China (includes Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau)

The government's human rights record remained poor, and the government continued to commit numerous and serious abuses. There was a trend towards increased harassment, detention, and imprisonment by government and security authorities of those perceived as threatening to government authority. The government also adopted measures to control more tightly print, broadcast and electronic media, and censored online content. Protests by those seeking to redress grievances increased significantly and were suppressed, at times violently, by security forces. There were notable developments in legal reforms during the year. However, some key measures to increase the authority of the judiciary and reduce the arbitrary power of police and security forces stalled. The government adopted new religious affairs regulations expanding legal protection for some activities of registered religious groups but was criticized for failing to protect unregistered groups.

The following human rights problems were reported:

• denial of the right to change the government
• physical abuse resulting in deaths in custody
• torture and coerced confessions of prisoners
• harassment, detention, and imprisonment of those perceived as threatening to party and government authority
• arbitrary arrest and detention, including nonjudicial administrative detention, reeducation-through-labor, psychiatric detention, and extended or incommunicado pretrial detention
• a politically controlled judiciary and a lack of due process in certain cases, especially those involving dissidents
• detention of political prisoners, including those convicted of disclosing state secrets and subversion, those convicted under the now-abolished crime of counterrevolution, and those jailed in connection with the 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations
• house arrest and other nonjudicially approved surveillance and detention of dissidents
• monitoring of citizens' mail, telephone and electronic communications
• use of a coercive birth limitation policy, in some cases resulting in forced abortion and sterilization
• increased restrictions on freedom of speech and the press; closure of newspapers and journals; banning of politically sensitive books, periodicals, and films; and jamming of some broadcast signals
• restrictions on the freedom of assembly, including detention and abuse of demonstrators and petitioners
• restrictions on religious freedom, control of religious groups, and harassment and detention of unregistered religious groups
• restrictions on the freedom of travel, especially for politically sensitive and underground religious figures
• forcible repatriation of North Koreans and inadequate protection of many refugees
• severe government corruption
• increased scrutiny, harassment and restrictions on independent domestic and foreign nongovernmental organization (NGO) operations
• trafficking in women and children
• societal discrimination against women, minorities, and persons with disabilities
• cultural and religious repression of minorities in Tibetan areas and Muslim areas of Xinjiang
• restriction of labor rights, including freedom of association, the right to organize and bargain collectively, and worker health and safety
• forced labor, including prison labor

There were several positive human rights developments during the year. The government returned authority to approve death sentences to the Supreme People's Court, supported local experiments to record police interrogation of suspects, and limited the administrative detention of minors, the elderly, pregnant women, and nursing mothers. In March government officials stated that family bible studies in private homes need not be registered with the government and said that the law permitted religious education of minors, but problems continued in both areas. The National People's Congress (NPC) adopted amendments to the law protecting women's rights and interests, including one outlawing sexual harassment. The government ratified International Labor Organization (ILO) Convention 111 prohibiting discrimination in employment. The government also hosted visits by international human rights monitors.

RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including

Freedom From:

a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life

During the year politically motivated and other arbitrary and unlawful killings occurred. While no official statistics on deaths in custody were available, state-run media reported that law enforcement officials killed 460 persons and seriously injured more than 100 through abuse or dereliction of duty in 2003.

In December police shot and killed at least three protesters in Dongzhou village, Guangdong Province, the first known shooting of public protesters by security forces since 1989. Villagers claimed that as many as 20 villagers were shot and killed by paramilitary riot police, with approximately 40 others missing. The government said the shooting occurred after protesters threw explosives at police and claimed that three protesters were killed. It suspended an official responsible for the incident, pending an investigation.

An unconfirmed, published report said that authorities beat a petitioner to death in Beijing in April.

Trials involving capital offenses sometimes took place under circumstances involving severe lack of due process and with no meaningful appeal. Executions often took place on the day of conviction or failed appeal. In Xinjiang, executions of Uighurs whom authorities accused of separatism but which some observers claimed were politically motivated were reported (see section 5). The government regarded the number of death sentences it carried out as a state secret. However, in March 2004 an NPC deputy asserted that nearly 10 thousand cases per year "result in immediate execution," a figure Supreme People's Court (SPC) and Ministry of Justice officials stated was exaggerated. Foreign experts estimated that the country executed between 5 thousand and 12 thousand persons each year. The SPC announced its intention to take back from provincial courts the authority to approve all death sentences, an authority given to provinces during the government's 1983 anticrime "strike hard" campaign. During the year judges were hired and an administrative division established to conduct reviews of death sentences, but the SPC had not yet begun exercising its authority (see section 1.e.). Media reports stated that approximately 10 percent of executions were for economic crimes, especially corruption. NPC officials insisted during the year that there were no plans to abolish the death penalty for economic crimes.

b. Disappearance

The government used incommunicado detention. The law requires notification of family members within 24 hours of detention, but individuals were often held without notification for significantly longer periods, especially in politically sensitive cases. Citizens who were reportedly detained with no or severely delayed notice included blind legal activist Chen Guangcheng, attorney Zhu Jiuhu, petitioner advocate Hou Wenzhuo, and writer Yang Maodong (also known as Guo Feixiong). In 2004 Jiang Yanyong and his wife were detained and held incommunicado for several weeks in connection with a letter he wrote to government leaders asking for reconsideration of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre.

As of year's end, the government had not provided a comprehensive, credible accounting of all those killed, missing, or detained in connection with the violent suppression of the 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations.

c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

The law forbids prison guards from extorting confessions by torture, insulting prisoners' dignity, and beating or encouraging others to beat prisoners; however, police and other elements of the security apparatus employed torture and degrading treatment in dealing with some detainees and prisoners. Officials acknowledged that torture and coerced confessions were chronic problems and began a campaign aimed at curtailing these practices. Former detainees credibly reported that officials used electric shocks, prolonged periods of solitary confinement, incommunicado detention, beatings, shackles, and other forms of abuse.

After a November visit, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Manfred Nowak concluded that torture remained widespread, although the amount and severity decreased. He reported that beatings with fists, sticks, and electric batons were the most common tortures. Cigarette burns, guard-instructed beatings by fellow inmates, and submersion in water or sewage were also reported. Nowak further found that many detainees were held for long periods in extreme positions, that death row inmates were shackled or handcuffed 24 hours per day, and that systematic abuse was designed to break the will of detainees until they confessed. Procedural and substantive measures to prevent torture were inadequate. Nowak found that members of some house church groups, Falun Gong adherents, Tibetans, and Uighur prisoners were specific targets of torture. The government said Nowak's preliminary report was inaccurate because he had visited only three Chinese cities (Beijing, Lhasa, and Urumqi) and urged him to revise conclusions in his final report.

Since the crackdown on Falun Gong began in 1999, estimates of Falun Gong adherents who died in custody due to torture, abuse, and neglect ranged from several hundred to a few thousand (see section 2.c.). In October Falun Gong adherents Liu Boyang and Wang Shouhui of Changchun, Jilin Province, reportedly died in custody after being tortured by police.

During the year police continued to use torture to coerce confessions from criminal suspects, although the government made efforts to address the problem of torture. A one-year campaign by the Supreme People's Procuratorate (SPP) to punish officials who infringed on human rights, including coercing confessions through torture or illegally detaining or mistreating prisoners, ended in May. The campaign uncovered more than 3,700 cases of official abuse.

A series of wrongful convictions in murder cases came to light in which innocent persons were convicted on the basis of coerced confessions. Among them, Nie Shubin of Hebei Province, who was executed in 1995 for a murder-rape, was exonerated in January after the true killer confessed. She Xianglin of Hubei Province was exonerated in March of murdering his wife in 1994 after she reappeared alive and well. The SPP campaign resulted in the prosecution of 1,924 officers and 1,450 convictions. Among them, a Gansu Province police officer was sentenced to life in prison in January for torturing a suspect to death. In June three Yunnan Province police officers were sentenced to one year in prison for torturing a suspect and rendering him disabled. At the campaign's conclusion, the SPP announced that preventing coerced confessions was its most important supervisory priority. Scholars advocated reform of police interrogation practices. In one highly publicized experiment, officials ordered audio and videotaping of police interrogations. Suspects in a few locations were offered the opportunity to have a lawyer present during interrogation.

During the year there were reports of persons, including Falun Gong adherents, sentenced to psychiatric hospitals for expressing their political or religious beliefs (see section 1.d.). Some were reportedly forced to undergo electric shock treatments or forced to take psychotropic drugs.

Petitioners and other activists sentenced to administrative detention also reported being tortured. Such reports included being strapped to beds or other devices for days at a time, beaten, forcibly injected or fed medications, and denied food and use of toilet facilities. A petitioner reportedly choked to death from force-feeding in a police-run psychiatric hospital in Beijing, according to a released inmate. Mao Hengfeng, a Shanghai housing petitioner who reportedly suffered various forms of torture while in reeducation-through-labor, was released in September, but authorities continued to monitor and harass her.

Prison and Detention Center Conditions

The Ministry of Justice administered more than 700 prisons with a population of over 1.5 million inmates, according to official statistics. In addition some 30 jails for juveniles housed approximately 22 thousand juvenile offenders. The country also operated hundreds of administrative detention centers, which were run by security ministries and administered separately from the formal court system (see section 2.d.).

Conditions in penal institutions for both political prisoners and common criminals generally were harsh and frequently degrading. Prisoners and detainees often were kept in overcrowded conditions with poor sanitation. Prison capacity became an increasing problem in some areas. Food often was inadequate and of poor quality, and many detainees relied on supplemental food and medicines provided by relatives; some prominent dissidents were not allowed to receive such goods. Political prisoners were segregated from each other and placed with common criminals, who sometimes beat political prisoners at the instigation of guards. Newly arrived prisoners or those who refused to acknowledge committing crimes were particularly vulnerable to beatings. In January 2004 political dissident He Depu was reportedly beaten by guards at Beijing No. 2 Prison and made deaf in one ear. Authorities acknowledged He's deafness, but asserted that he was already deaf when he entered prison. Prolonged use of electric shocks and use of a rack-like disciplinary bed were reported. Inner Mongolian cultural activist Hada was among those reportedly tortured. Chinese prison management forced prisoners to engage in labor, both as punishment and a source of funding (see section 6.c.).

Officials confirmed that executed prisoners were among the sources of organs for transplant. No national law governed organ donations nor were there reliable statistics on how many organ transplants using organs from executed prisoners occurred, but a Ministry of Health directive explicitly states that buying and selling human organs and tissues is not allowed. Transplant doctors stated publicly in 2003 that "the main source [of organ donations] is voluntary donations from condemned prisoners," but serious questions remained concerning whether meaningful or voluntary consent from the prisoners or their relatives was obtained.

Adequate, timely medical care for prisoners continued to be a serious problem, despite official assurances that prisoners have the right to prompt medical treatment. Labor activist Yao Fuxin suffered a heart attack in prison in August and foreign residents Yang Jianli and Wang Bingzhang previously suffered strokes in prison. In all three cases, authorities rejected their requests for outside medical care. Yao and fellow labor activist Xiao Yunliang also had to withstand frequent prison transfers while in ill health.

According to an NGO report, the government recently confirmed that Abidjan Obulkasim, a Uighur student imprisoned in 1995 on charges of counterrevolutionary activities, died in prison in 2003 of tuberculosis. Other prisoners with health concerns included democracy activists Qin Yongmin, Hua Di, Wang Sen, and He Depu; Internet writers Yang Zili and Luo Yongzhang; labor activists Hu Shigen and Zhang Shanguang; Inner Mongolian activist Hada; and religious prisoners Zhang Rongliang, Liu Fenggang, Xu Yonghai, Gong Shengliang, Bishop Su Zhimin, and other underground Catholic bishops. During the year some political prisoners went on hunger strikes to protest their treatment, including Shandong Province legal advocate Chen Guangcheng, Anhui Province democracy activist Zhang Lin, and writer Yang Maodong (Guo Feixiong).

Acknowledging guilt was a precondition for receiving certain prison privileges, including the ability to purchase outside food, make telephone calls, and receive family visits. Prison officials often denied privileges to those, including political prisoners, who refused to acknowledge guilt or obey other prison rules. After foreign resident Yang Jianli refused to wear his prison uniform and engaged in acts of civil disobedience, prison staff prohibited him from communicating with his lawyer, obstructed family visits, transferred him to another facility, and reportedly placed him on an abusive labor team. Foreign citizen and Falun Gong member Charles Lee staged a hunger strike to protest forced "reeducation" sessions he received in prison, where he remained at year's end. Some prominent political prisoners, however, received better than standard treatment.

Conditions in administrative detention facilities, such as reeducation-through-labor camps, were similar to those in prisons. Beating deaths occurred in administrative detention and reeducation-through-labor facilities. While the 2003 death of Sun Zhigang in a custody-and-repatriation camp for illegal migrants led the State Council to abolish that system, the government failed to enact proposed legislation to reform the system of reeducation-through-labor. The reform reportedly stalled because of objections from public security forces.

Sexual and physical abuse and extortion were reported in some detention centers. Falun Gong activists reported that police raped female practitioners, including an incident in November at the Dongchengfang police station in Tunzhou City, Hebei Province, in which two women were raped while in detention. Forced labor in prisons and reeducation-through-labor camps was common. Juveniles were required by law to be held separately from adults, unless facilities were insufficient. In practice, children sometimes were detained without their parents, held with adults, and required to work (see sections 1.d. and 6.c.).

The government generally did not permit independent monitoring of prisons or reeducation-through-labor camps, and prisoners remained inaccessible to most international human rights organizations. However, the government hosted visits by the UN high commissioner for human rights and the UN special rapporteur for torture and permitted them to visit prisons (see section 4). In July the government and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) agreed to terms permitting the ICRC to open an office in Beijing. The office opened, although the agreement did not grant the ICRC access to prisons. Working level meetings with foreign government officials on a prison labor memorandum of understanding continued during the year and included a few prison visits (see section 6.c.).

d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention

Arbitrary arrest and detention remained serious problems. The law permits police and security authorities to detain persons without arresting or charging them. It also permits sentencing without trial to as many as four years in reeducation through-labor camps and other administrative detention. Because the government tightly controlled information, it was impossible to determine accurately the total number of persons subjected to new or continued arbitrary arrest or detention. According to 2003 government statistics, more than 260 thousand persons were in reeducation-through-labor camps. Foreign experts estimated that more than 310 thousand persons were serving sentences in these camps in 2003. According to published SPP reports, the country's 340 reeducation-through-labor facilities had a total capacity of about 300 thousand persons. In addition the population of special administrative detention facilities for drug offenders and prostitutes grew rapidly following a campaign to crack down on drugs and prostitution. In 2004 these facilities held more than 350 thousand offenders, nearly three times as many as in 2002. The government also confined some Falun Gong adherents, petitioners, labor activists, and others to psychiatric hospitals.

Among those specially targeted for arbitrary detention or arrested during the year were current and former China Democracy Party activists, Falun Gong practitioners, domestic and foreign journalists, unregistered religious figures, and former political prisoners and their family members. Business associates of released Uighur political prisoner Rebiya Kadeer were detained in Xinjiang from May to December. Her relatives were also harassed on several occasions after her March release abroad (see sections 2.c. and 5).

Role of the Police and Security Apparatus

The security apparatus is made up of the Ministries of State Security and Public Security, the People's Armed Police, the People's Liberation Army (PLA), and the state judicial, procuratorial, and penal systems. The Ministries of State and Public Security were responsible for internal security. SPP and SPC officials admitted that courts and prosecutors often deferred to the security ministries on policy matters and individual cases. The PLA was responsible for external security, but also had some domestic security responsibilities.

The Ministry of Public Security (MPS) coordinates the country's law enforcement, which is administratively organized into local, county, provincial, and specialized police agencies. Recent efforts have been made to strengthen historically weak regulation and management of law enforcement agencies; however, judicial oversight was limited, and checks and balances were absent. Corruption at the local level was widespread. Police officers reportedly coerced victims, took individuals into custody without due cause, arbitrarily collected fees from individuals charged with crimes, and mentally and physically abused victims and perpetrators.

Arrest and Detention

Extended, unlawful detention remained a problem, although the government claimed to have eliminated it. In March both the SPP and the SPC told the NPC that they had resolved all cases of extended, unlawful detention. Nonetheless, a number of politically sensitive individuals were held for periods longer than that authorized by law, including journalists Zhao Yan and Ching Cheong. In some cases, investigating security agents or prosecutors sought repeated extensions, resulting in pretrial detention of a year or longer. It was uncertain how many other prisoners were similarly detained.

According to the law, police may unilaterally detain a person for up to 37 days before releasing him or formally placing him under arrest. After a suspect is arrested, the law allows police and prosecutors to detain him for up to six and one-half months before trial while the case is further investigated. Dissident Yang Jianli was held without conviction for more than two years before his verdict and five-year sentence was announced in May 2004.

The law stipulates that authorities must notify a detainee's family or work unit of his detention within 24 hours. However, failure to provide timely notification remained a serious problem, particularly in sensitive political cases (see section 1.b.). Under a sweeping exception, officials are not required to provide notification if doing so would "hinder the investigation" of a case. In some cases police treated those with no immediate family more severely.

According to regulations, public security organs had broad discretion to detain administratively suspects without supervision from a court or other outside bodies for up to 15 days, with the possibility of consecutive detention periods of up to 45 days. During the year the NPC passed the Security Administration Punishments Law, which banned administrative detention of minors, the elderly, pregnant women, and nursing mothers, created a maximum time for interrogation, and revised the maximum period of this type of detention to 20 days. The law provided for administrative review of detention decisions. It also expanded the number and type of offenses subject to administrative detention to include illegal demonstrations, disturbing social order in the name of religion, invasion of privacy, and publication that incites ethnic or national hostility or discrimination. Police continued to hold individuals without granting access to family members or lawyers, and some trials continued to be conducted in secret. Detained criminal suspects, defendants, their legal representatives, and close relatives were entitled to apply for bail; however, in practice few suspects were released pending trial.

The reeducation-through-labor system allows non-judicial panels of police and local authorities, called Labor Reeducation Committees, to sentence persons to up to three years in prison-like facilities. The committees have authority to extend an inmate's sentence for an additional year. Defendants were legally entitled to challenge reeducation-through-labor sentences under the Administrative Litigation Law through the court system (see section 1.e.). They could appeal for a reduction in, or suspension of, their sentences; however, appeals rarely were successful. Many other persons were detained in similar forms of administrative detention, known as "custody and education" (for prostitutes and those soliciting prostitutes) and "custody and training" (for minors who committed crimes). Li Guoqing was detained for three months in a mandatory drug rehabilitation center in Pingdingshan, Henan Province. Published reports said Li was given electric shocks until he signed a confession saying he took drugs and was then incarcerated at the center. Medical tests taken after his release supported his claim that he had never used drugs. A special form of reeducation centers was used to detain Falun Gong practitioners who had completed terms in reeducation-through-labor but whom authorities decided to continue detaining.

According to foreign researchers, the country had 20 ankang institutions (high-security psychiatric hospitals for the criminally insane) directly administered by the Ministry of Public Security. Some dissidents, persistent petitioners, and others were housed with mentally ill patients in these institutions. Patients in these hospitals were reportedly given medicine against their will and forcibly subjected to electric shock treatment. The regulations for committing a person into an ankang psychiatric facility were not clear. Credible reports indicated that a number of political and trade union activists, underground religious believers, persons who repeatedly petitioned the government, members of the banned China Democratic Party, and Falun Gong adherents were incarcerated in such facilities during the year. These included Wang Miaogen, Wang Chanhao, Pan Zhiming, and Li Da, who were reportedly held in an ankang facility run by the Shanghai Public Security Bureau. In August Wang Wanxing, who unfurled a banner in Tiananmen Square on the third anniversary of the 1989 massacre, was released from a Beijing ankang run by the Ministry of Public Security and sent abroad. After his release, he described conditions in the ankang as "basically sadistic" and said he witnessed a petitioner held in the facility who choked to death from force-feeding.

In 2004 the government attempted to resolve a motion that would have expelled China from the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) for using psychiatric facilities to incarcerate political prisoners. During the year, a WPA delegation visited the country without reaching a consensus

Administrative detention was frequently used as a vehicle to intimidate political activists and prevent public demonstrations (see section 2.b.).

Authorities arrested persons on charges of revealing state secrets, subversion, and common crimes to suppress political dissent and social advocacy. Citizens also were detained and prosecuted under broad and ambiguous state secrets laws for, among other actions, disclosing information on criminal trials, meetings, and government activity. The number of persons executed each year has been deemed by the government to be a state secret. Information could retroactively be classified a state secret by the government. Approximately 10 citizens writing on the Internet were detained on state secrets and subversion charges during the year (see section 2.a.)

The government used house arrest as a nonjudicial punishment and control measure against dissidents, released political prisoners, family members of political prisoners, petitioners, underground religious figures, and others it deemed politically sensitive or troublemakers. House arrest was characterized by complete isolation in one's own home or another location under lock and guard. In some cases house arrest involved constant monitoring, but the target of house arrest was occasionally permitted to leave the home to work or conduct errands. When outside the home, the subject of house arrest was usually, but not always, under surveillance. No publicly available laws or regulations governed conditions for house arrest.

Former senior leader Zhao Ziyang died in January after spending more than 15 years under house arrest in Beijing for his support of students during Tiananmen in 1989. Zhao's former aide Bao Tong remained under similar surveillance in his home. In March Jiang Yanyong was released after spending more than eight months in house arrest because he wrote to government leaders in 2004 requesting an official reassessment of the 1989 crackdown. He was formally detained for two months in June 2004 and was monitored in his home after release. His wife, who was detained at the same time as Jiang, was released earlier but forbidden to travel abroad until mid-year. At year's end Jiang remained unable to travel abroad. In September blind legal advisor and family planning whistleblower Chen Guangcheng was released by security authorities after four days of formal detention, but he was immediately placed under house arrest in Yinan County, Shandong Province. Local police and other government officials took turns monitoring him. Several underground Catholic priests and bishops were under house arrest for varying periods during the year. The longest serving among them may be Bishop Su Zhimin, who has reportedly been detained in a form of house arrest in Baoding, Hebei Province, since 1997. Government officials claimed they took no coercive actions against him (see section 2.c.). Tibetan nun Phuntsog Nyidrol remained under constant surveillance and could not travel freely despite expiration of her parole in February (see Tibet addendum).

Scores of other dissidents and activists reported regularly being placed under house arrest during sensitive political events, such as the NPC session or visits by foreign dignitaries, including the visit of the UN high commissioner for human rights in August and the November visit of the UN special rapporteur on torture. Authorities in Xinjiang used house arrest and other forms of arbitrary detention against those accused of the "three evils" of extremism, splittism, and terrorism, including at the time of Xinjiang's 50th anniversary celebration in October. Because authorities failed to distinguish carefully between peaceful activities supporting independence, "illegal" religious activities, and violent terrorism, it was difficult to determine whether raids, detentions, arrests, or judicial punishments were targeted at those peacefully seeking political goals, those seeking worship, or those engaged in violence (see section 5). Others held under house arrest for varying periods during the year included Tiananmen activist Qi Zhiyou, Internet writer Liu Di, underground Catholic bishops Jia Zhiguo and Wei Jingyi, members of the Tiananmen Mothers organization and the Independent PEN Center for Freedom to Write. Family members of some detained political prisoners reported being under house arrest or other surveillance for nearly one-third of the year.

The CCP used a form of discipline known as shuang gui for violations of CPC discipline, but there were reports of its use against nonparty members. Shuang gui is similar to house arrest and can be authorized without judicial involvement or oversight.

e. Denial of Fair Public Trial

The law states that the courts shall exercise judicial power independently, without interference from administrative organs, social organizations, and individuals. However, in practice the judiciary was not independent. It received policy guidance from both the government and the CCP, whose leaders used a variety of means to direct courts on verdicts and sentences, particularly in politically sensitive cases. At both the central and local levels, the government frequently interfered in the judicial system and dictated court decisions. Trial judges decide individual cases under the direction of the trial committee in each court. In addition the CCP's law and politics committee, which include representatives of the police, security, procuratorate, and courts, had the authority to review and influence court operations at all levels of the judiciary; in some cases the committee altered decisions. Party and political leaders were known to instruct courts and judges on the handling of individual cases. People's congresses also had authority to alter court decisions, but this happened rarely. Corruption often influenced judicial decision-making and safeguards against corruption were vague and poorly enforced (see section 3). The people's congresses appointed judges at the corresponding level of the judicial structure. Judges received their court finances and salaries from those government bodies and could be replaced by them. This sometimes resulted in local authorities exerting undue influence over the judges they appointed and financed.

The SPC is the highest court, followed in descending order by the higher, intermediate, and basic people's courts. These courts handle criminal, civil, and administrative cases, including appeals of decisions by police and security officials to use reeducation through labor and other forms of administrative detention. There were special courts for handling military, maritime, and railway transport cases.

Trial Procedure

Trials took place before a judge, who was often accompanied by "people's assessors," lay persons hired by the court to assist in decision-making. According to law, people's assessors had authority similar to judges, but in practice they deferred to judges and did not exercise an independent jury-like function.

There was no adversary system, no presumption of innocence, and judges and prosecutors typically used an inquisitorial style of questioning the defendant, who was often the only witness. The law affords no right to remain silent, no protection against double jeopardy, and no law governing the type of evidence that may be introduced.

The mechanism that allows defendants to confront their accusers was inadequate; according to one expert, only 1 to 5 percent of trials involved witnesses. Accordingly, most criminal trials consisted of the prosecutor reading statements of witnesses who neither the defendant nor his lawyer had an opportunity to question. Defense attorneys had no authority to compel witnesses to testify or to mandate discovery, although they could apply for access to government-held evidence relevant to their case. In practice, pretrial access to information was minimal and the defense often lacked adequate opportunity to prepare for trial.

The law gives most suspects the right to seek legal counsel shortly after their initial detention and interrogation, although police often circumvented defendants' right to seek counsel. Individuals who faced administrative detention were not granted the right to seek legal counsel. Government-employed lawyers were often reluctant to represent defendants in politically sensitive cases and defendants frequently found it difficult to find an attorney. In some sensitive cases, lawyers had no pretrial access to their clients, and defendants and lawyers were not allowed to speak during trials. In practice criminal defendants often were not assigned an attorney until a case was brought to court. Even in nonsensitive criminal trials, only one of every seven defendants had legal representation, according to credible reports citing internal government statistics.

Although the government did not publish a conviction rate, more than 98 percent of defendants whose cases were closed in 2004 were sentenced to criminal punishment; less than 0.5 percent of all defendants were found not guilty. In many politically sensitive trials, which rarely lasted more than several hours, the courts handed down guilty verdicts immediately following proceedings. Defendants who refused to acknowledge guilt often received harsher sentences than those who confessed. There was an appeals process, but appeals rarely resulted in reversed verdicts. Appeals processes failed to provide sufficient avenue for review, and there were inadequate remedies for violations of defendants' rights. Nationwide, original verdicts were changed on appeal in only 0.34 percent of all cases, including capital cases.

SPC regulations require all trials to be open to the public, with certain exceptions, such as cases involving state secrets, privacy, and minors. The legal exception for cases involving state secrets was used to keep politically sensitive proceedings closed to the public and in some cases even to family members. Under the regulations, foreigners with valid identification are allowed the same access to trials as citizens, but in practice foreigners were permitted to attend court proceedings by invitation only. As in past years, foreign diplomats and journalists sought permission to attend a number of trials only to have court officials reclassify them as "state secret" cases, fill all available seats with security officials, or otherwise close them to the public. Some trials were broadcast, and court proceedings were a regular television feature. A few courts published their verdicts on the Internet.

The government still had not implemented recommendations from the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention's 1997 visit, and the issues identified in 1997 continued to be serious problems. First, the law lacks a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Second, it fails to define "endangering national security," so overly broad prosecutions could and did occur. Third, the law includes no protection for those peacefully exercising rights protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Fourth, there is no real judicial control of the reeducation-through-labor system. During a return 2004 visit, the Working Group noted that the government announced plans to address deficiencies in reeducation through labor and regulate the use of psychiatric institutions in administrative detention through legislation, but there was no action on such legislation during the year.

The government offered limited legal aid and reduced fees for poor litigants. According to the Ministry of Justice, during the year 433,965 litigants in 253,665 cases received legal aid, up 48 percent and 33 percent, respectively, from the previous year. The four thousand government lawyers providing legal aid remained inadequate to meet demand. Nonattorney legal advisors and government employees provided the only legal aid options in many areas. According to government statistics, 10,458 employees provided legal aid at 3,023 legal aid institutions. New regulations required law firms and private attorneys to provide some legal aid. Criminal and administrative cases remained eligible for legal aid, although the vast majority of defendants still went to trial without a lawyer. During 2004 courts waived over $130 million (RMB 1.09 billion) in litigation costs.

Police and prosecutorial officials often ignored the due process provisions of the law. The lack of due process was particularly egregious in death penalty cases. There were over 60 capital offenses, including nonviolent financial crimes such as counterfeiting currency, embezzlement, and corruption. Executions were often carried out on the date of conviction. The SPC reported that in 2004 it reviewed 400 serious criminal cases, including capital cases, and began the process of taking back from provincial courts the authority to approve all death sentences to ensure that more uniform standards were used (see section 1.a.). From 2003 to October, the SPC rejected 7.2 percent of death sentences it reviewed and changed 22 percent of death penalty verdicts to life imprisonment. The government regarded the number of death sentences it carried out as a state secret. Minors and pregnant women were expressly exempt from the death sentence, although in the past the government executed a few criminals who were under age 18 at the time they committed an offense.

During the year lawyers, law professors, legal journals, and jurists held seminars and publicly debated systemic legal reform.

Courts lacked the independence and authority to rule on the constitutionality of laws. In December a law was enacted permitting any organization or individual to question laws and regulations they believe contradict the constitution. Under the new law, a constitutional challenge first requires consultation with the body drafting the questioned regulation and allows only an appeal to the NPC. During the year lawyers saw little opportunity to use the constitution in litigation.

Some lawyers who tried to defend their clients aggressively faced serious intimidation and abuse by police and prosecutors, and some were detained. According to Article 306 of the Criminal Law, defense attorneys can be held responsible if their clients commit perjury, and prosecutors and judges have wide discretion in determining what constitutes perjury. According to the All-China Lawyers Association, since 1997 more than 500 defense attorneys have been detained under Article 306 and similar charges. Although over 80 percent were ultimately acquitted, the prosecutions had a chilling effect on attorneys' willingness to handle controversial defense cases. In 1990 Beijing attorneys handled an annual average of 2.64 criminal cases; by 2000, the figure had dropped to 0.78. Nationwide, attorneys handled an average of only 0.72 criminal cases in 2004.

Harassment and detention of defense attorneys continued during the year. In February, Shanghai defense attorney Guo Guoting had his law license suspended and ultimately fled the country. His suspension came only days before the trial of journalist Shi Tao, whom Guo had agreed to defend against charges of leaking state secrets (see section 2.a.). The attorney who replaced Guo handling Shi's defense was unwilling to enter a not guilty plea on Shi's behalf. Guo previously defended several controversial clients, including forced eviction victims in Shanghai and their legal advisor Zheng Enchong. Zheng was sentenced in 2003 to three years' imprisonment for providing state secrets to overseas entities. After Zheng won a human rights award from the German Association of Judges in December, security officials harassed those who represented Zheng at the awards ceremony and prevented his wife from visiting him in prison.

In May Beijing attorney Zhu Jiuhu was detained in Shaanxi Province and held for four months after meeting with clients protesting land seizures involving private oil fields. Zhu was charged with unlawful assembly based on a meeting he had with his clients (see section 2.b.). The Beijing Bar Association made several unsuccessful attempts to secure Zhu's release, and attorneys hired by the bar association were refused access to him on several occasions. One of the attorneys defending Zhu, Gao Zhisheng, had his law license suspended later in the year. Zhu was released in September, but several of his clients remained detained. Among those clients, the leading organizer of the oil field protests, Feng Bingxian, was tried in December for instigating "mass social disorder" and sentenced to three years' imprisonment. The chief prosecutor at Feng's trial was part of a government working group investigating the seizure of the private oil fields and had been sued by Feng in a civil lawsuit. The prosecutor refused to stand down amid charges of conflict of interest.

In September blind legal activist Chen Guangcheng, who publicized family planning (see section 1.f.) and other abuses by local officials in Linyi City, Shandong Province, was detained in Beijing and held for four days before being forced to return to Shandong and placed under house arrest. Local officials physically abused Chen on several occasions after he tried to file lawsuits objecting to the abuses by local officials, including those involving family planning and police abuse of power. Attorneys and law professors who rallied to defend Chen were threatened with retaliation, including dismissal from university posts. In October local authorities and hired thugs beat attorneys Xu Zhiyong and Li Fanping when they tried to meet Chen at his home. Other attorneys attempting to appear in court on lawsuits Chen initiated were detained and forced to leave town. Chen remained under a form of house arrest at year's end, and the central government took no action.

In September authorities detained writer Guo Feixiong, an employee of the Gao Zhisheng law firm, as he was helping villagers attempt to recall the elected village head of Taishi, Guangdong Province. He was charged with gathering a crowd to disturb social order and held until December 29 (see section 2.b.). In December two attorneys assisting the Taishi villagers, Guo Yan and Tang Jingling, were fired by their law firms, allegedly due to government pressure.

In November the Beijing justice department closed the law firm of defense attorney Gao Zhisheng and suspended his license for one year. Authorities claimed Gao's suspension was due to his refusal to retract an open letter he wrote to Hu Jintao in October condemning abuse of Falun Gong practitioners. He was suspended shortly before the sentencing of another controversial client, house Christian pastor Cai Zhuohua (see section 2.c.). After Gao continued to fight his suspension, security officials rammed his car and threatened his life. Gao was detained, questioned, and released on several occasions.

Political Prisoners

Government officials continued to deny holding any political prisoners, asserting that authorities detained persons not for their political or religious views, but because they violated the law; however, the authorities continued to confine citizens for reasons related to politics and religion. Tens of thousands of political prisoners remained incarcerated, some in prisons and others in reeducation-through-labor camps and other forms of administrative detention. The government did not grant international humanitarian organizations access to political prisoners.

Western NGOs estimated that approximately 500 persons remained in prison for the repealed crime of "counterrevolution," and thousands of others were serving sentences under the state security law, which Chinese authorities stated covers crimes similar to counterrevolution. Persons detained for counterrevolutionary offenses included labor activist Hu Shigen; Inner Mongolian activist Hada; and dissidents Yu Dongyue, Zhang Jingsheng, and Sun Xiongying. Foreign governments urged the government to review the cases of those charged before 1997 with counterrevolution and to release those who had been jailed for nonviolent offenses under the old statute. During the year the government held expert-level discussions with foreign officials on conducting such a review, but no formal review was initiated. However, a number of "counterrevolutionary" prisoners were released during the year, some after receiving sentence reductions. Editor Chen Yanbin, who received a sentence reduction several years ago, was released on April 12 after spending more than 14 years in prison. The government maintained that counterrevolutionary prisoners were eligible for parole and early release on an equal basis with other non-counterrevolutionary prisoners but provided no evidence to support this assertion.

The reeducation-through-labor system allows nonjudicial panels of police and local authorities, called labor reeducation committees, to sentence persons to up to three years in prison-like facilities. The committees can also extend an inmate's sentence for an additional year. Defendants were legally entitled to challenge reeducation-through-labor sentences. They could appeal for a reduction in, or suspension of, their sentences; however, appeals rarely were successful. Many other persons were detained in similar forms of administrative detention, known as "custody and education" (for prostitutes and their clients) and "custody and training" (for minors who committed crimes). Li Guoqing was detained for three months in a forced drug rehabilitation center in Pingdingshan, Henan Province. Published reports said Li was given electric shocks until he signed a confession saying he took drugs and was then incarcerated at the center. A special form of reeducation center was used to detain Falun Gong practitioners who had completed terms in reeducation through labor, but whom authorities decided to continue detaining.

Amnesty International has identified more than 80 persons by name all of who remained imprisoned or on medical parole for their participation in the 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations; other NGOs estimated that as many as 200 persons remained in prison for political activities connected to the demonstrations.

The authorities granted early release from prison to Uighur businesswoman Rebiya Kadeer in March. Many others, including journalists Zhao Yan, Shi Tao and Jiang Weiping; Internet writers Yang Zili and Xu Wei; labor activists Yao Fuxin and Xiao Yunliang; China Democracy Party cofounder Qin Yongmin; political dissident Yang Jianli; family planning whistleblower Chen Guangcheng; Su Zhimin and other underground Catholic Bishops; house Christian activists Zhang Rongliang, Cai Zhuohua, Liu Fenggang and Xu Yonghai; Uighurs Tohti Tunyaz and Dilkex Tilivaldi; Tibetans Jigme Gyatso, Tenzin Deleg, and Gendun Choekyi Nyima; and Inner Mongolian cultural activist Hada remained imprisoned or under other forms of detention during the year. Political prisoners generally benefited from parole and sentence reduction at significantly lower rates than ordinary prisoners.

Criminal punishments could include "deprivation of political rights" for a fixed period after release from prison, during which the individual is denied the already limited rights of free speech and association granted to other citizens. Former prisoners also sometimes found their status in society, ability to find employment, freedom to travel, and access to residence permits and social services severely restricted. Former political prisoners and their families frequently were subjected to police surveillance, telephone wiretaps, searches, and other forms of harassment, and some encountered difficulty in obtaining or keeping employment and housing (see section 1.f.).

f. Arbitrary Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence

The law states that the "freedom and privacy of correspondence of citizens are protected by law"; however, the authorities often did not respect the privacy of citizens in practice. Although the law requires warrants before law enforcement officials can search premises, this provision frequently was ignored; moreover, the Public Security Bureau and the Procuratorate could issue search warrants on their own authority without judicial consent, review, or consideration. Cases of forced entry by police officers continued to be reported.

During the year authorities monitored telephone conversations, facsimile transmissions, e-mail, text messaging, and Internet communications. Authorities also opened and censored domestic and international mail. The security services routinely monitored and entered residences and offices to gain access to computers, telephones, and fax machines. All major hotels had a sizable internal security presence, and hotel guestrooms were sometimes bugged and searched for sensitive or proprietary materials.

Some citizens were under heavy surveillance and routinely had their telephone calls monitored or telephone service disrupted. The authorities frequently warned dissidents and activists, underground religious figures, former political prisoners, and others whom the government considered to be troublemakers not to meet with foreigners. During the year police ordered many such citizens not to meet with foreign journalists or diplomats, especially before sensitive anniversaries, at the time of important government or party meetings, and during the visits of high-level foreign officials. Security personnel also harassed and detained the family members of political prisoners, including following them to meetings with foreign reporters and diplomats, and urging them to remain silent about the cases of their relatives. Family members of prisoners were discouraged or prevented from meeting with the UN special rapporteur for torture.

Forced relocation because of urban development continued, and in some locations, increased during the year. Protests over relocation terms or compensation, some of which included thousands of participants, were common, and some protest leaders were prosecuted during the year (see sections 2.b. and 3). Some evictions in Beijing were linked to construction for the 2008 Olympics. In rural areas, relocation for major state projects, such as dams, and for commercial development resulted in the forced relocation of millions of persons.

The country's birth planning policies retained harshly coercive elements in law and practice. The laws restrict the rights of families to choose the number of children they have and the period of time between births. The penalties for violating the law are strict, leaving some women little choice but to abort pregnancies. In addition implementation of the policy by local officials resulted in serious violations of human rights. Reports of forced sterilizations and abortions, in violation of the national law, continued to be documented in rural areas.

The law standardizes the implementation of the government's birth limitation policies; however, enforcement varied significantly from place to place. The law grants married couples the right to have one birth and allows eligible couples to apply for permission to have a second child if they meet conditions stipulated in local and provincial regulations. Many provincial regulations require women to wait four years or more after their first birth before making such an application. According to the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the spacing requirement was removed in 5 and relaxed in 10 of the 30 counties across 30 provinces participating in UNFPA's "Fifth Country Program." The law requires couples that have an unapproved child to pay a "social compensation fee," which sometimes reached 10 times a person's annual income, and grants preferential treatment to couples who abide by the birth limits. Although the law states that officials should not violate citizens' rights, these rights, as well as penalties for violating them, are not clearly defined. The law provides significant and detailed sanctions for officials who help persons evade the birth limitations.

Social compensation fees are set and assessed at the local level. The law requires family planning officials to obtain court approval before taking "forcible" action, such as confiscation of property, against families who refuse to pay social compensation fees. However, in practice this requirement was not always followed.

The one-child limit was more strictly applied in the cities, where only couples meeting certain conditions (e.g., both parents are only children) were permitted to have a second child. In most rural areas (including towns of under 200 thousand persons), which included approximately two-thirds of the country's population, the policy was more relaxed, generally allowing couples to have a second child if the first was a girl or had a disability. Central government policy formally prohibits the use of physical coercion to compel persons to submit to abortion or sterilization, although reports of physical coercion to meet birth targets continued.

Provinces have responsibility to enforce the law through the implementation of regulations. All provincial-level governments except the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) have amended their regulations to conform to the new law. For example, Anhui Province passed a law permitting 13 categories of couples, including coal miners, some remarried divorcees, and some farm couples, to have a second child. Ethnic minorities like the Uighurs and the Tibetans are also allowed more than one child.

Seven provinces--Anhui, Hebei, Heilongjiang, Hubei, Hunan, Jilin and Ningxia--require "termination of pregnancy" if the pregnancy violates provincial family planning regulations. An additional 10 provinces--Fujian, Guizhou, Guangdong, Gansu, Jiangxi, Qinghai, Sichuan, Shanxi, Shaanxi and Yunnan--require unspecified "remedial measures" to deal with out-of-plan pregnancies.

In order to delay childbearing, the law sets the minimum marriage age for women at 20 years and for men at 22 years. It continued to be illegal in almost all provinces for a single woman to have a child. Social compensation fees have been levied on unwed mothers.

The country's population control policy relied on education, propaganda, and economic incentives, as well as on more coercive measures such as the threat of job loss or demotion and social compensation fees. Psychological and economic pressures were very common. According to provincial regulations, the fees ranged from one-half to 10 times the average worker's annual disposable income. Those who violated the child limit policy by having an unapproved child or helping another to do so faced disciplinary measures such as job loss or demotion, loss of promotion opportunity, expulsion from the party (membership in which was an unofficial requirement for certain jobs), and other administrative punishments, including in some cases the destruction of property. In the case of families that already had two children, one parent was often pressured to undergo sterilization. These penalties sometimes left women with little practical choice but to undergo abortion or sterilization. There were several rewards for couples who adhered to birth limitation laws and policies, including monthly stipends and preferential medical and educational benefits. The National Population and Family Planning Commission (NPFPC) expanded a number of programs to encourage smaller families. For example, new pension benefits were made available nationwide for those who adhered to birth limitation laws.

The law states that Family Planning Bureaus will conduct pregnancy tests on married women and provide them with unspecified "follow-up" services. Some provincial regulations provide for fines if women do not undergo periodic pregnancy tests. For example, in Hebei the range was $25 to $62 (RMB 200 to 500), and in Henan it was $6 to $62 (RMB 50 to 500).

Officials at all levels remained subject to rewards or penalties based on meeting the population goals set by their administrative region. There continued to be sporadic reports of violations of citizens' rights by local officials attempting to reduce the number of births in their region. The most egregious reports occurred in Linyi, Shandong Province. International press reports alleged that some 130 thousand persons were detained by local officials in "population schools" to force them or their relatives to submit to abortions or sterilization procedures. Local officials profited from this illegal system by charging fees, according to media reports. At least seven thousand people were forcibly sterilized. Local rights activists documented several cases of forced late-term abortions. According to law, citizens may sue officials who exceed their authority in implementing birth-planning policy. Legal activist Chen Guangcheng remained under investigation and house arrest as a result of his work exposing the abuses in Linyi (see section 1.e.). Use of population schools as detention centers was reported in 2004 in Anhui Province.

A subsequent NPFPC investigation revealed that local officials in Linyi had violated the law. Some officials were removed from office. The NPFPC announced it would take steps to enhance the rule of law and safeguard the rights of citizens. However, promotions for local officials still depended in part on meeting population targets.

Laws and regulations forbid the termination of pregnancies based on the sex of the fetus, but because of the intersection of birth limitations with the traditional preference for male children, particularly in rural areas, many families used ultrasound technology to identify female fetuses and terminate these pregnancies (see section 5). The most recent official figures put the overall male to female sex ratio at birth at 116.9 to 100 (compared with the statistical norm of 106 to 100), and in some parts of the country, the ratio was even more skewed. For second births, the national ratio was 151.9 to 100. During the year the NPFPC expanded programs to raise awareness of the sex ratio imbalance and to improve protection of the rights of girls.

Section 2 Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:

a. Freedom of Speech and Press

The law provides for freedom of speech and of the press, although the government generally did not respect these rights in practice. The government interpreted the CCP's "leading role," as mandated in the constitution, as circumscribing these rights. The government continued to threaten, arrest, and imprison many individuals for exercising rights to free expression. Internet essayists and journalists in particular were targeted, including Hunan writer Shi Tao and New York Times employee Zhao Yan. The government continued to control print, broadcast, and electronic media tightly and used them to propagate government views and CCP ideology. Such controls tightened during the year, and new regulations made it increasingly difficult to express views that differed from those authorized by the government on the Internet, through broadcast media and in print. Media outlets received regular guidance from the Central Propaganda Department listing topics that should not be covered, including politically sensitive topics. All media employees were under explicit orders to follow CCP directives and guide public opinion. These measures greatly restricted the freedom of journalists and Internet writers to report the news and led to a high degree of self-censorship.

The scope of permissible private speech continued to expand. Political topics could be discussed privately and in small groups without punishment, and minor criticisms of the government were common topics of daily speech. So long as the speaker did not publish views that challenged the Communist Party or disseminate such views to overseas audiences, the range of permissible topics for private speech continued to grow. However, public speeches, academic discussions, and speeches at meetings or in public forums covered by the media remained circumscribed. Those who aired views that disagreed with the government's position on controversial topics risked punishment ranging from disciplinary action at government work units to police interrogation and detention. These restrictions and more formal restrictions on freedom of the press and academic freedom had a chilling effect on freedom of speech.

Some citizens continued to speak out and publish on controversial topics, despite the government's restrictions. For example, Ding Zilin and other family members of those killed or missing at the 1989 Tiananmen demonstration wrote an open letter to legislators seeking an official reassessment of the verdict condemning the protests, including rehabilitation of recently deceased former Party Secretary Zhao Ziyang. Guangzhou Professor Ai Xiaoming wrote an open letter to Hu Jintao protesting the beating of villagers, including the elderly, in Taishi, Guangdong Province (see sections 2.b. and 4). Afterwards, Ai was reportedly beaten and threatened. In November Huang Jingao, party secretary of Lianjiang County, Fujian Province, was sentenced to life in prison for writing a 2004 open letter critical of endemic corruption. Li Changqing, a journalist from Fuzhou who helped Huang write the open letter, was detained and charged with subversion. Lawyer Gao Zhisheng wrote an open letter criticizing the persecution of Falun Gong, resulting in the suspension of his license to practice law (see section 1.d.).

Journalists who reported on topics that met with the government's or local authorities' disapproval continued to suffer harassment, detention, and imprisonment.

In July courts rejected an appeal by two editors from Guangdong Province's Southern Metropolitan Daily newspaper, despite receiving a petition from over 2,300 Chinese journalists claiming that conviction of the two editors on corruption charges in 2004 was punishment for the newspaper's muckraking news coverage. Yu Huafeng continued to serve an eight-year sentence on charges of embezzlement, and former editor Li Minying was serving a six-year sentence on bribery charges. The newspaper's editor-in-chief Cheng Yizhong, who was imprisoned for five months in 2004 on similar charges, which were subsequently dropped, was not allowed to travel abroad to accept a UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) press freedom award. Other journalists who remained in prison included Liaoning Province anticorruption reporter Jiang Weiping, Jiangsu Province journalist Huang Jinqiu, and Hunan Province journalist and Internet writer Shi Tao. During the year 32 journalists and Internet writers were imprisoned.

Detention of journalists and Chinese employees working for foreign media outlets increased concern that the government was attempting to intimidate foreign correspondents and newspapers. In April Hong Kong-born journalist Cheng Xiang (more commonly known as Ching Cheong) of the Singapore Straits Times was detained and charged with espionage. NGOs reported he was detained while researching a story about former leader Zhao Ziyang, while the government claimed he accepted money from overseas intelligence groups. In August security officials detained and questioned a Chinese employee of the Washington Post. The employee was released the same day. In November two Hong Kong journalists were harassed and expelled after attempting to interview Lin Mu, a secretary to former premier Hu Yaobang. New York Times employee Zhao Yan remained jailed without trial after being detained in September 2004 and later formally charged with fraud and leaking state secrets. Zhao Yan's detention came shortly after the newspaper published an article correctly forecasting the resignation of Jiang Zemin as chairman of the CMC. The newspaper denied that Zhao provided any information about Jiang's retirement. A handwritten note by Zhao that prosecutors highlighted as the key incriminating evidence said nothing about Jiang.

In addition to criminal prosecution of writers, some government officials used civil lawsuits and other punishments to intimidate authors and block controversial writings. In April writer Li Jianping was detained in Zibo, Shandong Province, for posting articles critical of the CCP on foreign Web sites. Originally charged with libel, he has since been formally arrested on subversion charges. There was still no verdict from the August 2004 libel trial of Anhui Province authors Chen Guidi and Wu Chuntao over their book China Peasant Survey (Nongmin Diaocha). The book, a best seller until it was banned, describes abuse and extortion of farmers by local officials, one of whom sued the authors and their publishing house for libel. Scholars and attorneys stated that the lawsuit and high damages sought of approximately $25 thousand (RMB 200 thousand) were intended to intimidate the publisher and inhibit criticism.

The government continued to close publications and punish journalists for printing material deemed too sensitive. In March Xiao Weibin, who in 2004 was dismissed as editor of Tongzhou Gongjin magazine, was stripped of his post as a member of the Guangdong Province Political Consultative Congress during the year. Zhang Jian, a reporter for the Legal Daily who in 2004 wrote about the beating death of bible distributor Jiang Zongxiu, was sanctioned by his work unit. In December three Beijing News editors, Yang Bin, Sun Xuedong and Li Duoyu, were fired. To protest the firing, over 100 of the newspaper's journalists held a brief work boycott. Published reports said the editors were fired because of the newspaper's reporting on controversial events, including a land protest in Shengyou, Hebei Province (see section 2.b.).

Newspapers could not report on corruption without government and party approval, although authorities approved reports about some high-profile cases. Publishers printed such material at their own risk. During the year journalists and editors who exposed corruption scandals frequently faced problems with the authorities. The 10-year sentence meted out to journalist Shi Tao in April was seen as a form of retaliation for Shi's past work exposing corruption in Hunan and Shanxi Provinces, according to published reports.

Propaganda authorities also restricted reporting about public protests (see section 2.c.). In December media were banned from reporting on an incident in Dongzhou, Guangdong Province, in which police fatally shot at least three protesters in a land dispute. Domestic and foreign reporters were also blocked from traveling to the area. Earlier in the year, authorities blocked reporting and prevented journalists from covering protests that turned violent, including July and August protests over the recall of the village chief in Guangdong's Taishi village and a May protest in Hebei Province's Shengyou village over a land dispute that left six dead and dozens injured.

Officials continued to censor and ban some reporting on labor, health, and environmental crises. In November local and central government authorities withheld information for several days about a toxic chemical spill into the Songhua River. Reporting was restricted and Web site comments were blocked concerning several fatal mining accidents (see section 6.e.). In August Henan Commercial News was closed for a month, and its editor was forced to resign after it publicized the government practice of paying journalists not to write about controversial stories. The article described how local officials paid journalists from $25 to $1,250 (RMB 201 to RMB 10,075) not to report about a coal mine accident. It claimed the practice was a common one and that journalists from Xinhua and large media outlets were paid more than local journalists for not reporting such events.

Transparency in the health sector improved compared with the government's cover up of the initial Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak in 2003. Central government officials pledged to promptly report cases of avian flu but acknowledged that local authorities did not promptly report some cases. International observers acknowledged that transparency had improved with regard to avian influenza but expressed concern about delays in reporting some human and animal cases. Some academics were unable to publish results of independent research into contagious disease cases. In September authorities announced that the number of people who died in natural disasters would no longer be considered a state secret and presumably could be reported by media.

There were a few privately funded print publications but no privately owned television or radio stations or Internet portals. The censorship process for private and government media continued to shift so that censors relied mostly on self-censorship and, in a few cases, post-publication sanctions. Nonetheless, the Central Propaganda Department continued to list areas that were off limits to media, and the government maintained authority to approve all programming.

Government-approved publishing houses were the only organizations legally permitted to print books. The State Press and Publications Administration (PPA) controlled all licenses to publish. No newspaper, periodical, book, audio, video, or electronic publication may be printed or distributed without the PPA and relevant provincial publishing authorities' approval of both the printer and distributor. Individuals who attempted to publish without government approval faced imprisonment, fines, confiscation of their books, and other sanctions. The CCP exerted control over the publishing industry by preemptively classifying certain topics as off-limits; selectively rewarding with promotions and perks those publishers, editors, and writers who adhered to CCP guidelines; and punishing with administrative sanctions and blacklisting those who did not.

Underground printing houses were targets of periodic campaigns to stop all illegal publications (including pornography and pirated computer software and audiovisual products).

Many intellectuals and scholars exercised self-censorship, anticipating that books or papers on political topics would be deemed too sensitive to be published. Overt intervention by the PPA, which was responsible for all printing and distribution in the country, and by the Party Central Propaganda Department, which provides editorial guidelines for all media, mostly occurred after publication. In November Christian pastor Cai Zhuohua was sentenced to three years in prison on charges related to his unapproved publication of religious literature (see section 2.c.). Sichuan Province scholar Wang Yi filed suit to reclaim hundreds of books he wrote that were confiscated by authorities.

In past years officials reportedly destroyed Uighur books on the grounds that Uighur groups used art and literature to distort historical fact and advocate ethnic separatism. Uighur writers and editors, including the editor of the Kashgar Literature Journal Korash Huseyin, were jailed during the year for publishing stories that authorities maintained advocated separatism (see section 5). Authorities continued to ban books containing content they deemed controversial. Among the most notable was Serve the People, a sexually explicit novel that officials said debased Chairman Mao's image and Notes on Party History, which exposed historical incidents that were embellished or purportedly fabricated by the CCP.

The authorities continued to jam, with varying degrees of success, Chinese-, Uighur-, and Tibetan-language broadcasts of the Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Asia (RFA) and the BBC. English-language broadcasts on VOA generally were not jammed. Government jamming of RFA and BBC appeared to be more frequent and effective. Internet distribution of "streaming radio" news from these sources often was blocked. Despite jamming overseas broadcasts, VOA, BBC, RFA, and Radio France International had a large audience, including activists, ordinary citizens, and government officials.

The government prohibited some foreign and domestic films from legally appearing in the country. Television broadcasts of foreign news, largely restricted to hotel and foreign residence compounds, occasionally suffered censorship. Politically sensitive coverage in Chinese, and to a lesser extent in English, suffered more censorship than in other languages. In the south, where television programming from Hong Kong was available, "public service announcements" frequently interrupted news items critical of the government.

In July the State Administration for Radio, Film, and Television announced regulations that banned cooperation between domestic broadcasting companies and foreign broadcasters in producing news content.

The government continued to encourage expanded use of the Internet, while monitoring use and control of content. It also took steps to increase monitoring of the Internet, restricted the information available online, and punished those who violated regulations. In March new regulations required all Web sites in the country to reregister with authorities or be closed. In July authorities required that Web sites operating under pseudonyms be reregistered using the sponsors' real names or face closure. In September the government issued Rules on the Administration of Internet News Information Services to enhance official control of online content. The regulations establish stricter registration procedures for Internet news portals and define information in online bulletin board systems and in text messages as news so that they are subject to the same regulations. In addition the guidelines include new restrictions on some content, specifically a ban against "inciting illegal assemblies, associations, marches, demonstrations, or gatherings that disturb social order." The guidelines also forbid "conducting activities in the name of an illegal civil organization."

The country's Internet control system reportedly employed between 30 thousand and 50 thousand persons and was allegedly the largest in the world. According to a 2002 Harvard University report, the government blocked at least 19 thousand sites during a six-month period and may have blocked as many as 50 thousand. At times the government blocked the sites of some major foreign news organizations, health organizations, educational institutions, Taiwanese and Tibetan businesses and organizations, religious and spiritual organizations, democracy activists, and sites discussing the 1989 Tiananmen massacre.

The number of blocked sites appeared to increase around major political events and sensitive dates. The authorities reportedly began to employ more sophisticated technology enabling the selective blocking of specific content rather than entire Web sites. Such technology was also used to block e-mails containing sensitive content (see section 1.f.). The government generally did not prosecute citizens who received dissident e mail publications, but forwarding such messages to others sometimes did result in detention. Individuals using the Internet in public libraries were required to register using their national identity card. Internet usage reportedly was monitored at all terminals in public libraries.

The Ministry of Information Industry regulated access to the Internet while the Ministries of Public and State Security monitored its use. Regulations prohibit a broad range of activities that authorities interpreted as subversive or as slanderous to the state, including the dissemination of any information that might harm unification of the country or endanger national security. Promoting "evil cults" was banned, as was providing information that "disturbs social order or undermines social stability." Internet service providers (ISPs) were instructed to use only domestic media news postings, record information useful for tracking users and their viewing habits, install software capable of copying e-mails, and immediately end transmission of so-called subversive material. Many ISPs practiced extensive self-censorship to avoid violating broadly worded regulations. According to a 2003 study by Reporters Without Borders of messages deemed to have "controversial content," only 30 percent were allowed onto Chinese "chat rooms." The site host filtered out or removed the remaining 70 percent.

Several individuals were jailed for their Internet writing during the year. Perhaps most notable was the 10-year sentence meted out to Hunan Province journalist Shi Tao in April for disclosing state secrets. According to the verdict in Shi's case, police searched his e-mail files and found that Shi had described to an overseas Internet discussion forum a propaganda department directive barring Chinese media from covering the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen massacre. That directive, widely circulated to Chinese journalists, was deemed a state secret. Shi had previously written extensively about corruption for Contemporary Trade News, and his jailing was also viewed as retaliation for such reporting. His attorney was jailed days before Shi's March 11 trial, and a substitute attorney entered a guilty plea on Shi's behalf.

Internet essayist Zhang Lin was detained in January and convicted in July on charges of endangering national security. The primary evidence against Zhang consisted of excerpts from 192 articles he posted online, including the words to a rock music song. Zhang was detained immediately upon returning from Beijing to mourn China's Tiananmen-era Premier Zhao Ziyang. Zhang used the country's constitutional guarantee of free expression in his defense, but was convicted and sentenced to five years in prison. He began a hunger strike in September.

Tsewangnorbu, a webmaster for a Web site run by the Snow Country Tibetans, was not heard from after Gansu Province security authorities shut down the Web site March 25, according to NGOs. His whereabouts remained unknown. In July, Internet writer and poet Zheng Yichun was sentenced to seven years in prison in Liaoning Province for inciting subversion. Evidence against him consisted of 63 articles and several essays he wrote calling for political reform, greater economic freedom and the end of imprisonment of writers. In December an intermediate court rejected Zheng's appeal. In October, Shi Xiaoyu was reportedly detained in Zhejiang Province after writing about labor disputes online. His status at year's end was unknown.

In April cyber dissident Yan Jun was released in Xian after serving a two-year sentence. Yan reportedly fled to Taiwan after his release. In June cyber dissident Huang Qi was released after serving his full five-year term for running a Web site discussing the 1989 Tiananmen massacre. Upon release he was supervised and his movements restricted. Some who supported Huang during his imprisonment, including previously detained university Internet essayist Liu Di, continued to suffer harassment and house arrest around sensitive political occasions. In August Shanghai petitioner activist Ma Yalian was released from a reeducation camp, where she had been held after posting articles online stating that individuals were committing suicide in front of government petitioning offices.

The government continued its efforts to get companies to sign a "Public Pledge on Self Discipline for China's Internet Industry." More than 300 companies had signed the pledge, including the popular Sina.com and Sohu.com, as well as foreign-based Yahoo's China division. Those who signed the pledge agreed not to spread information that "breaks laws or spreads superstition or obscenity." They also promised to refrain from "producing, posting, or disseminating pernicious information that may jeopardize state security and disrupt social stability." According to court documents Yahoo provided information to security authorities, including access to private e-mail accounts, used in the prosecution of journalist Shi Tao for leaking state secrets,. The company said it was required to provide the information under national law and customs. In December Microsoft deleted a blog reporting on the firing of journalists and a controversial strike at the Beijing News, stating that it did so at the government's request

The China Internet Association adopted a "self-regulatory pledge" for search engine services in 2004 that was viewed by many as even more strict than the government's self discipline pledge.

At year's end the China Internet Network Information Center reported that more than half of the country's 111 million Internet users had broadband access to the Internet, up 50 percent from the previous year. As of 2002 the country had more than two hundred thousand licensed Internet cafes, as well as a number of unlicensed ones. A campaign to crack down on illegal Internet cafes resulted in the closure of more than 12,575 venues during the last three months of 2004. Under regulations passed in 2004, Internet cafes must install software that allows government officials to monitor customers' Web usage. Internet users at cafes were often subject to surveillance. Most places sporadically enforced regulations requiring patrons to provide identification when using Internet cafes.

In March the government initiated a new campaign to "clean up" Web sites on university campuses. As part of the campaign, popular online bulletin boards at Beijing, Tsinghua and Nanjing Universities were closed. Students held public demonstrations to urge officials to reopen the Web sites. Campus groups supporting gay rights said their Web sites were also closed at the time, and many remained closed later in the year (see section 5). During anti-Japanese demonstrations in April, many university Web sites were closed. Some persons were detained and interrogated for discussing the anti-Japan demonstrations online or distributing e-mails and text messages about the demonstrations.

In 2004 the government announced it would invest nearly $6 million (RMB 49.8 million) to create a new system to control political publications on the Internet. The government also began censoring text messages distributed by mobile telephone in 2004. According to the state-run media, the campaign was designed to stop the spread of pornographic and fraudulent messages by telephone. During the year authorities launched a "strike hard" campaign against illegal text messages. All text messaging service providers were required to install filtering equipment to monitor and delete messages deemed offensive by authorities.

The government did not respect academic freedom and increased controls on political and social discourse at colleges, universities, and research institutes. Scholars and researchers reported varying degrees of control regarding issues they could examine and conclusions they could draw. In April new measures regulating nongovernment research institutes took effect, resulting in the closure of some institutes deemed politically sensitive, including the Unirule Institute run by economist Mao Yushi. Also in April authorities blocked the opening of the Beijing Chinese Citizens' Rights Information Center even though organizers, including recently released dissident Liu Jingsheng, had received the necessary administrative approval. Beijing University professor Jiao Guobiao was suspended indefinitely from teaching after criticizing censorship and ultimately left the university's employment. Law professors were warned not to propose abolition of the reeducation-through-labor system. At least one professor's university threatened him with dismissal because he represented politically sensitive clients. Scholar Xu Zerong remained in prison for "illegally providing state secrets" by sending sensitive reference materials on the Korean War to a contact in Hong Kong. Scholars studying religion reported that the official Protestant church blocked some publications it found objectionable.

University conferences involving foreign and domestic academics were canceled on short notice by authorities who decided the topics at issue were too sensitive. Conferences canceled during the year included those discussing corporate social responsibility, political reform, and the death penalty.

The government continued to use political attitudes as criteria for selecting persons for the few government-sponsored study abroad programs but did not impose such restrictions on privately sponsored students.

Researchers residing abroad also were subject to sanctions from the authorities when their work did not meet with official approval.

b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association

The law provides for freedom of peaceful assembly; however, the government severely restricted this right in practice. The law stipulates that such activities may not challenge "party leadership" or infringe upon the "interests of the state." Protests against the political system or national leaders were prohibited. Authorities denied permits and quickly moved to suppress demonstrations involving expression of dissenting political views.

Freedom of Assembly

At times police used excessive force against demonstrators. Demonstrations with political or social themes were often broken up quickly and violently. The vast majority of demonstrations during the year concerned land disputes, housing issues, industrial, environmental, and labor matters, and other economic and social concerns. During the year over 87 thousand "public order disturbances" were reported, according to government statistics, up 6.6 percent from 2004. Some of these demonstrations included thousands of participants. Incidents described as mob violence rose by 13 percent over 2004, according to the Ministry of Public Security, which said that the number of demonstrations continued to grow and protesters were becoming more organized. Land protests involving thousands of residents occurred throughout the year, including violent incidents in Hebei Province's Shengyou village and in Guangdong Province's Nanhai District, Dongzhou and Taishi villages (see section 1.a.). In April thousands of villagers in Zhejiang Province's Huaxi village battled with security thugs in demonstrations over polluting factories, while in October, 10 thousand workers in Chongqing took to the streets to protest corruption surrounding the bankruptcy of a local steel plant.

Authorities detained potential protesters before the June 4 anniversary of the Tiananmen massacre, after the death of former Premier Zhao Ziyang in January, at the time of the NPC session in March, and during the August visit by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour. Dissidents were detained around the time of other sensitive events to head off public demonstrations (see section 1.d.). Labor protests over restructuring of state-owned enterprises' (SOEs) and resulting unemployment continued, as did protests over environmental degradation and major infrastructure projects, such as dams. Protests, some of which included thousands of participants, were also widespread and usually concerned land, housing, and forced evictions. All concerts, sports events, exercise classes, or other meetings of more than 200 persons required approval from public security authorities. In practice much smaller gatherings also ran the risk of being disrupted by authorities.

Large anti-Japanese protests occurred in April in many cities, but the government brought them under control after a few weeks and refused to issue permits for further demonstrations. On December 23, Chongqing-based activist Xu Wenping was sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment for inciting subversion stemming from his role in organizing petitions concerning the anti-Japanese rallies.

The government continued to wage a severe campaign against the Falun Gong movement, but there were no reports of public Falun Gong protests during the year. In many cases Falun Gong practitioners were subject to close scrutiny by local security personnel, and their personal mobility was tightly restricted, particularly at times when the government believed public protests were likely.

Persons petitioning the government continued to face restrictions on their rights to assemble and raise grievances. Hundreds of thousands of petitions were filed each year, according to domestic experts, but only a small fraction received any action by authorities. Most petitions mentioned grievances about land, housing, entitlements, the environment, or corruption. Petitioners largely sought to present their complaints at national and provincial "letters and visits" offices but also targeted foreign embassies and media to bring attention to their complaints.

Petitioners continued to face harassment, detention, and incarceration. According to a published report, in April a petitioner was beaten to death while petitioning in Beijing. In July Shanghai petitioners Yang Weiming and Liang Yuling were detained for protesting the new petition regulations, and petitioner Wang Qiaojuan was sentenced to one year of reeducation. Police said she assaulted them, but eyewitnesses said police beat her for protesting forced evictions and left her bleeding and unconscious. In September Shanghai petition leader Xu Zhenging was tried in connection with his work on forced evictions and his attempt to attend a memorial service for Zhao Ziyang. Over 100 other petitioners, many of whom were Xu's supporters, reportedly were detained shortly after the trial and some were threatened with the possibility of being sent to psychiatric hospitals. Among them was activist Mao Hengfeng, who had been released from a reeducation facility earlier in September. Beijing and provincial officials moved petitioners out of the capital at the time of the March NPC session and again in April just before the new regulations took effect. Some were reportedly sent to psychiatric facilities.

In December 2004 Beijing-based petitioner leader Ye Guozhu was sentenced to four years in prison for attempting to hold a rally to protest forced evictions. He was not permitted to meet with family members or meet with lawyers to file an appeal, and his whereabouts remained unknown.

On May 1, new regulations urging local officials to resolve petitioners' legitimate problems and protect their legitimate rights came into effect. State-run media said that more than 80 percent of petitions were reasonable and could be, but were not, resolved by local governments. The regulations were accompanied by a public relations campaign in which public security chiefs nationwide were urged to meet petitioners face-to-face. Although the regulations banned retaliation against petitioners, reports of retaliation continued. This was partly due to incentives provided to local officials by the central government to prevent petitioners in their regions from raising complaints to higher levels. Incentives included provincial cadre evaluations based in part on the number of petitions from their provinces. This initiative aimed to encourage local and provincial officials to resolve legitimate complaints but also resulted in local officials sending security personnel to Beijing and forcibly returning the petitioners to their home provinces. Such detentions occurred both before and after the enactment of the new regulations and often went unrecorded.

One provision of the new regulations reportedly limits to six the number of petitioner representatives in a single matter. In May Beijing defense attorney Zhu Jiuhu was detained in Shaanxi Province and held for four months after meeting with clients protesting land seizures involving private oil fields. He was charged with illegal assembly because he met with too many petitioner clients at one time. Zhu was ultimately released without charges. One of his clients, investor Feng Bingxian, was sentenced in December to three years in prison on charges of instigating mass social disorder in connection with the protests and other legal efforts to obtain compensation for confiscation of the private oil fields (see section 1.e.).

Freedom of Association

The law provides for freedom of association, but the government restricted this right in practice. CCP policy and government regulations require that all professional, social, and economic organizations officially register with, and be approved by, the government. In practice these regulations prevented the formation of truly autonomous political, human rights, religious, spiritual, labor, and other organizations that might challenge government authority. Implementation of these regulations tightened during the year. As a result, some domestic NGOs were denied registration or deregistered, while other social groups previously registered as for-profit businesses were required to reregister as not-for-profit organizations with government sponsorship (see section 2.a.).

Authorities established a task force during the year to increase scrutiny over NGOs, especially those with links overseas. Published reports said the task force was part of a campaign initiated in response to "color revolutions" in former Soviet republics and aimed to block NGOs from fomenting political change. Security ministries participated in this task force and interrogated representatives of domestic and international NGOs about their activities. International foundations, NGOs involved in social and charitable activities,

and groups dedicated to combating discrimination against women, persons with disabilities, and minorities were targets of the campaign, along with organizations focused on rights issues.

The NGO Empowerment and Rights Institute (EARI), which worked on petitioner issues, appeared to come under particular scrutiny, as its employees were often monitored and its offices raided. During November visits by foreign officials to Beijing, security officials asked EARI Executive Director Zhao Xin to leave Beijing. When Zhao complied with their request and traveled to Sichuan Province, he was beaten severely and had to be hospitalized for several weeks. He claimed police witnessed the beating but took no action, although officials later apologized to him. The group's previous director, Hou Wenzhuo, left the country during the year after being harassed, interrogated and detained by security officials.

No laws or regulations specifically govern the formation of political parties. But the China Democracy Party remained banned, and the government continued to surveil, detain, and imprison current and former CDP members (see section 3).

As in past years, individuals were charged with and often convicted of "disclosing state secrets" after passing information to human rights NGOs based abroad (see sections 1.c. and 2.a.).

According to government statistics, at the end of 2004 there were approximately 153 thousand social organizations, including 1,673 national-level and cross-provincial organizations, 20,563 provincial organizations, 50,424 local and county-level organizations registered with the Ministry of Civil Affairs, and others. NGOs were required to register with the government. To register, an NGO must find a government agency to serve as the NGO's organizational sponsor, have a registered office, and hold a minimum amount of funds. Organizations with social or educational purposes that had previously been registered as private or for-profit businesses reportedly were requested to find a government sponsor and reregister as NGOs during the year (see section 4). Experts estimated that there were over one million unregistered NGOs.

Although the registered organizations all came under some degree of government control, various NGOs were able to develop their own agendas. A number of NGOs had support from foreign secular and religious NGOs, and several were able to undertake limited advocacy roles in public interest areas like women's issues, the environment, health, and consumer rights. According to government guidelines, NGOs must not advocate nonparty rule, damage national unity, or upset ethnic harmony. Groups that disregarded guidelines and unregistered groups that continued to operate could face administrative punishment or criminal charges.

c. Freedom of Religion

The law provides for freedom of religious belief and the freedom not to believe. However, the government sought to restrict religious practice to government-sanctioned organizations and registered places of worship and to control the growth and scope of the activity of religious groups. The government recognized five main religions: Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Protestantism, and Catholicism. A government-affiliated association monitored and supervised the activities of each of these faiths. Membership in these faiths as well as unregistered religious groups grew rapidly. The government tried to control and regulate religious groups, especially groups that were unregistered, to prevent the rise of sources of authority outside the control of the government and the party.

The government's respect for religious freedom remained poor, although the extent of religious freedom continued to vary widely within the country. Freedom to participate in officially sanctioned religious activity continued to increase in most areas. Religious activity grew not only among the five main religions, but also among Korean Christians, Russian Orthodox, and folk religions. Bibles and other religious texts were available in most parts of the country. At the same time, crackdowns against unregistered Protestants and Catholics, Muslim Uighurs, and Tibetan Buddhists (see Tibet Addendum) continued. The government continued its repression of groups that it determined to be "cults" and of the Falun Gong spiritual movement in particular.

All religious venues were required to register with the State Administration for Religious Affairs (SARA) or its provincial or local offices (known as Religious Affairs Bureaus (RABs). SARA and the RABs were responsible for monitoring and judging whether religious activity was "normal" and therefore lawful. SARA and the CCP's united front work department provided policy guidance and supervision over implementation of government regulations on religious activity.

On March 1, new regulations governing religious affairs came into effect. Officials said the regulations were an attempt to bring regulatory practices governing religious affairs within a legal framework. Unlike previous regulations, the new regulations protect the rights of registered religious groups, under certain conditions, to possess property, publish literature, train and approve clergy, and collect donations. Analysts and some government officials said the new regulations would create greater space for lawful religious activity by groups not affiliated with the five main religions. However, critics stated the new regulations merely codify past practices and give authorities broad discretion to define which religious activities are permissible.

The new regulations require religious groups to register places of worship and authorized the government to define what religious activity is "normal" and therefore lawful. Spiritual activities in places of worship that have not registered may be considered illegal and participants can be punished. Government officials stated that private homes where family and friends meet to study the Bible would not be required to register, but venues for formal worship services should be registered, even if such formal worship takes place in a private home. Under the new regulations, clergy need not be approved by the government, but must be reported to the government after being selected pursuant to the rules of the relevant government-affiliated religious association. A national campaign requiring religious groups to register or to come under the supervision of official "patriotic" religious organizations continued during the year. Some groups registered voluntarily, while a number registered under pressure; several groups avoided officials in an attempt to avoid registration, and authorities refused to register others. Various unofficial groups reported that authorities refused them registration without explanation. The government contended that these refusals were mainly the result of failure to meet requirements concerning facilities and meeting spaces. Some religious groups were reluctant to comply with the regulations out of principled opposition to state control of religion or due to fear of adverse consequences if they revealed, as required, the names and addresses of church leaders and members.

A campaign to prevent "foreign infiltration" continued during the year. On July 7, Protestant Pastor Cai Zhuohua, his wife, and two other relatives were convicted of operating an illegal business, stemming from their large-scale publishing of bibles and Christian literature without government approval. Cai and two family members were sentenced to three years, two years, and 18 months in prison, respectively, while a fourth defendant was released after the trial for time served. Reports indicated that Cai and his two codefendants did not file an appeal because they were threatened with longer sentences. The four were detained in September 2004, after authorities seized over 200 thousand volumes of religious literature from a warehouse they owned. According to reliable reports, the central government and CCP officials described the prosecution of Cai as one of the most important cases in the campaign to prevent foreign infiltration under the cover of religion. Other churches, mosques and temples also came under scrutiny because of their contacts with foreign groups.

Local authorities' handling of unregistered religious groups, especially Protestant "house churches," varied widely. In certain regions, government supervision of religious activity was minimal and registered and unregistered Protestant and Catholic churches existed openly side-by-side and were treated similarly by the authorities. In such areas many congregants worshipped in both types of churches; congregants in unregistered churches were also able to procure Bibles at official churches. In some parts of the country, unregistered house churches with hundreds of members met openly, with the full knowledge of local authorities, who characterized the meetings as informal gatherings to pray, sing, and study the Bible. In other areas house church meetings of more than a handful of family members and friends were strictly proscribed. House churches often encountered difficulties when their membership grew, when they arranged for the regular use of facilities for the purpose of conducting religious activities, or when they forged links with other unregistered groups.

Leaders of unauthorized groups were sometimes the target of harassment, interrogation, detention, and physical abuse. Police closed "underground" churches and other places of worship, including some with significant memberships, properties, financial resources, and networks. Local officials destroyed several unregistered places of worship around the country. Authorities particularly targeted unofficial religious groups in locations where there were rapidly growing numbers of unregistered churches, or in places of long-seated conflict between official and unofficial churches, such as with Catholics in Baoding, Hebei Province, or with evangelical underground Protestant groups in Henan Province and elsewhere.

Protestant house churches and their leaders were subject to a selective crackdown in many areas. Authorities frequently disrupted house church meetings and retreats and detained leaders and church members. In May authorities reportedly detained hundreds of house church members from different groups in Jilin Province. In June authorities reportedly held approximately 100 pastors at Henan Province's Qi County detention center after detaining them at religious retreats in the province. On July 1, some 70 Christians were detained administratively in Henan Province's Sui County. On August 2, authorities reportedly abused some of 40 worshippers detained in Hubei Province's Zaoyang City. On August 7, a house church in Hejing County, Xinjiang Province, was reportedly raided and several worshippers were detained. In late September security officials reportedly broke a chest bone of Xinjiang businessman Tong Qimiao while interrogating him about the activities of house churches in Xinjiang. A number of leaders detained in previous years, including Henan Province underground church leader Zhang Rongliang and Beijing-based Christian activists Liu Fenggang, Xu Yonghai, and Yan Haibing, remained in prison or in reeducation-through-labor camps. The government refused to confirm Zhang Rongliang's whereabouts or the charges against him. Xu Yonghai, who had been sentenced to two years in prison, had not been released at year's end although more than two years had passed since his December 2003 arrest. In September house church historian Zhang Yinan, who was detained in 2003, was released from a reeducation-through-labor camp in Pingdingshan County, Henan Province.

Detention of "underground" Catholic bishops, priests, and lay leaders who refused to join the government-approved Chinese Patriotic Catholic Church continued during the year. In April a Vatican spokesman complained of the January detention of Hebei Province Bishop Zhao Zhendong, and the separate March detentions of Zhejiang Province Bishop Lin Xili, Hebei Province priest Zhao Kexun and lay-worker Gao Xinyou. On April 1, Bishop Yao Liang of Xiwanzi in Hebei Province and Father Wang Jinling were detained for a few days prior to the pope's death. Other underground bishops reportedly were kept under heightened surveillance at the same time. In July one such bishop, Jia Zhiguo of Hebei Province, was confined to his home, the sixth time authorities had detained him in an 18-month period. In July Fujian Province police reportedly detained and abused a priest, Lin Daixian, and 10 other Catholics. In November six priests from Zhengding, Hebei Province, were detained. Two of them, Wang Jingshan and Gao Lingshen, were reportedly beaten. Seven underground Catholics from Zhaoxian, Hebei reportedly were detained in late November. Six were released, but priest Gao Baojin remained unaccounted for. In November the Vatican condemned the beating of 16 nuns, one of whom was blinded and another partially paralyzed. The nuns, from an officially recognized church order, were attacked as they attempted to prevent demolition of a Catholic school in Xian.

In Hebei Province, where approximately half of the country's Catholics reside, friction between unofficial Catholics and local authorities continued, as authorities punished many underground priests and believers who refused to join the official Chinese Church. On September 2, priests Pang Yongxing and Ma Yongjiang reportedly were detained for providing religious services to underground Catholics in Hebei Province's Qingyuan County. Reliable sources also reported that Bishop An Shuxin, Bishop Zhang Weizhu, Father Cui Xing, and Father Wang Quanjun remained detained in Hebei Province. According to reliable reports, Bishop An was last seen four years ago. There was no new information about underground Bishop Su Zhimin, who has been unaccounted for since his reported detention in 1997. Reports suggested that he had been held in a government-run guesthouse near Baoding, Hebei Province. The government continued to deny taking coercive measures against him.

The law does not prohibit religious believers from holding public office; however, party membership is required for almost all high-level positions in government, state-owned businesses, and many official organizations. During the year Communist Party officials again stated that party membership and religious belief were incompatible. Government and CCP officials reiterated that religious believers should resign their party membership. The Routine Service Regulations of the People's Liberation Army state explicitly that service members "may not take part in religious or superstitious activities." CCP and PLA personnel have been expelled for adhering to Falun Gong beliefs.

Despite regulations encouraging officials to be atheists, some party officials engaged in religious activity, most commonly Buddhism or a folk religion. The NPC included several religious representatives. NPC Standing Committee vice chairmen included Fu Tieshan, a bishop and vice-chairman of the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association, and Pagbalha Geleg Namgyal, a Tibetan reincarnate lama. Religious groups also were represented in the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, an advisory forum for "multiparty" cooperation and consultation led by the CCP, and in local and provincial governments.

Official religious organizations administered local religious schools, seminaries, and institutes to train priests, ministers, imams, Islamic scholars, and Buddhist monks. Students who attended these institutes had to demonstrate "political reliability," and all graduates must pass an examination on their political as well as theological knowledge to qualify for the clergy. The government permitted registered religions to train clergy and allowed an increasing number of Catholic and Protestant seminarians, Muslim clerics, and Buddhist clergy to go abroad for additional religious studies, but some religion students had difficulty getting passports or obtaining approval to study abroad. In most cases foreign organizations provided funding for such training programs.

Religious organizations of all faiths, including those composed of foreigners, were encouraged to engage in charitable activities and social services. Religious organizations engaged in social services faced obstacles registering with local authorities. These difficulties were similar to those faced by nonreligious NGOs (section 2.b.).

Traditional folk religions such as Fujian Province's "Mazu cult" were still practiced in some locations. They were tolerated to varying degrees, often seen as loose affiliates of Taoism or as ethnic minority cultural practices. However, the government has labeled folk religions "feudal superstition" and sometimes repressed them. SARA established a new administrative division responsible for activities of folk religions and religions outside the main five, including the Russian Orthodox Church and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Buddhists made up the largest body of organized religious believers. The traditional practice of Buddhism continued to expand among citizens in many parts of the country. Tibetan Buddhists in some areas had growing freedom to practice their faith. However, government restrictions remained, particularly in cases in which the government interpreted Buddhist belief as supporting separatism, such as in some Tibetan areas and parts of the Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region. In July emissaries of the Dalai Lama met with government officials, the fourth round of consultations to take place since 2002 (see Tibet Addendum).

Regulations restricting Muslims' religious activity, teaching, and places of worship continued to be implemented forcefully in Xinjiang. Xinjiang authorities used counter terrorism as an excuse for religious repression of Uighur Muslims, as documented in an NGO report released in April (see section 5). Xinjiang authorities often charged religious believers with committing the "three evils" of terrorism, separatism, and Muslim extremism. While targeted at Muslims, this tight control of religion in Xinjiang affected followers of other religions as well.

Authorities continued to prohibit the teaching of Islam to elementary and middle school-age children in some areas, although children studied Arabic and the Koran without restriction in many others. Local officials stated that school-age children may not study religion or enter mosques in Xinjiang. In August a teacher, Aminan Momixi, and over 30 students were reportedly detained for holding Koran study sessions during school vacation. Authorities confiscated their Korans and Muslim textbooks and the government declined to clarify Momixi's status. According to media reports, Xinjiang authorities confiscated religious publications on many other occasions, sometimes detaining those who possessed unapproved religious texts.

Authorities reserved the right to censor imams' sermons. In particular, imams were urged to emphasize the damage caused to Islam by terrorist acts in the name of the religion. Certain Muslim leaders received particularly harsh treatment. In 2000 authorities began conducting monthly political study sessions for religious personnel and the program continued through the year.

According to an overseas organization, 179 practitioners of the Sala order, a local Sufi branch of Islam, were arrested in August following a government ban on the movement. A Xinjiang official denied the existence of the movement but said a separate movement of Islam called Salafism was restricted around the National Day and New Year's holidays due to concerns that followers of the movement supported extremism. In August, 2004 eight Uighur Muslims in Hotan were reportedly charged with endangering state security and scores were detained on charges of engaging in "illegal religious activities." Because of government control of information coming from Xinjiang, such reports were difficult to confirm.

In addition to the restrictions on practicing religion placed on party members and government officials throughout the country, teachers, professors, and university students in Xinjiang were not allowed to practice religion openly.

The government permitted Muslim citizens to make the Hajj to Mecca and in some cases subsidized the journey. More than 10 thousand Chinese Muslims made the Hajj journey during the year, nearly half of them on government-organized delegations. During the year 6,900 Chinese Muslims traveled to Saudi Arabia in preparation for the 2006 Hajj, according to the China Islamic Association.

Media reports stated that authorities confiscated illegal religious publications in Xinjiang. The Xinjiang People's Publication House was the only publisher allowed to print Muslim literature. In addition to national restrictions on party members and government officials' religious practice, teachers, professors, and university students in Xinjiang were not allowed to practice religion openly.

The government and the Holy See have not established diplomatic relations and there was no Vatican representative on the Mainland. The government stated that the role of the pope in selecting bishops, the status of underground Catholic clerics, and Vatican recognition of Taiwan remained obstacles to improved relations.

After the death of Pope John Paul II in April, government and Patriotic Church officials made conciliatory statements but did not send a delegation to the pope's funeral. Official Catholic churches were encouraged to hold masses remembering Pope John Paul II and tens of thousands of residents took part. Official Catholic Churches welcomed Pope Benedict XVI and his picture was displayed prominently in many official and unofficial Catholic venues across the country. The government also minimized historical disputes with the Vatican. Nonetheless, the government rejected the Vatican's invitation to send a delegation of three bishops from the official church and one from the "underground" church to an October synod meeting in Rome.

The government insisted it retains sole power to appoint bishops, but the Vatican has recognized most bishops of the official Catholic Church, either before or after their appointment by the government. In a few cases, the bishop named by the government-affiliated church conflicted directly with the bishop recognized by the Vatican, contributing to tensions between the official and unofficial Catholic churches and between the Vatican and the government. There was friction between some bishops of the Patriotic Church who have been consecrated with secret Vatican