丹麦大赦国际秘书长给议会和政府的信

【明慧网2000年3月29日】

议会和政府哥本哈根
2000年3月20日

在过去的两年里中国的人权状况已明显恶化。中国人民去年所经历的镇压是自1989年天安门广场镇压学生示威以来最恶劣的。中国当局于1999年7月禁止法轮功运动以来，对法轮功追随者的严重迫害格外引人注目。国际特赦已记录若干起虐待被捕的该运动成员案件，包括一名42岁的妇女在狱中被打死。中国统治者在修订的《刑法》中有关国家安全方面已开始用非常严厉的措施压制那些行使基本的集会和言论自由的人。

(关于新疆的人权问题，有删节)

镇压也影响了更大范围的中国社会，今天它不仅影响到政治对手和宗教圈及少数民族，也影响到触及工作状况，环境及社会问题的公民。

(关于新疆、西藏的人权问题，有删节)

最近两年中国的事态的发展使人对中国1997年签署联合国“社会、经济和文化权力”，以及1998年签署的“公民和政治权力”两个主要公约的诚意提出质疑。撇开严重违反人权的问题，这种状况也使得欧盟及其它同中国当局的对话变得艰难。中国当局显然已精确地预计到了国际的批评已经定型了，随即回复到对任何和平的和非暴力的改造社会者的广泛镇压。

在1999年初中国政府回复到它的诡辩，声称对中国人权状况的批评干涉中国内政。这是一个明显与人权公约准则相抵触的声明。1999年国际特赦已要求欧洲重新考虑其和中国的幕后对话。国际特赦支持与中国的对话。但是对话和施压一定要并行，以达到状况的改善。现在各国与中国对话都失败了，包括欧盟和中国的对话，突出表现为缺乏明确的目标和透明度，参与者是一个非常封闭的小圈子，没有令人信服的诚意，因此，毫不奇怪，中国人权缺乏实质性的进步。

和1997年一样，1998年没有提出谴责中国的决议，当时的论据是中国有了进步，然而这种作法显然是无效的。

所以丹麦政府应恢复作为对1997年联合国人权委员会做出贡献的标志的实质性的批评。那时丹麦是人权委员会的成员。今天丹麦不是。但是在3月20日至4月28日的人权委员会第56次集会上，对丹麦政府的期待应是这样的：

丹麦政府应公开明确表示支持对中国的决议。

丹麦政府应积极寻求欧盟的决定以支持决议，也就是说联络其它支持决议的欧盟政府，并与之合作。

丹麦政府应利用其对委员会成员国的影响以获得对决议的支持。

丹麦政府应要求与中国政府的继续对话必须有清晰和广为人知的目的，一个时间表，对内容更公开的报导，双方更广泛的参与，以及更好地配合其它国家(美国，加拿大和澳大利亚)与中国的对话。

如该信所述，我们应要求丹麦议会的各党派表达他们对中国人权状况的决议的支持，并告知政府议会对这项决议的动议积极支持的期许。

最好的祝愿，

Lars Normann Jogensen 丹麦大赦国际秘书长

---

Parliament (Folketinget) and Government Copenhagen
20th march 2000 (Translated from Danish)
The Human Rights situation in China has markedly deteriorated during the latest two years. The suppression of the Chinese people has during the last year been the worst since the crack down of the student demonstrations at the Tian An Men square in 1989. Not the least the persecution of the adherents of the Falun Gong movement has been very conspicuous, since the Chinese authorities banned the movement in July 1999. Amnesty International has documented a number of cases about the mistreatment of the arrested adherents of the movement, here under about a 42 year old woman that was beaten to death in the prison. The Chinese rulers also has began to employ the very rigid measures pertaining to the national security in the revised Criminal Law to suppress persons, which also are making use of the all elementary freedom of expression and freedom of organization.

A week ago the Amnesty International received information that a known and active business woman, Rebiya Kadeer, on March 9 this year received a sentence of eight years of prison during a secret procedure. She was arrested on August 11, 1999 on her way to a meeting with a delegation from US Congressional Research Service. Thereupon she was accused of delivering state secrets to foreigners. Her health condition is very poor because of the detainment in the Liudaowan prison, known for torture and mistreatment of detained. Amnesty regards her as prison of conscience, and demands her released immediately and without conditions.

The suppression affects also much broader parts of the Chinese society, as today it not only affects the political opposition, together with religious circles and ethnic minorities, but also citizens, which takes hands of working conditions, environments and social problems.

The latest years there has also been a strike down on presumed Uighur nationalists and autonomy Muslim leaders in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomy Region (XUAR). The ethnic stir and thereby also the suppression is expected to increase because of the wear down of the economical and cultural rights in XUAR, hereby there is also arised great unemployment.

From Tibet there are continuos reports of torture and death in prisons among prisoners of conscience, together with continuos patriotic "education", which also comprises Tibetan monasteries. Sometimes monasteries are closed down and "unpatriotic" monks and nuns are expelled. Also Christian groups are persecuted.

The latest two-tree years development in China is questioning the seriousness of the Chinese governments signing of the two major UN conventions on social, economical and cultural rights in 1997 and the citizens and political rights in 1998. Apart from the issue of serious violations of human rights, this development is also affecting the EU dialog, and the other dialog processes with the Chinese authorities, very hard. The Chinese authorities has obviously calculated, that the international criticism has been framed securely and thereupon reverted to massive suppression of anybody peacefully and non-violent working on changes of society.

At the beginning of 1999 the Chinese government also reverted to its rhetoric insisting that the criticism of the human rights situation in China was a misplaced interference in the internal affairs of China. A statement in clear conflict with the principles oft human rights conventions. Already in 1999 the Amnesty International requested the EU to reconsider its dialog behind closed doors. Amnesty supports dialog with China. But dialog and pressure must go hand in hand, if improvements of conditions shall be obtained. The now failed dialog with among others the EU and the Chinese government was signified by absence of clear goals and transparency, a very closed circle of participants, unconvincing seriousness and not surprising, absence of concrete progress for human rights in China.

The improvements called on in 1998 as argument for not proposing a resolution according to that in 1997, all appeared futile.

Therefore the Danish government ought to resume the active criticism, that characterized the contribution at the UN human rights commission in 1997. At that time Denmark was a member of the human rights commission. So is not Denmark today. But the expectations to the Danish government in connection with the 56th assembly of the human rights commission 20th march 28th April 2000 must be that:

the Danish government gives a clear expression in public for its support of a resolution on China.

the Danish government actively is working for an EU decision to support a resolution, i.e. make contact with and co-operates with the other EU governments that supports a resolution.

the Danish government makes use of its influence on third countries, which are members of the commission to gain support of the resolution.

the Danish government makes requirements that a continued dialog with the Chinese government must have clear and known purposes, a time schedule, a more open reporting on the contents, broader participation from both sides, together with better co-ordinating with the other dialogs with China (USA, Canada and Australia).

As of this letter we shall request the parties of the Danish parliament (Folketinget) to express their support of a resolution on the human rights situation in China and notify to the government the expectation that it actively back up upon the motion of such a resolution.

Best Regards
Lars Normann Jogensen
General Secretary of AI in Denmark