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.