Last Tuesday Spanish Judge Santiago Pedráz requested authorization from the Chinese Ministry of Justice to investigate eight Chinese leaders, including the Party Secretary of both Xinjiang and Tibet, on charges of mistreatment of minorities, a charge that involves not a single Spanish citizen. In addition to questioning the leaders the judge also wants to visit detention centers and major protest sites within the country to find if the accusation made by certain special interest groups could be proven. All of this is part of Spain's recent efforts to fix the world's problems, an effort known simply as "Universal Jurisdiction".
Xinjiang's Party Secretary Wang Luquan, leader since 1994 and member of China's Politburo, probably won't take much notice to this news. It's not the first international case brought by Spain and a few other countries who have enacted the idea of universal jurisdiction into their law. It matters not if the crimes were committed within their borders or involved their own citizens, in the case of certain types of crimes these courts make an effort to reach beyond their jurisdiction.
Everybody with the exception of the judge himself seems to realize these requests are in vain. Says Pedráz, "Given the cordial relations between our two respective countries, I hope that you will respond favorably to my request." Highly unlikely, my friend, and the more you ask, the less cordial those relations will be. China usually doesn't take kindly to people meddling in "internal affairs".
Spain is also in the process of taking on another high-profile case. The New York Times reported back in March that Spanish courts were beginning to open an investigation against 6 high-profile Bush administration officials, one which also touches on Xinjiang a bit. The allegations? Providing the legal framework to justify Guantanamo Bay where a few of Xinjiang's ethnic Uyghur minority are being held until they can somehow find a home.
I'm glad to see there are countries who care about people outside their own borders but considering these requests and any future rulings have absolutely no effect on the people here in Xinjiang or its leader, what is the reasoning behind universal jurisdiction? Accountability is necessary, for sure, but one country can't do this alone and if the idea is to initiate change then there has to be a better way.
Further Reading:
The Standard in Hong Kong: Judge Aims at Mainland Leadership
AFP (Spanish): Juiz espanhol quer interrogar dirigentes chineses por repressão no Tibete
10 Comments:
I whole-heartedly agree that something needs to be done on a grand scale. But at the same time I find it laughable that just one country thinks it can investigate human rights issues in China. Seriously, who do they think they're kidding? The only result, as you've said, is that China will become more hostile towards Spain and any other country that tries to meddle in its affairs. If only there could be a concentrated, world-wide effort then perhaps something could be done. But until then, I don't expect anything at all. Please keep updating on this issue as I would love to know more as events unfold.
Doesn't Spain have better things to do like their unemployment problem?
I think its courageous for a free democratic society to raise issues and concern on behalf of a race (Tibetan in this case) who have been under tremendous suffering under the Chinese regime. THese people have every right to bring international attention to their cause, and for a judge in Spain to stand firm on his belief, I applaud him!
Spain's principled stance on universal jurisdiction to bring human rights abusers and war criminals to justice anywhere in the world is probably the most important legal work being done anywhere on the planet. That they are practically alone in doing so belies not the pointlessness of the effort but the depth of compromise in most modern "democracies." There is nothing "better to do" for anyone than to defend the world against war criminals and other individuals whom have used their tremendous powers as representatives of state to suppress, injure, torture or kill people, especially in this age of serious rollback of human/civil rights. It's incredibly disappointing that universal jurisdiction hasn't been embraced by more "free" countries, nevertheless, Spain deserves nothing but the highest commendation for their efforts. People deriding this effort, and by dint tacitly approving of the heinous crimes being investigated should seriously think about who will defend them when their human rights come under threat before making their half-baked, blase little comments.
Interesting array of comments. Universal jurisdiction is a highly debatable practice and whether you agree or disagree with Spain, I feel that anybody standing up for the oppressed deserves to be at least recognized.
Stephan, I don't believe that anybody here has been "deriding" their efforts. I merely pointed out that they seem to be knocking on a wall thinking it's a door - it's never going to open.
However, just because an effort is in vain doesn't mean it's not worth the energy. I realize this. I do believe, however, that the right to try cases such as this should not be left in the hands of one country. Right now nobody cares because it's Spain, but if the US had done this same thing people all over the world would be shouting "Who do you think you are, the world police?" That's why we have international organizations, isn't it?
As I said, Spain should stick their nose out from other countries business unless some country did something that is truly heinous act like genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Unfortunately, what this 'universal jurisdiction' doesn't cover that because much of the 'proof' was sent from special interest groups. Besides, before Spain should tell other countries on how to treat their minorities, maybe they should look into themselves on how they treat the Basques.
This judge in Spain is over-reaching by a long shot but maybe his heart is in the right place. But its really a job for the UN - if it had the guts. It could be argued that questioning Chinese policy in Tibet and Xinjiang is not meddling in China's internal affairs. An argument could be made that China is meddling in the internal affairs of Tibet and Xinjiang.
This judge in Spain is over-reaching by a long shot but maybe his heart is in the right place. But its really a job for the UN - if it had the guts. It could be argued that questioning Chinese policy in Tibet and Xinjiang is not meddling in China's internal affairs. An argument could be made that China is meddling in the internal affairs of Tibet and Xinjiang.The flaw in your reasoning is that Tibet and Xinjiang is part of China, so it is considered internal affairs.
After reading this site, it is obvious that the blogger is a CCP apologist. Nice one brother... your site is a thinly vailed farce.
@Anonymous - I appreciate comments on this site, but personal attacks (especially ones by commenters who obviously haven't read my post) are unnecessary. If you care to re-read the article you'll find that I am commenting on Spain's universal jurisdiction policy as opposed to anything about the CCP.
Besides that, I openly reveal my identity on this blog. My name is Josh, not "the blogger" and I live here in Xinjiang. I am proud of this openness but it does leave me vulnerable and therefore I must be careful what is said. If you can't appreciate that then by all means please leave and don't come back.
Post a Comment
Comment Guidelines:
*Comments that do not abide by these guidelines will be deleted*