Re-education through work

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shayang Re-education Camp workers

Re-education through work ( Chinese  勞動 教養  /  劳动 教养 , Pinyin láodòng jiàoyǎng , 劳教 for short , Laojiao ) was a system of detention centers in the People's Republic of China , where people for crimes such as theft , prostitution and possession, use and distribution of illegal drugs up to Detained for four years by a police order without a judgment. That is why we speak of administrative detention. On December 28, 2013, the abolition of "re-education through labor" was announced through the adoption of a resolution by the Standing Committee of the Chinese People's Congress as the highest legislative body.

The different prison sentences in China

There are two different types of sentencing in the Chinese legal system. A defendant can either be placed in administrative detention by a police authority or convicted by an ordinary court.

Administrative detention

For minor offenses there is the possibility of administrative detention. This sentence is imposed by a police station. The maximum term of imprisonment is three years, it can be halved with good conduct, but can also be extended by up to a further year. The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure do not apply to a conviction; a police authority can convict an accused according to a vaguely defined procedure. There are several forms of administrative detention, the most common form of administrative detention is “re-education through work” (láojiào). There is also “custody and upbringing” (shourong jiaoyu) and “compulsory drug rehabilitation” (qiangzhi jiedu).

In the past few decades, administrative detention has been used again and again to imprison a large number of citizens in political campaigns without much fuss. The last major action was in 1999 when over ten thousand Falun Gong practitioners were locked away after an unauthorized demonstration in Beijing's government district. Administrative detention is also sometimes used quite arbitrarily against political opponents or citizens who are uncomfortable with the local authorities. In total there are about 1.4 million prisoners in China, so there is one prisoner for every 950 inhabitants, of these 1.4 million prisoners, 400,000 are in administrative detention. In the USA the ratio is one prisoner per 143 inhabitants, in the Federal Republic one prisoner per 1,357 inhabitants.

From the point of view of the Chinese government, administrative detention is less of a punishment, rather the camps of “re-education through labor” are a necessary means of reintegration, especially for juvenile law breakers. The “re-education through labor” camps are presented as a short-term intervention by the state to prevent petty criminals from sliding into larger crimes. Hence the official distinction between criminal and administrative detention. Inmates in a re-education center are paid for their work, those in criminal detention (in the Laogais) are not.

Imprisonment issued by the courts

The majority of prison sentences are passed through criminal trials. These proceedings are conducted in accordance with the Chinese Code of Criminal Procedure. There are proceedings with a trained judge and defense counsel for the accused. The prison sentences pronounced by the courts are served in labor camps called “reform through work” ( láogǎi , 劳改 ). In contrast to administrative detention, the sentences imposed by the courts are referred to as “criminal detention”.

Competence dispute between the judiciary and security authorities

The system of administrative detention has been in the political discussion since the judicial reform in 1997 at the latest. As early as 2004, 420 delegates to the People's Congress made 13 requests to reform the administrative camp detention. The discussion is still ongoing and proposals for change are being discussed at the highest political level.

Lawyers up to the Supreme Court want to see the role of the courts strengthened. They argue that administrative detention has become illegal in its current form since the year 2000 (with the entry into force of the Legislature Act, which requires clear rules for the detention of a citizen). Administrative detention also violates the China-signed Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ( ICCPR ). The system of administrative detention was a sanction from a time when there was no comprehensive and solid legal system, which has made it obsolete.

On the other hand, the security authorities insist on the current system. They stress that those affected have the right to appeal to higher authorities, that abuse of power by the police in carrying out this measure rarely occurs and that this measure has proven to be extremely effective in preventing crime and maintaining public order.

However, even the legal scholars who support the current system consider a more precise definition of the legal status of administrative detention and its relationship to other laws as well as a standardization of the procedure, which has so far been handled very differently locally, to be essential.

Problems of administrative detention

The problem for the government is that in the current system there are always disputes between the police and the judiciary. Famous was the case of a young farmer who was arrested in Henan in December 2006 after a fight. The prosecutor dismissed a minor trial and ordered his release. The police immediately arrested the farmer and put him in two-year detention. A lawyer tried unsuccessfully to charge the police with perverse law and arbitrariness . Such cases, in which college judges are disgraced by police departments, damage the reputation of the entire Chinese judiciary.

Dispute about administrative detention

The internal party dispute over administrative detention has been going on for several years now, and one decision has been postponed again and again. Despite many criticisms, it is currently considered certain that the administrative detention will continue to exist. As a compromise between the judiciary and the police, it is discussed to limit the duration of administrative detention to a maximum of 18 months; the legal provisions should be made more precise and the possibilities of appeal should be improved in order to counteract the abuse of administrative detention and to reduce contradictions between administrative detention and the legislature law.

In November 2013, it became known that the Chinese government was planning to end the "transformation through work" program. On December 28, 2013, the system was finally abolished.

Lists of corresponding camps

Rare view of a Hubei Province re-education camp , from the archives of the Laogai Museum in Washington

See also

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ China abolishes the system of re-education through labor. In: Beijing Rundschau . December 30, 2013.
  2. ↑ China abolishes the re-education camps. In: DiePresse.com . December 28, 2013.
  3. ↑ Dirk Pleitner: Human Rights Committee joint public hearing on: Jan. 24, 2008 Amnesty International, January 24, 2008 (PDF).
  4. ↑ a b Jim Yardley Many in Jails without Trial; NYT, May 9, 2005
  5. ^ Benedikt Köhler Every 143rd resident of the USA behind bars; Heise.de, July 29, 2003
  6. ↑ a b Wu Jiao New law to abolish laojiao system; China daily, March 1, 2007
  7. ^ Ruth Kirchner Questionable Re-education; The Parliament, May 14, 2007  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / www.das-parlament.de  
  8. ↑ a b Jonny Erling Violent protest against detention in labor camps; Die Welt, December 5, 2007
  9. ↑ a b Ingrid Saltin: The system of re-education through work. In: chinaweb.de . September 2007.
  10. ↑ Fabian Reinbold, Lisa Erdmann: Reform policy: China's CP announces the abolition of re-education camps. In: Spiegel Online . 15th November 2013.