Guangzhou Officials Release Activist Guo Feixiong

Guangzhou city officials released rural issues activist Guo Feixiong without charge on the exact date of their legally mandated deadline, according to a December 28 report by Radio Free Asia (RFA). Authorities formally arrested Guo Feixiong, whose true name is Yang Maodong, on October 4, 2005, for "gathering people to disturb public order," a crime under Article 290 of China's Criminal Law. The Panyu District People's Procuratorate issued its Decision Not to Prosecute on December 26, 2005 (posted by the Boxun Web site) and noted that public security officials had completed a supplementary investigation and resubmitted their findings to the procuratorate on November 27, 2005. The December 26 decision stated: "This procuratorate believes that criminal suspect Yang Maodong carried out the behavior set forth under Article 290, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, but that the circumstances were minor. In accordance with Article 37 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, there is no need to administer criminal punishment."

The charge against Guo arose in connection with his efforts to provide legal advice to the villagers of Taishi village, Guangzhou city, in their recall campaign against an allegedly corrupt village committee head. On September 12, 2005, about 1,000 public security officials clashed with villagers and took into custody nearly 50 individuals, including Guo. Officials released the six Taishi villagers who remained in detention along with Guo, according to RFA. Guo told RFA (in a taped interview available on the RFA Web site and transcribed by Boxun) that local authorities have continued to use "mafia tactics," including threats and violence, against Taishi villagers. Beijing lawyer Gao Zhisheng, head of the Beijing Shengzhi Law Firm where Guo worked as a legal consultant, speculated that officials released Guo due to a lack of sufficient evidence and called their decision to hold Guo until the last minute "the last resort of the mafiosi." The Beijing Justice Bureau shut down Gao's law practice in November 2005, and a December 14 RFA report hinted that the Guangzhou Justice Bureau may have contributed to the firing of Guangzhou lawyers Tang Jingling and Guo Yan from their respective law firms. All three lawyers contributed to Guo Feixiong's criminal defense case.

Guo's release has generated optimistic and emboldened responses from some Chinese activists. The Independent Chinese Pen Center (ICPC) issued a statement on December 28 commending efforts by local authorities to resolve Guo's case in accordance with the law. At the same time, ICPC also used the occasion to call for greater protection of citizen rights and the release of all prisoners of conscience. ICPC has also called for an investigation into the conditions of Guo's detention. Since his release, Guo has posted through Boxun his own Letter to Guangdong Provincial Government Agencies Reporting "Forced Labor" While in Prison, dated November 20, 2005. Guo's letter describes a widespread, organized system of forced labor in the detention center where authorities held him. Guo also accuses the Panyu district government of organizing and deriving profits from the system of forced labor, and calls for a province-wide investigation into similar conditions in detention centers and prisons throughout Guangdong province.

Several reports following Guo's release from detention provide background on the Taishi conflict and liken the string of events there to the clash between villagers and authorities in Dongzhoukeng village, Shanwei city. A December 27 article by Reuters noted that both villages lie 210 kilometers apart in Guangdong. According to Reuters, "even the booming Pearl River Delta region that neighbours Hong Kong is experiencing spreading protest." The CECC's 2005 Annual Report included an introductory section on Growing Social Unrest and the Chinese Leadership's Counterproductive Response. As protests continued over the issue of land confiscations in Guangdong (in December), as well as in Xi'an, Shaanxi province (in November) and Chengdu, Sichuan province (in October), some human rights lawyers have questioned the effectiveness of the central government's response. The National People's Congress (NPC) will deliberate this year on a draft "Law on Handling Sudden Incidents," due for passage in June 2006, according to a December 28 article by Xinhua (via the NPC Web site). Beijing lawyers Gao Zhisheng and Chen Yongmiao question whether the law will focus on quashing incidents (like the one in Dongzhoukeng) rather than settling them, according to a December 29 article by Kyodo. The Chinese government's continued restrictions on Beijing lawyer Zhu Jiuhu and Shanghai lawyer Zheng Enchong underscore the politically sensitive nature of their roles as property rights advocates and the government's desire to maintain control over the nation's property markets.