The Beating of a Butterfly's Wings

Some common misunderstood facts about the Zhenyuan story:

1. It is amazing that the Chinese government allowed this story to be published. Does that not show that they want this kind of corruption revealed?
A: The Chinese government did not allow this story to be published. In mid-June the South City News was told by the government to not publish ANY articles dealing with orphanages, family planning offices, or baby-buying. After two weeks of internal discussion, the newspaper, against the prohibitions of the government, published the story anyway (their account of the decision to rebuke the government by publishing the story can be read here). There is in fact NO evidence that the government is allowing stories about orphanages to be published. In Hunan, the government stopped all reporting shortly after the story broke.

2. How is this story being treated inside China?
A: The original article has been redacted and republished broadly across China, both in print and on TV (as of this writing a Baidu search returns over 250 "hits" on the story). The focus is largely on the abuse by Family Planning officials, although some mention that the story resulted from inquiries by an American adoptive mother. Comments by Chinese residents to these articles range from anger that this story was published, making China lose face, to outrage at the government that allows these perverse policies to continue.

3. Weren't Family Planning officials just doing their jobs?
A: That is certainly how they look at it. The one-child policy is just that, a policy, a goal. There are no stated penalties given for having more than one's quota of children. Thus, Family Planning officials are free to do whatever they want to families -- a dinner at a fancy restaurant, a pig, a hefty fine, the destruction of one's home, the taking of one's child. If any good comes from this story, it will be the formalization of penalties for over-quota children.

4. Did the orphanage director know this was happening, or was he innocent in this story?
The China Daily account indicates that the orphanage "authorities forged documents stating the babies were orphans and adoption fees were split between the orphanage and officials."

5. How common are these stories?
A: In our research of different orphanages across China, we see many blogs of angry citizens like the one that wrote about Zhenyuan. They are found in every Province, in many, many orphanage cities.

UPDATE: The blame-game is starting in Guizhou. The China Daily reports that Provincial Civil Affairs official of Zhenyuan County Luo Qiong Zhen stated: "100% of the kids sent out for adoption are abandoned babies or orphans. If the kids' birth parents report that this is not true, they can complete the forms to retrieve their children."

This statement is contradicted by Tang Jian, officer in the Zhenyuan County Family Planning Control Bureau, who stated: "Were kids taken by force and sent to the orphanage to be adopted internationally? This is totally true."

One of the birth mothers (Yang Shui Ying) reported in the China Daily (that article contains additional information) recounted that as Shi Guang Ying, the Family Planning official, was leaving with her daughter, he turned to her and said, "Don't worry. When your girl is a little bit older the orphanage will send her outside China for adoption." This was meant to placate the birth mother. It didn't.

It appears that the method used by Family Planning was to target the most vulnerable in Zhenyuan -- families whose husbands were away from home working, or who had little money with which to pay the fines. Additionally, they seem to have targeted families with female children rather than male. One of the fathers, Li Ze Ji, whose child was taken by Family Planning while he was in working in Zhejiang Province, angrily responded, "If I had been home when they took my daughter away, I would have killed them!"

July 3, 2009 UPDATE: The South City News has published the story of the Chinese Government's attempted suppression of this story. On June 13, 2009 the paper was ready to run with the story and was told by the Government they were prohibited from publishing any story that deals with orphanages, family planning offices, or baby-buying. After two weeks of deliberation, they modified the story slightly and published it despite this prohibition.

July 4, 2009 UPDATE: Netwerk TV in the Netherlands last night broadcast a segment detailing China's reaction to the investigation last year of the Gaoping Family Planning confiscations. After the Dutch delegation returned from China (where they met with the CCAA) Dutch Justice Minister Levenkamp received a letter from CCAA Director Lu Ying telling them "it is best not to pursue, expand or elaborate on this issue further and to keep [this] secret for related families in order not to interrupt the bond established between the adoptive parents and the children and impose any unnecessary pressure on them." The actual letter will here available soon.

___________________________

A corruption story is building in Guizhou Province, and it started with one adoptive mother asking all the right questions.

Wendy was one of the first adoptive parents to purchase our new birth family reports. Her daughter is from the Zhenyuan SWI in Guizhou Province, a small orphanage by IA standards. Wendy ordered one of our Birth Parent Analysis for her daughter. In this report we alerted Wendy to aggressive family planning tactics being used in Zhenyuan, and pointed her to a Chinese blog that recounted the confiscations of three children found to have been internationally adopted.

Wendy contacted this blogger and began to share information with this individual. This resulted in additional interest from Chinese media, and yesterday a long and in-depth account of the Family Planning abductions was published in Guangzhou. Abbreviated versions have since been picked up by other Chinese and English outlets, including the China.Org, Shanghai Daily, and the South China Morning Post. None of these secondary articles displays the anger and resentment manifested in the original article, and I am hopeful that an English version of the original piece will be published.

The Zhenyuan orphanage has adopted a little over 40 children since 2003, almost all of them apparently brought to the orphanage through Family Planning confiscations. What is peculiar about Zhenyuan is that the orphanage made no attempt to disguise the origin of these children -- the adoption paperwork lists the finding location as the birth parent's home. Thus many of Zhenyuan's adoptive parents have been given a direct line to their child's birth family.

This story is exploding inside China, for one simple reason -- these actions are viewed as a tremendous abuse of power. Families are of course aware that they must register their children, but the law says NOTHING about the government seizing the children of those who violate Family Planning policy. To then learn that their children were "sold" (the Chinese understanding) to foreigners for adoption, and that they would never see them again, has resulted in a fire-storm of controversy.

The circumstances in Zhenyuan are hardly unique. As we analyze the finding ads from all over China we see patterns that indicate this type of practice is taking place in many, many areas. Bloggers in small towns lament the brutal actions of their Family Planning officials. They beg for someone to listen, to do something to make a change. These local citizens have largely been ignored and unseen by anyone.

Until now.

Inside China:
China-wide: http://news.sina.com.cn/s/2009-07-02/080218137623.shtml
http://www.mitbbs.cn/article_t/USANews/31230645.html
http://club.chinaren.com/0/149592969

http://bbs.asuro.cn/read-htm-tid-292443.html
Guangdong: http://gcontent.nddaily.com/d/fb/dfb84a11f431c624/Blog/c79/662656.html#comment_tabs (Original Article)

http://www.mitbbs.cn/article_t/USANews/31230645.html

http://bbs.0668.com/viewthread.php?tid=305065

Sichuan: http://press.idoican.com.cn/detail/articles/20090702141059/

Chongqing: http://www.cqautofan.com/thread-168938-1-1.html

Hong Kong: http://news.ifeng.com/society/5/200907/0701_2579_1228343_1.shtml

In English: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2009-07/03/content_8350349.htm

Outside China:
Spain: http://www.adn.es/sociedad/20090702/NWS-0114-Denuncian-extranjeros-adopcion-familias-darlas.html

England: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8130900.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/5732679/Chinese-babies-sold-for-adoption-to-US-and-Europe-report-claims.html

United States: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124656106407087613.html

Netherlands: http://www.nrcnext.nl/blog/2009/07/03/2200-voor-een-chinese-wees-die-nog-ouders-heeft/
http://www.netwerk.tv/uitzending/2009-07-03/weer-adoptieschandaal-china
http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/4314006/_%20_Gedwongen_%20adoptie_naar_%20Nederland_%20_.html?p=%2036,2
http://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/nederland/article2805888.ece/_Illegale_Chinese_adoptiekinderen_in_Nederland_.html#mailfriend
http://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/nederland/article2806655.ece/De_meeste_adoptiekinderen__zijn__vondeling___maar_niet_allemaal_.html#mailfriend
http://www.ad.nl/buitenland/3341970/Adoptievereniging_trekt_kinderhandel_na.html

Forecast: Increasing Wait Times, Frequent Boys

In August 2008, in the midst of the Beijing Olympic Games, I collected data from the six largest adopting Provinces in China to look at the near-term prospects for a referral speed-up. At that time, faced with ever declining submission rates, I predicted that referrals would continue to decrease, and wait times increase over the foreseeable future. On August 11, 2008 the CCAA finished January 2006 applications. Seven months later, the CCAA is just beginning the referral of families that have applied in early March 2006. Since August 2008, the wait time has increased six months.

While some families speculated that after the Olympics referrals would pick up, this has failed to happen. In fact, a look at the "supply-side" of the equation provides evidence that there will probably not be any significant speed-up in referrals until the last half of 2009, if at all. The China program continues to labor under an increasing demand trend, and a declining supply of children to fill that demand.

Looking a the top six Provinces, 2008 saw the continuation of a declining trend. In 2006, total submissions for Guangdong, Jiangxi, Hunan, Chongqing, Guangxi and Jiangsu were 7,427, a number that fell to 5,750 in 2007, and which fell further last year, to 4,958. Thus, since 2006, submissions for the six largest Provinces have declined 33%.



In the last year, trackers of referrals have noticed an uptick in the number of male children being referred. Most of the data is anecdotal -- agency announcements, Yahoo DTC groups, etc. Looking at the six largest Provinces lends substantiation of this conclusion. In 2006, 611 boys were submitted by our study Provinces. This number increased to 879 in 2007, and increased further in 2008 to 1098. In fact, the percentage of boys referred has increased from 8% in 2006 to 15% in 2007 to over 22% in 2008.

The increase is not consistent across China. The largest increase in male referrals was seen in Guangdong Province, which saw male referrals more than double from 2006-2008, increasing 129%. Whereas Guangdong's referrals were 8% male in 2006, in 2008 that percentage climbed to nearly 24%.

Jiangsu Province also saw a large increase, more than doubling between 2006 and 2008. Hunan Province saw their male referrals increase 80%, while Chongqing's male referrals increased 61%. Jiangxi Province increased 45%. while Guangxi increased the least, increasing only 22.5%. Clearly things are changing in China. As the real numbers of female referrals drops sharply, the real number of male referrals is increasing. This is turning preconceived notions of China on its head.

One probable explanation for the increased number of boys being submitted is the changing attitudes towards girls in general, and increased pre-marital sex among China's youth. A single woman is just as likely to abandon a boy child as a girl, so as sexual mores change among China's youth, one would expect the sex-ratios of abandoned children to equalize. I believe this largely explains the increased number of boys being found.

However, total submissions across China have continued to decline, mostly the result of fewer abandonments. This decline can be attributed to several factors -- ultra-sound technology, changing attitudes towards girls -- but the largest factor, I believe, is that the black market for children results in fewer children from being abandoned. The Chinese are nothing is not practical.

One can see the problem orphanages face by analyzing the "wholesale" prices (paid by traffickers for healthy infants) of trafficked children over the past five years. In 2001, for example, traffickers in one story received 200 yuan for each child. This number had risen to 1,200 - 2,000 yuan per child by 2003. By early 2009, reports indicate that the wholesale price has risen to 7,000 yuan for girls in some cases.

As the market for black-market children has increased, fewer Chinese families simply abandon their child on the street. Thus, orphanages have seen their numbers of foundlings decrease. This is true even in the orphanages involved in baby-buying programs such as Fuzhou (Jiangxi), which have seen their numbers decline even as "rewards" have been increased for children. Clearly the market has moved away from the orphanages.

It will be interesting to watch what impact the increased donation will have on submission rates. The increase from $3,000 to $5,000 was ostensibly made by the CCAA to help offset the declining revenues resulting from fewer adoptions. But as we move into 2009, it will be interesting to watch if any orphanages see significant increases in the number of children "found". Preliminary surveys of January and February 2009 submissions indicate that the number of children being "found" is increasing. In July we will look to see if these increases are concentrated in any specific areas or orphanages.

If there is an increase in submissions, will it be children that were "held back" (found before 2009)? Or will the increase come from new "foundlings" (children found after the increase)? Or will the increase raise the financial bar for domestic families, resulting in even fewer orphanage children being adopted domestically? Supporters of the international Hague agreement on adoption will want to watch these trends as they develop.

At this point, there is little reason to believe that referral rates will increase significantly in the near-term. As of the end of 2008, submission rates were overall in decline, but with the sex ratio of the children submitted increasing.

Birth Parent Analysis

I am frequently asked how likely it is that a birth parent search would be successful, or how reliable a child's finding information might be, or if a particular orphanage is involved in trafficking. Over the years I have accumulated a huge amount of data concerning China's orphanages -- press reports, finding ads, and personal experiences in many of the cities. This data allows one to place the finding of a particular child against the forest of every other internationally-adopted child found in that area.

A few years ago I was asked to locate the finding ad of a Guangdong Province girl. After locating her ad, we detected another child, whose ad was published in a different newspaper, but who was found a few yards from the first child on the same day, and who had an identical birth date. We alerted the adoptive family of this second child, and told them there was a distinct possibility that she was a sibling.

A year later we performed a research project to the orphanage that this child came from, and the adoptive family of the second child joined the project also. We put both families in touch with each other, and subsequent DNA testing determined a probable relationship between the two girls.

This is one example of how looking at the "forest" from which our children come can allow us to make exciting discoveries.

The Birth Parent Analysis reports will look at several data sets. First, we look at the overall orphanage statistics from 2000-2008. How many children were adopted? How many of those were boys and girls, healthy and Special Needs? We then look at the finding location distribution. Against this background we look at the finding location of your child -- were other children found at this location? If so, when? How many were found in the general area? Are there local press reports that shed light on these patterns?

Combining all of this analysis will allow adoptive families a clearer picture concerning birth-parent search probabilities and finding location accuracy. Armed with this information families can decide if searching for more information will be fruitful.

___________________

More information on Research-China.Org's Birth Parent Search Analysis can be found here. Data is available from 2000 forward in most cases. There is no charge if we are not confident that our data is complete for your child's orphanage.

China's "Charter 08" -- A Turning Point in History?

Whenever we are in China and are able to have a discussion with "everyday" people, one common thread quickly appears -- the antipathy virtually all citizens in China have for their government. While largely directed at local officials, who most citizens see as corrupt, the temperature of discontent simmers at 211 degrees. One small spark could turn China into a contagion of rebellion.

Last week an important document was issued by important and common people within China. Currently signed by 744 individuals, it is gaining momentum inside China through websites and other informal means.

Quite simply, the "Charter 08" (deriving its name from "Charter 77" issued by intellectuals in Czechoslovakia in 1977) is a call for dramatic reform in China, including the creation of a new Constitution, separation of powers, election of public officials, and the de-politicalization of the military.

It will be interesting to watch how China's State-government responds to this charter. If they ignore it, much like the government of Czechoslovakia did in 1977, they will simply postpone the day of change to some unknown and unpredictable date in the future. But one day one of the 74,000 "mass incidents" China experiences each year will reach critical mass and explode across China.

I hope "Charter 08" gains traction and becomes a turning point in China's history.

Here is the text (in English) of the "Charter 08":

Charter 08 (English Version)

Translated from the Chinese by Perry Link

The following text of Charter 08, signed by hundreds of Chinese intellectuals and translated and introduced by Perry Link, Professor of Chinese Literature at the University of California, Riverside, will be published in the issue of The New York Review dated January 15, which goes on sale on January 2.
—The Editors

I. Foreword

A hundred years have passed since the writing of China’s first constitution. 2008 also marks the sixtieth anniversary of the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the thirtieth anniversary of the appearance of Democracy Wall in Beijing, and the tenth of China’s signing of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. We are approaching the twentieth anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre of pro-democracy student protesters. The Chinese people, who have endured human rights disasters and uncountable struggles across these same years, now include many who see clearly that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values.

By departing from these values, the Chinese government’s approach to “modernization” has proven disastrous. It has stripped people of their rights, destroyed their dignity, and corrupted normal human intercourse. So we ask: Where is China headed in the twenty-first century? Will it continue with “modernization” under authoritarian rule, or will it embrace universal human values, join the mainstream of civilized nations, and build a democratic system? There can be no avoiding these questions.

The shock of the Western impact upon China in the nineteenth century laid bare a decadent authoritarian system and marked the beginning of what is often called “the greatest changes in thousands of years” for China. A “self-strengthening movement” followed, but this aimed simply at appropriating the technology to build gunboats and other Western material objects. China’s humiliating naval defeat at the hands of Japan in 1895 only confirmed the obsolescence of China’s system of government. The first attempts at modern political change came with the ill-fated summer of reforms in 1898, but these were cruelly crushed by ultraconservatives at China’s imperial court. With the revolution of 1911, which inaugurated Asia’s first republic, the authoritarian imperial system that had lasted for centuries was finally supposed to have been laid to rest. But social conflict inside our country and external pressures were to prevent it; China fell into a patchwork of warlord fiefdoms and the new republic became a fleeting dream.

The failure of both “self-strengthening” and political renovation caused many of our forebears to reflect deeply on whether a “cultural illness” was afflicting our country. This mood gave rise, during the May Fourth Movement of the late 1910s, to the championing of “science and democracy.” Yet that effort, too, foundered as warlord chaos persisted and the Japanese invasion [beginning in Manchuria in 1931] brought national crisis.

Victory over Japan in 1945 offered one more chance for China to move toward modern government, but the Communist defeat of the Nationalists in the civil war thrust the nation into the abyss of totalitarianism. The “new China” that emerged in 1949 proclaimed that “the people are sovereign” but in fact set up a system in which “the Party is all-powerful.” The Communist Party of China seized control of all organs of the state and all political, economic, and social resources, and, using these, has produced a long trail of human rights disasters, including, among many others, the Anti-Rightist Campaign (1957), the Great Leap Forward (1958–1960), the Cultural Revolution (1966–1969), the June Fourth (Tiananmen Square) Massacre (1989), and the current repression of all unauthorized religions and the suppression of the weiquan rights movement [a movement that aims to defend citizens’ rights promulgated in the Chinese Constitution and to fight for human rights recognized by international conventions that the Chinese government has signed]. During all this, the Chinese people have paid a gargantuan price. Tens of millions have lost their lives, and several generations have seen their freedom, their happiness, and their human dignity cruelly trampled.

During the last two decades of the twentieth century the government policy of “Reform and Opening” gave the Chinese people relief from the pervasive poverty and totalitarianism of the Mao Zedong era and brought substantial increases in the wealth and living standards of many Chinese as well as a partial restoration of economic freedom and economic rights. Civil society began to grow, and popular calls for more rights and more political freedom have grown apace. As the ruling elite itself moved toward private ownership and the market economy, it began to shift from an outright rejection of “rights” to a partial acknowledgment of them.

In 1998 the Chinese government signed two important international human rights conventions; in 2004 it amended its constitution to include the phrase “respect and protect human rights”; and this year, 2008, it has promised to promote a “national human rights action plan.” Unfortunately most of this political progress has extended no further than the paper on which it is written. The political reality, which is plain for anyone to see, is that China has many laws but no rule of law; it has a constitution but no constitutional government. The ruling elite continues to cling to its authoritarian power and fights off any move toward political change.

The stultifying results are endemic official corruption, an undermining of the rule of law, weak human rights, decay in public ethics, crony capitalism, growing inequality between the wealthy and the poor, pillage of the natural environment as well as of the human and historical environments, and the exacerbation of a long list of social conflicts, especially, in recent times, a sharpening animosity between officials and ordinary people.

As these conflicts and crises grow ever more intense, and as the ruling elite continues with impunity to crush and to strip away the rights of citizens to freedom, to property, and to the pursuit of happiness, we see the powerless in our society—the vulnerable groups, the people who have been suppressed and monitored, who have suffered cruelty and even torture, and who have had no adequate avenues for their protests, no courts to hear their pleas—becoming more militant and raising the possibility of a violent conflict of disastrous proportions. The decline of the current system has reached the point where change is no longer optional.

II. Our Fundamental Principles

This is a historic moment for China, and our future hangs in the balance. In reviewing the political modernization process of the past hundred years or more, we reiterate and endorse basic universal values as follows:

Freedom. Freedom is at the core of universal human values. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom in where to live, and the freedoms to strike, to demonstrate, and to protest, among others, are the forms that freedom takes. Without freedom, China will always remain far from civilized ideals.

Human rights. Human rights are not bestowed by a state. Every person is born with inherent rights to dignity and freedom. The government exists for the protection of the human rights of its citizens. The exercise of state power must be authorized by the people. The succession of political disasters in China’s recent history is a direct consequence of the ruling regime’s disregard for human rights.

Equality. The integrity, dignity, and freedom of every person—regardless of social station, occupation, sex, economic condition, ethnicity, skin color, religion, or political belief—are the same as those of any other. Principles of equality before the law and equality of social, economic, cultural, civil, and political rights must be upheld.

Republicanism. Republicanism, which holds that power should be balanced among different branches of government and competing interests should be served, resembles the traditional Chinese political ideal of “fairness in all under heaven.” It allows different interest groups and social assemblies, and people with a variety of cultures and beliefs, to exercise democratic self-government and to deliberate in order to reach peaceful resolution of public questions on a basis of equal access to government and free and fair competition.

Democracy. The most fundamental principles of democracy are that the people are sovereign and the people select their government. Democracy has these characteristics:

(1) Political power begins with the people and the legitimacy of a regime derives from the people.
(2) Political power is exercised through choices that the people make.
(3) The holders of major official posts in government at all levels are determined through periodic competitive elections.
(4) While honoring the will of the majority, the fundamental dignity, freedom, and human rights of minorities are protected. In short, democracy is a modern means for achieving government truly “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

Constitutional rule. Constitutional rule is rule through a legal system and legal regulations to implement principles that are spelled out in a constitution. It means protecting the freedom and the rights of citizens, limiting and defining the scope of legitimate government power, and providing the administrative apparatus necessary to serve these ends.

III. What We Advocate

Authoritarianism is in general decline throughout the world; in China, too, the era of emperors and overlords is on the way out. The time is arriving everywhere for citizens to be masters of states. For China the path that leads out of our current predicament is to divest ourselves of the authoritarian notion of reliance on an “enlightened overlord” or an “honest official” and to turn instead toward a system of liberties, democracy, and the rule of law, and toward fostering the consciousness of modern citizens who see rights as fundamental and participation as a duty. Accordingly, and in a spirit of this duty as responsible and constructive citizens, we offer the following recommendations on national governance, citizens’ rights, and social development:

1. A New Constitution. We should recast our present constitution, rescinding its provisions that contradict the principle that sovereignty resides with the people and turning it into a document that genuinely guarantees human rights, authorizes the exercise of public power, and serves as the legal underpinning of China’s democratization. The constitution must be the highest law in the land, beyond violation by any individual, group, or political party.

2. Separation of powers. We should construct a modern government in which the separation of legislative, judicial, and executive power is guaranteed. We need an Administrative Law that defines the scope of government responsibility and prevents abuse of administrative power. Government should be responsible to taxpayers. Division of power between provincial governments and the central government should adhere to the principle that central powers are only those specifically granted by the constitution and all other powers belong to the local governments.

3. Legislative democracy. Members of legislative bodies at all levels should be chosen by direct election, and legislative democracy should observe just and impartial principles.

4. An Independent Judiciary. The rule of law must be above the interests of any particular political party and judges must be independent. We need to establish a constitutional supreme court and institute procedures for constitutional review. As soon as possible, we should abolish all of the Committees on Political and Legal Affairs that now allow Communist Party officials at every level to decide politically-sensitive cases in advance and out of court. We should strictly forbid the use of public offices for private purposes.

5. Public Control of Public Servants. The military should be made answerable to the national government, not to a political party, and should be made more professional. Military personnel should swear allegiance to the constitution and remain nonpartisan. Political party organizations shall be prohibited in the military. All public officials including police should serve as nonpartisans, and the current practice of favoring one political party in the hiring of public servants must end.

6. Guarantee of Human Rights. There shall be strict guarantees of human rights and respect for human dignity. There should be a Human Rights Committee, responsible to the highest legislative body, that will prevent the government from abusing public power in violation of human rights. A democratic and constitutional China especially must guarantee the personal freedom of citizens. No one shall suffer illegal arrest, detention, arraignment, interrogation, or punishment. The system of “Reeducation through Labor” must be abolished.

7. Election of Public Officials. There shall be a comprehensive system of democratic elections based on “one person, one vote.” The direct election of administrative heads at the levels of county, city, province, and nation should be systematically implemented. The rights to hold periodic free elections and to participate in them as a citizen are inalienable.

8. Rural–Urban Equality. The two-tier household registry system must be abolished. This system favors urban residents and harms rural residents. We should establish instead a system that gives every citizen the same constitutional rights and the same freedom to choose where to live.

9. Freedom to Form Groups. The right of citizens to form groups must be guaranteed. The current system for registering nongovernment groups, which requires a group to be “approved,” should be replaced by a system in which a group simply registers itself. The formation of political parties should be governed by the constitution and the laws, which means that we must abolish the special privilege of one party to monopolize power and must guarantee principles of free and fair competition among political parties.

10. Freedom to Assemble. The constitution provides that peaceful assembly, demonstration, protest, and freedom of expression are fundamental rights of a citizen. The ruling party and the government must not be permitted to subject these to illegal interference or unconstitutional obstruction.

11. Freedom of Expression. We should make freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and academic freedom universal, thereby guaranteeing that citizens can be informed and can exercise their right of political supervision. These freedoms should be upheld by a Press Law that abolishes political restrictions on the press. The provision in the current Criminal Law that refers to “the crime of incitement to subvert state power” must be abolished. We should end the practice of viewing words as crimes.

12. Freedom of Religion. We must guarantee freedom of religion and belief and institute a separation of religion and state. There must be no governmental interference in peaceful religious activities. We should abolish any laws, regulations, or local rules that limit or suppress the religious freedom of citizens. We should abolish the current system that requires religious groups (and their places of worship) to get official approval in advance and substitute for it a system in which registry is optional and, for those who choose to register, automatic.

13. Civic Education. In our schools we should abolish political curriculums and examinations that are designed to indoctrinate students in state ideology and to instill support for the rule of one party. We should replace them with civic education that advances universal values and citizens’ rights, fosters civic consciousness, and promotes civic virtues that serve society.

14. Protection of Private Property. We should establish and protect the right to private property and promote an economic system of free and fair markets. We should do away with government monopolies in commerce and industry and guarantee the freedom to start new enterprises. We should establish a Committee on State-Owned Property, reporting to the national legislature, that will monitor the transfer of state-owned enterprises to private ownership in a fair, competitive, and orderly manner. We should institute a land reform that promotes private ownership of land, guarantees the right to buy and sell land, and allows the true value of private property to be adequately reflected in the market.

15. Financial and Tax Reform. We should establish a democratically regulated and accountable system of public finance that ensures the protection of taxpayer rights and that operates through legal procedures. We need a system by which public revenues that belong to a certain level of government—central, provincial, county or local—are controlled at that level. We need major tax reform that will abolish any unfair taxes, simplify the tax system, and spread the tax burden fairly. Government officials should not be able to raise taxes, or institute new ones, without public deliberation and the approval of a democratic assembly. We should reform the ownership system in order to encourage competition among a wider variety of market participants.

16. Social Security. We should establish a fair and adequate social security system that covers all citizens and ensures basic access to education, health care, retirement security, and employment.

17. Protection of the Environment. We need to protect the natural environment and to promote development in a way that is sustainable and responsible to our descendents and to the rest of humanity. This means insisting that the state and its officials at all levels not only do what they must do to achieve these goals, but also accept the supervision and participation of non-governmental organizations.

18. A Federated Republic. A democratic China should seek to act as a responsible major power contributing toward peace and development in the Asian Pacific region by approaching others in a spirit of equality and fairness. In Hong Kong and Macao, we should support the freedoms that already exist. With respect to Taiwan, we should declare our commitment to the principles of freedom and democracy and then, negotiating as equals, and ready to compromise, seek a formula for peaceful unification. We should approach disputes in the national-minority areas of China with an open mind, seeking ways to find a workable framework within which all ethnic and religious groups can flourish. We should aim ultimately at a federation of democratic communities of China.

19. Truth in Reconciliation. We should restore the reputations of all people, including their family members, who suffered political stigma in the political campaigns of the past or who have been labeled as criminals because of their thought, speech, or faith. The state should pay reparations to these people. All political prisoners and prisoners of conscience must be released. There should be a Truth Investigation Commission charged with finding the facts about past injustices and atrocities, determining responsibility for them, upholding justice, and, on these bases, seeking social reconciliation.

China, as a major nation of the world, as one of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and as a member of the UN Council on Human Rights, should be contributing to peace for humankind and progress toward human rights. Unfortunately, we stand today as the only country among the major nations that remains mired in authoritarian politics. Our political system continues to produce human rights disasters and social crises, thereby not only constricting China’s own development but also limiting the progress of all of human civilization. This must change, truly it must. The democratization of Chinese politics can be put off no longer.

Accordingly, we dare to put civic spirit into practice by announcing Charter 08. We hope that our fellow citizens who feel a similar sense of crisis, responsibility, and mission, whether they are inside the government or not, and regardless of their social status, will set aside small differences to embrace the broad goals of this citizens’ movement. Together we can work for major changes in Chinese society and for the rapid establishment of a free, democratic, and constitutional country. We can bring to reality the goals and ideals that our people have incessantly been seeking for more than a hundred years, and can bring a brilliant new chapter to Chinese civilization.

—translated from the Chinese by Perry Link

Various perspectives on "Charter 08" can be read here:

http://globalvoicesonline.org/2008/12/15/china-charter-08-to-be-free-and-fearless/