Chapter 3 The Case of Reporters Without Borders
3.3 The Case of Huang Qi and the United Nations
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Networking is another function of the office. Employees at the Taipei office commonly go to functions to broaden their base of contacts in the media, government, civil, and private sectors.
Alviani told me he would like to expand the Taipei office in both size and scope.
But because funds and bureaucratic approval is limited at this time, the office seems likely to only have two full-time staffers for some time.
3.3 The Case of Huang Qi and the United Nations
In this section, I will examine advocacy done by RSF for Huang Qi, a Chinese journalist and blogger who has been held in prison in China since November 2016.
Much of the research and legal documentation on this case was handled by RSF’s Taipei bureau, before being finalized by RSF’s Paris headquarters and forwarded to the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), which later issued a subsequent statement condemning Chinese authorities’ treatment of the journalist and urging Chinese authorities to release him. Because this initiative, shouldered by Taiwanese employees in RSF’s Taipei office (the full-time Taiwanese staffer and a part-time Taiwanese intern), garnered a response from the UN, it is a crucial case study of how NGOs act as a gateway for Taiwanese people to affect intergovernmental organizations from which they’re excluded.
A native of China’s Sichuan province, Huang Qi made a name for himself by blogging about local government negligence that allowed for the construction of shoddy buildings that easily collapsed during the catastrophic 2008 Sichuan earthquake and may have greatly exacerbated the human toll of the disaster. In 1998, Huang and his wife created a website called 64 Tianwang, which originally focused on bringing to light
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
cases of human trafficking. Over time though, the site expanded its coverage to include articles on an array of human rights-related topics considered sensitive to the Chinese Communist Party, including the Falun Gong and the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre.
Huang was also a frequently quoted source in international media coverage of the 2008 earthquake.
While Huang has been detained since 2016, this most recent and ongoing detention is just one of many prison terms he has served since 2000. He has been in and out of prison a number of times since 2000. In that time-span, RSF has bestowed on Huang its Cyber-Freedom Prize in 2004 and named 64 Tianwang the winner of its Press Freedom Prize in 2016.
In late 2018 and early 2019, during which time I was an intern at RSF’s Taipei office, Huang Qi was the subject of considerable attention. Employees in RSF’s Taipei office had been tracking Huang’s case since his detention in 2016, both through direct sources and secondary news sources. For example, in September 2018 RSF published an article with the headline: “China: RSF press freedom laureate falls victim to violence in detention again.” The article detailed allegations of torture against Huang Qi and described his deteriorating health in prison while being denied medical treatment.
But articles to RSF’s website were not the only way RSF’s Taipei office advocated for Huang Qi that winter. In early November, the full-time Taiwanese staffer of RSF’s Taipei bureau, who shared her experience with me for this thesis on condition of anonymity, conducted extensive research into the case of Huang Qi for the purpose of petitioning the UN to condemn China’s treatment of him. A Taiwanese intern also contributed research to the petition. The intended audience of the petition was the UN’s
‧
Punishment, which falls under the umbrella of the UN’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. In order to file this petition, employees at RSF’s Taipei bureau filled out a model questionnaire that can be accessed easily on the website of the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture. Below is one section of the model questionnaire:II. Circumstances surrounding torture
A. Date and place of arrest and subsequent torture
B. Identity of force(s) carrying out the initial detention and/or torture (police, intelligence services, armed forces, paramilitary, prison officials, other)
C. Were any person, such as a lawyer, relatives or friends, permitted to see the victim during detention? If so, how long after the arrest?
D. Describe the methods of torture used
E. What injuries were sustained as a result of the torture?
F. What was believed to be the purpose of the torture?
G. Was the victim examined by a doctor at any point during or after his/her ordeal? If so, when? Was the examination performed by a prison or government doctor?
H. Was appropriate treatment received for injuries sustained as a result of the torture?
I. Was the medical examination performed in a manner which would enable the doctor to detect evidence of injuries sustained as a result of the torture? Were any medical reports or certificates issued? If so, what did the reports reveal?
J. If the victim died in custody, was an autopsy or forensic examination performed and which were the results?
(UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, model questionnaire)
In filling out this questionnaire, Taiwanese citizens at RSF’s Taipei office produced a much more thorough account of Huang Qi’s ordeal than could be done for one of RSF’s short articles. The model questionnaire more closely resembles a legal document that might be used in a court case than a typical advocacy petition.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
When finished, the aforementioned Taiwanese full-time employee of RSF’s Taipei office forwarded the document to Paul Coppin, head of legal desk at RSF’s Paris headquarters. Coppin then submitted the completed questionnaire to the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Torture via email on November 09, 2018.
RSF published an article on November 13, 2018 with the headline, “China: RSF submits the case of journalist Huang Qi to UN Special Rapporteur on Torture.” In addition to announcing that RSF had filed a case with the UN accusing Chinese authorities of torturing Huang Qi, the article summarized the issue of Huang Qi’s imprisonment and alleged torture. “On Friday, RSF filed a petition with the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment to urge the United Nations to publicly challenge China on the torture of Huang Qi,” read the article (RSF 2018).
It quoted Cédric Alviani, director of RSF’s Taipei bureau, as saying, "On the rare visits allowed to them, Huang Qi's lawyers found that Huang was the victim of repeated beatings and denials of medical treatment, which is clearly torture because of his state of health.” The article went on to explain that “Since November 28, 2016, the journalist has been detained without trial … The mistreatments inflicted on Huang, which appear to be intended to force the journalist to plead guilty, are all the more worrying because Huang is seriously ill in the kidneys, heart and liver” (RSF 2018).
A bit over a month later, the UN responded. In what amounted to a resounding success for RSF, and a searing rebuke to the Chinese Communist Party, the UN’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) expressed concern over the alleged torture of Huang Qi, reiterated an April 2018 opinion by the UN’s Working
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) that found Huang Qi’s imprisonment arbitrary, and highlighted a statement by the WGAD urging China to release Huang Qi. One intriguing part of the statement, which was published on the official website of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, detailed an exchange between UN human rights officials and Chinese authorities:
The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has been in contact with the authorities regarding the case. The Government has responded to the communication leading to the adoption of the Opinion, but has not yet implemented it. More recently, the Government has informed the WGAD that Mr. Huang was being “provided with adequate medical treatment (…) that his illness is under control, and he is in sound state mentally. The alleged torture is inconsistent with facts.” (OHCHR, 2018)
We see here an example of United Nations officials pressuring Chinese authorities over human rights abuses due to a case report written by Taiwanese citizens and submitted to the UN indirectly through an NGO.
Seong-Phil Hong, chair-rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and one of the UN human rights experts credited with forming the UN’s expressed concern about Huang Qi, confirmed to me over email that the decision was made after consulting RSF’s model questionnaire.
Regarding the three tiers of advocacy influence I outlined in the analytical approach section in the first chapter of this thesis, it is clear this case should be classified as tier three, the tier with the sharpest focus and highest efficacy. This case study fits this tier because it is a time-specific piece of advocacy aimed at influencing the behavior of specific actors, and because we are able to rule out confounding variables.