{"id":47916,"date":"2025-12-01T11:50:00","date_gmt":"2025-12-01T11:50:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/?post_type=reports&p=47916"},"modified":"2026-10-28T11:58:13","modified_gmt":"2026-10-28T11:58:13","slug":"the-supremacy-of-the-party-chinas-weaponisation-of-legislation-and-policy-to-curtail-freedom-of-religion-or-belief","status":"publish","type":"reports","link":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/reports\/the-supremacy-of-the-party-chinas-weaponisation-of-legislation-and-policy-to-curtail-freedom-of-religion-or-belief\/","title":{"rendered":"The Supremacy of the Party: China\u2019s Weaponisation of Legislation and Policy to Curtail Freedom of Religion or Belief"},"content":{"rendered":"

CSW\u2019s previous reports on freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) in China, published in 2020 and 2022 respectively, documented the rapid and \u00a0significant deterioration of the human rights situation in the country. Both reports focused on visible violations targeting religious or belief communities.\u00a0

The authoritarian posture of the Chinese government became even more apparent during and after the COVID-19 \u00a0pandemic. While much of the world gradually returned to normal, China maintained its harsh and deeply repressive \u2018zero tolerance\u2019 lockdown policy. In 2022, public frustration over the government\u2019s extreme measures culminated in the peaceful White Paper protest. The movement was swiftly crushed and many participants were \u00a0arrested, while others were forced into exile.

Three years on, and the pattern of suppression has not only persisted but, expanded. FoRB violations are no longer limited to the closure or demolition of \u00a0community sites or the arrests of clergy. The violations have evolved into more subtle and systemic forms of control, extending across a wide spectrum that includes education, law, technology, international trade and cultural expression. At the heart of this expansion lies the concept of \u00a0\u2018sinicisation\u2019.\u00a0<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

While it may appear to be a benign effort to integrate religious practice with Chinese culture, the \u00a0essence of religious sinicisation is not merely cultural assimilation; it is political domestication.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The objectives of this report are to inform policy makers, parliamentarians, researchers, NGOs, media, enterprises, and religious leaders of the repressive legal architecture underpinning FoRB violations in China, and to encourage them to consider further actions that could be taken to address this, and thereby assist victims. It also aims to elicit further academic research, and policy advocacy.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
Download the report (English)<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n
Download the report (Chinese)<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

CSW\u2019s previous reports on freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) in China, published in 2020 and 2022 respectively, documented the rapid and \u00a0significant deterioration of the human rights situation in the country. Both reports focused on visible violations targeting religious or belief communities.\u00a0 The authoritarian posture of the Chinese government became even more apparent during […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":44167,"template":"","categories":[],"regions":[131,128],"class_list":["post-47916","reports","type-reports","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","regions-china","regions-east-asia"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/reports\/47916","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/reports"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/reports"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/reports\/47916\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":47923,"href":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/reports\/47916\/revisions\/47923"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/44167"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=47916"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=47916"},{"taxonomy":"regions","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.csw.org.uk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/regions?post=47916"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}