government goes contrary

to the REAL. Article 121 of the Constitution states,“the organs of self-government of the national au-tonomous areas employ the spoken and written lan-guage or language in common use in the locality.”Moreover, Article 10 of the Law on Regional Na-tional Autonomy (LRNA) provides that these or-gans “shall guarantee the freedom of the nationali-ties in these areas to use and develop their own spo-ken and written languages....” International Law laysintense emphasis on minorities languages with thestate having the prime responsibility in the protec-tion and promotion of minority languages. Article27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Po-litical Rights (ICCPR) to which PRC is a signatoryparty states “In those States in which ethnic, reli-gious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belong-ing to such minorities shall not be denied the right,in persons belonging to such minorities shall not bedenied the right, in community with the other mem-bers of their group, to enjoy their own culture, toprofess and practice their own religion, or to usetheir own language.”24 In light of China’s constitu-tion, national and international laws, the state ofPRC has the responsibility protect the Tibetan lan-guage. The proposed change in the education sys-tem by the regional government of Qinghai abso-lutely contradicts all the legal provisions.

During the year, practice of centuries old traditionalTibetan Buddhism and the monastic communityfaced yet another strike by the CCP and the gov-ernment. After the notorious Order no 5 issued bythe State Administration for Religious Affairs(SARA) in 2007 giving a legal instrument for thegovernment to strike at the core of Tibetan Bud-dhism belief system by making any Tibetan Bud-dhist teacher and lama illegal if they haven’t beenapproved by the CCP, in September 2010 the SARAissued Order no 8 - ‘Management measure for Ti-betan Buddhist monasteries and temples’. 25 The 44articles regulation which entered into force on 1November 2010 obstructs the centuries old tradi-

Executive Summary

9

tional Tibetan Buddhist practices, restricts relation-ship between students and masters, and provides astrong legal support for the authorities to controlthe monastic institutions as well as monks and nuns.This regulation is a reinforcement legal instrumentto curb primarily the influence of the Dalai Lamaand other heads of Tibetan Buddhism most of whomlive in exile pursuing their religious propagation andteachings. Since most of the heads of schools of Ti-betan Buddhism reside in exile, the regulation isspecifically aimed to obstruct transmission of teach-ings and traditional practices of Buddhist hierarchy.The relationship between Buddhist teachers and stu-dents and traditional Buddhist studies will be af-fected negatively by the regulation. This regulationapplicable to the whole of Tibet will further tightenthe control on the monks and nuns and enable theauthorities to implement policies uniformly acrossthe monastic institutions in Tibet.

In what can be construed as an escalation of controlin the monastic institutions in Tibet, the UnitedFront Work Department (UFWD) of the Commu-nist Party of China (CPC) conducted a meeting onthe democratic management of the monastic insti-tutions from 14 - 15 August 2010. The meetingheld at Shigatse drew heads of monastic institutionsand local UFWD heads in the “TAR” as well as Ti-betan areas in four provinces to tighten religiousinstitutions in Tibetan areas. During the meeting,the head of the UFWD, Du Qingli, remarked thatthe patriotic and legal education should be strength-ened in order to make the monks and and nuns abideby the laws of the country and voluntarily protectunity of nation, nationalities and social stability. Healso called the monastic leaders to be result orientedin the democratic management, monks and nunsobservance of law and produce leaders in opposingthe splittist forces.26 Du Qingli also urged the lead-ers of the monastic institutions to put the peoplefirst by producing charismatic monks and nunstrustworthy in politics, excel in Buddhist studies,

and elect and appoint smart monks and nuns in themonastic institutions administration. During themeeting the DMC27 of the monastic institutionsacross Tibet shared their experiences and plannedeffective communications between the institutionsin order to better manage and control the monksand nuns in the monastic institutions in future.

Monastic institutions of Tibet are primary targetsof the authorities in inculcating loyalty by strikinghard and control through a chain of commands fromthe central government religious bureau, regionalreligious bureaus and the DMCs within the institu-tions itself. The numerous rules and regulationsimplemented in the monasteries and nunneries tocontrol the monks and nuns restrict their move-ment. In some areas even to seek medication in hos-pitals and to visit families they are required to seekpermission from the authorities at various levels;county, township and monastery, depending on theduration of time. The Lhasa Municipality ReligiousAffairs Committee issued a monastic code of con-duct in April 2009.28 Article 5 of the code of con-duct states that monks and nuns expelled frommonastic institutions, leave the monastery on theirown or withdrew upon advice by others should beexpelled in written document by the DMCs of themonastery or nunnery. The DMC should registerthe names of the expelled monks and nuns to thereligious affairs office in the higher levels. The ex-pelled monks and nuns are put under strict vigi-lance by the Public Security Bureau and they arenot allowed to indulge in religious activities as wellas enroll in other monastic institutions. Monks andnuns under suspicion of political activities are espe-cially put under strict vigilance and their movementsrestricted.

Beijing’s discourse on Tibet always had two strands,one that of “development” and “stability” on the otherhand. The government insists on spending billionsof dollars in development works in Tibet including


10

huge state subsidies, however, the “TAR” and theother Tibetan areas incorporated into four provincescontinue to remain poorest in China. The WesternDevelopment Strategy [Ch: xibu da kaifa] launchedin 1999 and described as “leap over” model of de-velopment of Tibet provide special assistance toovercome Tibet’s “backwardness”. With intenseemphasis on heavy and hard infrastructure projectsin Tibet, little priority has been given to investmentsin local agriculture and livestock, as well as soft in-frastructure including health, education, employ-ment and local participation. With over 80 percentof Tibetans living in rural areas, the benefits of WDShave not been accessible to the large majority of eth-nic rural Tibetans. Little of the development moneyhas trickled down to the poorest sections of the so-ciety. While China claims to prioritize economicrights of its people, it has failed to employ rightsbased and need based approach to development inTibet thus rendering extreme difficulties in the livesof nomads and farmers with long term implicationsof turning them beggars in the urban towns andcities which is already evident quite prominently.

The search for answers to the great floods of 1998and repeated dust storms in urban Chinese cities haveled to blaming the “ignorant” and “selfish” Tibetannomads for the degradation of the grassland. AfterMao Zedong’s ascent to power his campaign touplift the proletariat led to the great famine of 1959to 1961 costing 45 million lives across China ac-cording to latest research.29 Two decades of com-munization had disastrous consequences setting ofa series of grassland degradation. Since discussion ofCultural Revolution were forbidden and past policyfailures are taboo topic, the pastoral nomads wereblamed for causing grassland degradation therebysaving the state of its causation. The governmentciting watershed protection, scientific rationality andclimate change mitigation, ordered Tibetan nomadsto be removed from their pastures. The govern-ment officially claims that there is a contradictionbetween grass and animals and the policy is funda-

mentally based on oversimplified logic that morethe animals, less the grass; less the animals, morethe grass. The nomads do not have the right to speakup or organize themselves to put forward their griev-ances.

The Tuimu Huancao (“removing animals to growgrass”) policy implemented strongly since 2003.Since then hundreds of thousands of nomads havebeen removed especially in the area where three greatrivers; the Yellow, Yangtse and Mekong all rise inglacier melt on the Tibetan plateau. Although theexact number of how many pastoralist nomads havealready been removed is hard to quantify for thelack of independent monitors or a system and thenomads being gagged by the government, expertsestimate about one million nomads out of the totaltwo million already having been affected by thepolicy so far. Almost all of Tibet’s nomads will havebecome displaced persons by the year 2013. Withlittle experience in rangeland management, the statehas recently directly intervened in livelihoods ofnomads on the Tibetan plateau. The nomads whohave been removed have had their land rights docu-ments cancelled. They have become landless withno training in skills to survive in a modern economyand become dependent on the state for subsidizedrations given for a set period. For many families,the compensation has been inadequate as the infla-tion shoots up the cost while the subsidies remainthe same. Such a policy thrust by the state on thenomads is in direct contravention of article 6 andarticle 11 of the International Covenant on Eco-nomic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)30

which requires the state to ensure everyone to freelychoose or accept his living by work as well as anadequate food, clothing and housing, and to thecontinuous improvement of living conditions. TheUN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food,Olivier De Schutter, after his mission to the PRCbetween 15-23 December 2010 in his preliminaryobservations and conclusions told the government

Executive Summary

11

that nomads should not be forced to sell off theirlivestock and resettle.31 The expert report read: Whilethere is little doubt about the extent of the land deg-radation problem, the Special Rapporteur would notethat herders should not, as a result of the measuresadopted under the tuimu huancao policy, be put in asituation where they have no other options than tosell their herd and resettle. The International Cov-enant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights pro-hibits depriving any people from its means of subsis-tence, and the 1992 Convention on Biodiversity ac-knowledges the importance of indigenous communi-ties as guarantors and protectors of biodiversity (Art. 8j). China has ratified both of these instruments. TheSpecial Rapporteur encourages the Chinese authori-ties to engage in meaningful consultations with herd-ing communities, including in order to assess the re-sults of past and current policies, and examine all avail-able options, including recent strategies of sustainablemanagement of marginal pastures such as the NewRangeland Management (NRM) in order to combinethe knowledge of the nomadic herders of their territo-ries with the information that can be drawn frommodern science. The government of PRC should heedthe recommendations of the UN expert and respectthe right of the nomads to refuse resettlement. Inlight of research conducted by the universities ofQueensland, Arizona, Montana and Qinghai in con-cluding that the Tibetan nomadic pastoralism is sus-tainable and viable to the high plateau ecology, theremoval and sedenterisation of nomads should beput to an end and the nomads already removedshould be allowed the chance to return to their pas-tures according to their wishes. Instead of orderingslaughtering or selling of livestock, the governmentcould well introduce insurance programs on live-stock so that the nomads’ herds remain small in sizeand insured against natural calamities etc.Despite the fact that the state pumped in billions ofdollars in aid money in development projects afterBeijing’s rule over Tibet since 1959, the spring 2008uprising in Tibet shook the central government and

the authorities in Tibet, who have been believingtheir own propaganda that the Tibetans are happyunder the benevolent rule of CCP, to face the real-ity. After a decade since the last work forum, theFifth Tibet Work Forum was held in Beijing from18-20 January 2010. President Hu Jintao and morethan 300 of China’s most senior Party, governmentand military leaders attended the meeting. Hu Jintaostated “we must also soberly understand that Tibet’sdevelopment and stability are still faced with manydifficulties and challenges and have encounteredmany new situations and new issues.” 32 In an un-precedented development, unlike previous fourwork forums on Tibet the Fifth included all Tibetanareas incorporated into Sichuan, Qinghai, Gansu andYunnan provinces. Although not much is known,the forum indicates the regional integration of poli-cies across all Tibetan areas of the PRC. 33 After adecade of the ambitious Western Development Strat-egy, the authorities seem to have acknowledged thatthe inequality between the rich and the poor haswidened, social services are not uniform and theeducation level of the people uneven. The Fifth Ti-bet Work Forum indicates to be focusing on ac-complishing improvements in rural Tibetans liveli-hood. “This time we are really focusing on improv-ing livelihood, whereas previous policies were mostlyconcerned with industry and infrastructure”, saidLobsang Dramdul, a development economics spe-cialist at the China Tibetology Research Centre inBeijing, in an interview with the Reuters.34 Unlikepast forums, the work forum did not revealmegaprojects lists although it may well be becausethe high expenditure projects will be announced inthe 12th Five Year Plan for the years 2011 to 2016.35

Zhang Yun of the China Tibetology Research Cen-tre said “it used to be said that first should comefast economic development and then livelihoods.But now the focus is much more on people’swellbeing.” When the 11th Five Year Plan waslaunched in 2006, the rhetoric was similar withpromises of shifting capital expenditure in Tibet from


12

heavy infrastructure, towards meeting needs of therural Tibetans by improving housing and raisingincomes in the rural areas. People First (Ch: YirenWeiben) strategies were publicized much in the pastalso. However, the reality indicates that the Stateprioritizes full speed growth and wealth accumula-tion rather than pushing for rural upliftment andaddress the long forgotten rural poor, health, edu-cation and income generation. The inclusion of allTibetan areas in present day China besides the “TAR”in development programs is expected to make somepositive impact in the attitude of the leaders at alllevels of administrative units although the Tibetanswill hardly benefit as they are a minority amongstother extremely poor minority communities withinthe larger mainstream Han population dominatedprovinces of Qinghai, Gansu, Sichuan and Yunnan.The cadres well practiced in diverting funds awayfrom Tibetan areas will strongly resist the inclusionof all Tibetan areas during the Fifth Tibet Work fo-rum.

During the year thousands of lives were lost duringthe earthquake in Kyegudo (Ch: Jyekundo) and themudslide disaster in Drugchu. While it is commend-able that the government provided good support inthe relief efforts for quake struck Kyegudo, it isunfortunate that the state did not allow the DalaiLama to the area despite his direct request for a visitto the area to say prayers and console the grievingfamilies. The government would have won muchadmiration by the Tibetan people as well as interna-tionally had it set aside politics and let the humanemotions and spirituality connect. The key to winover hearts and minds of the Tibetan people lies inconnecting with the Dalai Lama. The state shouldhave a bold vision in resolving the issue of Tibetthrough dialogue with Dalai Lama in order to en-sure a stable environment where in the people ofTibet and China live harmoniously.

(Endnotes)

1 “Dissenting Voices: Targeting the Intellectuals, Writers &Cultural Figures“, TCHRD Special Report, September 2010,available for download at www.tchrd.org

2 “CHINA/TIBET: Writer and editor detained“, 11 August2009, International Pen, http://www.internationalpen.org.uk/i n d e x . c f m ? o b j e c t i d = 0 A 1 B C 0 4 A - 3 0 4 8 - 6 7 6 E -26A0824934D28267

3 “One More Tibetan Intellectual Arrested“, TCHRD PressRelease, 22 August 2010, http://tchrd.org/press/2010/pr20100822.html

4 The authorities later released Shogdung and Kalsang Tsultrim.Although exact reasons are not known, international campaignmight have been instrumental in securing their release.

5 “Six Family Members Arbitrarily Detained and Sentenced OverTheir Activism“, TCHRD Press Release, 9 July 2010, http://tchrd.org/press/2010/pr201007009.html

6 “China Tightens Grip on Tibet’s Business Class“, TIME, AustinRamzy / Beijing, 18 Aug 2010,http://www.time.com/time/w o r l d / a r t i c l e /0,8599,2011548,00.html#ixzz17z59zgv8“Tibetanbusinessman jailed for life“, Guardian.co.uk, 12 August 2010,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/12/tibet-businessman-dorje-tashi-jailed

7 “Statement in support of three environmentalist brothers inTibet by global conservation activists“, 21 October 2010,http://www.tew.org/archived/2010/21102010.html

8 “China mulls lessening number of crimes punishable by death“,Xinhua, 23 August 2010, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-08/23/c_13457426.htm

9 “Lhasa Court sentences one Tibetan to death and five tolengthy prison terms“, TCHRD, 26 May 2010, http://www.tchrd.org/press/2010/pr201005026.html

1 0 “China bans evidence from torture“, BBC, 31 May 2010,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10198592

1 1 “Law Assures Fight Against Torture in China“, Chen Qiuping,3 February 2001, www.china.org.cn, http://www.china.org.cn/english/2001/Mar/8387.htm

1 2 “Tibet Activist Trial Begins”, The Strait Times, 22 June 2010,http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Asia/Story/STIStory_544025.html

1 3 “TCHRD commemorates 13th UN International Day inSupport of Victims of Torture“, TCHRD, 26 June 2010, http://tchrd.org/press/2010/pr201006026.html

1 4 “UN: End ‘Disappearances’ Worldwide”, Human RightsWatch, http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/12/22/un-end-disappearances-worldwide

1 5 “Medical Students’ Protest ‘Not Resolved’“, Radio Free Asia,16 September 2010, http://www.rfa.org/english/news/tibet/T i b e t a n % 2 0 s t u d e n t s % 2 0 p r o t e s t -09162010152026.html?searchterm=None

1 6 TCHRD communication submitted to the UN WorkingGroup on Arbitrary Detention, April 2010

1 7 “Firings Over School Protests”, Radio Free Asia, 19 March

Executive Summary

13

2010, http://www.rfa.org/english/news/tibet/firings-03192010161218.html

1 8 “Rebkong Students Rise Against Sinicization of Education“,TCHRD, 20 October 2010, http://www.tchrd.org/press/2010/pr20101020.html

1 9 “Tibet protests Chinese being taught as sole language inregional schools“, Christian Science Monitor, 22 October,http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2010/1022/Tibet-protests-Chinese-being-taught-as-sole-language-in-regional-schools

2 0 “ Tibetan Students Protest Language Policy”, Financial Times,20 October 2010, www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a38af942-dc0a-11df-a9a4-00144feabdc0.html

21 “When Tibetan Students Fight for the Tibetan Language,Woeser“, High Peaks Pure Earth, 19 November 2010, http://www.highpeakspureearth.com/2010/11/when-tibetan-students-fight-for-tibetan.html

2 2 “MEMORANDUM ON GENUINE AUTONOMY FORTHE TIBETAN PEOPLE“, Tibet.net, http://www.tibet.net/

2 3 “TEACHING AND LEARNING TIBETAN: THE ROLEOF THE TIBETAN LANGUAGE IN TIBET’S FUTURE“,Roundtable before the Congressional-Executive Commissionon China roundtable, 7 April 2008, http://libweb.uoregon.edu/ec/e-asia/read/teachtibet.pdf

2 4 “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights“, Officeof the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights,http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm

2 5 Original text in Chinese language, National Religious AffairsBureau issued “Measures for the Administration ofTibetanBuddhist temple, www.gov.cn, 8 October 2010, http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2010-10/08/content_1717257.htm

2 6 "Du Qinglin attended the democratic management of TibetanBuddhist temple and addressed the exchange of experience“,Tibet.cn, 16 August 2010, http://www.tibet.cn/wzz/wenzhang/201008/t20100816_617507.htm

2 7 The Democratic Management Committee (Ch: we yuan hi,Tib: u-yon lhan khang) is an administrative organ establishedin 1962 in religious institutions in Tibet and reconstructedunder the 1996 “patriotic reeducation”campaign.

2 8 Tibetan language version of Annual Report 2009: HumanRights Situation in Tibet, TCHRD

2 9 “Mao’s Great Leap Forward ‘killed 45 million in four years’”,The Independent, 17 September 2010, http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/maos-great-leap-forward-killed-45-million-in-four-years-2081630.html

3 0 The People’s Republic of China ratified the ICESCR in March2001, Document available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm

3 1 “Mission to China: preliminary observations and conclusions“,Beijing, 23 December 2010, UN Special Rapporteur on theRight to Food, http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdfofficialreports/de-schutter-china-statement.pdf

International Campaign for Tibet, 29 January 2010, http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/top-level-meeting-beijing-sets-strategy-tibet

3 4 “Silence on Tibetan talks is golden”, Francesco Sisci, AsiaTimes, 29 January 2010, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LA29Ad02.html

3 5 “CHINA’S 2010 WORK FORUM ON TIBET: A TURNTOWARDS MEETING BASIC HUMAN NEEDS?”,GabrielLaffite, 1 March 2010

2 3 “TEACHING AND LEARNING TIBETAN: THE ROLEOF THE TIBETAN LANGUAGE IN TIBET’S FUTURE“,Roundtable before the Congressional-Executive Commissionon China roundtable, 7 April 2008, http://libweb.uoregon.edu/ec/e-asia/read/teachtibet.pdf

2 4 “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights“, Officeof the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights,http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm

2 5 Original text in Chinese language, National Religious AffairsBureau issued “Measures for the Administration of TibetanBuddhist temple, www.gov.cn, 8 October 2010, http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2010-10/08/content_1717257.htm

2 6 "Du Qinglin attended the democratic management of TibetanBuddhist temple and addressed the exchange of experience“,Tibet.cn, 16 August 2010, http://www.tibet.cn/wzz/wenzhang/201008/t20100816_617507.htm

2 7 The Democratic Management Committee (Ch: we yuan hi,Tib: u-yon lhan khang) is an administrative organ establishedin 1962 in religious institutions in Tibet and reconstructedunder the 1996 “patriotic reeducation” campaign.

2 8 Tibetan language version of Annual Report 2009: HumanRights Situation in Tibet, TCHRD

2 9 “Mao’s Great Leap Forward ‘killed 45 million in four years’”,The Independent, 17 September 2010, http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/maos-great-leap-forward-killed-45-million-in-four-years-2081630.html

3 0 The People’s Republic of China ratified the ICESCR in March2001, Document available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm

3 1 “Mission to China: preliminary observations and conclusions“,Beijing, 23 December 2010, UN Special Rapporteur on theRight to Food, http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdf/officialreports/de-schutter-china-statement.pdf

3 2 “Fifth National Conference on Tibetan Work held in Beijing”,China Tibet Information Center, 22 January 2010, http://eng.tibet.cn/news/today/201001/t20100122_540471.htm

33 “Top-level meeting in Beijing sets strategy on Tibet“, InternationalCampaign for Tibet, 29 January 2010, http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/top-level-meeting-beijing-sets-strategy-tibet

3 4 “Silence on Tibetan talks is golden”, Francesco Sisci, AsiaTimes, 29 January 2010, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LA29Ad02.html

3 5 “CHINA’S 2010 WORK FORUM ON TIBET: A TURNTOWARDS MEETING BASIC HUMAN NEEDS?”,GabrielLaffite, 1 March 2010

3 2 “Fifth National Conference on Tibetan Work held in Beijing”,China Tibet Information Center, 22 January 2010, http://eng.tibet.cn/news/today/201001/t20100122_540471.htm

3 3 “Top-level meeting in Beijing sets strategy on Tibet“,


14

15

CIVIL AND POLITICAL LIBERTIES

Introduction

2010 was yet another year during which humanrights situation in Tibet has witnessed many flagrantviolations, including increased imprisonment, arbi-trary detentions, strict police responses to express-ing political opinion or to just promoting Tibetanculture. As a result, Tibet continues to belong tothe group of the worst world territories as far ashuman rights situation goes.

Civil and political rights are understood as basichuman rights and as such they became the first his-torically protected. In righs People’s Republic ofChina (referred to as PRC from here after) it is how-ever not the case and this chapter is going to exam-ine the situation on this very essential field of hu-man rights during 2010.

International norms of human rights

Civil and political rights were the first rights to becodified and generally accepted by the internationalcommunity. The basis of what we understand to-day as civil and political rights can be found in U.N.Charter (1944), the document to establish UnitedNations1. According to this, the members are bound“to fulfill in good faith” the obligations assumed bythem in accordance with the U.N. Charter, includ-ing “promoting and encouraging respect for humanrights and for fundamental freedoms…”2

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights(“UDHR”) was explicitly adopted for the purposeof defining the meaning of the words “fundamentalfreedoms” and “human rights” appearing in the U.N.Charter. Although not legally binding, the UDHRis a fundamental constitutive document of theUnited Nations widely regarded by Human Rightsexperts as having acquired legal force as part of cus-tomary international law.3 The UDHR has thuscontributed “to render human rights the commonlanguage of humankind.”4

Even though UDHR has been widely accepted andthroughout the time has become part of interna-tional customary law, it does not induce any formalrequirements. 5 For this purpose two Convenantswere drafted - International Covenant on Civil andPolitical Rights (ICCPR) and International Cov-enant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights(ICESC), both adopted in 1966 and coming intoforce 10 years later in 1976. These treaties are legallybinding for the countries which adopted them andas such form the international law. 6.

Popularly we mostly refer to UDHR as the majorhuman rights document, which is partly because ofthe time gap between the adoption of UDHR (1948)and the Covenants coming into force (1976), whenit was the Declaration which was the only compre-hensive human rights document7.

In this chapter we will mostly use ICCPR as theinternational document defining civil and politicalrights. As already said, the first right stated in Ar-

16


ticle 1 of ICCPR is the right to self-determinationand free disposal with natural resources.

ICCPR then dismisses the death penalty as beingagainst essential right to life. It forbids torture orany maltreatment while in detention. Article 9 ex-plicitly denies arbitrary arrests and detention. Also,“anyone who is arrested shall be informed of thereasons for his arrest”. All the persons should be freeto move around the territory of their country andshould also be free to leave and re-enter the country.Everyone has the right for fair and public trial, whichincludes presumption of innocence until provenguilty, right to defend at a lawful court in person orby legal assistance of own choice. The Covenant rec-ognizes right the to assembly and association. Fi-nally, Article 27 states that possible minorities shallbe free to preserve their culture, language or reli-gion.8

Freedom of opinion and expression is “an essentialtest right” and is of special importance here. Theright to freedom of opinion and expression servesas an important indicator regarding the protectionof other human rights and fundamental freedoms.9

Under Article 19 of the ICCPR, the right to free-dom of opinion and expression comprises three dif-ferent elements: (a) the right to hold opinions with-out interference; (b) the right to seek and receiveinformation and the right of access to information;and (c) the right to impart information and ideas ofall kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, inwriting or in print, in the form of art, or throughany other media of one’s choice.10

The right to freedom of opinion is absolute andmay not be limited in any way.11 However, the free-dom of expression is not absolute. The ICCPR rec-ognizes that such rights “may be subject to certainrestrictions, but these shall only be such as are pro-vided by law and are necessary: (a) for respect of therights or reputations of others; (b) For the protec-tion of national security or of public order, or ofpublic health or morals.”12

One proposal which addresses this very issue of theextent of freedom of expression came into being in1995, when group of 37 on international lawadopted the Johannesburg Principles on National Se-curity, Freedom of Expression and Access to Informa-tion13 (hereinafter, Johannesburg Principles). Thisdraft addresses the lack of clarity under internationallaw regarding the scope of legitimate restrictions onfreedom of expression and information on nationalsecurity grounds.14

The Johannesburg Principles have gained widespreadacceptance, and are arguably considered norms ofcustomary international law.15 One year after theiradoption, Abid Hussain, the U.N. Special Rappor-teur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, rec-ommended that the U.N. Human Rights Commis-sion endorse them.16 They have been repeatedlynoted in the annual resolutions of U.N. HumanRights bodies on freedom of expression,17 and havebeen referred to by courts around the world.18 Inaddition, the Johannesburg Principles are referencedregularly by U.N. Special Rapporteurs.19 Recogniz-ing that governments justify the commission of se-rious violations of human rights as necessary to pro-tect national security, the obligations set out in theJohannesburg Principles are clearly aimed at curb-ing abuses of power. Until today, however, theJohannesburg Principles have not yet been formallyimplemented.

Chinese legal provisions of human rightsPRC’s International commitments

PRC is a member country of UN and one of the 5permanent members of UN Security Council. Byvirtue of its membership, the PRC is legally bound“to fulfill in good faith” the obligations assumed bythem in accordance with the U.N. Charter, includ-ing “promoting and encouraging respect for humanrights and for fundamental freedoms…”20

Civil and Political Liberties

17

PRC has signed both Covenants comprising theInternational Bill of Human Rights, though it hasratified only ICESCR. PRC officials have on sev-eral occasions expressed their intent to ratify theICCPR21. In the PRC government’s 2009–10 Na-tional Human Rights Action Plan (“HRAP”) issuedin April 2009, officials declared that the ICCPRconstituted one of the “fundamental principles” onwhich the plan was based. The PRC committed it-self to “continue legislative, judicial, and adminis-trative reforms to make domestic laws better linkedwith this Covenant, and prepare the ground for ap-proval of the ICCPR.”22 There has been no cleardynamics toward ratifying the ICCPR during 2010.

For complete list of international treaties which PRCis part of see Appendix-3 to this Report.

PRC’s domestic law

Constitution of the PRC guarantees various free-doms to all the citizens. Article 35 of the Constitu-tion of the PRC provides that citizens “enjoy free-dom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of associa-tion, of procession and of demonstration.”23 ThePRC’s constitutional guarantees also include the rightto criticize any state organ or functionary.24 Accord-ing to the Regulations on the Administration of Pub-lishing, “all levels of the People’s Government shallensure that citizens are able to legally exercise theirright to freedom of publication.”25 The Constitu-tion of the PRC also includes formal, explicit guar-antees for human rights. Article 33, which guaran-tees to Chinese citizens equal treatment before thelaw includes “[t]he State respects and preserves hu-man rights.”

Despite the existence of these provisions and theCCP’s verbal assurances of implementing them, freespeech guarantees under the Chinese Constitutionare overpowered by other provisions imposing vagueand over-broad affirmative duties on citizens. For

example, Article 52 requires Chinese citizens to safe-guard “the unity of the country;”26 Article 54 statesthat “it is the duty of citizens of the PRC to “tosafeguard the security, honor and interests of themotherland;”27 and Article 53 obliges Chinese citi-zens, organizations, and public organs to “keep statesecrets.”28

Vague, over-broad, circular, and arbitrarily appliedclassification of matters involving “state secrets,” oractivities which “incite subversion of state power”completely undermine China’s domestic free speechguarantees. Using these legal tools, State authoritiesare able to characterize their assault on the freedomof expression and information in the PRC as in ac-cordance with the law.

Development on human rights’ law in PRCin 2010

Presumably in response to widespread internationalcriticism regarding the abuses of power carried outby China’s state secrets framework, on April 29, 2010the National People’s Congress Standing Commit-tee issued a revised version of China’s State SecretsLaw (1989), to take effect October 1, 2010. Thisrevision is ostensibly an element of China’s broaderefforts to bring its legal system into line with theICCPR—policy commitments evinced in China’sfirst ever Human Rights Action Plan of 2009-10.29

The Central government news agency claims thatthe revised Law on the Protection of State Secrets(2010) contains a new definition that narrows thescope of state secrets. Despite such claims, the defi-nition of “state secrets” in the 2010 law continuesto suffer from problems of vagueness and over-breadth. The definition of state secrets “preserves thebroad categories that give officials wide discretionto declare information a state secret.”30 Thus, theCECC concluded that the revised law does not ap-pear to narrow the definition’s scope.31

18


Article 28 of the revised law tightens requirementson Web and telecommunications service providersoperating in China regarding state secrets andInternet use. The new law “obligates network op-erators and service providers to cooperate with thepolice, state security officials and prosecutors in in-vestigating leaks of state secrets. On discovering aleak, they must promptly block it and report it tohigher authorities.”32

In May 2010 the Chinese government announced anew set of regulations aimed at stifling the freedomof expression and information inside Tibet. Anybusiness providing photocopy services will now berequired to apply for a permit from the governmentand to record indentifying information about theirclients.33 Photocopier services will also be requiredto monitor and document the contents of any docu-ments being reproduced.34

The new regulations, which were reportedly alreadybeing implemented in Tibet in May 2010, will likelyimpose affirmative duties on photocopy service pro-viders to report the reproduction of any materialthat may be regarded as “politically sensitive” to theState security organ. Sources in Lhasa have confirmedthat the new rules appear to apply only to materialswritten in the Tibetan language.35

Areas of concern in civil and political rightsin TibetArrests, detentions and sentencing

According to information collected by Tibetan Cen-tre for Human Rights and Democracy (TCHRD),till 30 December 2010 there are 831 known Politi-cal Prisoners in Tibet. Out of which 360 were sen-tenced. 188 were arrested in 2010 and out of that71 were sentenced.

Many of the arrests in Tibet show signs of immensepolitical interference. The CCP fears about the unityof the state and about losing its power. This is espe-

cially visible with its attempt to control all the mod-ern means of communicating, which could be pos-sibly used against it. It therefore carries strong re-prisals against every action which deviates from theofficial line stated by the Party. The western regionsof the PRC with strong national minorities (Tibet,Xinjiang) are especially the targets of these actions.Every public gathering, criticism or even promo-tion of the particular culture is seen as dangerousand is often being labeled as “splittism”.

The security presence in major Tibetan cities, espe-cially in the capital Lhasa was extended to the levelwhich was described as “war zone” during major an-niversaries. This is very likely the main reason whythere were fewer popular demonstrations36. Stillthere are cases presented in this chapter which showthat some Tibetans express their opinion even withknowledge of severe punishment.37

Another tool used by the CCP to promote its lineof seeing the reality lies in judiciary processes. Asthis chapter shows, many arrests and detentions havesigns of political interference, therefore a free courtwould have to reveal this . Under these circumstancesit is natural there are no free trials and the Partymanage the courts’ decisions, especially in “sensitive”cases and areas of PRC, which Tibet belongs to. Thischapter mentions some of the trials where courtswere simple agents of a higher political body’s lineof thought.

One of the ways of influencing the judiciary trialsand keeping them in secret is an organized crack-down by the CCP on the Chinese lawyers and hu-man rights advocates. Many of them found them-selves without license after speaking out in favor ofTibet, human rights or other “sensitive” issues.38

Similarly, often the detained Tibetans are not al-lowed to be represented by the advocate chosen bythem, but they get one appointed to them by thegovernment.


19

Death Penalty

In 2010 information surfaced about two Tibetanssentenced to death with two years reprieve for theiractivities in the spring 2008 uprising in Tibet. Tilldate seven Tibetans have been given death sentences,with two actually executed, for their participationin the March 2008 uprising. The Kardze Interme-diate People’s Court sentenced Pema Yeshi, 28, fromThankyi Township, Nyarong County, Kardze “Ti-betan Autonomous Prefecture”, Sichuan, to deathwith two-year reprieve on 17 November 2009. Ac-cording to a Ganzi Daily report on 18 March 2009,Pema and two other Tibetans were arrested on 11March 2009 under suspicion of pasting and distrib-uting pamphlets calling for Tibetan independenceon roads of the township and setting fire to the town-ship government building on 28 February 2009. Thefamily members learnt about his arrest only afterfive months and were informed of the sentence on10 December 2009. Under such circumstances itcan be assumed the summary and arbitrary natureof judicial proceedings against him. 39

On 25 May 2010, the Lhasa Intermediate People’sCourt sentenced Sonam Tsering to death with twoyears reprieve under article 289 and 263 of the Chi-nese Criminal Law. According to the Lhasa EveningNews, Sonam was charged of rioting and incitingpublic to riot on 14 March 2008. 23-year oldSonam was born in a nomadic family in PayulCounty, Kardze “TAP”. He had arrived in Lhasa inlate 2007 and took active participation when theuprising broke out in March 2008. Instead of ad-dressing the roots of the Tibetans protests, the gov-ernment and its propaganda department have beenprojecting the popular Tibetan uprising with animage of criminal activities to the international com-munity. 40

Major protests in Tibet and Chineseresponses

After last year’s boycott of celebrating the TibetanNew Year (Losar) this year some Tibetans chose an-other expression of showing their respect to thosekilled in 2008 uprising – they were wearing oldclothes. Tibetan New Year is a major Tibetan holi-day and is normally accompanied by big celebra-tions where people wear their best traditional cloth-ing. The celebrations were accompanied by tightpolice controls.41

This year’s anniversary of 2008 March uprising sawanother Chinese “strike hard campaign” in whichby estimates around 400 Tibetans were detained.The police was checking all the ethnic Tibetan pass-ersby in Lhasa whether they had the required per-mits for staying in the city. Those who failed toprovide the documents were either detained or sentto their homes. Ethnic Chinese were not questioned,according to the reports.42

Two major protests against Chinese developmentpolicies were staged by Tibetan villagers and metwith armed response from security forces. The firstone happened in May in Madang Township (Amdo)where the villagers protested against the expansionof the cement factory. According to the sources, theyshowed awareness of the Chinese laws and currentParty’s directives in their petitions and demands. Yet,when repairing the road which had been previouslyblocked for the factory’s expansion, the authoritieswarned them to move out. Even while startingmoving out they were fired upon by the securityforces. 15 Tibetans were left wounded.43

Similarly, in the second incident in August 2010 inBaiyu Country, Sichuan Province, Tibetans pro-tested against extensive gold mining operations forthree days. After that, security forces started to fireupon the protesters.44 Chinese sources admitted kill-ing one Tibetan “accidentally”45, though Tibetan

20


sources say at least 4 people were killed and at least30 wounded.46

The modest improvements of the Chinese responsemight have been noticed during the protest ofaround 300 Tibetan students in Beijing against thenew language policy which is considered by manyTibetans as the sidelining of Tibetan language andthus endangering its very existence. Unlike in otherpart of PRC (Tibet), their protest was allowed toend peacefully without any interference by the au-thorities.47

Detentions at schools and universities

March and April 2010 saw a huge number of de-tentions and expulsions of Tibetan students andteachers from schools and academic institutions ineastern Tibet. The incidents took place at the MachuTibetan Nationality Middle School, the KanlhoTibetan Middle School No. 3, the Primary Schoolin Driru County, the Khar Primary School in SertharCounty, the Serthar Buddhist Institute, andBarkham Teachers Training Institute and NorthwestNational Minorities’ University in Lanzhou.48

This shameful treatment of students and teachersby Party organs demonstrates minimal tolerance fordissenting voices in academic institutions. TCHRDreceived reports that authorities held students asyoung as 11 to 15 years old in detention.

Incidents at Machu Middle School

A series of events at the Tibetan Middle School ofMachu, consisting of approximately 1500 students,illustrates the Chinese government’s escalating crack-down on the fundamental freedoms of Tibetan stu-dents, teachers, and school administrators. OnMarch 14, 2010 approximately 30 students fromthe Tibetan Middle School in Machu, located inthe far west region of Gansu, staged a peaceful protest to decry their lack of freedoms and to mark thesecond anniversary of the 2008 Uprising against

China’s repressive rule in Tibetan areas. Accordingto reports, State authorities had intensified securitymeasures at the school in the lead-up to March 10,preventing students from even leaving the schoolgrounds and banning a planned forum on the topicof “Tibetan experiences of joy and sorrow.”49

According to reports, the student protesters werejoined by 500 to 600 other Tibetans. In addition tocalling for resolution of the Tibet situation throughdialogue, the demonstrators shouted slogans suchas “Free Tibet,” “Long life for His Holiness the DalaiLama,” and “Chinese get out of Tibet.”50 Within30 minutes, the peaceful protesters were surroundedby armed Chinese security forces, and at least 40people were detained. Following this incident ap-proximately 3,000 armed police were deployedthroughout the town. The school was surroundedby armed security forces and all the students werelocked inside the campus. The entire Machu areawas reported to be in the grip of a climate of ten-sion and fear.

In addition to the reports of over 40 detentions onMarch 14, school administrators suffered conse-quences as a result of the peaceful, student-led dem-onstrations. The school’s headmaster and two assis-tants were dismissed from their jobs following theprotests. Sonam Tse, the head of the Machu PublicSecurity Office, was reported to have been relievedof his title as well.51 Concerned students submitted

Machu Middle School students broke out protest in Qinghai

Province in October 2010


21

petitions to State authorities in Machu County seek-ing reinstatement of the three sacked school headsand vowed to carry on with more protests until theirdemands were met.

During the afternoon of April 3, 2010 MachuMiddle School students staged another protest overthe firing of the school’s head master and two of hisTibetan assistants.52 On April 6 Tsering Dhondupof Ngulra Rulsa Village, and Thupten Nyima ofMuru Ngakor Village, were expelled over their par-ticipation in the protest on March 14.53 Both werelater detained for their alleged roles in organizingthe demonstrations.54

Students at Machu Middle School began a hungerstrike on April 22, demanding the release and rein-statement of three sacked school heads. The stu-dents also levied demands that the Chinese govern-ment cease its forced inclusion of communist doc-trines and policies in school curriculum.55

Details of the incidents remain sketchy due to theCCP’s tight controls on the flow of informationfrom Tibetan areas. Specific details regarding thecontinued detainment of students, teachers, or ad-ministrators are therefore unavailable. However, ac-cording to reports, the school remained under mili-tary lockdown for some time following the pro-tests of March and April 2010.

The situation at Machu Middle School deterioratedeven further in late April. Twenty-one teachers fromthe school were fined 20 to 60 thousand yuan($8,785) for “bad management” and for teaching“subversive” topics. According to sources in the area,the fines were for failing to “give the students a goodeducation on a daily basis and supervising well theirdaily activity.”56

Press freedom and internet censorship

The President and Party General Secretary Hu Jintaoin the past stated that journalists should “promotethe development and causes of the Party and thestate” and that their “first priority” is to “correctlyguide public opinion.”57 Not surprisingly and inaccordance with this statement, the Press Freedomorganization placed China at the 168th position intheir 2009 Press Freedom index out of 175 coun-tries.58 Also Tibetan exile leader Dalai Lama findsthe censorship as a major barrier and the actual sourceof the problems between Tibetans and Chinese, forthe Party controls the flow of information to itscitizenship which allows it, among others, to por-tray him as a terrorist.59

The Chinese government systematically controls allthe media. For example, any person or group whowishes to publish a newspaper, host a website orwork as a journalist must get prior approval fromthe government. In May 2010 government strength-ened the requirements to now include an exam fromChinese Communist Party journalism and Marxistviews.60 This effectively allows it to control the con-sent of domestic media.

In current times it is especially internet which servesas a major media to express an opinion by many.Naturally, the Party opts to filter the informationavailable on-line in PRC. Chinese policy with cen-sorship the expressing of opinion is, however, nottransparent. While for most of the internet users,which are now more than 400 million in PRC, pub-lishing critical opinions creates no severe risk, forsome “prominent” figures (opposition representa-tives, human rights critics, political activists etc) thiscan lead to a long term imprisonment on the basisof subverting of state power or splittism. Peoplefrom Tibet are among those, who are under sys-tematic control of the government.61

22


Chinese law also places affirmative duties on internetand cell phone service providers, including thosebased outside of China, to filter and remove con-tent the CCP deems politically sensitive. Further-more, such enterprises are required by law to reportsuspicious activities to authorities.62

In 2010, the Party authorities announced new re-strictions on media freedom in the PRC. The newregulations “forbid exchange of articles and reportsamong newspapers of the provinces and the barring ofnews media to do their own investigative reportingon national and international issues.”63 In effect,Chinese newspapers are now under legislative or-ders only to reproduce stories on international is-sues, as authorized by the State-owned news agency,Xinhua, further ensuring the content and circula-tion of information within the PRC will remainconsistent with CCP doctrine.64

The CCP’s White Paper on the State of the Internetin China (June 8, 2010) claimed that the regulationof the Internet in the PRC “guarantees freedom ofspeech” and is “consistent with international prac-tice.”65 The white paper claims the PRC’s policies“clearly prohibit the spread of information that con-tains contents subverting state power, underminingnational unity, infringing upon national honor andinterests, [and] inciting ethnic hatred and seces-sion….” However, no clear definitions of these con-cepts exist in the law of the PRC.66

All internet users within PRC face a number of re-strictions while trying to browse the websites. Firstly,companies are required by the government to con-duct self-censorship of unwanted materials. Theseinclude, for example, political sensitive informationand morally undesirable pages. However, even thenthere is a major barrier between all the traffic withinPRC and outside being referred to as a “Great Chi-nese firewall”. This system filters the demanded webpages and in case of undesirable content returns aconnection reset.67

During 2010 it was the argument between Googleand Chinese government which was drawing vastattention worldwide about the level of internet free-dom in PRC. After its access to PRC in 2006, Googlewas conducting self-censorship to comply with thelocal rules. This was subject to wide criticism in-ternationally. In January 2010, Google stated itwould no longer pursue self-censoring. It was alsoannounced by Google that their system had beenunder sophisticated cyber attack originating in PRCwhich had aimed at the Gmail accounts of varioushuman rights activists.68

At least another two international IT companies(Dell, Go Daddy Group) announced they were con-sidering a withdrawal from Chinese market due tonew regulations of using internet and (or) betterconditions in other countries.69

Later on, in April 2010, it was announced after yetanother cyber attack originating from PRC, classi-fied documents from computers of Dalai Lama,Indian governmental networks and a number of em-bassies had been stolen. However, it has not beenproved that the Chinese government is behind theattack.70

The practice of the Chinese government of strictcontrol of the information flow in Tibet was espe-cially evident during the deadly earthquake, affectedthe Tibetan areas in Yushu County, Qinhgai prov-ince in April 2010. After the earthquake of 7.1magnitude of Richter scale71, in which almost 3000people died72, it was the Buddhist monks who pro-vided immediate and major portion of help, accord-ing to many but Chinese sources.73 the Chinese me-dia tried to downplay the role monks played duringthe relief operations. The Party even criticized for-eign medias for showing too much pictures ofmonks while doing rescue operations75. Apart fromthe internationally criticized decision to order monksout of the affected area, it was the general lack ofunbiased information which shows the approachbeing followed in Tibet. Party officials banned jour-


23

nalists from outside Qinghai province from cover-ing the accident and rescue operations. In addition,a top Party official insisted that Chinese media em-phasize the government’s response to the disaster,the “good(ness)” of the Communist Party, and eth-nic groups “uniting” in disaster relief.76 The disasterwas therefore misused by the government to pro-mote its narrow goals instead of providing much-needed help and assistance to the affected people.

Some of the Tibetan intellectuals were arrested afterpublishing their criticism about Chinese responseto the earthquake, or for organizing donation cam-paigns for the victims and survivors (see some ofthe cases below).

Targeting of Tibetan culture andintellectuals

One of the major strategies of the Chinese govern-ment in Tibet in 2010 was that of systematic crack-down on everything Tibetan. This mostly took aform of assault on well known Tibetans who wereregarded as major representatives of the Tibetan cul-ture and national pride. This section presents someof the most notable cases of the attack on Tibetanculture. 77

Dhondup Wangchen

Tibetan filmmaker Dhondup Wangchen78 who wasdetained in 2008 was to be sentenced for 6 years in

December 2009. His crimewas making a film that wascritical of human rightsconditions in Tibet. Leav-ing Fear Behind was prima-rily a compilation of inter-views conducted with or-dinary Tibetans, who spokeopenly on camera regarding

their views of the Beijing Olympics and their viewson the Chinese government.79 During the deten-

tion, he was reportedly brutally mistreated in an at-tempt to extract a confession from him.

During the trail he was unable to choose freely thelegal assistance, as officials informed his lawyer LiDunyong he would not be able to defend him. In-stead, the government appointed a lawyer forWangchen. Authorities also refused a request by for-eign diplomats to observe his trial. 80

Wangchen’s family was unable to obtain informa-tion about his conditions, nor was informed of thecharges against him. Reportedly suffering fromHepatitis B for which he is not receiving treatment,Wangchen is serving his sentence doing hard labor.In May 2010 it was published he was transferred toa labor camp in Qinghai Province where conditionsare thought to be very harsh. 81

Karma Samdrup

Prominent businessman and philanthropist KarmaSamdrup, once lauded by the CCP as a model citi-

zen was detained inJanuary 2010 oncharges of an inci-dent dating back to1998. However, itis widely believed

that the prosecution was in direct reprisal for hisdefense of his two brothers, both environmental-ists, who were imprisoned in August 2009 after ac-cusing a police official of poaching of endangeredspecies.82

In June 2010, after six months of incarceration,during which Karma endured severe beatings, forcedinterrogation, inhuman treatment, and torture byChinese authorities, Samdrup was convicted oncharges of grave-robbing and sentenced to fifteenyears in prison, deprivation of political rights forfive years, and a fine of $1500.83 On July 3, 2010(the same day his brother was sentenced to five yearsin prison), Karma’s lawyers and members of his fam-

24


ily submitted materials for an appeal hearing.84 Theappeal was rejected on July 7, the same day it wasreportedly received by the judicial authorities, whothen waited nearly a month to inform Karma’s de-fense attorneys.

The prosecution of Karma Samdrup is particularlyalarming because of his prior warm relations withthe Chinese Communist Party. Fluent in Chinese,Mr. Samdrup was exceptionally successful in thriv-ing under Chinese rule while maintaining a strongTibetan identity. He and his brothers were regardedby the CCP as ideal Tibetans. A widely-acclaimedbook praising the brothers for their work, Tianzhu(“Heavenly Beads”), was published in China in 2009.However, in a foreshadowing of the brothers’ chill-ing relations with the government, the book wassuddenly banned throughout the PRC for no ap-parent reason despite its lack of political content.85

The charges against Karma stem from his purchaseof a carpet, clothing and a wooden coffin in Xinjiangin 1998 that were thought to have been pilferedfrom an ancient tomb located in a protected area.At that time, the Chinese authorities refused to pros-ecute Samdrup because the actual looters had alreadybeen apprehended, the evidence in the case was lack-ing, and Karma had a license to deal in such items.86

This is what makes the revival of the charges in 2010,based on almost exactly the same evidence from1998, so dubious.

Before his arrest on January 3, Karma had gone tothe detention center where his two brothers wereimprisoned. After hearing of their mistreatment atthe hands of Chinese authorities, he began agitatingfor their release.87 Soon thereafter, Karma himselfwas arrested and imprisoned.It is said that Karma’s troubles with Chinese authori-ties may also have been related to his support formass petitions in his home area of Gonjo Countyin Tibet. Karma had offered ideas to a group ofZirong villagers for petitioning the Beijing govern-

ment over grievances related to their compensationfor farmlands. However, Karma had urged the vil-lagers to trust the government and to give the Partyspace to resolve the problems.

Karma’s environmental protection work may alsohave made him some enemies amongbusinesspersons whose profitability suffered as a re-sult. His prominence and ability to attract fundsinto the region may also have created hostility andled to rivalries with territorial local Party leaders.88

Karma Samdrup pleaded before court not guilty and

stated that he endured daily beatings from the po-

lice and fellow prisoners. His mistreatment included

days without food or sleep, being soaked with cold

water in the dead of winter, and being drugged with

a substance that made his eyes and ears bleed, appar-

ently in an effort to force him to sign a confession.89

He appeared “frail and gaunt” after 6 months indetention; Dolkar Tso, Karma’s wife estimates helost 40 pounds in custody.

The trial of Karma Samdrup has been widely criti-cized by international observers, Tibet experts, andPu Zhiqiang, his own defense attorney. Pu told re-porters that he was denied access to Mr. Samdrupfor six months. The two were allowed to meet onlyfor 30 minutes on the eve of the trial, which wasoriginally scheduled for June 1, then suddenly post-poned. Their entire exchange was videotaped by thepolice.

Pu also described blatant evidence-tampering and a“mysterious witness” that suddenly appeared on thesecond day. Nearly the entire record pertaining toKarma’s Trial had been altered.90 Signatures wereadded to documents, and Samdrup’s lawyers’ requeststo see the prosecutors’ case file, as required by law,went unheeded. Finally the day before the resched-uled trial was to start, Karma’s lawyers were allowedto make copies of the file, but parts of the materialhad been removed.91


25

During the first two days of the trial, a court policeofficer approached the judge numerous times andhanded him an envelope. When Pu inquired, sug-gesting that the judge was receiving instructions, theenvelopes stopped. However, then the judge startedreceiving text messages which disrupted the proceed-ings, clearly suggesting outside influence. 92

The judge refused to delve into Mr. Samdrup’sclaims of having been beaten and drugged duringhis 6-month period of pre-trial detention. “Thecourt completely ignored the facts, trampled on thelegal system and violated Karma’s humanity,” saidPu.93

Karma’s three day trial came to a close around mid-night on June 24. The ten-page Chinese languageopinion was made available within hours of the sen-tencing—strongly suggesting that the decision was“preordained,” according to Nicholas Bequelin, aresearcher at Human Rights Watch.94 Human RightsWatch also stated that Samdrup’s case showed “seri-ous and repeated violations of China’s own crimi-nal procedure law.”95

Shogdung

Tragyal (pen name Shogdung), a forty-seven yearold leading Tibetan intellectual, philosopher andwriter who had long been closely associated withthe CCP, was detained by Chinese security person-nel in April 2010. In May his family was informedthat he was being held on the charges of “instigatingto split the motherland.”96

Tragyal is the highest-profile Tibetan writer to facearrest since the 2008 Uprising.97 His arrest is un-doubtedly connected with the contents of his new-est book, The Line Between Sky and Earth, whichwas characterized as “one of the most open and dar-ing critiques of the Chinese Communist Party poli-cies in Tibet over the last 50 years.”98

Shogdung’s arrest occurred within days of him sign-ing an open letter criticizing the Chinese authori-ties’ handling of the emergency response to theMarch earthquake in Qinghai province. The letterdated 21 April and signed by six other Tibetan writ-ers expressed condolences to the quake victims andencouraged Tibetans not to send donations throughofficial state channels, including China’s Red Cross.Tragyal himself had requested to visit the quake zonebut was refused by state authorities.

Shogdung was released in October on bail, accord-ing to his lawyer. However, he is still awaiting histrial. This is likely to occur within one year, as ac-cording to Chinese laws release on bail cannot ex-ceed this term.99

Tashi Rabten

Concern is mounting over the harassment and de-tention of Tashi Rabten (pen-name Therang), a stu-

dent, writer and liter-ary editor at theNorthwest MinoritiesUniversity in Lanzhouin Gansu. Rabten wasdetained in April 2010along with Druklo(pen-name Shokjang),another student-writer. The arresting

authorities proceeded to confiscate their Tibetan lan-guage books, mobile phones, laptop computers andcourse materials.100 After a few months disappear-ance, he was located in a detention centre in BarkhamCounty in November 2010.101

Rabten was due to graduate from the University in2010. In 2009, Tashi Rabten authored a book, alsobanned, entitled Written in Blood, which focusedon issues of democracy, the 2008 Uprising, and thebrutal Chinese suppression thereof. Reportedly be-

26


ing handled by the Chinese as a “political matter,”Rabten had published about 1,000 copies of thebook and managed to distribute more than 400copies before the Chinese authorities banned it.102

Tashi is one of the brave young thinkers of the newTibetan generation—fluent in Tibetan and Chinese,Internet-savvy, and having grown up in Chinese-ruled Tibet. In addition to his studies, he editedEastern Snow Mountain, a literary magazine thatquickly drew the ire of the CCP following the pub-lication of an edition that dared to refute state nar-ratives of the 2008 Uprising.

Rabten was known to have been under surveillancefor some time, and the April 2010 detainment wasnot Rabten’s first run-in with Chinese authorities inrecent years. Any information about Rabten is sub-ject to secrecy.

Music and arts

In May 2010, CCP authorities at a high school nearShigatse banned 27 popular Tibetan-language songs,including “The Hope of the Son of the Snow-City,”and “The Five-Colored Prayer Flags (Tibetan-lan-guage version),”103 in audio, video, digital media,or ringtone format. 104 Authorities warned of severerepercussions for anyone caught in possession ofthem.

The crackdown on “reactionary ringtones” ‘has af-fected Tibetan students as well. TCHRD receivedinformation that Chinese police are carrying outroutine searches of students’ personal belongings ingovernment-run schools in Tibetan areas as part ofits broader patriotic re-education campaign.105 Ac-cording to a twenty-five year-old female Tibetanrefugee from Lhasa who arrived in Dharamsala inJune 2010 and was interviewed by TCHRD staff,students caught with banned music on their mobilephones are being expelled from school in the Lhasaarea.106

Deterioration of the situation of Tibetanexiles in Nepal

Year 2010 has not only witnessed more tight secu-rity measures of Chinese government in Tibet butalso an increased effort to influence the neighbor-hood area around Tibet. The traditional crossingroute from Tibet leads to Nepal, which is used ev-ery year by approximately 2000 Tibetan refugees.107

Though most Tibetans choose not to stay here andmove on to India, there is a strong Tibetan minor-ity in Nepal of some 20,000 exiles. The Chinesegovernment considers this outflow of Tibetans aproblem for various reasons, especially for thesepeople having direct experience with Chinese ruleand can therefore harm the Chinese image world-wide. Another problem can be that they are gettingeducation in India and when coming back to Tibetcan pass on the information on fellow Tibetans,which is definitely not what the CCP desires.

It has been therefore always in Chinese government’sinterest to close this crossing point between Tibetand Nepal and it has been using a number of strat-egies to meet the goal. One is for example monitor-ing of the movement of Tibetans in Tibet. Anotheris strengthening of border patrolling. The construc-tion of infrastructure in border areas can be also in-terpreted this way as it can be of help to the per-sonal operating of Chinese personell in the area. Yetanother strategy has been to influence the Nepaleseside to take the direction which the PRC promotes.PRC has been doing this by providing donations toNepal, which itself is a country with a lot of pov-erty.108 By this means PRC managed to build a stronginfluence on policy forming of this independentstate.

The Nepalese government stated this year it wouldnot tolerate any anti-Chinese behavior in its terri-tory. It also went on with arresting Tibetans duringanti Chinese protests. The representative of DalaiLama in Nepal was also detained days before March


27

10 anniversary allegedly in a bid to prevent majorprotests109. Most notably, U.N. confirmed that threenewly Tibetan arrived refugees were forcefully repa-triated by Nepal. Nepal transported three Tibetansby helicopter to the Tibetan borders where they weremet by Chinese forces. Two of the Tibetans wereput into jail. 110

This is an open violation of the informal agreementbetween Nepalese government and U.N. refugeeagency (UNHCR), which was agreed in 1989 afterNepal stopped giving newly arrived Tibetans refu-gee status. According to this agreement, though, theNepalese government agreed to give Tibetan refu-gees a free passage through Nepal en route to India.The repatriation this year was the first such case since2003.111

Another incident in Nepal points in the same direc-tion to violating the right to free expression of Ti-betan exiles. During this, Nepalese police seized theballot boxes and blocked Tibetans from voting fortheir exile leaders. Among others, USA expressedtheir deep concerns about such behavior.112

The development of political situation in Nepalshows that CCP not only intends to control all theaspects of life in PRC itself, but tries to influencethe dynamics of other independent states, in thiscase Nepal. The question which remains is what kindof political freedom can Tibetans (and all the world,finally) expect within PRC, if Chinese governmenteven tries to influence the situation of civil and po-litical liberties in other, neighboring, countries.

Conclusion

Civil and political rights during 2010 in Tibet havewitnessed some worrying trends the overall situa-tion can be understood as getting worse. Chinesegovernment would be eager to consider lower num-ber of protests as a sign of changing the Tibetans’minds; however, this is by no means the case. Tibet-

ans, inside Tibet as well as in exile, continue to de-mand the basic right to self-determination, accom-panied by the respect of other basic human rights,from PRC. These are, in contrast to rhetoric, not atall being met. Tibetans continue being deprived ofbasic right to decide about their political and eco-nomical future.

A well representative example shows the gap betweenthe government’s rhetoric and actual action. In Janu-ary 2010 a document on formulating the new gov-erning strategy of Tibet was issued by Politburo ofCCP. In this document, Tibetan right to autonomywithin PRC was assured, aside with characterizingthe development path as “Chinese with some Ti-betan traits” remaining. It is remarkable that in a25-member committee to issue this important docu-ment about Tibetan future, no Tibetan is in-cluded.113

Chinese government spent this year in yet anotherpursu it to solve their “Tibetan problem” which intheir point of view stands for sidelining everythingTibetan and promoting state unity. Some more so-phisticated policies this year tried to meet this goal.Most notably, not only criticism of the Party, butseemingly every expression of Tibetan national pridewas labeled as splittism and subverting of state powerand Tibetans were persecuted by the authorities.Many well known and popular Tibetans foundthemselves under severe attacks which apparentlytargeted the Tibetan intelligentsia in an attempt tocut the people off from everything Tibetan.

Though already two years from the national upris-ing, Chinese security forces were on high alert andespecially during major anniversaries many parts ofTibet revoked as war zones. It is therefore not sur-prising that many Tibetan chose not to express theiropinion under such severe police (and at times mili-tary) surveillance.

28


Freedom of press, internet freedom and freedom toexpress the opinion in general have gone throughdifficult time, too. The Party continued to controlall the media and any expression of the opinion notfully in conformance with the Party line provokedthe reaction. The information flow was firmly con-trolled by the government, with foreign journalistsbeing often ruled out from certain zones. The usageof internet in PRC is under special regime with allinformation filtered. All political content deviatingfrom the CCP line remains routinely blocked. InTibet, this policy is even more severe and all theinternet and press activity is systematically underwatch.

Chinese repressive policies were not only steppedup to tighten the freedoms of Tibetans in Tibet,but also managed to worsen their position in Nepal.Nepal is traditionally a major crossing point on theway to exile and Chinese success in pursuing itspolicy in thier direction in this independent statecan be seen as very worrying.

We can regard as a modest sign of improvement inthe level of civil and political liberties in that theprotest in Beijing was not met with any police ac-tion and that the Fifth Tibet Work Forum for thefirst time incorporated all Tibetan areas into theirscope of interest. However, these two improvementswere hugely overwhelmed by negative tendencies aswere presented in this chapter.

It is therefore appropriate to conclude that condi-tions of Tibetans in Tibet are getting worse in thearea’s of civil and political rights. To improve thesituation, Chinese government to accept that Tibet-ans want to achieve their right to self-determina-tion, which does not necessarily mean they wish toseparate, as has been for long time emphasised bythe official position of Tibetan government in exilein their “middle way” approach. Until PRC s acceptthis, the protests of Tibetans will go on.

(Footnotes)

1 Henry J. Steiner & Philip Alston, International Human Rightsin Context, Law Politics Morals, Second Edition, New York:Oxford University Press, 2000, p. 137

2 Charter of the United Nations, articles 1 & 2, available athttp://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml

3 See e.g., Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F. 2d 876 (1980) (USCircuit Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit).

4 Audio Visual Library of International Law, United Nations,available at http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/udhr/udhr.html

5 Henry J. Steiner & Philip Alston, International Human Rightsin Context, Law Politics Morals, Second Edition, New York:Oxford University Press, 2000, p. 142

6 Ibid.7 Ibid., p.1378 ICCPR, available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/

ccpr.htm 9 Human Rights in China, “State Secrets, China’s Legal

Labyrinth“, 2007 p. 5, available at http://www.hrichina.org/public/contents/article?revision_id=41506&item_id=41421

10 ICCPR, available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm

1 1 Ibid.1 2 Ibid.1 3 Article 19, The JohannesburgPrinciples on National Security,

Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, October1, 1995, available at http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4653fa1f2.html

1 4 The Johannesburg Principles: Overview and Implementation,p. 7.

1 5 Human rihgts in China, State Secrets, China’s Legal Labyrinth,2007 p. 6, available at http://www.hrichina.org/public/contents/article?revision_id=41506&item_id=41421

1 6 Report of the Special Rapporteur, Promotion and protectionof the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Mr. AbidHussein, at para. 154, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1996/39 (22 March1996).

1 7 See e.g., Commission on Human Rights Resolution 1996/53, preamble, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1996/53 (1996).

1 8 See, e.g.,Gamini Athukoral “Sirikotha” and Ors v. Attorney-General, 5 May 1997, S.D. Nos. 1-15/97 (Supreme Court ofSri Lanka) and Secretary of State for the Home Departmentv. Rehman [2001] UKHL 47 (House of Lords).

1 9 See e.g., Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial,summary or arbitrary executions, Philip Alston, p. 43, U.N.Doc. A/HRC/11/2/Add.1 (29 May 2009).

2 0 Charter of the United Nations, articles 1 & 2, available at


29

http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml2 1 United States Congressional-Executive Commission on China

(CECC) 2009 Annual Report, [hereinafter CECC 2009 AnnualReport] notes to Section II: Freedom of Expression, at note 4.(“In February 2009, during the UN Human Rights Council’sUniversal Periodic Review of the Chinese Government’s humanrights record, the Chinese Government supportedrecommendations made by Member States that China ratifythe ICCPR. At the time, Chinese officials also said China wasin the process of amending domestic laws, including the criminalprocedure law and laws relating to reeducation through labor,to make them compatible with the ICCPR. UN GAOR, Hum.Rts. Coun., 11th Sess., Report of the Working Group on theUniversal Periodic Review—China, A/HRC/11/25, 3 March09, paras. 63, 114(1)”).

2 2 See State Council Information Office, National Human RightsAction Plan of China (2009–2010), Xinhua (Online), 13 April09, introduction, sec. V(1).

2 3 Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, Article 35,available at http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/constitution/constitution.html

2 4 Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, Article 41.2 5 Regulations on the Administration of Publishing, (December

25, 2001), article 5, available at http://www.cecc.gov/pages/v i r t u a l A c a d / e x p /explaws.php?PHPSESSID=f1898bb6598e1c46f08d09472288aaa3#publishinglaw

26 Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, Article 52.2 7 Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, Article 54.2 8 Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, Article 53.2 9 National Human Rights Action Plan of China (2009–2010).3 0 National People’s Congress Standing Committee Issues Revised

State Secrets Law, CECC, May 20, 2010, available at http://w w w . c e c c . g o v / p a g e s / v i r t u a l A c a d /index.phpd?showsingle=140456

3 1 Ibid.(“There are several reasons that this additional languagedoes not narrow the scope of state secrets. First, the 1989Law already contained an implicit requirement thatinformation is considered a state secret if disclosure wouldresult in some harm to “state security and interests” (Article9). Second, the references to “politics, economy, nationaldefense, foreign relations” are not exhaustive, as indicated bythe use of “among others” (deng). Third, such categories arebroad enough to encompass a wide array of information. Finally,officials may still rely on the catch-all Item 7 to declareinformation a state secret.”)

3 2 Jonathan Ansfield, China Passes Tighter Information Law, NewYork Times, April 29, 2010, available at http://w w w. n y t i m e s . c o m / 2 0 1 0 / 0 4 / 3 0 / w o r l d / a s i a /30leaks.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

33 Sharon LaFraniere, China Aims to Stifle Tibet’s Photocopiers,New York Times, May 20, 2010, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/world/asia/21tibet.html

3 4 Ibid.; This information was confirmed in a TCHRD interview(June 25, 2010) with a newly-arrived Tibetan refugee (25years old, female) from the Lhasa area.

3 5 “Crackdown on Tibetan Ringtones“,Radio Free Asia, 21 May 2010, http://www.rfa.org/english/news/tibet/ringtones-05212010110758.html

3 6 “Tibetans mark Uprising anniversaries despite crackdown:Lhasa like a ‘war-zone’”, ICT, 22 March 2010, http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/tibetans-mark-uprising-anniversaries-despite-crackdown-lhasa-war-zone

3 7 CECC 2010 Annual Report, p. 228, available at http://f r w e b g a t e . a c c e s s . g p o . g o v / c g i - b i n /getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_house_committee_prints&docid=f:61507.pdf

3 8 “Lawyers’ Licenses Withheld”, Radio Free Asia, 18 July 2010,http://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/lawyers-inspection-07182010184545.html?searchterm=None

3 9 “A Tibetan sentenced to suspended death sentence, two othersto life and 16 years in prison in Nyarong”, TCHRD, 24February 2010, http://tchrd.org/press/2010/pr20100224.html

4 0 “Lhasa Court sentences one Tibetan to death and five tolengthy prison terms”, 26 May 2010, TCHRD, http://tchrd.org/press/2010/pr201005026.html

4 1 “Tension Across Tibet as Tibetans Mark New Year WithPrayers for The Dead“, 15 February 2010, Newsblaze, http://newsb laze . com/s tory /20100215164456zzzz .nb/topstory.html

4 2 Jane Macartney, “Hundreds rounded up in Tibet crackdown“,11 March 2010, The Times, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article7056345.ece

4 3 Kalsang Rinchen, “15 Tibetans wounded as Chinese policeopen fire in Labrang“, 18 May, Phayul, http://w w w . p h a y u l . c o m /newsarticle.aspx?id=27328&article=15+Tibetans+wounded+as+Chinese+police+open+fire+in+Labrang

4 4 “Chinese Police Shot at Least 4 Tibetans in Mining Protest“,20 August 2010, NTD Television, http://english.ntdtv.com/ntdtv_en/ns_china/2010-08-30/779130239663.html

4 5 “China says only one Tibetan shot dead in Palyul mine protest“,1 September 2010, Phayul, http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=28059

4 6 “4 Tibetans Shot Dead by Chinese Police over Mining Protest“,27 August 2010, Tibet Custom, http://www.tibetcustom.com/article.php/20100827215003962

4 7 “Tibetan students in China protest over language policy“, 20October 2010, BBC, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11581189

4 8 “Tibetan students staged peaceful protest in Machu County“,TCHRD Human Rights Update, May 2010, available at http://www. tchrd .o rg /pub l i c a t ions /h r_upda te s /2010/hr201004.html#Machu%20County; “More than thirtyTibetan Primary Students detained, one expelled in SertharCounty after protest“, TCHRD Press Release, April 15, 2010,available at http://www.tchrd.org/press/2010/pr20100415.html

49 “Tibetans mark Uprising anniversaries despite crackdown:Lhasa like a ‘war-zone’”, ICT, 22 March 2010, http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/tibetans-mark-uprising-anniversaries-despite-crackdown-lhasa-war-zone

30


5 0 Ibid.5 1 “China: Firings over school protests“, 19 March 2010 Radio

Free Asia, http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4bab813919.html

5 2 “Protest erupts again“,Tibet Times, http://www.tibettimes.net/news.php?showfooter=1&id=2477

5 3 Yangyal Sham, “21 Tibetan Teachers Fined for ‘TeachingSubversive Topics’”, The Tibet Post International, 2 April2010,www.thetibetpost.com/en/news/tibet/818-21-tibetan-teachers-fined-for-qteaching-subversive-topicsq

5 4 “Tibetan students staged peaceful protest in Machu County“,TCHRD Human Rights Update, May 2010, available at http://www. tchrd .o rg /pub l i c a t ions /h r_upda te s /2010/hr201004.html#Machu%20County

5 5 Kalsang Rinchen, “Machu Middle School students go onhunger strike, demand sacked teachers’ reinstatement”, Phayul,3 May 2010, http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=27230

5 6 A ‘Raging Storm’: The Crackdown on Tibetan Writers andArtists after Tibet’s Spring 2008 Protests, ICT, 2010, p. 74,available at http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/raging-storm-crackdown-tibetan-writers-and-artists-after-tibets-spring-2008-protests

5 7 CECC 2009 Annual Report, p. 50-51, available at http://w w w. c e c c . g o v / p a g e s / a n n u a l R p t / a n n u a l R p t 0 9 /CECCannRpt2009.pdf

58 Press Freedom Index 2009, available at http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2009,1001.html

5 9 “Dalai Lama: Chinese ‘Censorship’ At Root Of TibetProblem’”, 21 February 2010, Radio Free Europe, http://w w w . r f e r l . o r g / c o n t e n t /Dalai_Lama_Chinese_Censorship_At_Root_Of_Tibet_Problem/1964030.html

6 0 CECC Annual Report 2010, p. 12, available at http://f r w e b g a t e . a c c e s s . g p o . g o v / c g i - b i n /getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_house_committee_prints&docid=f:61507.pdf

6 1 p. 3, Ibid.6 2 See, e.g., Provisions on the Administration of Internet New

Information Services, issued September 25, 2005, effectiveSeptember 25, 20005, arts. 19, 20, 21, available atwww.cecc.gov

6 3 Tenzin Tsering, “China tightens media law to curb criticism”,Phayul, 23 July 2010 http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=27801&article=China+tightens+media+law+to+curb+criticism

6 4 Ibid.6 5 Government White Paper on Internet Claims Free Speech

Protected, CECC, available at http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/index.phpd?showsingle=142107

6 6 Ibid.6 7 Owen Fletcher and Dan Nystedt, “Google Says Mobile Services

Now Mostly Accessible in China“, 8 April 2010, PC World,http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/193773/google_says_mobile_services_now_mostly_accessible_in_china.html

6 8 “Google stops censoring search results in China“, 23 Marcvh,BBC, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8581393.stm

6 9 “Dell and Go Daddy threaten to follow Google out of China“,25 March 2010, Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

technology/google/7517291/Dell-and-Go-Daddy-threaten-to-follow-Google-out-of-China.html

7 0 Tania Branigan, “Cyber-spies based in China target Indiangovernment and Dalai Lama“, 6 April 2010, Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/apr/06/cyber-spies-china-target-india

7 1 According to Chinese officials, see “Monks Told To Go Home“,20 April 2010, Radio Free Asia http://www.rfa.org/english/n e w s / c h i n a / g o h o m e -04202010144941.html?searchterm=None

7 2 “Final death toll from China quake almost 3,000, state newsagency says“, 31 May 2010, Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/31/china-earthquake-yushu-county-death-toll

7 3 Chris Buckley, “Quake sees Tibetan Buddhist monks assertroles“, 16 April 2010, ICT http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/tibet-news/quake-sees-tibetan-buddhist-monks-assert-roles

7 4 Tania Branigan, “Aid-giving monks told to leave Chinaearthquake zone“, 22 April 2010, Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/22/china-earthquake-monks-must-leave

7 5 “Foreign media’s coverage of Yushu earthquake misleading“,21 April 2010, China Tibet Online http://chinatibet.people.com.cn/6958633.html

7 6 “Communist Party Controls Media Coverage of YushuEarthquake“, CECC, available at

http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/index.phpd?showsingle=139627

7 7 For more cases and information see publication of TCHRD -Dissenting Voices:Targeting the Intellectuals, Writers andCultural Figures, 2010, available at http://tchrd.org/publications/topical_reports/Dissenting_Voices-2010/Dissenting_Voices-2010.pdf

7 8 See Profile 11, Dissenting Voices, 2010, TCHRD.7 9 Jane Macartney, “Filmmaker Dondup Wangchen jailed for

letting Tibetans tell their tale“, 8 January 2010, The Times http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/

article6978798.ece8 0 2009 Human Rights Report: China, U.S. Dept of State.8 1 Andrew Jacobs, “Tibetan Gets Suspended Death Sentence in

China“, 27 May 2010, NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/world/asia/28tibet.html

82 “ Fears for three environmentalist brothers as ‘gaunt’ KarmaSamdrup on trial after torture “, 24 June 2010,ICT http:www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/fears-three-e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t - b r o t h e r s -%E2%80%98gaunt%E2%80%99-karma-samdrup-trial-after-torture

8 3 Andrew Jacobs, “Tibetan Environmentalist Receives 15-YearSentence“, 24 June 2010, NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/world/asia/25tibet.html

8 4 “A sharp knife above his head“4 August 2010, ICT Report,available at http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-r e p o r t s / % E 2 % 8 0 % 9 8 - s h a r p - k n i f e - a b o v e - h i s -head%E2%80%99- t r i a l s - and - s en t enc ing - th r e e -environmentalist-brothers-tibet


31

8 5 Robert Barnett,“Expanding Crime and Punishment in Tibet“,3 July 2010, available at http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/barnett2/English

8 6 Andrew Jacobs, “Tibetans Fear a Broader Crackdown“, 23June 2010, NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/24/world/asia/24tibet.html

8 7 Andrew Jacobs, “Tibetan Environmentalist Receives 15-YearSentence“, 24 June 2010, NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/world/asia/25tibet.html

8 8 “Landmark sentencing?“, 24 June 2010, Tibet Info http://www.tibetinfonet.net/content/update/162

8 9 Andrew Jacobs, “Tibetans Fear a Broader Crackdown“, 23June 2010, NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/24/world/asia/24tibet.html

9 0 Ibid.9 1 “A sharp knife above his head“ 4 August 2010, ICT Report,p.

23 available at http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/%E2%80%98-sharp-knife-above-his-head%E2%80%99- t r i a l s - and - s en t enc ing - th r e e -environmentalist-brothers-tibet

9 2 Ibid., p.259 3 Andrew Jacobs, “Tibetan Environmentalist Receives 15-Year

Sentence“, 24 June 2010, NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/world/asia/25tibet.html

9 4 Ibid.9 5 “China: Drop Charges Against Tibetan Environmental

Philanthropis“, Human Rights Watch, 10 June 2010, availableat http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/06/10/china-drop-charges-against-tibetan-environmental-philanthropist

96 “ Quake Critic Arrested“, 4 June 2010, Radio Free Asia http:// w w w . r f a . o r g / e n g l i s h / n e w s / t i b e t / c r i t i c -06042010161739.html?searchterm=None

9 7 A ‘Raging Storm’: The Crackdown on Tibetan Writers andArtists after Tibet’s Spring 2008 Protests, ICT, 2010, p. 11,available at http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/raging-storm-crackdown-tibetan-writers-and-artists-after-tibets-spring-2008-protests.

9 8 Ibid., p. 149 9 Kalsang Rinchen, “Tibetan writer ‘Shogdung’ released on ‘bail

pending trial’”, 15 October, Phayul http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=28351

100 A ‘Raging Storm’: The Crackdown on Tibetan Writers andArtists after Tibet’s Spring 2008 Protests, ICT, 2010,p. 32,available at http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/raging-storm-crackdown-tibetan-writers-and-artists-after-tibets-spring-2008-protests.

101 Pen American Centre, November 2010, http://www.pen.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/3776/prmID/172 “Missing Tibetanwriter traced to detention center in BarkhamCounty“,Phayul.com, 20 November 2010, http://www.phayul.com/news/discuss/view.aspx?id=28592#39102

102 Ibid.103 “Crackdown on Tibetan Ringtones”,21 May 2010, Radio Free

Asia http://www.rfa.org/english/news/tibet/ringtones-05212010110758.html

04 See “Where Tibetans write”, Bhuchung Sonam http://www.tibetwrites.org/?_Bhuchung-D-Sonam_

105 “China Bans Religious Practice in Tibetan Schools in TAR“,TCHRD Human Rights Update, June 2010, available at http://www.tchrd.org/publications/hr_updates/2010/

106 Interview with Tibetan refugee (name withheld) in McleodGanj 25 June 2010.

107 According to TCHRD sources108 “Tibetan detainees in Nepal start hunger strike“ 17 March,

AFP http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jODPJT-nyPu88-d1vEuxXf__YJ1A

109 “Nepal police arrest Dalai Lama’s representative“, 7 March2010, Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/south-asia/Nepal-police-arrest-Dalai-Lamas-representative/articleshow/5655215.cms

110 Claire Cozens, “UN ‘concerned’ over Nepal‘s repatriation ofTibetans“, 28 July 2010, AFP http://www.google.com/h o s t e d n e w s / a f p / a r t i c l e /ALeqM5g0SI3kQ1nBgpmUKQsaEpZs3a7avw

111 Ibid.112 “Call to Protect Exile Rights“, 10 June 2010, Radio Free

Asiahttp: / /www.r fa .org/engl i sh/news/t ibet/ t ibet-10062010175358.html?searchterm=None

113 CECC 2010 Annual Report, p. 216, available at http://f r w e b g a t e . a c c e s s . g p o . g o v / c g i - b i n /getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_house_committee_prints&docid=f:61507.pdf

33

RIGHTS TO EDUCATION

· The foundation for the development of humanresources.

· The thread that joins all the other human rights.

That the education of the child shall be directedto…

“The development of respect for the child’sparents, his or her own cultural identity,language and values, for the national valuesof the country in which the child is living,the country from which he or she mayoriginate, and for civilizations different fromhis or her own.”

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child(CRC), ratified in 1992 by China, Article 29 of theCRC.

Introduction

Trying to study any aspect of China’s rule in Tibettoday – despite the appearance of a growing open-ness – is a struggle. In fact; this applies to China as awhole and not just to the countries – like Tibet –which are under China’s occupation and where, there-fore, the situation is far more difficult. This is be-cause China is still a totalitarian communist stateand not a functioning democracy. The so-called‘opening of Tibet’ was simply an ‘opening’ of Tibetto international tourism to generate income for theGovernment. There was no meaningful ‘opening’for the Tibetan people – who still live under foreigndomination by a nation who have historically and

culturally looked down on Tibetans as inferior.

The basic aim and purpose behind China’s educa-tion policy in Tibet today – if it can be called an‘education’ policy – is assimilation. This is evidentfrom the fact that China’s declared plans and poli-cies are more about numbers rather than content.This is to say that all the impressive statistics aboutthe number of scholars and the number of studentsand the figures about government funding do notreveal the fact that all of this is not aimed at givingTibetan students the opportunity to receive a properTibetan education to enable them to learn their ownlanguage and culture and, therefore, to grow up asTibetans.

In view of the fact that all the job opportunities –both in the public and the private sector – are all inChinese; where then is the incentive for the newgeneration of Tibetans to study Tibetan? The fewgood schools in Tibet are concentrated in the majortowns to serve the children of Chinese officials andbusiness communities and teaching in all theseschools is in Chinese. Also, with a few exceptions,most Tibetans do not even have the means to sendtheir children to these schools.

What is more; now with the huge numbers of Chi-nese immigrants moving into Tibet; any semblanceof cultural diversity permitting Tibetans to main-tain their own language is a thing of the past. And,it hardly needs to be said that language is the key tocultural preservation. In fact, language is what givesunity and identity to culture.

34


Today, Tibetans have already been reduced to a mi-nority in Tibet. This is not all. There are more andmore and more Chinese settlers moving into everypart of Tibet everyday. Yes; there are new schoolsbeing built in Tibet today, but these are for the chil-dren of the Chinese immigrants moving into Tibet.

In addition to the problem of declared polices notbeing implemented and being entirely at odds withground realities, an added difficulty is that even thepolicies themselves are changed frequently withoutdue process. This is more so in countries like Tibetunder Chinese occupation where the people haveno rights and no say in the decision-making pro-cess.

A further difficulty that greatly complicates any ef-fort at studying the state of education for Tibetansin Tibet today is that Tibet under China’s rule hasbeen divided into some six different areas. This isnot all. The policies for these different areas of Ti-bet are not the same. What the world knows as ‘Ti-bet’ today is the truncated half – the so-called TibetAutonomous Region (TAR). Most of Eastern Ti-bet has been incorporated into neighbouring Chi-nese provinces like Gansu; Sichuan and Yunnan. Theentire north-eastern province of Tibet – where thepresent H.H. the Dalai Lama was born – has beenre-named ‘Qinghai’. Tibetans know it as Amdo orDho-me.

The education policy in all these areas is differentfrom the education policy and practice in the so-called TAR.

International Obligations:

We live in an increasingly interdependent world to-day where it is not only expected – but necessary forall countries to abide by certain laws and obliga-tions. And, when any one or more nations; espe-cially a major world power like China fails to liveup to their obligations then it becomes a problem

for the rest of the international community. Peopletoday are fond of using the terms – ‘Global Village’and ‘Family of Nations’ – to emphasise the grow-ing dependence of different countries to each other.In such a situation; all the more reason why it is notonly expected but actually necessary that everyonein the ‘Village’ and every member of the ‘Family’does not fail in their duties and obligations.

China, today, is a signatory to all major internationallaws and this is as it should be. China is not onlythe world’s biggest nation in terms of population;China is a major power in all other respects – mili-tary; political and economic. But rather than thesebeing a source of hope that it should be; for thecountries under China’s occupation, this is a sourceof growing concern. There are two reasons why thisis so. Firstly; because of the gap between the signingand the actual practice. Yes; by and large – in fact inmost cases – China does not actually implementthe various international laws that it has signed. Onthe other hand, because China has signed these in-ternational laws; there is less attention on the partof the other governments and even the internationalmedia. This means that in some cases, like the re-mote areas of Tibet, the situation often gets worse.

Year after year our past reports have highlighted thisimportant fact. Without going through all the in-ternational laws and obligations that China contin-ues to violate, let us take these examples:-

Dhonyoe, a 16-year-old student of class VI whoparticipated in the Khar Primary School protest on8 April 2010, was expelled from the school.Dhonyoe hails from Thatsi Township, SerthaCounty. Following the incident Khar Primaryschool administration was fined 10,000 ChineseYuan for students’ indiscipline. The Tibetan Centrefor Human Rights and Democracy (TCHRD) con-demns expulsion of the class VI student from school.

Education

35

According to sources, eighteen vehicles of People’sArmed Police (PAP) were brought into SerthaCounty as a measure to intimidate the residentsthereby preventing the escalation of the protest.1

“States Parties shall take all appropriate measuresto ensure that school discipline is administered in amanner consistent with the child’s human dignityand in conformity with the present Convention.”2

The Committee on the Rights of the Child haspointed out that the convention will protect thechild’s right but:

This year on 8 April 2010 more than thirty TibetanPrimary Students were detained in Sertha Countyin Kardze (Ch: Ganzi) “Tibetan Autonomous Pre-fecture” (‘TAP’). More than thirty students of KharPrimary School in Sertha County were detained bythe Chinese security forces following minor stonethrowing incident that took place after security forcesparaded monks in various places around the county.The names of the monks cannot be confirmed atthe moment.

Following the incident more than thirty Tibetanstudents of Khar Primary school were detained bythe security forces. Although most of the studentswere released after brief detention, around 10 stu-dents are still being held. It was announced that theremaining students won’t be released until they paymonetary fine of 2000 Yuan each and sign suretyletter by their parents guaranteeing non participa-tion by their children in such activities. The juve-niles are currently held at Sertha county Public Se-curity Bureau (PSB) Detention Centre. Most of thedetained were students in their early teens.3

— “All ethnic groups in China have the right to useand develop their own spoken and writtenlanguages. “All ethnic groups have the freedomto use and develop their own spoken and writtenlanguages” is a provision of the Constitution…..”4

II. Full Equality among Ethnic Groups:

China‘s Ethnic Policy and Common Prosperity andDevelopment of All Ethnic Groups: White Paper:http://www.china.org.cn/e-white/index.htm

Domestic Laws:

The key difficulty with ‘International Law’ is thatthere is no instrument – no ‘World Government’ –to enforce ‘International Law.’ Yes; there are excep-tions to this situation in so far as small countries arebrought in to line by the major powers who im-pose sanctions on them when they become tootroublesome. But what happens when a majorpower like China repeatedly violates internationallaw? Sadly; nothing.

We have pointed out above some examples of Chinacontinuing to violate International Law withoutfacing any consequences.

So let us now turn our attention to China’s owndomestic laws and see how far these are implementedin practice. Here again, sadly, the experience of theTibetan people – as also the other nations underChina today – has been that the so-called ‘Laws’ areimplemented only when it suits the purpose andconvenience of the Chinese government and theChinese Communist Party. It is hard to have to saythis; but most of these ‘Laws’ seem only to serve acosmetic purpose to make China appear ‘progres-sive’ and ‘democratic’ – but have little or no mean-ing in the lives of ordinary people.

The following case histories will help to emphasisthis disturbing fact.

According to the constitution:

“All nationalities in the People’s Republic ofChina are equal…………..The people of allnationalities have the freedom to use anddevelop their own spoken and written

36


languages, and to preserve or reform theirown ways and customs.”5

This is what the Constitution of China says but inreality;

Gendun Tsering, age 20, from Ser-Due village,Marthang County, Ngawa Prefecture, Sichuan Prov-ince, in an interview on 15 December 2010 at theReception Centre, Dharamshala said that:

“I had to discontinue going to school because we(the students) rarely had actual teaching at school,we either played or helped the staff to clean theschool compound.”

In yet another case:

Tashi (name changed): a student at TCV Upper, toldthe Centre that:

“I studied till class VII and History used tobe my favourite subject, that’s why I broughtmy history text book along with me. Butwhat I study here as history is different fromwhat I read in my text book from Tibet.”

Yes; there is ‘Education’ in Tibet but then what kindof education is imparted to the young minds mat-ters. Tibetans cannot grow up and learn their his-tory, culture and tradition. “Education” in Tibet is

always connected with ‘Patriotic Education’ or ‘Po-litical Education’:

As Chen Kuiyuan explicitly proclaimed at the FifthRegional Meeting on Education, the paramount goalof CCP educational policy in Tibet is to secure the‘loyalty’ of Tibetan children to the ‘great mother-land and the great socialist cause.’ In other words,the primary objective of schools in Tibet is not toeducate but to indoctrinate.6

The policy in 1994 was to indoctrinate rather thaneducate and it still remains the same in 2010. Thewhole idea of conserving the dying culture and giv-ing equal right to the minorities seems like a lie.

“…….. The State shall set up institutes of nation-alities and, in other institutes of higher education,nationality-oriented classes and preparatory classesthat exclusively or mainly enroll students from mi-nority nationalities. Preferred enrolment and pre-ferred assignment of jobs may also be introduced.……”7

If the Government of China only implements theConstitution there would not be any protest butthis is not so and thus:

On 2 September 2010, around 100 Tibetan stu-dents of the Tibetan Medical Institute, protested infront of the TAR, appealing that the distribution ofjobs should be done without partiality.8

Lhasa, Oct. 9 newspaper reporter Liu LiangMing reports:

[“This year in July, Tibet Autonomous UniversityTraining Master the first 10 graduates (PHD) . Thismarks the development of higher education in Ti-bet has taken an important step towards the rapiddevelopment of education in Tibet that way.

At present, there were altogether 1,008 kinds of

Gedun Tsering

Education

37

schools at all levels, including three colleges anduniversities, 11 secondary vocational schools, 100middle schools, 894 primary schools, while teach-ing point of 2304, the region at all levels of stu-dents in nearly all types 39.8 million people. Region’s44 counties have six years of universal compulsoryeducation, covering a population of 1,566,600, ac-counting for 62.8% of total population.

Five counties in the goal of universal nine-year com-pulsory education, covering a population of258,000, accounting for 10.27% of the total popu-lation. 20 counties through the acceptance of basi-cally eliminating illiteracy among young adults, theregion’s illiteracy rate dropped to 38.1%. School-age children enrollment rate 87.2%, secondaryschool enrollment rate of 39%, high school enroll-ment rate of 16%. Existing staff working full re-gion more than 2.2 million, of which 1.733 mil-lion ethnic minority faculty, accounting for 78.7%of the total faculty.

Learned that the “fifth” period, the autonomous re-gion will continue to consolidate and improve theexisting “general six” results, not speed up the “SixP” universal process in the region, focusing on thedevelopment of secondary education, actively de-velop high school education and higher education.”]9

This is a beautiful picture presented to us by theGovernment of China but Tibet Justice Centre hasa different report. The sheer absence of HumanRights Office, NGOs and other International of-fices in Tibet clearly shows that there isn’t any trans-parency in the working of the Government of Chinain Tibet.

[“Our research confirmed that access to educationfor Tibetan children remains poor and in some casesabsent. This is, as noted, partially due to demo-graphic factors. Children raised in cities and otherdeveloped regions typically enjoy better access - togenerally higher quality - educational institutions

than those in remote and rural regions of Tibet. Butaccess to education also can be a function of wealthin a different respect. Many Tibetan children reportedthat they were forced to pay for supplies or servicesthat Chinese students received for free or at a lowercharge. They also reported that teachers expected‘gifts’ of various kinds. Parents who could affordthese gifts secured for their children a higher qualityof teaching and better treatment. But Tibetan par-ents, who tend to be poorer than most Chinese set-tlers in Tibet, usually could not afford to give ‘gifts’on behalf of their children. Moreover, while mostTibetan children we interviewed did not progressbeyond primary school in Tibet, our interviews cor-roborated prior reports indicating that access to sec-ondary and higher education almost always dependson guangxi within the CCP or the school system.Tibetan parents - particularly those who resist as-similation - rarely possess guangxi. Their childrenthus suffer from poor access to higher education.Finally, the Sinocization of education, both in termsof its medium (language) and its content, reinforcesthese trends, effectively inhibiting further Tibetanchildren’s access to education.”]10

Forked tongue: Tibetan language under attack:A Free Tibet Campaign briefing for InternationalMother Language Day: 21 February 2008:http://www.freetibet.org/files/Forked%283%29.pdf

A 37-year-old Tibetan from Amdo who attended alocal government conference on the future of theTibetan language told Tibet Watch researchers inDharamsala:

“It was said that it is useless to learn Tibetanlanguage in schools. There is no future forthe students in learning Tibetan as Chineselanguage is overwhelming modern society.Some said that Tibetan could only be alanguage for the study of Buddhism in themonasteries.”11

38


Medium of Education – The New Policy:

“……..Schools (classes and grades) and otherinstitutions of education where most of thestudents come from minority nationalitiesshall, whenever possible, use textbooks intheir own languages and use their languagesas the media of instruction.”12

The key reason behind the policy to do away withthe bi-lingual system and to impose Chinese as themedium of education is said to be “to safeguard na-tional unity and harmony.”13 The reality is that Chinawants to achieve ‘uniformity’ – not ‘unity’. Unity –by its very nature – acknowledges; in facts accepts;diversity. The fact that Tibetan language – bothwritten and spoken – being completely differentfrom Chinese has been cited as the clearest evidenceof Tibet’s independence from China in the past. Thisis what China is seeking to wipe out.

There have been wide-spread protests by studentsacross Tibetan areas in present-day Qinghai Prov-ince at a time when the Bilingual Educational Policyis about to be changed because this will result incompletely sidelining Tibetan as the medium ofeducation. In addition to putting up banners andposters; students have taken out peaceful protestsacross the province. In support of the grievance ofthe students; more than a hundred teachers havesubmitted a petition. Students of Beijing Univer-sity also protested.

The reasons given by the Qinghai Provincial Gov-ernment for changing the Bilingual EducationalPolicy and imposing Chinese as the medium of edu-cation are:

i) Firstly; if Tibetan is maintained as the medium ofeducation Tibetans will always remain backward;

ii) That the Tibetan people will not be able to benefitfrom the new job opportunities arising fromChina’s economic development;

iii) What is more; that Tibetan students will not beable to benefit from the higher educationalopportunities all of which are in Chinese;

iv) And finally; that using Chinese as the mediumof education will benefit all Tibetans in the longterm.

In addition to the above reasons for imposingChinese as the medium of education thegovernment has also stated that this policy willbe implemented only in a phased manner.

However; the reasons why Tibetan students areprotesting against the imposition of Chinese asthe medium of school education are:

i) That Tibetan language will immediately bereduced to the status of a second language becauseall other subjects will be taught in Chinese;

ii) Secondly; because there will be few jobopportunities in learning Tibetan; that even if itis taught as a second language there will be littleor no interest in learning a language for whichthere is little or no practical use;

iii) Thirdly; and most importantly, at a time whenthe Tibetan people are struggling to preserve theirculture, not keeping Tibetan as the medium ofschool education could ensure the demise ofTibetan culture because one’s mother tongue iswhat gives both unity and identity to culture.

Rebkong Students Rise Against Sinicization of Education

Education

39

For the above reasons, the Tibetan students are urg-ing the Government of China to respect their rightto the freedom of language and culture which areenshrined in the Constitution of China. In fact; allthat the Tibetan students are requesting is for theGovernment to respect the laws enshrined in theConstitution of China regarding the rights of ‘Mi-norities’ to preserve their separate language, cultureand identity.

What is more; it is not only in the Constitution buteven in the more recent ‘White Paper’ the Govern-ment of China14 has again stated clearly that it rec-ognizes the right of ‘minorities’ to preserve their lan-guage, culture and identity.

This includes not just Tibetans but also people ofEast Turkistan, Southern Mongolia and Manchu-ria.

The Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democ-racy (TCHRD) urges all concerned officials not toimpose the ‘one-language’ policy and to heed to thewishes of the students and to continue with the cur-rent ‘two-language’ policy which has worked so wellthus far. Most of all; TCHRD would like to appealto the leaders of the Government of China inBeijing to respect the Constitution; the currentpolicy and laws – “all of which recognize the rightof ‘minorities’ to preserve the respective language,culture and identity.” We also call on the Chineseleaders to give the necessary directives to the offi-cials in the areas concerned so that peace can be re-stored and also that the Tibetan people in these ar-eas can continue to preserve their language and cul-ture free from fear.

The New Education Policy, let alone strengtheningrespect for human rights, does not even show anytolerance towards the diversity of language and cul-ture of the minorities under the Government ofChina.

“The organs of self-government of national autono-mous areas shall guarantee the freedom of the na-tionalities in these areas to use and develop their ownspoken and written languages and their freedom topreserve or reform their own folk ways and cus-toms.”15

In reaction to the replacement of Tibetan languageby Chinese language as the medium of instructionin schools in Qinghai Province, followed by the stu-dents protesting against this New Policy the Euro-pean Parliament urged the Chinese government on25 November 2010, “to support a genuine policyof bilingualism, whereby all subjects, includingmaths and science, are allowed to be taught in theTibetan language,……”16

The Members of European Parliament, stressed that“………Tibetan language, as one of Asia’s four oldand most original languages, ………..is a funda-mental and irreplaceable element of Tibetan iden-tity, culture and religion.”17

On 27 October 2010 the Qinghai Province Com-munist Party’s Secretary, Qinghai Province NationalPeople’s Congress Chairman, Jiang Wei said that thechange in the Bi-lingual system of education is acommendable and a historic change and thereforethis change will be implemented.18

Conclusion:

One fact that sums up the state of education in Ti-bet today; yes, one fact that says everything there isto say about education in Tibet today is that everyyear Tibetans inside Tibet make the painful deci-sion to send their children to be educated in theTibetan refugee schools in India. For anyone will-ing to accept the truth and reality about the state ofeducation in Tibet today, this fact alone should beenough evidence that the Tibetan people do not haveeven the most basic right to provide their children aproper Tibetan education and to bring them up as

40


Tibetans. What else could force loving parents tomake the painful decision to send their children intoexile – most likely never to see them again?

After the March 2008 protest the number of refu-gees coming into exile has reduced drastically. Thisyear, out of ————————— refugees…………….. are children below 18, crossing thetreacherous Himalayan border only to receive properTibetan education.19

Finally; the one decision of the Chinese governmenttoday that could bring an end to Tibet’s rich cultureas it has been for the past two thousand years is thedecision to impose Chinese as the medium of edu-cation. Indeed, we cannot emphasise this enough,but this is the decision that could wipe out Tibetannational identity as we know it today.

Language is the life-line of any culture. Language islike the thread which links together different beadsto form a beautiful necklace or a precious rosary.And; when the thread is broken; then the differentbeads fall apart and there is no necklace and no ro-sary.

So also with culture. It is language which links to-gether different elements of a nation’s customs andtraditions and gives unity and identity to thatnational’s culture. And, when the language is lost orsuppressed – as is being done by China’s colonialrulers in Tibet today – then the different elementsof the culture fall apart and in due course will disin-tegrate and die.

It is hard for us to use this term – but this is ‘Cul-tural Genocide’. We; therefore, call on all world lead-ers to prevail on China’s leaders to reverse this deci-sion to help preserve what is perhaps the last surviv-ing ancient culture.

(Endnotes)

1 http://www.tchrd.org/press/2010/pr20100415.html2 Convention on the Rights of the Child: Adopted and opened

for signature, ratification and accession by General Assemblyresolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989. Article 28 (2)

3 http://www.tchrd.org/press/2010/pr20100415.html5 Article 4, Constitution of the People’s Republic of China.6 Chen Kuiyuan, Speech to Fifth TAR Conference on Education,

26 October 19947 Chapter VI, Responsibilities of State Organs at Higher Levels:

Article 71. Law of the People’s Republic of China on RegionalNational Autonomy.

8 http://www.tibettimes.net/news.php?cat=3&&id=33159 “People’s Daily Overseas Edition” (October 10, 2002 first

edition)1 1 Forked tongue: Tibetan language under attack: A Free Tibet

Campaign briefing for International Mother Language Day:21 February 2008: http://www.freetibet.org/files/Forked%283%29.pdf

1 2 Law of the People’s Republic of China on Regional NationalAutonomy: Chapter III. The power of Autonomy of the Organsof Self-Government: Article 37.

1 3 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2010-0449+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN

1 4 http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/features/tibetpaper/tibet.html

1 5 Law of the People’s Republic of China on Regional NationalAutonomy: Chapter I. General provisions: Article 10.



1 8 www.qh.xinhuanet.com/qhpeace/1 9 Reception Centre, Dharamshala

41

RIGHTS TO SUBSISTENCE

Subsistence

Tibet is known as “Roof of the world” and “TheThird Pole” on earth. With an average height ofmore than 4000 meters above the sea level, over 80percent of Tibetans sustain their livelihood on agri-culture and nomadic pastoralism. Despite the cen-tral government efforts that include huge state sub-sidies, the “Tibet Autonomous Region” (“TAR”) hascontinued to remain China’s poorest administrativeunit. The Western Development Strategy (WDS)[Ch: xibu da kaifa] started in 1999 with an under-lying political agenda to maintain stability as well asto further integrate the restive regions of the westinto China has brought havoc in Tibet especially inthe rural areas. Infrastructure construction and en-vironmental protection and improvement, whichare two of the five components of the strategy haveparticularly brought huge pressures in the lives ofthe Tibetans. The WDS is described as a “leap over”model of development of Tibet, whereby the Beijinggovernment provided special assistance to overcomethe region’s “backwardness”. However, investmentsin local agriculture and livestock, as well as soft in-frastructure including health, education, employ-ment and local participation have been given theleast priority. Little of the development money istrickling down to the 80 percent of Tibetans livingin rural areas. The benefits of the WDS have notbeen accessible to the large majority of ethnic ruralTibetans.

It is concerning to see that the large concentrationof population of Tibet engaged in labour intensiveagriculture and pastoralism have not benefited fromthe large-scale developments in Tibet. Policy failureand denial of local participation in the policy-mak-ing decisions are the prime attributes of this failure.The recurrent theme in Beijing’s discourse on Tibethas been its “developmental” and “beneficial” rolein Tibet. While China claims to prioritize economicrights of its people, it has failed to employ rightsbased and need based approach to development inTibet thus rendering extreme difficulties in the livesof nomads and farmers with long term implicationsof turning them beggars in the urban towns andcities which is already evident quite prominently.

Fifth Tibet Work Forum 2010

Two years on the heels of the Spring 2008 uprisingin Tibet, the government has started to do somesoul searching as to why the Tibetans rose up againstthe government although the state has generouslypumped in billions of dollars in aid money in de-velopment projects. It has come as a rude shock tothe authorities who have been till now believing theirown propaganda that the Tibetans are happy andgrateful to the Chinese Communist Party and thecentral government in Beijing. President Hu Jintao’sstatement for the Work Forum states “We must alsosoberly understand that Tibet’s development andstability are still faced with many difficulties andchallenges and have encountered many new situa-tions and new issues.” 1

42


After a decade since the last work forum, the FifthTibet Work Forum was held in Beijing from 18-20January 2010. Since the Chinese occupation of Ti-bet, only four such work forums have been con-ducted till date prior to the fifth held this year. Presi-dent Hu Jintao and more than 300 of China’s mostsenior Party, government and military leaders at-tended the meeting. While the Fourth Tibet WorkForum in 2001 focused on the “Tibet AutonomousRegion”, the Fifth included all Tibetans areas inpresent day China which have been incorporated inSichuan, Yunnan, Gansu and Qinghai provinces.Although not much is known, the forum indicatesthe regional integration of policies across all Tibetanareas of the PRC. 2After a decade of the ambitiousWestern Development Strategy, the authorities haveacknowledged that the inequality between the richand the poor has widened, social services are notuniform and the education level of the people un-even. The Fifth Tibet Work Forum indicates to befocusing on accomplishing improvements in ruralTibetans livelihood. “This time we are really focus-ing on improving livelihood, whereas previous poli-cies were mostly concerned with industry and infra-structure”, said Losang Dramdul, a developmenteconomics specialist at the China Tibetology Re-search Centre in Beijing, in an interview with theReuters.3 Unlike past forums, the work forum didnot reveal megaprojects lists. Australian academicand development expert, Gabriel Laffite, opines thatit may well be because the high expenditure projectswill be announced in the 12th Five Year Plan for theyears 2011 to 2016.4 Zhang Yun of the ChinaTibetology Research Centre said “it used to be saidthat first should come fast economic developmentand then livelihoods. But now the focus is muchmore on people’s wellbeing.”5

However, the rhetoric was similar when the 11th FiveYear Plan was launched in 2006 where promises ofshifting capital expenditure in Tibet from heavy in-frastructure, towards meeting needs of the rural Ti-betans. Promises were made about improving rural

housing in the TAR and raise the incomes in therural areas. Shift towards People First (Ch: YirenWeiben) was also announced in the past in light ofpressure over long forgotten rural poor, health, edu-cation and income generation. The reality howeverindicates that China prioritizes full speed growthand wealth accumulation rather than pushing forrural upliftment. The Fifth Work Forum revealedthat Tibetan areas in Qinghai, Gansu, Yunnan andSichuan will be included in the development pro-grams. This is expected to effect the attitude of theleaders at all levels of administrative units. How-ever, the Tibetans in the provinces of Qinghai,Gansu, Sichuan and Yunnan, will hardly benefit asthey are minorities amongst other extremely poorminority communities within the larger mainstreamhan population dominated province. According toGabriel Laffite, “the 2010 Work Forum’s inclusionof all Tibetan areas will be problematic, and stronglyresisted by cadres well practiced in diverting fundsaway from Tibetan areas.

The biggest livelihood issue surrounding rural Ti-bet today revolve around the major official policiesof tuimu huancao (removing animals to grow grass)and tuigeng huanlin (convert farmland to forest).Access to land and cancelling land leases of rural Ti-betans for governmental as well as private compa-nies in mining activities have led to high level ten-sions on many occasions. These issues will be dis-cussed in this chapter.

Taking note of the immense threat posed to Tibetannomads and farmers under the official policies oftuimu huancao and tuigeng huanlin, the UnitedNations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food,Mr. Olivier De Schutter, after his mission to thePRC from 15-23 December 2010, told the govern-ment of China not to compel nomads to settle. Inthe Preliminary Observations and Conclusions, theexpert said.6

Subsistences

43

Nomadic herders in Western Provinces and Autono-mous Regions, especially in the Tibet (Xizang) andInner Mongolian Autonomous Regions, are anothervulnerable group. The Grassland Law adopted in1985 both inorder to protect grassland and in orderto modernize the animal husbandry industry to-wards commodification has now been comple-mented by a range of policies and programmes, in-cluding tuimu huancao (“removing animals to growgrass”) and tuigeng huanlin (“Returning Farmlandto Forest”). These programmes, part of the 1999Western Development Strategy (xibu da kaifa), seekto address the degradation of pasture lands and con-trol disasters in the low lands of China. They in-clude measures such as grazing bans, grazing landnon-use periods, rotational grazing and accommo-dation of carrying capacity, limitations on pasturesdistribution, compulsory fencing, slaughter of ani-mal livestock, and the planting of eucalyptus treeson marginal farmland to reduce the threat of soilerosion. While there is little doubt about the extentof the land degradation problem, the Special Rap-porteur would note that herders should not, as aresult of the measures adopted under the tuimuhuancao policy, be put in a situation where they haveno other options than to sell their herd and resettle.

The International Covenant on Economic, Socialand Cultural Rights prohibits depriving any peoplefrom its means of subsistence, and the 1992 Con-vention on Biodiversity acknowledges the impor-tance of indigenous communities as guarantors andprotectors of biodiversity (Art. 8 j). China has rati-fied both of these instruments.The Special Rappor-teur encourages the Chinese authorities to engage inmeaningful consultations with herding communi-ties, including in order to assess the results of pastand current policies, and examine all available op-tions, including recent strategies of sustainable man-agement of marginal pastures such as the NewRangeland Management (NRM) in order to com-bine the knowledge of the nomadic herders of their

territories with the information that can be drawnfrom modern science. The Special Rapporteur alsoencourages the Chinese authorities to invest in re-habilitating pasture, and to support remaining no-mads with rural extension. The potential of live-stock insurance programmes should also be explored,as tested successfully in Mongolia. Such programs,which pay nomads to restock and recover after amajor disaster, encourage nomads to keep herds atmuch smaller scale as they would not fear losingtheir herding activity after such disasters if coveredby such insurances.

Blame the nomads

The great floods of 1998 and repeated dust stormsin urban Chinese cities have forced the Chinese au-thorities to identify the source of these disasters. Thesearch for answers led to the conservation of theWatershed in Qinghai Province. The “ignorant” and“selfish” nomads were blamed for the degradationof the grassland. History and science prove that thenomads are not at fault but the state is.

In the aftermath of Chinese occupation of Tibet,Mao Zedong unleashed his campaigns to uplift theproletariat. This frenzy campaign led to the greatfamine of 1959 to 1961 which cost 45 million livesacross China according to latest research. Two de-cades of communization had disastrous conse-quences setting of a series of grassland degradation.Since discussions on Cultural Revolution were for-bidden, past policy failures became a taboo topic.The pastoral nomads were easy scapegoats and theywere blamed for being ignorant and selfish leadingto the degradation of grassland which were actuallya state causation. The government citing watershedprotection, scientific rationality and climate changemitigation, ordered Tibetan nomads numberingaround two million to be removed from their pas-tures. The government officially claims that thereis a contradiction between grass and animals and that

44


the displaced nomads are “ecological migrants” whohave voluntarily chosen to move for the better goodof the civilization. The reality however is a starkopposite as the nomads do not have the right tospeak up or organize themselves to put forward theirgrievances.

Since 2003, the nomadic pastoralists are requiredto remove both their herds and themselves fromthe pastures under the official policy of tuimuhuancao, “removing animals to grow grass”.7 Hun-dreds of thousands of nomads have been removedsince then especially in the area where three greatrivers; the Yellow, Yangtse and Mekong all rise inglacier melt on the Tibetan plateau. The exact num-ber of how many pastoralist nomads have alreadybeen removed is hard to quantify for the lack ofindependent monitors or a system and the nomadsbeing gagged by the government. Almost all ofTibet’s two million nomads will have become dis-placed persons by the year 2013.

The policy is fundamentally based on an oversim-plified logic that more the animals, less the grass;less the animals, more the grass. If the watershedsare to be conserved and degradation and desertifica-tion reversed, pastoralist nomads should be removedto grow more grass.

With little experience in rangeland management, thestate has recently directly intervened in the liveli-hoods of the nomads on the Tibetan plateau. Thisis in reversal of the 1980s and 1990s policy whichencouraged nomads to manage both their familyherds and land on a long term sustainable term withguarantees of long-term leasehold rights topastureland. The nomads who have been removedhave had their land rights documents cancelled. Theyhave become landless with no training in skills tosurvive in a modern economy and become depen-dent on the state for subsidized rations given for aset period. For many families, the compensation hasbeen inadequate as the inflation shoots up the cost

while the subsidies remain the same.

Such a policy thrust by the state on the nomads isin direct contravention of article 6 and article 11 ofthe International Covenant on Economic, Social andCultural Rights (ICESCR)8 which requires the stateto ensure everyone to freely choose or accept his liv-ing by work as well as an adequate food, clothingand housing, and to the continuous improvementof living conditions.

Article 6 of ICESCR

1) The State Parties to the present Covenantrecognize the right to work, which includes theright of everyone to the opportunity to gain hisliving by work which he freely chooses or accepts,and will take appropriate steps to safeguard thisright.

2) The steps to be taken by a State Party to thepresent Covenant to achieve the full realizationof this right shall include technical and vocationalguidance and training programmes, policies andtechniques to achieve steady economic, social andcultural development and full and productiveemployment under conditions safeguardingfundamental political and economic freedoms tothe individual.

Article 11 of ICESCR

1) The State Parties to the present Covenantrecognize the right of everyone to an adequatestandard of living for himself and his family,including adequate food, clothing and housing,and to the continuous improvement of livingconditions. The States Parties will takeappropriate steps to ensure the realization of thisright, recognizing to this effect the essentialimportance of international co-operation basedon free consent.

Subsistences

45

2) The State Parties to the present Covenant,recognizing the fundamental right of everyoneto be free from hunger, shall take, individuallyand through international co-operation, themeasures, including specific programmes, whichare needed:

a) To improve methods of production, conservationand distribution of food by making full use oftechnical and scientific knowledge, bydisseminating knowledge of the principles ofnutrition and by developing or reforming agrariansystems in such a way as to achieve the mostefficient development and utilization of naturalresources;

b) Taking into account the problems of both food-importing and food-exporting countries, to ensureand equitable distribution of world food suppliesin relation to need.

A nomad, Shang Lashi, a resident at a resettlementcentre in Yushu confided to Jonathan Watts ofthe Guardian that he felt cheated saying “If I couldgo back to herding, I would. But the land hasbeen taken by the state and the livestock has beensold off so we are stuck here. It’s hopeless…Wewere promised jobs. But there is no work. Welive on the 3,000 yuan a year allowance, but theofficials deduct money from that for the housing,which was supposed to be free.”9

Another Tibetan was quoted as saying “Maduo(Tib: Matod) is now very poor. There is no way tomake a living…the mines have closed and grasslandsare destroyed. People just depend on the money theyget from the government. They just sit on the kang[a raised, heated, floor] and wait for the next pay-ment.”

In November 2010, China Tibet Online websitereported that China has successfully sedenterised6000 Tibetan nomads in Shangri-la (Tib:

Gyalthang) County of Deqen (Tib: Dechen) Ti-betan Autonomous Prefecture in Yunnan province.The announcement read “6,000 herdsman saygoodbye to nomadism in Deqen. Shangri-la Countyof Deqen Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, YunanProvince, has helped more than 1,300 families no-madic herders left nomadic life and moved intocomfortable, spacious houses. This year, a total of111, 780, 900 yuan will be invested on construc-tion projects to help 6,000 nomadic herders of 1,300families move into new houses.” The County hadconstructed 2,135 sets of dwelling houses over theperiod of 2009-2010, reported China’s online Ti-bet news service.

About one tenth of the population, around 250,000Tibetan farmers and herders were relocated to settlein new “socialist villages” between 2006 -2007. Inmany cases the Tibetans are to spend on their ownto build the new houses. According to HumanRights Watch in its June 2007 report “No One Hasthe Liberty to Refuse”,10 resettlement often involvesthe slaughter of livestock of the nomadic herdersfor them to be relocated to poorly built concretehouses. The nomads are forced to abandon their tra-ditional lifestyle with many driven to frustration anddespair. 11 The Tibetan nomads are facing enormousdifficulties after being forced into urban settlementsby the government. In a rare admission China’s of-ficial media Xinhua acknowledged that the nomadsare finding their new lives difficult. Tador, a 33-year-old former nomad told the Xinhua on 22 Septem-ber 2010 that “the money for selling 40 yaks and25 sheep has been used...It is so expensive to nowlive near the town center. Everything costs bigmoney.” Tador had been moved away from his an-cestral home in Yushu County in Qinghai and misseshis yaks and the life of a herdsman. He now lives inJiajiniang village and has no jobs in the months otherthan the harvest season from May to June. The re-port surprisingly further states that he has no senseof security since he is relying on business which can

46


be bankrupt by inadequate rainfalls or abnormal cli-mate changes. “There is no way to return - the grass-land is sealed off by the government and, anyway, Idon’t have money to buy yaks and sheep,” Tadorwas quoted as saying.According to the Xinhua report, “So far, some50,000 herdsmen, mostly Tibetans, have bid fare-well to the nomadic life and were moved closer tothe town centers near their old homes, where theyhave better access to health and educational re-sources.” The Deputy Director of the SanjiangyuanEcological Preservation and Construction Office, LiXiaonan, states it can now hold more water and thewater has improved since efforts began to repair thewetland. Li said resettling 50,000 herdsmen hasbeen the key to improve the ecosystem but the gov-ernment will now have to find ways to provide moreforms of aid, other than handing out quotas of freegrain and cash subsidies to the resettled herdsmen.12

The nomads who bear the direct impact of the policyare reeling under enormous hardship which is evi-dent in the case study below.

YS (name withheld) is a 16 year old teenager fromChemaleb Village, Yige Township, Chuma County,Yushu Prefecture. He belongs to a nomadic familyand didn’t receive any education like many others inhis village as the nearest government school is fivehours by walk. He escaped to India to receive edu-cation. YS testified to TCHRD in January 2010regarding the ordeals of nomads in his native placeremoved by the government in implementing tuimuhuancao policy.13

Most of us in Yushu are nomads. Before the au-thorities allocated grassland, the richer familieswould have about 3000 sheep and more than a thou-sand yak, an average family would have around afew hundred livestock and the poorest would haveabout 40 or 50 livestock. Since the Chinese authori-ties made demarcations of the grassland, the num-ber of livestock went down as there wasn’t enoughpasture for the herds. Many livestock had to be ei-

ther sold or killed. This policy has made us poorer.To make matters worse, about two years ago thelocal authorities again enforced a ceiling on the live-stock. Earlier my family had about 200 yak andover one hundred sheep. Nowadays, we are left with70 yaks and 40 sheep after the policy was imple-mented which required us to either sell or kill thelivestock. Like us many other families also faced simi-lar situation. The local authorities say that the soil isgetting ruined and hence they say the families aredirected to follow the livestock ceiling order. Ac-cording to the order, each family member is entitledto seven yaks and nine sheep.

No nomad family is willing to reduce their live-stock as for generations we have sustained ourselvesthrough our nomadic lifestyle and never faced prob-lems regarding food, cloth and housing. If the no-mads sell of their livestock they don’t get reasonablemoney but if they want to buy back livestock itcosts a few times the prize at which one sells. Hencethe nomads insist on not selling their livestock andretain it. But the officials pressurize them to sell itoff and they have to abide by it. The Chinese gov-ernment has made plans to destroy the nomads byputting them in the county or township dwellingplaces. For example, nomadic families in Gegey,Chushin, Thama and Sero etc under Ratoed Town-ship, Yushu County, have all been ordered to selloff their livestock and settle in Yushu Prefecture in2005. The nomads there had to sell off their live-stock at a price of 700 Yuan for a yak and sheepfetches even less amount. Now if they have to buyback their livestock they will have to pay around2000 Yuan for a yak and about 1500 Yuan for asheep. The nomads have been resettled in concretehouses constructed by the government on a bondthat they will live in the houses and are not sup-posed to sell it or rent it to others. The nomadshave for generations lived on the pastures with noproblems on their livelihood. But after having beenresettled in government built concrete houses in

Subsistences

47

urban areas they face enormous hardships in gettingused to the urban ways of living. Moreover, sincethey don’t have any other particular skills and areilliterate, they can not engage in business activities.While their expenditures continue to increase theirincome source has been cut off and hence their live-lihood standard has gone down instead of becom-ing better. Around 90 percent of the resettled fami-lies say that their earlier lives were much happier.But they can’t return to their pastures as they arelegally bound by the government to stay in the smallconcrete houses for ten years. Although I don’t knowthe exact number of resettled people in concretehouses in Yushu Prefecture, a rough estimation offour villages numbering about 200 nomads have beenresettled from the places I mentioned earlier. Theyare suffering over there and I feel very soon the no-madic families including mine in Chuma Countywill face similar hardships.

Converting farmland to forest

In 1999, Chinese government launched the programof tuigeng huanlin (convert farmland to forest). Thecampaign “convert farmland to forest” requires Ti-betans to plant trees on their farmland to reduce thethreat of soil erosion but it is turning into land con-fiscation in many areas. Farmers had to work with-out pay and to find alternative livelihood. The localTibetans view the programs as pretext by the Chi-nese government to carry out resource explorationprojects and for security reasons. On the surface levelthe program displays a concern for environment byplanting trees on farmland, however, on closer lookit neither helps environment nor ecology. On thecontrary it does put pressures on subsistence of thefarmers. Not only do the farmers lose part of theirland, growing trees hardens topsoil making it un-suitable to grow crops in the future. The authoritiesenforce these unpopular measures by force thusthreatening the livelihood of Tibetan farmers whohave only a tiny portion of arable land on the entireTibetan plateau. The implementation of the pro-

gram was devoid of prior consultation with the lo-cal population, arbitrary, top down, no due legalproceedings, relocation strategy, rehabilitation andcompensation for the affected people. The programsare in direct violation of article 6 and 11 of theICESCR which the PRC ratified in 2001.TD (name withheld), 31 years old, belonging toNya-ngu village, Longa Township, NyagrongCounty told TCHRD in April 2010:14

The farmers in our area are facing enormous hard-ships after the government took away a portion ofland from all the farming families. According to thefamily size the authorities took away land and plantuseless trees on it. Five or six years ago when theytook away the land, the authorities promised thatcompensation in rice will be given according to thesize of land taken away but this stopped after a year.We had 26 mu15 of land but 12 mu was taken backby the government so we were left with only 14mu of land. For the land we had to give away, wewere supposed to receive 1700 Gyama (850 kg) ofrice. Similarly in Nya-nga village, the authoritiestook away land from around 30 families accordingto the size of family. They too were compensatedby rice or cash for a year only. We now have verylittle produce and have to plan our meals accord-ingly otherwise there will be shortage of food forus.

“Comfortable housing” program

One fifth of the 11th Five Year Plan of 2006-2010was marked for the Yiren Weiben (people first)projects which account for 22 billion Yuan out ofthe 100 billion yuan allocated to the “TAR”. Theremaining money was invested in infrastructuremegaprojects. Within the Yiren Weiben project,housing programs for rural Tibetans was allocated3.2 billion yuan. Social scientists studying the anjugongchen (comfortable housing) program in threevillages near Shigatse found that households could

48


receive 20,000 yuan towards the cost of a new house.This subsidy was only about 20 percent of the costof building a new house as it cost about 50,000yuan in the poorest village and 80,000 in the rich-est. The subsidies was a loan and not grant, interestfree for three years, which Agricultural Bank of Chinaissues on the orders of central government. Onlyabout 47 percent of the households in the three vil-lages took up loans. However, in some other vil-lages, rural Tibetans didn’t have the right to refusewhich is well documented in the Human RightsWatch report “No One Has the Liberty to Refuse”released in July 2007. Such programs are beneficialand successful only if they receive income supportaccording to development economics. When thethree year interest free loans are availed by the vil-lagers, the young and the strong in the family hadto migrate to cities for income resulting in declinein farming and putting the burden on women intheir households. Many Tibetans who feel that theycan repay the anju gongchen loan go to urban areasto work as migrant labourers to earn cash. How-ever, the urban construction boom in Lhasa andShigatse will continue to take place until Beijingpumps in more money into Tibet. Even if the cityconstruction boom continues, Tibetans competewith poor Chinese immigrants who use guanxi (con-nection) and tricks in muscling them out. There aredangers that young rural Tibetans will be trapped inhuge debt when the construction boom slowsdown.16

Access to land

The Tibetans have always strongly protested againstthe mining activities being carried out in their area.Mining causes a host of problems for the locals thatinclude environment, land, livelihood and religioussentiments17. In the past, thousands of Tibetans havebeen removed from their traditional dwelling placesfor mining projects by the government as well as byprivate companies. This year there were few occa-sions where in Tibetans protested against mining in

their area due to various reasons amongst which ac-cess to land for livelihood is primary.

On 17 August 2010, three Tibetans were fatally shotand around 30 were injured when police shot liverounds on a group of around a hundred Tibetansprotesting against mining in SharchuGyashoed Village, Palyul (Ch: Baiyu) County of-fices in Kardze (Ch: Ganzi) Prefecture, Sichuan. 18

The local Tibetans have been concerned about theimpact of the mining on their lives and have beensternly demanding compensation from the govern-ment. According to the Radio Free Asia the protest-ers were upset because heavy equipment brought infor the increased mining operations had damagedfarmland. 19 The International Campaign for Tibet(ICT) reported that the local Tibetans have put to-gether a petition to the authorities who were seek-ing to increase the number of mining sites in thearea. 20 The ICT quoted a source, “Local people tookthe petitions to the government building and gath-ered in front of the building, and some sat downoutside the office. Armed security threw tear gas atthe crowd and afterwards opened fire.” In a rare ad-mission, the Chinese state media, Xinhua, reportedthat a 47-year-old Tibetan called Babo was killedby a “stray bullet” when the police fired on the “at-tacking” Tibetans who were using “knives, clubs androcks” injuring 17 police officers. 21 The report how-ever deliberately fails to mention the cause of pro-test which was the Tibetans’ concern for the farm-land.

On 4 May 2010, Tibetan villagers in Markham (Ch:Mangkang) County in Chamdo (Ch: Changdu)Prefecture, “TAR”, protested against the miningoperations in their locality. Thirteen Tibetans weredetained and five injured when police quelled theirprotest against a mining company which was givenpermission to resume mining at the three major sites;Tsongshen, Choeten, and Deshoe, in MarkhamCounty. 22

In another incident, on 15 May 2010 Chinese po-

Subsistences

49

lice opened fire on Tibetans at a cement factory inLabrang (Ch: Xiahe) County, Gansu Province. TheTibetans were protesting against a cement factorywhich was polluting the local environment, hurt-ing religious sentiments of the local Tibetans andblocking access to land. Fifteen people were takento hospital with injuries sustained from gunshotsand police beatings. The Tibetans from the sevenvillages in Madang Township, Labrang County, hadearlier signed a writ petition expressing their disap-pointment over the factory polluting the environ-ment, hurting religious sentiment and blocking roadaccess to the locals. The Tibetans in Madang werebuilding a road leading to Yarshul (Ch: Yaxiu) Vil-lage which had been blocked by the authorities forfactory expansion.23

Conclusion

The Chinese government underestimated the en-trepreneurship skills of pastoral nomads in the Ti-betan economy who are known for producing sur-pluses which were donated to the local monasteriesrather than to retain as capital for further expan-sion. However, in contemporary Tibet, Chinese sta-tistical yearbooks classify nomads as rural labourers.Loss of livelihood in prefectures of Kyegudo (Ch:Yushu) and Golok (Ch: Guoluo) are directly attrib-utable to tuimu huancao policy. In recent years sci-entific fieldwork conducted by universities of Ari-zona, Montana, Queensland and Qinghai confirmsthat Tibetan nomadic pastoralism is sustainable. Asagainst the earlier drawn conclusions, the Chinesescientific reports acknowledge sustainable, skillfuland productive management strategies of Tibet’spastoral nomads. Citing reasons of climate change,nomadic backwardness and in order to conserve theheadwaters of the three great rivers, the nomads arebeing removed in huge numbers to grow more grassunder the tuimu huancao policy. The implementa-tion of this policy breaches the collective rights ofwhole nomadic community to their economic, so-

cial and cultural rights to livelihood. The govern-ment made no efforts in assisting nomads to lessenrisk by providing sustainable rehabilitating pro-grams. No environment impact assessment or popu-lar participation in the policy regarding the removalof herds and herders has been carried out. The no-mads deeply regret having to leave their pastures andherds under the government program. There is noway for them to get back as the state has cancelledthe land lease.

The tuigeng huanlin (convert farmland to forest)policy is bringing negative impact on the farmers’livelihood. Besides the farmers having to give awayportions of their land to the state afforestationproject, the trees in their field is hardening the soilwhich affects their crop. This policy exacerbates thefarmers woes as they already reel under harsh cli-matic conditions to grow crop. The mining activi-ties in Tibet lead to strong resistance by the Tibetanfarmers and nomads which often lead to high ten-sion on the ground resulting in death of Tibetans inpolice firing. The level and frequency of these inci-dents are increasing as shown by the events in 2010.This tension is likely to escalate further in the nearfuture as the government’s obsession with heavyinfrastructure projects and mining explorations isincreasing year by year.

The government of PRC should heed the advice ofthe UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Foodmade in the Preliminary Observations and Conclu-sions after the mission to PRC conducted between15 - 23 December 2010. The expert recommended,“Herders should not, as a result of the measuresadopted under the tuimu huancao policy, be put ina situation where they have no other options thanto sell their herd and resettle.” The InternationalCovenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rightsand the Convention on Biodiversity prohibits de-priving any people from its means of subsistenceand acknowledges the importance of indigenouscommunities as guarantors and protectors of

50


biodiversity.

The 12th Five Year Plan to be revealed in 2011 shouldbe scrutinized strictly as much of the developmentprojects are taking place in Tibet and the livelihoodof the Tibetan people in Tibet will depend on it.While the Fifth Tibet Work Forum held in January2010 indicated inclusion of Tibetan areas outsidethe “TAR” in future development projects withstrong emphasis on developing rural Tibet, past ex-perience and rhetoric does not indicate a positivenote.

(Endnotes)

1 “Fifth National Conference on Tibetan Work held in Beijing“,China Tibet Information Center, 22 January 2010, http://eng.tibet.cn/news/today/201001/t20100122_540471.htm

2 “Top-level meeting in Beijing sets strategy on Tibet“,International Campaign for Tibet, 29 January 2010, http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/top-level-meeting-beijing-sets-strategy-tibet

3 “Silence on Tibetan talks is golden“, Francesco Sisci, AsiaTimes, 29 January 2010, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LA29Ad02.html

4 “CHINA‘S 2010 WORK FORUM ON TIBET: A TURNTOWARDS MEETING BASIC HUMAN NEEDS?”, GabrielLaffite, 1 March 2010, Phayul.com, http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=26753&t=1

5 The Financial Times, 18 February 2010, www.ft.com6 Preliminary observations and conclusions: Mission to the

People’s Republic of China from 15 to 23 December 2010,UNSpecial Rapporteur on the Right to Food, 23 December2010, pg 4, available at http://www.srfood.org/images/stories/pdf/officialreports/de-schutter-china-statement.pdf

7 For a detail understanding of Tuimu Huancao policy see ThePolitical Ecology of Grassland Conservation in QinghaiProvince, China : Discourse, Policies and the Herders, IRENEBREIVIK, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 2007

8 The People’s Republic of China ratified the ICESCR in March2001, Document available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm

9 “Tibetan nomads struggle as grasslands disappear from theroof of the world“, Guardian, 2 September 2010, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/02/tibetan-plateau-climate-change

1 0 “No One Has the Liberty to Refuse”, Human Rights Watch,June 2007, http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2007/06/10/no-one-has-liberty-refuse

11 “China relocates 6000 Tibetan nomads in Shangri-la under itscontroversial program”, Phayul.com, 29 November 2010 ,http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=28631

1 2 "China‘s resettled herdsmen deal with adjustment woes“, 22September 2010, Xinhua net, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/indepth/2010-09/22/c_13525300.htm

Subsistences

51

1 3 Interview at Kathmandu, Nepal, TCHRD, January 20101 4 Interview at Kathmandu, Nepal, TCHRD, April 20101 5 Mu is a measure of land equal to 67 square meters1 6 “Han Chinese migrants causing unrest in Tibet“, ANI, 25 July

2010 , http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/170842“Chinese Immigration Surge Causes Loss of TibetanLivelihood“, Tibet.Net, 7 August 2010, http://www.tibet.net/enindex.php?id=1727&articletype=flash&rmenuid=morenews

17 " Mine Sparks Anger in Qinghai“, Radio Free Asia, 5 May2010, http://www.rfa.org/english/news/tibet/sacred-05072010114842.html

18 “Report: 4 Tibetans fatally shot in mine dispute“, August 30,2010, Associated Press (AP), http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9HSE59O0.htm

1 9 “Police firing kills 3, injures 30 Tibetans in Palyul County“,August 26, 2010, Phayul.com, http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=28009

2 0 " Chinese government admits to fatal shooting of Tibetan inmining protest“, 31 August 2010, International Campaign forTibet, http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/ict-news-reports/chinese-government-admits-fatal-shooting-tibetan-mining-protest

2 1 “17 police injured, one Tibetan dead in dispute“, Xinhua,Updated: 2010-08-30, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2010-08/30/content_11227839.htm

2 2 “13 arrested, five injured as Tibetans protest Chinese miningin Markham“, Tibetan Review, 17 May 2010, http://www.tibetanreview.net/news.php?id=6356

2 3 " Police Open Fire At Tibetans Protesting Cement FactoryPollution“, Australia Tibet Council, 18 May 2010, http://www.atc.org.au/news-mainmenu-28/eye-on-tibet/1327-police-open-fire-at-tibetans-protesting-cement-factory-pollution“15 Tibetans wounded as Chinese police open fire inLabrang”, Phayul.com, 18 May 2010, http://www.phayul.com/newsarticle.aspx?article=15+Tibetans+wounded+as+Chinese+police+open+fire+in+Labrang&id=27328

53

Freedom of Religion

Freedom of religion is a fundamental human right.This right has been protected under various inter-national laws as well as domestic laws of the People’sRepublic of China as follows:

Article 36 of the Constitution of the People’s Re-public of China

Citizens of the People’s Republic of China enjoyfreedom of religious belief. No state organ, publicorganization or individual may compel citizens tobelieve in, or not to believe in, any religion; normay they discriminate against citizens who believein, or do not believe in, any religion. The state pro-tects normal religious activities. No one may makeuse of religion to engage in activities that disruptpublic order, impair the health of citizens or inter-fere with the educational system of the state. Reli-gious bodies and religious affairs are not subject toany foreign domination.

Article 11 of the Regional National Autonomy Lawof the People’s Republic of China

The organs of self-government of national autono-mous areas shall guarantee the freedom of religiousbelief to citizens of the various nationalities.

RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

No state organ, public organization or individualmay compel citizens to believe in, or not to believein, any religion, nor may they discriminate againstcitizens who believe in, or do not believe in, anyreligion.

The state shall protect normal religious activities.üüNo one may make use of religion to engage in ac-tivities that disrupt public order, impair the healthof citizens or interfere with the educational systemof the state.

Religious bodies and religious affairs shall not besubject to any foreign domination.

Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of HumanRights

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, con-science and religion; this right includes freedom tochange his religion or belief, and freedom, eitheralone or in community with others and in public orprivate, to manifest his religion or belief in teach-ing, practice, worship and observance.

Although the freedom of religion is guaranteed un-der domestic laws of the PRC, but in practice rightto freedom of religion and worship is severely curbedthrough interference and control in total contrastto what is protected by the constitution.

The Tibetans in Tibet do not have the right to wor-ship and belief. The government enforces an under-lying principle of Love Your Country, Love Your Re-

54


ligion as the basis of religious activities in order tostrictly control and regularly interfere in the religiousstudies and activities ensuring it to fall in line withthe official viewpoint and policies. Love for the na-tion is put forward as the benchmark for the rightto practice religion. According to Buddhism, a Bud-dhist seeks refuge in the three jewels; the Buddha,the Doctrine and the Sangha, however, the TibetanBuddhist in Tibet are made to abide by the govern-ment demands in blasphemy of the faith by mak-ing them denounce and oppose their root gurus,accept and put faith on lamas installed by the gov-ernment in contrary to traditional practices, observerules and regulations violating religious precepts andmaking religion agreeable to socialism.

The government this year tightened its control onreligion and religious activities, widely implementedthe patriotic re-education campaign in monasteries,conducted classes on legal aspects of religion, andtightened control by the state religious officials andinstitutions by regularly interfering in the activitiesof the monastic institutions.

In the aftermath of the spring 2008 uprising in Ti-bet, the authorities have tightened control in themonastic institutions by having resident work teamsto conduct patriotic reeducation campaign, classeson law, step up scrutiny and investigation in themonasteries and nunneries leading to arrest and ex-pulsion of monks and nuns, curb opinion and speechand promulgate new rules and regulations for themonastic community to observe and abide with.Normal religious activities of monasteries and nun-neries have been made to stop in order to imple-ment the patriotic education campaign. On manyoccasions, the monks and nuns are prohibited to goout of their institutions and pilgrims are not allowedto visit the monasteries and temples. On some oc-casions the monastic institutions have even facedshortage of food supply due to restriction of move-ment.

Religious Affairs Conference

The United Front Work Department (UFWD) ofthe Communist Party of China (CPC) conducted ameeting on the democratic management of themonastic institutions between 14 - 15 August 2010.The meeting held at Shigatse drew heads of monas-tic institutions and local UFWD heads in the “TAR”as well as Tibetan areas in four provinces to tightencontrol on religious institutions on Tibetan areas.

During the meeting, the head of the UFWD, DuQingli, remarked that the patriotic and legal educa-tion should be strengthened in order to make themonks and and nuns abide by the laws of the coun-try and protect the unity of the nation, nationalitiesand social stability. He also called on the monasticleaders to be result oriented in the democratic man-agement, so that monks and the nun’s observanceof law produce’s leaders opposing the splittistforces.1 Du Qingli also urged the leaders of themonastic institutions to put the people first by pro-ducing monks and nuns trustworthy in politics,excelling in Buddhist studies and charismatic. Theyshould elect and appoint smart monks and nuns inthe monastic institutions administration. During themeeting the Democratic Management Committees(DMC)2 of the monastic institutions across Tibetshared their experiences and planned effective com-

Conference on “Exchange of Experience onConference on “Exchange of Experience onConference on “Exchange of Experience onConference on “Exchange of Experience onConference on “Exchange of Experience onDemocratic Management of Tibetan BuddhistDemocratic Management of Tibetan BuddhistDemocratic Management of Tibetan BuddhistDemocratic Management of Tibetan BuddhistDemocratic Management of Tibetan BuddhistMMMMMonasteriesonasteriesonasteriesonasteriesonasteries” in session in S” in session in S” in session in S” in session in S” in session in Shigatsehigatsehigatsehigatsehigatse

Religious Freedom

55

munications between the institutions in order tobetter manage and control in future the monks andnuns in the monastic institutions.

‘Management measure for Tibetan Buddhistmonasteries and temples’

On 30 September 2010, the State Administrationfor Religious Affairs issued a new regulation OrderNo.8 - ‘Management measure for Tibetan Buddhistmonasteries and temples’. 3The 44 articles regula-tion which entered into force on 1 November 2010obstructs the centuries old traditional practices re-stricts relationship between students and teachers andprovides a strong legal support for the authoritiesto control the monastic institutions as well as themonks and nuns. Since most of the heads of theschools of Tibetan Buddhism reside in exile, theregulation is specifically aimed to obstruct the trans-mission of teachings and traditional practices ofBuddhist hierarchy. The relationship between Bud-dhist teachers and students and traditional Buddhiststudies will be affected negatively by the regulation.This regulation applicable to the whole of Tibet willfurther tighten control on monks and nuns and en-able the authorities to implement policies uniformlyacross the monastic institutions in Tibet.

The monastic institutions of Tibet are the primarytargets of authorities in inculcating loyalty by strik-ing hard and exercising control through a chain ofcommands from the central government religiousbureau, regional religious bureaus and the DMCsin the institutions itself. The numerous rules andregulations implemented in the monasteries andnunneries to control the monks and nuns restricttheir movement. Even to seek medication in hospi-tals and to visit families they are required to seekpermission from the authorities at various levels;county, township and monastery, depending on theduration of time. The Lhasa Municipality ReligiousAffairs Committee issued a monastic code of con-

duct in April 2009.4 Article 5 of the code of con-duct states that monks and nuns who are expelledfrom monastic institutions or leave the monasteryon their own or withdraw upon advice by othersshould be expelled in a written document by theDMCs of the monastery or nunnery. The DMCshould register the names of the expelled monks andnuns write the religious affairs office at the higherlevel. The expelled monks and nuns are put understrict vigilance by the Public Security Bureau andthey are not allowed to indulge in religious activi-ties as well as enroll in other monastic institutions.Monks and nuns under suspicion of political activi-ties are especially put under strict vigilance and theirmovements restricted. The authorities’ regular in-terference in the monastic institutions and restrict-ing the monastic communities freedom to practicereligion and the resistance by the monks is evidentin the following case study.

Khedup Gyatso, 24, hails from Derge County,Kardze “TAP”, Sichuan. He joined the local GyansaMonastery when he became 14 years old and spentten years in the monastery.

The implementation of “patriotic re-education” be-fore the outbreak of protests in the spring of 2008was lenient in our monastery compared to otherregions of Tibet. There were around 200 monks outof which 160 were staying “illegally” in the monas-tery since the Chinese government had issued a newregulation limiting the number of monks allowedto stay. The new regulation was passed under thename of “patriotic re-education,” which restrictedthe number of monks that can be housed in themonastery to 60. However, the rule was not strictlyimplemented. The population of 200 monks con-tinued to stay in the monastery and would only leaveduring the arrival of inspection officers. Despite this,there were strict prohibitions on the building of newtemples and stupas. The religious congregation wasalso strictly limited and prior permission from thelocal authority was required, contrary to which

56


would affect the holding of future processions. Fur-thermore, the monks faced great obstacles in get-ting a proper monastic education.

Since the outbreak of protests in Tibet in 2008, theimplementation of “patriotic re-education” in themonastery had been far more frequent and strict.The monks of our monastery in the month of April, in solidarity with the protests happening aroundother regions of Tibet, protested against religiousrepression and for a free Tibet. Many monks werearrested during the protests including the abbot, TS(name withheld), along with the Chant master, TT(name withheld), and senior teacher, LS (name withheld). The abbot was released after two months af-ter being brutally tortured. The Chant master wassentenced to imprisonment for two years and thesenior teacher was given a six year prison sentence.There is no clear information about the prisons inwhich they are being held.

The religious congregation of any kind after thiswas out of question. The Democratic ManagementCommittee (DMC) and Religious Affairs Bureau(RAB) frequently conducted surprise raids in ourmonastery. There was strict enforcement of the regu-lation passed that limited the number of monks atthe monastery. Additionally, the authorities specifi-cally chose which monks were allowed to stay andwhich had to leave. The patriotic re-education ses-sions were more often than ever. During the ses-sions we were forced to oppose, criticize and de-nounce H.H. the Dalai Lama which was the mostdifficult part for most of the monks. We were se-verely beaten if we refused. The DMC and RABofficials distributed papers where we had to writeour criticism and scathing immoral attacks on H.H.the Dalai Lama. We were also forced to sign with athumbprint and signature that we opposed “sepa-ratist forces and hostile international splittist groups”and support the Chinese authority.

Furthermore, the “patriotic re-education” sessions

obstructed our daily religious practice. We were of-ten called for meetings and sessions of patriotic re-education during which we were unable to practiceour religious activities. The situation in our monas-tery had become extremely oppressive and repres-sive. There was no freedom, peace or happiness.Most of the monks would often try to bunk themeetings whenever the DMC and RAB arrived toconduct the patriotic re-education sessions. The newregulations and constant interruptions placed greatobstacles on the monk’s ability to receive a propermonastic education.

By 2009 it was getting worse and our monasteryenvironment became very hostile. In the month ofApril, I along with two other monks, LobsangNorbu, 30, and Kunga Rinchen 26, protestedagainst the officials and hoisted the Tibetan nationalflag on the roof of the monastery. We then escapedto the mountains where we spent almost one yearand six months moving from one place to another.We strongly felt that there was no future and weunderstood clearly that we shall land up in prison inmiserable conditions if we remained in Tibet. More-over, the Chinese authorities continue to conductceaseless “patriotic re education” and the quality ofour monastic education has been steadily deterio-rating, and now almost no learning takes place there.

So we made up our mind to escape to India with ahope of getting a proper monastic education. Wefled Tibet and reached the Tibetan Reception Cen-tre in Nepal in the month of October. We are nowhere before you and have come to undertake reli-gious study and spiritual contemplation in one ofthe monasteries in India.

Restrictions on Religious activities:

The holding of religious ceremonies and rites is afundamental component of religious activities. Itholds a feature of worship and observance of reli-

Religious Freedom

57

gious belief. Generally, in many faiths, ceremoniesare the main way for individuals to exercise theirfaith in community and to practice fully ones’ reli-gious life. It also helps to observe and mark impor-tant spiritual events. The ceremonies have a strongritualistic component and constitute physical mani-festations of the central doctrine of a person‘s be-lief.

The constitution of China provides freedom of re-ligion on one hand and at the same time restrictsthe exercise of religious belief. It limits protectionof the exercise of religious belief to activities thegovernment defines as “normal.” The government’s2005 White Paper on Regional Autonomy for Eth-nic Minorities states, “Organs of self-governmentin autonomous areas, in accordance with the provi-sions of the constitution and relevant laws, respectand guarantee the freedom of religious belief of ethnicminorities and safeguard all legal and normal reli-gious activities of people of ethnic minorities.”5

In January 2010, Chinese authorities in BarkhamCounty banned the third annual winter session of areligious congregation which was to be held atGyalrong Tsodhun Kirti Monastery. The monasteryhad spent nearly five months seeking permissionfrom local authorities, as well as from the countyoffice, to organize the annual event, but permissionwas refused on the basis that it was “political andunlawful.” Following the decision, severe restrictionswere imposed and the entire monastery was putunder strict surveillance.6

Patriotic re education:

Patriotic re-education launched in April 1996 by thegovernment is a campaign focusing on monasteriesand nunneries with the aim to change the basic ele-ments of belief. It is generally referred to as “Loveyour religion, love your country” campaign but hasbeen conducted in recent times as “Law Education”.

The campaign has been mainly focused on “splitist”groups, a label given by the Chinese government topeople who support Tibetan independence and theleadership of the Dalai Lama. The campaign aimsto partly remove the influence of the Dalai Lama.The patriotic re-education campaign in Tibet is aforced campaign where Tibetans are forced to de-nounce their spiritual leader whom they hold sa-cred. It has led to wide-spread arrests and expulsionsof monks who have refused to be “re-educated”along Chinese communist lines and to denouncethe Dalai Lama.

In monasteries and nunneries across Tibet officialsare carrying out the patriotic re-education campaign.During the campaign, “work forces” arrive at themonasteries unannounced and interrupt the monk’sstudies. The monks are forced to read literaturewhich speaks of the benefits of living under theChinese government and labels the Dalai Lama as a“splittist” who intends to break up the Chinese na-tion.

One of the primary aims of the campaign is to de-nounce the Dalai Lama. Tibetans are being forcedto accept that all the Tibetans in exile are membersof a militia with the Dalai Lama as their leader ac-cording to reports coming out of Kirti Monasteryin Tibet. They are also being forced to provide, onindividual basis, their signature or thumb impres-

Minister of Central United Front Work Department, DuQingli, interacts with the conference delegates

58


sion on a document indicating their opposition tothe Dalai Lama, and to Tibet’s independence. Whilethe patriotic re-education sessions are going onmonks are not allowed to perform any religious ac-tivity, and moreover, they have been undergoingimmense suffering in prison if they refuse to par-ticipate.7 When monks and nuns resist the campaign,they face severe physical punishment such as beat-ings and detentions, expulsion from the monaster-ies and sometimes it has also led to the closure ofthe monastery. Chinese authorities, besides closingdown monasteries, attempts to weaken the freedommovement by introducing regulations to limit thenumber of monks and nuns, and to expel lamas frommonasteries where there are “too many”.8

Since the conducting of “patriotic re-education” con-tinues ceaselessly, some monks flee their monasticinstitutions not being able to comply with ordersand denunciation and vitriolic criticisms the per-son of the Dalai Lama. Many escape to India withthe hope of getting a proper Buddhist monasticeducation and pursuing the traditional spiritual stud-ies under the blessings of their teacher, the DalaiLama.The psychological trauma caused to the monasticcommunity by the patriotic re-education campaignis evident in the case study below.

Patriotic Reeducation Leads to Monk’sSuicide9

Ngawang Gyatso, a 70 year old monk of ShagRongpo Monastery committed suicide on 20 May2010. This was just days after approximately fiftyChinese “work team” officials arrived at the monas-tery following the arrest of Dawa Rinpoche and fourother monks of Shag Rongpo in Lhasa on 17 May2010. The work team’s massive patriotic re-educa-tion campaign contributed to an environment ofconstant religious repression in the monastery. Hetook his life because of depression and the oppres-sive security measures carried out against monks at

Shag Rongpo Monastery, Nagchu County, “TAR”.

Ngawang Gyatso was said to have left a suicide note,but it was confiscated by the authorities and monksof the monastery were warned not to discuss thesuicide. They were forced to explain it as a naturaldeath.

The patriotic re-education campaign had been in-tensified across Tibet after the 2008 uprising, andwas specifically targeted at monasteries, which werethe sites of many demonstrations. Prior to his ar-rest, Dawa Rinpoche was accused of consulting with

the Dalai Lamaover the searchfor the FifthR o n g p oChoeje. Hewas removedfrom his post atthe monasteryas it became

the focus of re-education work teams. When thework team arrived in May 2010 they were accom-panied by more than 150 armed security personnelswho were visible during the sessions.The re-educa-tion sessions were focused on denouncing the DalaiLama. The increased repression became too muchfor some of the monks to deal with, which lead toGyatso’s suicide, and drove others to leave.

Conclusion

Year 2010 was marked by the high profile confer-ence held in August 2010 at Shigatse on democraticmanagement of the monastic institutions in Tibet.The conference which drew heads of monastic in-stitutions and local UFWD heads in the “TAR” aswell as Tibetan areas in present day China will de-fine and reinforce control in the monastic institu-tions in Tibet. Although not much is known, thepreliminary reports suggest that the notorious pa-triotic reeducation will be strengthened and the le-

Dawa Rinpoche

Religious Freedom

59

gal education classes which have been implementedin some of the monastic institutions will now beconducted in all the Tibetan areas in present dayChina.

The new regulation on ‘Management measure forTibetan Buddhist monasteries and temples’ issuedin September 2010 by the State Administration forReligious Affairs clearly aims to cut the links be-tween Tibetans inside Tibet and the Buddhist mas-ters living in exile. This 44-articles regulation widelyknown as the Order no 8 is yet another legal instru-ment developed by the PRC aimed at weakeningthe influence of the Dalai Lama. Earlier in 2007 theSARA issued Order no 5 making the traditionalTibetan Buddhist belief system illegal if there is noapproval by the state for reincarnate lamas. WhileOrder no 5 aimed to strike at the core of the Bud-dhist reincarnation belief, the newly implementedOrder no 8 aims to obstruct the transmission ofspiritual teachings and influence of the Buddhistmasters in exile. The relationship between Bud-dhist teachers and students and traditional Buddhiststudies will be affected negatively by the regulation.

The monastic institutions of Tibet are the primarytargets of authorities in inculcating loyalty by “pa-triotic reeducation” campaign and control througha chain of commands from the central governmentreligious bureau, regional religious authorities andthe DMCs in institutions itself. The numerous rulesand regulations implemented in the monasteries andnunneries to control the monks and nuns restricttheir movement. Even to seek medication in hospi-tals and to visit families they are required to seekpermission from the authorities at various levels,county, township and monastery, depending on theduration of time. Besides restricting personal free-dom, the monastic community is under intense re-strictions in living a free spiritual life in pursuit oftheir faith and belief.

(Endnotes)

1 Du Qinglin attended the democratic m anagement of TibetanBuddhist temple and addressed the exchange of experience,Tibet.cn, 16 August 2010, http://www.tibet.cn/wzz/wenzhang/201008/t20100816_617507.htm

2 The Democratic Management Committee (Ch: we yuan hi,Tib: u-yon lhan khang) is an administrative organ establishedin 1962 in religious institutions in Tibet and reconstructedunder the 1996 “patriotic reeducation” campaign.

3 National Religious Affairs Bureau issued “Measures for theAdministration of Tibetan Buddhist temple, www.gov.cn, 8October 2010, http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2010-10/08/content_1717257.htm

4 Tibetan language version of Annual Report 2009: HumanRights Situation in Tibet, TCHRD

5 State Department releases International Religious FreedomReport, 2010, International Campaign for Tibet, 17 November2010, http://www.savetibet.org/media-center/tibet-news/state-department-releases-international-religious-freedom-report-2010

6 Free Tibet’s Submission to the Conservative Party HumanRights Commission, July 2010, http://www.freetibet.org/files/CPHRCevidence2010.pdf

7 Tibetans forced to accept “patriotic re-education”, Tibet.Net,13 June 2010,http://www.tibet.net/en/index.php?id=209&articletype=flash&rmenuid=morenews&tab=1

8 h t t p : / / b o o k s . g o o g l e . c o . i n / b o o k s ? i d = Patriotic+re+education+in+Tibet+restricting+number+of+monks

9 Patriotic Re-education leads to monk’s suicide, July 2010,TCHRD, http://www.tchrd.org/publications/hr_updates/2010/hr201007.html#monk

60


61

Appendices

62


63

Appendices

64


65

Appendices

66


67

Appendices

68


69

Appendices

70


71

Appendices

72


73

Appendices

74


75

Appendices

76


77

Appendices

78


Note:

� The above list contains the names of political prisoners documented by TCHRD from various sourcestill 30 December 2010, utmost care was taken while preparing the list.

� Despite scarcity in sources, TCHRD managed to enlist the names of some 831 people out of estimatedthat 360 who had been sentenced. 188 were arrested or detained in 2010Tibetan and from which 71were sentenced in 201. People’s Uprising across “TAR’ and Tibetan areas in Qinghai, Sichuan, Gansuand Yunnan Provinces.

� The names of many Tibetan people are not available; TCHRD will try to unearth those names so asto bring forth to the attention of International Community.

� For rectification and information with regard to name, age, sex, affiliation, prison term and originplease contact TCHRD.

Abbreviation:

DET: DetainedDET?: Detained but release status unknownPSB DC: Public Security Bureau Detention CentreD: DayM: MonthY: YearD.S: Death SentenceLife Life Imprisonment

79

Appendices

APPENDIX 2

Table Listing Relevant International Human Rights Instruments Signedand/or Ratified by the People’s Republic of China

Instrument Signed on Ratified on Ideals

InternationalCovenant onEconomic, Social andCultural Rights(ICESCR)

27 October 1997 27 March 2001

Recognising that, in accordance with theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights, the idealof free human beings enjoying freedom from fearand want can only be achieved if conditions arecreated whereby everyone may enjoy hiseconomic, social and cultural rights, as well as hiscivil and political rights.

InternationalCovenant on Civiland Political Rights(ICCPR)

5 October 1998

Recognising that, in accordance with theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights, the idealof free human beings enjoying freedom from fearand want can only be achieved if conditions arecreated whereby everyone may enjoy his civil andpolitical rights as well as his economic, social andcultural rights.

InternationalConvention on theElimination of AllForms of RacialDiscrimination(ICERD)

29 December 1981

Considering that all human beings are equalbefore the law and are entitled to equal protectionof the law against any discrimination and againstany incitement to discrimination.

Convention on theElimination of AllForms ofDiscriminationAgainst Women(CEDAW)

17 July 1980 4 November 1980

Recalling that discrimination against womenviolates the principles of equality of rights andrespect for human dignity, is an obstacle to theparticipation of women, on equal terms withmen, in the political, social, economic andcultural life of their countries, hampers thegrowth of the prosperity of society and the familyand makes more difficult the full development ofthe potentialities of women in the service of theircountries and of humanity.

Convention AgainstTorture and OtherCruel, Inhuman orDegrading Treatmentor Punishment (CAT)

12 December 1986 4 October 1988

Desiring to make more effective the struggleagainst torture and other cruel, inhuman ordegrading treatment or punishment throughoutthe world.

United NationsConvention on theRights of the Child(CRC)

29 August 1990 2 March 1992

Considering that the Child should be fullyprepared to live an individual life in society, andbrought up in the spirit of the ideals proclaimedin the Charter of the UN, and in particular in thespirit of peace, dignity, tolerance, freedom,equality and solidarity.

80


GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

“TAP” “Tibet Autonomous Prefecture” (Tib. Bod rang skyong khul); There are 10 ofthese administrative areas (below the level of a province or region) createdoutside “TAR” by the Chinese authorities, located in northern and easternTibet (in the Tibetan provinces of Kham and Amdo)

“TAR” “Tibet Autonomous Region” (Tib. Bod rang kyong lljongs, Ch. xizang Zizique);Formally created by China in 1965, this area of central and western Tibet,covering the area of west of the Yangtse River and south of the KunlunMountains, is the only area recognized by China as being “Tibet”

Barkhor (Tib) The old Tibetan quarter and market area around the Jokhang Temple inLhasa. In Tibetan it literally means the “middle circuit” or centralcircumambulation

Cadre (Tib. le che pa, Ch. gan bu) Technically applies to staff of the ChineseGovernment administration; also referred to those working on official projectsor in state enterprises

CAT United Nations Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman orDegrading Treatment or Punishment

CCP (Ch. Zhon Guo Gong Chan Dang) Chinese Communist Party; founded inJuly 1921

CEDAW United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms ofDiscrimination Against Women

Circumambulation A religious ritual circling clockwise around a holy place in order to accumulatemerit

County (Tib. dzong, Ch. xian) The Middle level administrative unit equivalent todistrict

CPL Criminal Procedure Law; the revised CPL came into effect on 1 January1997

CPPCC Chinese People’s Political Consultative CongressCultural Revolution (Tib. rigs-nas-gsar-brje); The campaign initiated in 1966 by Mao Zedong in

order to regain control of the Communist Party by ordering the youth to“bombard the headquarters” (purge opponents within the Party) and toeradicate the “four olds” (old ideas, old culture, old customs and old habits).The Chinese authorities no describe it as “Ten Bad Years”, referring to theentire period of 1966 to 1979.

Detention Centre (Tib. lta srung khang, Ch. kanshoushuo) Place where prisoners are held withoutcharge prior to sentencing

DMC (Tib. u-yon lhan khang, Ch. we yuan hi) Democratic ManagementCommittee; Administrative organs established in 1962 in religiousinstitutions in Tibet and reconstructed under the 1996 “patriotic re-education”campaign

81

Appendices

Drapchi prison Officially known as “Tibet Autonomous Region” PrisonEndangering State Security Charge introduced in the revised CPL to replace “counter-revolutionary”Floating population (Ch. liudong renkou) Term used to refer to Chinese migrants who are

unregistered permanent and temporary residents in TibetGeshe (Tib) Spiritual title and doctorate; monk or lama who has completed the highest

course in metaphysics and other academic monastic studies in the Gelugpaschool

Guanxi (Ch) Literally, “connection”; colloquially a connection to officialdom to acquirepreferential treatment

Gyama (Tib) Unit of measurement equivalent to 500 gramsGyama (Tib) Unit of measurement equivalent to 500 gramsHukou (Ch) Household Registration cardICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political RightsICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural RightsKhenpo (Tib) Literally abbot. In Nyingma and Kagyu tradition of Tibetan Buddhism,

Khenpo is analogous to the Geshe degreeLama (Tib) The Tibetan term for a respected religious teacher, equivalent to the Sanskrit

term guru. A lama is not necessarily a monk, although monasticism is preferredfor all lamas in the Gelugpa School. Chinese politicians use the term incorrectlyto refer to any monk

Mu (Tib) A measure of land equal to 67 square metersNPC National People’s CongressPAP People’s Armed PolicePatriotic re-education Initiated in 1996 in Tibet’s monasteries and nunneries, “patriotic re-education”

campaign was designed to purge the influence of the Dalai Lama, toindoctrinate the monks and nuns with political ideology and to crackdownon dissent activities.

Potala Palace Official winter residence of the Dalai Lama in LhasaPRC People’s Republic of ChinaPrefecture (Tib. sa khul, Ch. diqu) The administrative area below the level of province

or region and above the level of a countyProcuracy (Tib. zhib chu, Ch. jian chayan) A Chinese judicial agency responsible for

investigating and prosecuting criminal cases. It also handles complaints againstpolice, prison officials and other branches of the administration

Prostrate Buddhist practice of lying face down before any sacred bodyPSB (Tib. schi de chus, Ch. Gong An Ju) Public Security Bureau, local level police

force responsible for detaining and arresting suspects and for pre-trial custodyRe-education Indoctrination of Chinese Communist ideology and national unity; carried

out extensively in religious institutions and labour camps in TibetRukhag (Tib) One small unit within a prison, village, school, or military etcSaga Dawa (Tib) The month of Buddha’s birth, Enlightenment and Death

82


Splittism (Tib. Khadral ringlugs) Party term for the movement for Tibetanindependence or any nationalist sentiments

Strike Hard (Tib. dungdek tsanen, Ch. yanda) A PRC campaign targeted at crushingcorruption and crime. Within Tibet, Chinese authorities are aiming thecampaign at “splittists”

Tsampa (Tib) Roasted barley flourTsongkhul (Tib) Detention AreaTsuglhakhang (Tib) Central Cathedral in LhasaUNWGAD United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary DetentionWork Team (Tib. las don ru khag, Ch. gongzuo dui) Specially formed units of government

personnel sent to conduct “patriotic re-education” in an institution or localityYartsa Gunbu (Tib) A Tibetan medicinal plant (Botanical name cordyceps sinensis)Yuan (Ch) Chinese currency (8 Yuan is equivalent to 1 dollar.)

Annual Report - TCHRD - 2010

Documents

Transcript of Annual Report - TCHRD - 2010