{"id":30838,"date":"2024-01-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-01-16T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/csw-yeo.1wp.site\/reports\/briefing-socialist-rule-of-law-in-china-6149\/"},"modified":"2026-09-23T19:40:09","modified_gmt":"2026-09-23T18:40:09","slug":"briefing-socialist-rule-of-law-in-china-6149","status":"publish","type":"reports","link":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/reports\/briefing-socialist-rule-of-law-in-china-6149\/","title":{"rendered":"Briefing: ‘Socialist rule of law’ in China"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"\/<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

In 2014, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping announced plans to \u2018construct Socialist rule of law with Chinese characteristics\u2019. The meaning of this has become clear in recent years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Anti-Terrorism Law for the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region (XUAR, in force since August 2016), the De-radicalization Regulations for XUAR (in force since April 2017) and Hong Kong National Security Law (in force since July 2019) have ushered in perhaps the most devastating consequences known to the outside world. Less visible have been the effects of the revised Regulations on Religious Affairs (in force since February 2018) and other relevant administrative rules on citizens\u2019 fundamental right to freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) across China.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Two Chinese human rights lawyers recently shared their views, through an online forum, on the issues currently faced by religious groups in China. Both have been defending individuals from various religion or belief groups who have faced legal prosecution in recent years. This briefing provides a summary of the points they have raised, and some data based on CSW research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Worsening violations against religious groups<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

Since the CCP began a period of economic \u2018Reform and Opening Up\u2019 in 1978 under Deng Xiaoping, until around 2015, religious groups (apart from banned groups) were more commonly subject to administrative punishment, whereby they would not be tried or sentenced. Punishments included, but were not limited to, members being placed in administrative detention for up to 15 days, groups being banned from gathering by the local civil affairs bureau, or meeting venues being forcibly demolished by the local authorities as \u2018unauthorised buildings\u2019. In some cases, people were sent to labour camps for \u2018re-education\u2019<\/a> for two or three years as more severe punishment, again without trial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, in more recent years, the numbers of religious adherents who have faced criminal prosecution has increased rapidly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Cases involving Protestant Christian groups since 2018 collected by CSW by October 2023<\/i>(including those pending trials)<\/i><\/p>\n\n\n\n

China is officially an atheist state. Under the increased ideological control of Xi Jinping, the Chinese authorities attach even higher sensitivity to matters involving religious groups. Therefore, there is barely public space for education and discussions surrounding religious beliefs. It is unsurprising that many police officers, public prosecutors and judges lack basic religious literacy, let alone an understanding of FoRB as one of the basic human rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A lawyer remarked that when it comes to FoRB cases, the criminal justice agencies are more likely to fall short of legal norms and, in the absence of accountability, even \u2018do whatever they please\u2019. He also remarked that, as a result of the government\u2019s crackdown, more religious groups have been driven underground. Some have chosen to hide, destroy or avoid keeping up-to-date financial accounts due to the pressure they are facing, however a lack of transparency can lead to poor management of ecclesiastical disputes and corruption, which can in turn can be used as a means of further government prosecution against such groups in what the lawyer described as \u2018a vicious circle\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018The current situation shows our ruling party\u2019s lack of confidence in [dealing with] religious issues.\u2019<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Legal framework<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

There are no provisions within China\u2019s constitution for a mechanism to review whether a law or a government decision violates the constitution. Chinese judges do not have power to declare a local piece of legislation inconsistent with the constitution invalid, and China does not have a body to review the constitutionality of legislation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a result of these flaws, there is no way for anyone to seek the abolishment of legislation even if it clearly violates the Chinese constitution, such as the 2017 Regulations on Religious Affairs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the principle of legal supremacy, laws passed by the National People’s Congress are higher in ranking than administrative regulations passed by the State Council. However, on a day-to-day basis, more attention is paid to the latter because of their operational practicality. So, when a defence lawyer makes a point in court by quoting the constitution as the most fundamental law of the country, they will likely be ignored by the judge. On the other hand, articles of the Regulations on Religious Affairs are frequently quoted by police officers and religious affairs bureau officials as they raid meeting venues, declare gatherings to be illegal or take participants to police stations for questioning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Law enforcement<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

Chinese law enforcement is responsible for periodic waves of nationwide crackdowns such as on groups the Chinese state media refers to as \u2018black societies and evil forces<\/a>\u2019. From 2018 to 2021, County Religious Affairs Bureaus lead \u2018the fight to eliminate black or evil forces\u2019 in religious activity venues. According to the Norway-based media outlet Voice of Tibet<\/a>, Tibetan organisations elected and recognised by villagers to protect their mother tongue, the environment, religion, culture and the rights and interests of the locals were targeted as \u2018evil force organisations\u2019 and subjected to severe crackdowns during this period, as was the case for the nine Tibetans criminally detained by the Tongren County police in Qinghai province on 13 July 2018.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When it comes to legal technicalities, many regulations have adequate provisions, but they are not implemented and enforcement agencies do not show any motivation to seriously apply them in practice. Crucially, these agencies also do not bear any consequences for compliance failure, and the wronged parties do not have effective remedies. One lawyer said that he had spent thousands of yuan in postage in a month sending letters of complaints or objections but received very few responses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018We often tell those who work in law enforcement agencies that<\/i><\/b>[as lawyers]<\/i><\/b>we are diligently implementing General Secretary Xi’s \u201claw-based governance\u201d. \u2019<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Xie jiao\u2019<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme People\u2019s Court and the Supreme People\u2019s Procuratorate interpreted<\/a> \u2018xie jiao\u2019 as \u2018illegal organisations, which, through fraudulent use of religion, qi gong<\/i>, or any other name, by deifying and promoting their ringleaders, or by fabricating and spreading superstitious fallacies to confuse and deceive others, grow membership and control group members, and harm society\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such a vague definition gives the authorities power to target legitimate religious activities. A lawyer recalled a case where a house church pastor was accused for their \u2018unbiblical teaching\u2019 on suspicion of \u2018spreading superstition\u2019. Much to his amusement, the evidence produced was a doctrine document provided by a pastor affiliated with the government-approved Three Self Patriotic Movement (TSPM).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In July 2022, China\u2019s Anti-Xie-Jiao Association published an article<\/a> listing 25 groups which the author claims have been designated \u2018xie jiao\u2019 by \u2018relevant national departments\u2019 since the 1980s. This is not an official document, and there are no official government or legal documents defining any particular group as \u2018xie jiao\u2019 that are accessible to the public.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The process by which public security, procuratorate and courts identify \u2018xie jiao\u2019 appears to be completely arbitrary. Some groups are frequently targeted while others in the same region are largely left alone. Some house church leaders receive a fine while others are arrested and handed harsh prison sentences with a \u2018xie jiao\u2019 label.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the case of the group known as the Shouters (\u2018huhan pai\u2019; other names include Assembly \u2018zhaohui\u2019 or Little Flock \u2018xiaoqun\u2019), for example, anyone found in possession of a copy of the Recovery Bible or books written by Watchman Nee and Witness Lee may be identified as one of the Shouters and prosecuted for \u2018organising or using a xie jiao<\/i> organisation to undermine law enforcement\u2019 under Article 300 of the Criminal Law; having 250 copies of such books could land someone in jail for up to seven years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018I have asked investigative officers, prosecutors and judges: Where can you find me a document in which a department has designated, let\u2019s say, the Shouters as a xie jiao or a xie jiao organisation? I have asked the prosecution dozens of times in court whether there is such a thing. No one has ever said \u201cYes, I can find it for you\u201d or showed me such a document.\u2019<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Other trumped-up charges against religious groups<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

In addition to those prosecuted for belonging to \u2018xie jiao\u2019, recent years have seen a marked increase in members of religion or belief groups being targeted on a number of other unfounded charges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1)<\/b>Fraud<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The number of prosecuted leaders and staff members of unregistered churches has been increasing at a concerning rate. They are typically accused of \u2018fraud\u2019 for receiving or collecting tithes and offerings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Year<\/b><\/p><\/td>

‘Fraud’ cases known<\/b><\/p><\/td>

Christians released after detention<\/b><\/p><\/td>

Christians still in pre-trial detention<\/b><\/p><\/td>

Christians jailed<\/b><\/p><\/td><\/tr>

2019<\/p><\/td>

1<\/p><\/td>

2<\/p><\/td>

0<\/p><\/td>

1<\/p><\/td><\/tr>

2020<\/p><\/td>

1<\/p><\/td>

0<\/p><\/td>

0<\/p><\/td>

4<\/p><\/td><\/tr>

2021<\/p><\/td>

3<\/p><\/td>

9<\/p><\/td>

9<\/p><\/td>

0<\/p><\/td><\/tr>

2022<\/p><\/td>

5<\/p><\/td>

2<\/p><\/td>

9<\/p><\/td>

3<\/p><\/td><\/tr>

2023 (until October)<\/p><\/td>

3<\/p><\/td>

7<\/p><\/td>

4<\/p><\/td>

0<\/p><\/td><\/tr> <\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/td> <\/tr> <\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Number of cases known to CSW where independent Protestant church members have been detained (including those released on bail) or jailed for \u2018fraud\u2019 since 2019.<\/i><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A lawyer pointed out<\/a> that the logic behind the accusations against house church pastors across the country is the same: If a church is not registered with the government, it is illegal, which means the pastor is fake, which means that the tithes and offerings they receive are fraudulent. Such a logic indicates \u2018an utter denial of the legitimacy of house churches\u2019. On the other hand, there is admittedly lack of a proper accounting policy and transparency in some churches.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2)<\/b>\u2018Illegal business operation\u2019<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Illegal business operation\u2019 is a typical \u2018pocket crime\u2019, frequently used by the Chinese authorities to target educational services and publication products provided by religious groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CSW research shows that Chinese religious believers have been detained or imprisoned on charges of \u2018illegal business operation\u2019 in recent years for reasons including but not limited to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n