The blogosphere is abuzz with the unsettling news that the Chinese government has arrested Xu Zhiyong, a 36-year-old attorney, thereby dealing another blow to the growing Chinese rule of law movement. In authoritarian countries or nations in transition, lawyers often play a key role in bringing greater democracy through the judicial protections, accountability, and transparency that are hallmarks of the rule of law. In 2007, Pakistan’s so-called lawyers revolution demonstrated the centrality of the judiciary and attorneys in protecting Constitutional freedoms and the rule of law in the face of General Musharraf’s imposition of emergency rule. While Pakistan is lauded as a successful instance of resistance, human rights lawyers around the world continue to face a hostile environment. To name a few examples, in 2003 the Ethiopian government disbanded the Women’s Lawyers Association, a women’s rights group, and in the same year the Tunisian government assaulted human rights lawyers and refused to legalize their organizations. As recently as January 2009, a human rights lawyer working on abuses by the Russian military in Chechnya was shot and killed in broad daylight, following a news conference in Moscow. In China as elsewhere, corrupt and oppressive governments fear being held legally accountable, and strike out against lawyers in an attempt to maintain impunity.
Mr. Xu seems by all accounts an excellent but certainly far from radical lawyer. Since his graduation from Peking University law school he had taken up cases of disenfranchised or abused persons, such as those suffering from government beatings, arrested for publishing news offensive to the Chinese government, and victims of poisoned milk. Before his arrest he was preparing to challenge “black jails,” the Chinese government’s illegal holding cells for vocal critics. He co-founded the Open Constitution Initiative, a Beijing-based non-profit legal services and research center, which the Chinese government shut down following a raid on July 17, 2009. Claiming that the center was involved in tax evasion, the government also disbarred 53 Beijing lawyers at this time. The center had been involved in highly sensitive cases such as challenging the Chinese government’s role in 2008’s Tibetan unrest, and this together with Mr. Xu’s arrest imply that, whatever tax problems did or did not exist, the government’s motive in closing the center and in Mr. Xu’s arrest is to squash the rule of law movement.
Lawyers play a critical role in investigating and reporting human rights violations and in ensuring the responsibility of the state and remedies for victims. Mr. Xu and the Open Constitution Initiative represent real and effective action to secure human rights in China; for example, Mr. Xu’s very first case led to the abolition of vagrancy laws that allowed police to detain people traveling without a permit outside of their registered towns, demonstrating that one legal action can have significant impact throughout China. The New York Times writes today that “China is at a critical juncture” following 30 years of legal reform. China lacks neither lawyers nor functioning courts, and while objectively this is a good thing and necessary for the rule of law, the government appears immensely threatened by the prospect of a functioning judiciary and the ability of its citizens to redress human rights violations. Chinese law professor He Weifang states that the Communist Party’s concern regarding lawyers is that they will be able to challenge China’s one party rule and to lead a pro-democracy movement by mobilizing their network of clients that have legal and other grievances against the Chinese government. More generally, the Chinese government seems to fear any movement from civil society to hold it legally accountable.
Whether the next wave of democratic change in China will come at the hands of lawyers remains to be seen, but it is certain that future reforms cannot take place without progress towards the rule of law. Like human rights defenders around the world, Mr. Xu is owed protection by his government rather than attack from it. Hopefully, the current media attention around his case will save him from harm and ensure his prompt release.
