On April 8, two Tibetans, Lobsang Gyaltsen and Loyak, were sentenced to death by the Municipal Intermediate People’s Court in Lhasa.
Both men were convicted of committing arson that caused death against Chinese-owned businesses.
Another two Tibetan activists, Tenzin Phuntsok and Kangtsuk, received suspended death sentences, and a third, Dawa Sangpo, was sentenced by the same court to life imprisonment.
These latest verdicts are the first death sentences to be meted out by Chinese courts to those who took part in protests that swept Lhasa and other Tibetan cities in the spring of last year.
Since these trials took place in complete isolation from the rest of the world, with no impartial observers or foreign journalists present, it is to be doubted, strongly, that the defendants received anything remotely like a fair trial in accordance with international judicial standards.
APPEAL
We therefore appeal to the authorities of the People’s Republic of China to rescind the decision to execute these protesters, and to provide them with an opportunity to be re-tried in a judicial process that is more in keeping with the international standards that China says it adheres to.
The first standard that must be met is that the trial must be verifiable and open to international observation.
Beyond the grim fates of the Tibetans, we are also concerned about the hundreds of other detained protesters who have yet to be tried by the Municipal Court in Lhasa.
Indeed, it is our belief that the recent death sentences could mark the onset of an avalanche of highly doubtful court rulings in Tibet, which could lead to a worrying number of executions in that tense and troubled region.
RESPECT
If China is to gain an international position of respect commensurate with its position in the world economy, as well as to benefit from its rise to pre-eminence among the world economic powers, then it is vital that China’s representatives in Tibet acknowledge the need for due legal process for all of its citizens, including its ethnic minorities.
Tied to that sense of due process of law is a call for the Chinese leadership to allow representatives of the international community to have access to Tibet and its adjoining provinces.
For these provinces have now been, for the most part, cut off from international observation ever since the protests that wracked Tibet last spring.
TRANSPARENT
Only by making its rule in Tibet more transparent for the rest of the world can the government of the People’s Republic of China dispel the dark shadows of suspicion that now hang over Tibet.
Only by allowing an international presence to report, dispassionately and truthfully, on what is happening in Tibet, will China’s government dispel the idea that its continued rule there means that even more severe human rights abuses will be inflicted on members of China’s ethnic minorities.
Vaclav Havel is a former president of the Czech Republic; Prince Hassan Bin Talal is president of the Arab Thought Forum; Desmond Tutu, a Nobel peace prize laureate, is Archbishop Emeritus of Cape Town; Vartan Gregorian is a former president of Brown University and president of the Carnegie Council; and Yohei Sasakawa is a Japanese philanthropist.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS