Annual Report, 2000: Enforcing Loyalty
Chapter 1: Political Repression
The Chinese government's overriding concern about state
stability versus "splittist" forces has led to a series of
wide-ranging repression in the political sphere. Any act
or view remotely symbolic of Tibetan identity that has
the potential to "threaten state stability" and challenge
the authority of China's leadership is severely clamped
down in the hope that this safeguards the unity of the
"motherland".
Political repression on the plateau continued unabated
throughout the year 2000. The focus was on the "separatist"
activities of the Tibetan masses, which included even such
simple and traditional acts as performing incense-burning
ceremonies and displaying traditional altars and
photographs of the Dalai Lama. Most of the official
pronouncements of prominent leaders of "TAR" in 2000
largely focussed on concerns over political stability.
Beijing hardened its policy towards "splittist" activities
and repression was intensified all over Tibet. This
current intensification of political repression is
an outcome of Chinese government policies that are
clearly reflected in the official statements of top
Chinese leaders. During the seventh Chinese People's
Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) on 22 May 2000,
Legchog,
Chairman of the "TAR", said, "... government staff
should advise local people and their subordinates to
oppose splittism and cut ties with the Dalai Lama. The
Dalai Lama issue should be studied and any underground
organisation activating in Tibet should be filtered and
gotten rid of." Vice-Premier
Li Lanqing's
statement at the subsequent meeting of the CPPCC on
1 September 2000
clearly reiterates that "government officials
should continue striking hard on splittist activities
and oppose the Dalai Lama's counter-revolutionary acts.
Moreover, work teams should continue visiting religious
institutions and this should be the number one priority in
order to ensure peace in Tibet."
1
Lhasa City experienced an atmosphere of fear and
intimidation following an official order in March 2000
which forbade the cadres and government workers from going
against the aims and beliefs of the Chinese Communist
Party. The same order created furore amongst Tibetan cadres
and government employees who were compelled to withdraw
their children studying in exile schools and give up
religious artefacts from their homes. A Review Committee
was particularly set up in June 2000 by officers of the
Toelung Dechen County and heads of various townships who
threatened local citizens with legal inquest if they were
discovered possessing the banned pictures of the Dalai
Lama from their homes.
China still fails to honour the protection
of all citizens from arbitrary detention and
unfair trial. The introduction of the charge
"endangering state security"
2
in the revised Criminal Procedure Law
3
has now enabled
China to legally continue its practice of arbitrary
arrest to suppress subversive opinions. The exercise of
freedom of expression and opinion - a recurring factor in
most incarcerations of an arbitrary nature - is lawfully
safeguarded under Article 9 of the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights and the provisions of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Yet in
Tibet under Chinese colonisation, peaceful expressions and
demonstrations against Chinese policies and directives,
possession of forbidden Dalai Lama photographs and
the Tibetan national flag, and allegiance to the "Dalai
Clique" are common grounds for arrest and detention. TCHRD
recognises 26 known arrests recorded in the year 2000 to
be arbitrary in nature.
The Third Work Forum on Tibet, held in Beijing in
1994, laid the groundwork for countering "splittist"
activities in Tibet. The outcome was the formulation
of "Strike Hard" campaign where a "total war was to be
waged against the Dalai Clique". The Forum resulted in
restrictive policies being implemented in Tibet across
various sectors of society. The repression included the
rural areas where "loyal" cadres were given important
political positions. "TAR" officials placed importance
on the fact that rural grassroots officials were "the
key force for uniting and leading the masses in an
in-depth struggle against separatism, stabilising the
farming and pastoral areas."
4
The judiciary plays an equally participatory role in
intensifying repression in Tibet. The "TAR" Higher People's
Court made a determined effort to "strike hard" against
political activism and launched co-ordinated actions in
a unified manner to execute the campaign with the "power
of a thunderbolt and the speed of lightning".
5
With the launch of the "Strike Hard" campaign in 1996,
law courts at all levels across Tibet conducted legal
proceedings with a sense of political fanaticism.
Prison malpractice in the form of torture was a recurring
element in all the testimonies provided to monitoring
agencies by former prisoners. Supplementary information
received during 2000 from former Drapchi Prison inmates
on the May Drapchi Protest of 1998 sheds further light
on how the dissenting voices of prisoners were silenced
through solitary confinement, indiscriminate torture and
sentence extension.
Increased restrictions were imposed during 2000 on Tibetan
returnees from exile leading to the alleged detention
of approximately 50 students
6
and the expulsion
of 29 Tibetan tour guides. The movements of exile
returnees - who are viewed with suspicion of being involved
in political disturbances - are monitored closely through
China's pervasive espionage network and interrogation
procedures. The possibility of securing any government
related job is non-existent for Tibetans returning to
their homeland from period in exile.
A major focus has been placed this year by the Chinese
government on purifying "unpatriotic" elements amongst
Tibetan cadre contingents through various coercive
measures. The investigation and purification strategies
- one of the fundamental objectives in Beijing's battle
against "splittism" - has left Tibetan cadres in an
ideological dilemma. The Chinese government considers purging
disloyal cadres and fast-track economic development on
the plateau as its two most effective weapons to combat
pro-independence activities.
The punitive strategies to test Tibetan cadre's loyalty to
the regime include bans on religious display and recalling
their children from attending schools in exile. The
Sixth General Body Meeting of the Discipline Inspection
Commission of the "TAR" Party Committee held from 15 to
17 March 2000 instructed "all party cadres and government
employees to observe orders prohibiting their children
to study in schools administered by the Dalai Lama".
Those who breach the regulations would be "dealt with
seriously", and it can even lead to the cancellation of
children's residential cards. "Freeze in promotion and
transfer without hesitation" are the stated punishments
for those cadres and government employees who fail to
comply with the Commission's directive.
These prohibitive measures are strongly reinforced in
the policies of the Third Work Forum, which placed great
emphasis on fighting against "corrosive influence" and
"enhancing internal administration".
7
Other strategies enshrined in the Third Forum ordered that
defecting cadres who have fled into exile be expelled from
the Party, and those who delay their return from exile
would face involuntary resignation from their jobs in the
Party.
Strict orders were issued against the celebration of
traditional religious and cultural festivals, especially
the birthday celebration of the Dalai Lama on 6 July.
8
Additional Public Security Bureau (PSB) personnel,
People's Armed Police (PAP) and other regional security
forces were stationed on the lingkhor routes to monitor
and record the movements of Tibetans. Staff of various
government offices and schools were compelled to assist
Chinese officials in identifying government workers and
students who made the prohibited circumambulations.
Additionally, if Party members, cadres and teachers
continued to involve themselves in "superstitious
[religious] activities", they would be "fined in accordance
with the Party's regulations."
9
A telephone number for people to inform on others found
taking part in religious activities was also published
in the article. According to unofficial reports, fines
of up to several hundred yuan have already been issued,
in some cases to those found with photographs of the Dalai
Lama in their home.
10
Article 39 of the Chinese Constitution stipulates the
inviolability of the residence of every citizen of the
PRC. However, the extensive raids on 18 houses of members
of the Lhasa-based Tibetan Opera Association in June 2000
11
is a clear violation of the provision, which states that
"Unlawful search of, or intrusion into, a citizen's
residence is prohibited."
This year, withdrawals of at least 32 students from five
different schools in exile have been reported following
renewal of the ban in 2000. While 22 of the students
clearly specified the reason as threats surrounding their
family members in Tibet, only ten mentioned that they
were required to return immediately according to letters
from their parents. One of the underlying reasons behind
the ban on sending children to schools run by the exile
Tibetan government is the official suspicion of "splittist"
ideas seeping into the minds of younger Tibetans.
Cases of parents working for the Chinese government in a
variety of occupations, journeying to India to take back
their children to Tibet have been recorded this year.
The majority of the recalled children are adolescents
attending high school, some of them were in their final
year of studies. The youngest student to have left school
midway is an eight-year-old girl who first joined an
exile institution in 1996. At the age of four, she walked
across the Himalayas with a group of escapees in order to
attend school.
Unwilling to place their families at risk, the students
made the difficult decision to return to an uncertain
future. Both parents and students have expressed regret at
their having to abandon their studies in India, especially
as the students now face extremely limited prospects for
future education or employment in colonised Tibet. In
addition, these youths will be subjected to increased
discrimination, surveillance and repression for having
spent time in an exile school run by the "Dalai Clique".
Tibetans in their homeland with a history of visiting
India are treated with suspicion; it is assumed that
they have political involvement and association with
"splittists". Tibetan returnees from India are invariably
detained at the Nepal-Tibet border although the duration
of their detentions may differ. At the time of detention,
the detainee undergoes harrowing interrogation sessions
concerning motivation for the visit and future objectives.
Life back in Tibet thereafter becomes one of captivity
without actual imprisonment; random surveillance and
regular inquiry become a part of everyday life for these
returnees. Even juvenile Tibetans are not exempted from
such harassment. The detention of 50 students
12
at the border this year and the strict surveillance
of
Khenpo Jigme Phuntsok
13
substantiate such concerns.
Other Tibetans like
Gonpo Dhondup
14
have managed to evade detention and escaped into
exile. Gonpo, a musician, fled Tibet for the second time
and reached India in March 2000. His first attempt was in
1996 when he joined the Tibetan Institute of Performing
Arts (TIPA) in Dharamsala, India. Gonpo returned to Tibet
following health problems, whereupon he was detained
for 12 days and fined approximately 6,000 yuan (US $
750). Despite the fine and detention, Gonpo continued to
face harassment due to his trip to India and his former
association with TIPA. Unable to cope with the perpetual
torment he was subjected to, Gonpo ultimately fled Tibet.
Palden Sangpo
15
was arrested by Chinese border police while returning to
Tibet from India in August 1999. Palden was subsequently
detained in Nyari Detention Centre in Shigatse Prefecture,
"TAR", and continues to be detained without any formal
charges.
A further venue of discrimination awaiting the exile
returnees is in the sphere of job opportunities. Here,
they are discriminated against simply because the
pejorative label "exile returnee" renders them officially
unemployable. This is spelled out in an official
statement made years earlier by a top Lhasa official,
"Those graduates from the Dalai Clique schools who have
come to work in Tibet should be controlled strictly; they
should not be allowed to work in the party and government
or other important departments. Those who are already
working in Tibet should be checked, and should be dealt
with in different ways according to different matters."
16
The dismissal of 29 Tibetan tour guides from Shigatse
Prefecture Tourist Travel Agency
17
in Lhasa on 1 July 2000 is in line with this
directive. A common factor about all the 29 expelled tour
guides was that every one of them was an exile-educated
Tibet returnee.
"TAR" Tour Guide Discipline Management Department,
established in Lhasa in June 2000, conducted an extensive
investigation into 18 branch tourist agencies in Lhasa
administered by China International Tourist Service
(CITS). According to
Sonam Wangdue,
one of the 29 expelled
Tibetan guides who reached Nepal on 27 July 2000,
"An inspection committee, dispatched by the newly set-up
Guide Discipline Management Department, conducted strict
investigations in various tours and travel agencies in
Lhasa City functioning under "TAR" International Tourist
Service. Inquiries were made regarding our personal
backgrounds, particularly the names of educational
institutions where we have studied, and any past history
of political activism. We were further interrogated
concerning our knowledge of guide regulations and made to
produce documents to prove our credentials. Within five
days prior to the birthday celebration of the Dalai Lama,
29 of us were sacked. However, three Tibetan graduates
from Chinese universities were not stripped of their tour
guide jobs."
18
In May 2000, more than a hundred Chinese tour guides
were reportedly recruited, thereby minimising employment
opportunities for Tibetan guides. Tibetan guides are
required to pass a political examination and produce
a middle school certificate, either from a Chinese or
Tibetan school. The "TAR" Chinese authorities brought
out a 13-point guide regulation for Tourist Guides.
19
China's revised Criminal Procedure Law (CPL) gives
greater scope for abuse of power to law-enforcing bodies.
Under Article 60 of the law, an arrest can be authorised on
any suspects if "there is evidence to prove the facts of
the crime". This has led to the arrest of citizens prior
to obtaining solid evidence instead of producing proof of
clarification on the principal facts of the crime.
The law increased the period of preliminary detention from
seven to 30 days. Moreover, there are provisions within
the CPL granting police greater leeway to detain suspects
prior to trial. It is during this period of detention
that "suspects" are susceptible to the worst kind of
treatment, without being given an effective opportunity
to have his or her case heard promptly by a judicial or
similar authority.
20
Ngawang Kyonmey,
released in September 2000 spent two
years in Gutsa Detention Centre, Lhasa, for his political
involvement.
Jampel Sherab
was detained in Gutsa for 18
months following his participation in the 27 September 1988
independence demonstration in Lhasa. Neither was tried in
a court and their detention periods far exceeded the time
limit. This exemplifies the Chinese government's blatant
disregard for national as well as international law and
the UN Covenants to which it is a signatory.
Detentions of Tibetans under suspicion of involvement in
political activities are prevalent. Suspects are "subjected
to long pre-trial detention with no right to bail or habeas
corpus."
21
Verdicts are passed despite the fact that the evidence
gathered is insufficient to warrant a sentence.
Bangri Tsamtrul Rinpoche,
director of Gyatso Khimlop Institute in Lhasa,
was arrested in August 2000. Although no specific
reasons for his arrest were issued, it is believed that
foreign nationals funded the institution he directed,
and this was a major source for suspicion of political
activities. He was reportedly detained along with his
wife Nyima Choedon and four staff members of the school
including
an English language teacher,
Gadhe Gya (30),
Tibetan language teacher,
Dawa Dhondup (35),
a Thanka painting teacher,
Gelek Nyima (30),
and Chinese language teacher,
Dawa (30).
Although the four staff members have
been released, it was reported that
Bangri Rinpoche and Nyima
remain detained in Gutsa Detention Centre. No
additional information is available on their present
conditions or whereabouts.
Political prisoners are not only denied visitation
rights but family members are also denied information
about the detainee's location. This is a violation of
the revised CPL which requires family members of the
detainee to be notified within 24 hours of placing him or
her under arrest.
Ngawang Choephel,
the exiled musician
serving an 18-year sentence for "espionage", was able
to see his mother in 2000 for the first time since his
arrest in 1995. His mother,
Sonam Dekyi
has repeatedly
petitioned for a meeting with him but was turned down
until September 2000. She flew over to Chengdu, Sichuan,
where she communicated briefly with her only son amid
tight security behind two layers of wire mesh. She was
refused physical contact and saw him only twice, each
meeting lasting for about an hour.
At the time of prosecution, the right to obtain defense
is largely ignored in the case of political prisoners,
which vitiates the potential legal progress the revised
CPL claims to have made. The right to appeal is another
area of concern. While there have been numerous cases of
successful appeals by criminal prisoners, there is not
one single claim of such a case for political prisoners.
The very term "political prisoner" is not acknowledged
by the Chinese authorities. The myth is maintained
that no one can be detained solely on account of his or
her views or opinions. This, however, contradicts the
continued imprisonment of 451 political prisoners, who
were all arrested for exercising their right to freedom
of expression.
Although the exact number of prisons, detention centres and
"re-education through labour" units across the plateau is
not available, the fact that there are detention centres
above every county level where Tibetan political prisoners
are detained for long periods, is indisputable. What
is also certain is the severity of treatment meted out
to these prisoners. This explains the difficulty in
determining the precise number of political prisoners in
Tibet.
TCHRD has documented the arrest of 26 Tibetans during the
course of 2000. While the nature of arrest and location
may vary, all of them have been linked to political
activities deemed to "endanger state security". Detention
of Tibetans for being discovered in possession of pictures
and audio-tapes containing speeches of the Dalai Lama are
common. There are other cases of Tibetans being charged
with guiding Tibetan escapees into India.
Tsewang,
a 22-year-old from Karang Township, Dowi Salar Autonomous
County, Qinghai Province was initially arrested after
PAP officers suspected him of guiding Tibetans escaping
over the Himalayas into exile. His house was ransacked
and officials discovered photographs of the Dalai Lama,
political leaflets and audio-cassettes. He is reportedly
being detained in the Beijing Road Police Station in
Lhasa.
While information on detainees is officially limited,
even to the extent of missing identities or names, there
is no doubt that all of these prisoners were detained for
exercising their fundamental human right to freedom of
expression. The mode of this expression has lately shifted
from staging demonstrations to putting up pro-independence
posters at prominent locations in town, in front of county
offices or even at religious establishments. In religious
institutions, poster incidents have been frequent during
"work team" visits. Five monks
22
from Thenthok Monastery pasted posters in their monastery
with slogans such as "Tibet is Independent" during a
30-member "work team" visit from the Chamdo Religious
Department on 1 May 2000. They were all detained in Dzogang
County Detention Centre in Chamdo Prefecture.
Arrest and detention while trying to flee into exile
is another common feature of repression in Tibet today.
While it is impossible to accurately monitor the number of
prisoners detained at the border while trying to exit or
re-enter Tibet, the fact that these detainees go through
interrogation, beatings and other forms of punishment is
certain.
Tashi,
a 27-year-old monk from Tashi Cho-Gang Monastery,
reached India in June 2000. He was held for
three months and nine days in Gutsa Detention Centre during
his first attempt to flee Tibet in December 1999.
Reliable sources confirmed the extension during 2000 of
prison sentences on nine Tibetans for a further five years.
The reason for the additional prison terms is unknown. The
nine were arrested on 31 October 1999 during the mass
demonstration in Kandze Township, Kandze "TAP" Sichuan
Province, demanding the release of
Geshe Sonam Phuntsok,
his assistant Sonam Choephel,
and another monk, Agya Tsering.
23
The nine detainees
24
were paraded around the village in order to threaten the
other Tibetans with similar consequences.
Geshe Sonam Phuntsok
remains detained in a prison in Kandze County.
Fresh information on sentence extensions of Drapchi Prison
inmates following the high-profile May 1998 protest was
received in 2000. According to
Phuntsok Wangchuk
25
from Drapchi unit # 5, ten monks and three nuns have had
their sentences extended.
26
Jangchup Dolma,
27
who received six years extension to her existing five
years' sentence, is the longest-serving female political
prisoners in new rukhag # 3.
According to Choeying Kunsang,
28
Jangchup was accused of being the leader who spearheaded
the Drapchi protest in May 1998 and thus received higher
sentence extension.
Other arrests this year include the detention of
Tashi Phuntsok,
29
who was associated with a poster incident in Taktse County
in Lhasa municipality during the birthday celebration
of the Dalai Lama on 6 July 2000. Despite official
restrictions, posters displaying slogans such as "Free
Tibet", "Tibet Belongs to Tibetans" and "China Quit
Tibet", appeared in Taktse County. Following a series
of investigations into the incident, Takste PSB officers
detained Tashi. According to them, Tashi's handwriting
matched with that on the posters. Details of his current
whereabouts and condition are unknown.
Eight people from Sog County in Nagchu Prefecture were
detained in March 2000 on charges of political activities.
Five of them were monks from Sog Tsendhen Monastery. On
the night of 17 March 2000,
Yeshi Tenzin (32) and
Gyurmey (28)
were arrested and beaten to reveal the names of their
"accomplices". Two days later, three monks,
Tenzin Chowang (63),
Namgyal Soepa (26),
an unidentified monk,
and three laymen -
Diru Dadak (36),
Tsering Lhagon (40)
and
Serpa Sichoe (80)
-
were detained in the Lhasa Intelligence Bureau office.
Since then the eight have not been seen nor have their
family members been allowed to visit them. Additional
information from a different source indicates the detention
of another four individuals
30
from Sog County. While details surrounding their arrest
are not clear, it is suggested that they could have been
associated with the aforementioned detainees. Of the four,
Khedrup is reportedly detained in Lhasa Prison.
Despite the repetition of official avowals that China
remains an atheist-Marxist state, Beijing displays
extraordinary hypocrisy in its practices. On the one hand,
religious artifacts and religious ceremonies are banned to
Tibetans, while on the other hand, endorsing a reincarnate
high lama is a matter for state manipulation. Many
Tibetans have been detained relating to ideological
conflicts concerning reincarnation. On 30 December 1999,
the Chinese authorities declared a boy named
Lodroe Gyatso
(lay name Sonam Phuntsok) as the reincarnation of the
sixth Rating Rinpoche. Eight monks from Rating Monastery
were arrested on 17 May 2000 under suspicion of "plotting
to kill the reincarnate boy."
31
The names and details of the eight monks are not available to date.
The political repression of Tibetans is also apparent
from the emergence of new "re-education through labour"
facilities, the expansion of Outridu Prison - now called
Lhasa Prison - and a new construction at Drapchi Prison.
Following the 1998 riots in Drapchi Prison, authorities
undertook immediate renovations to house more prisoners
in solitary confinement, and started restructuring within
the prison to impede international investigation and
monitoring. There is also evidence of a new three-storey
building with balconies, possibly to house the additional
prison security personnel stationed in Drapchi to repress
further disturbances.
32
Lhasa Prison underwent some significant structural
changes since 1997, suggesting an approximate doubling
of prison capacity.
33
At the beginning of 2000, there were no less than 17 rows
of cells from an original count of four cellblocks.
34
This year a new "re-education through labour" unit
operative in Zethang Village, 10 km east of Chamdo, was
reported. Directly administered by the Law Enforcement
Department, this unit began functioning since January 1998
although information was received only this year. The unit
facilitates 30 rooms, each with a capacity of six prisoners
and 30 prison staff. Information received during the time
about this unit revealed the detention of approximately
30 prisoners in total, out of which two were held for
political reasons each serving three years sentence.
The logistical obstacles in receiving information from all
corners of Chinese-controlled Tibet means that precise
data on arrests which took place in previous years have
only recently come to light. The imprisonment of Lobsang
Nyima from Pomda Monastery in 1997 only reached monitoring
agencies in 2000. He was detained in September 1997 for
refusing to read the literature denouncing the Dalai Lama
during a "work team" visit to his monastery. Lobsang was
sentenced to five years' imprisonment. There was similar
delay in the case of Dawa Dorjee
35
who was sentenced in 1996 by Nagchu Intermediate People's
Court to 18 years' imprisonment for having pasted
pro-independence posters. He was transferred to Drapchi
Prison in 1997.
Almost all of the prisoners arrested have at some stage,
undergone serious physical abuse at the hands of either
Public Security Bureau officers or prison guards
- or often by both. Torture is a prevalent occurrence in
detention centres and prisons in Tibet, resulting in many
deaths. Extortion of confessions is a common malpractice
although Chinese Criminal Law prohibits this method of
interrogation. In fact the law imposes a heavy penalty
on those extorting confessions.
3
Article 43 of the CPL corroborates the same.
37
These enshrined legalities are clearly flouted in the
face of ongoing occurrences of torture being employed as
a means of intimidation, information gathering and insult
to detainees.
Prison authorities appear to relish exercising this
barbaric "privilege". Prison official Pema Bhuti, who
features prominently in all the testimonies of former
female political prisoners, is notorious for her insatiable
appetite for punishing and beating nuns. Former inmates of
rukhag # 3 of Drapchi Prison say they shudder at the mere
thought of her vicious behaviour. From an ordinary prison
official, she had risen to the position of head of rukhag
# 3 for her "exceptional" abuse of power. She is reputed
for addressing nun prisoners as dumo ("evil spirits").
There are reports of death of two political prisoners
while in detention during the year 2000. Although the real
cause of death is often not given due to restrictions on
information
- even to family members of the deceased -
the frequent occurrence of torture and maltreatment is a
clear indication of the causes of death of political
prisoners.
Article 4 of the Chinese government
regulations on detention centres, which came into force
in March 1990, provides that beatings and verbal abuse,
corporal punishment and maltreatment of "offenders",
are all strictly forbidden. In reality there is no one
in a Tibetan prison to whom prisoners can complain of
maltreatment. Furthermore, testimonies of former political
prisoners distinctly indicate that these kind of frequent
and violent acts of torture and abusive language are an
integral part of the Chinese interrogation system for
political prisoners. The occurrence of deaths in detention
is indicative of the severity of torture methods.
China undertook to respect the provisions of the Convention
Against Torture (CAT) which it ratified on 4 October 1988.
It thereby agreed to take legislative, administrative,
judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in
any territory under its jurisdiction. As recently as May
2000, Quio Zong Zhun, the Chinese representative, claimed
in a meeting of the CAT that "Chinese authorities have
been respecting and complying to the provision of the
Convention", and that "the authorities are making their
best possible effort to prevent infliction of torture,
and other inhuman and degrading treatment of prisoners."
The beatings meted out to political prisoners by prison
security personnel contradicts the verity of the Chinese
government's claim of respecting the provisions in the
Convention. Two political prisoners from Drapchi Prison,
Lobsang Wangchuk
38
and
Khedrup
39
,
were victims of such prison beatings that within days led
to their premature deaths. Both monks were beaten severely
with iron rods by prison authorities during the May Protest
in Drapchi Prison. While being beaten, the two were dragged
from their prison cells with their hands tied tightly
behind their backs and placed in solitary confinement
cells. Although both sustained serious injuries prompt
medical aid and attention was denied to them escalating
their conditions. Two days later, Lobsang Wangchuk was
taken to a hospital after his condition worsened; however,
he succumbed to his injuries on the way. Khedrup was seen
briefly, with his hands and legs manacled, being taken out
for interrogation on 17 May by fellow inmates. He died in
solitary confinement in late May.
In February 1999 the Chinese government, in their statement
to the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women,
made erroneous claims that the protest in Drapchi in May
1998 never occurred.
40
In April 2000,
Choeying Kunsang
gave a detailed account of
the Drapchi incident and the events leading to the death
of her friend and prison mate,
Dekyi Yangzom,
and four other nuns
41
on 7 June 1998. According to Choeying, Dekyi came back
"black and blue all over having received brutal beatings
and was barely able to walk". She told Choeying that
the prison authorities jabbed her with an electric
shock baton on her breasts; cheeks, and inserted it into
her vagina. The next day, Dekyi was required to join a
session of collective punishment along with the rest of
the prisoners, exacerbating her condition. Choeying last
saw her on 13 May 1998.
Not only do these women suffer gross violations of human
rights from imprisonment by a highly dubious legal system
for peaceful expression of their religious and personal
beliefs, but they are constantly suffering barbaric
injustices and brutality on their person as inmates. This
constitutes a flagrant display of total disregard for the
rights, dignity and health of Tibetan women.
In May 2000, in a statement made by the Chinese delegation
to the UN Committee Against Torture at the United Nations
in Geneva, many claims were made regarding the humanitarian
and special considerations received by prisoners in
Tibet. Touted examples included, "special consideration
[is given] to [the] way of life and special customs of
prisoners of ethnic minority" and, "attention is given
to the special features and characteristics of different
ethnic groups when arranging cultural educational and
recreational programmes for inmates of ethnic minorities."
The claim of "special consideration" to cultural customs
alone has been easily disproved, and the declaration of
"cultural educational and recreational programmes for
inmates" is patently ridiculous. Claims were also made
denying the use of torture, and stating that, "prison
authorities administer the prisons and supervise and
control prisoners in strict accordance with the principles
of "rigorous, civilised, scientific and direct supervision
and control of prisoners according to law". No prisoners
shall be discriminated against or maltreated. Their
legitimate rights are fully protected. And they are given
humanitarian treatment."
After the initial beating, which lasted for three hours,
16 nuns were taken away and put into solitary confinement
cells from the new rukhag #3 on 1 May 1998. Three of them
received sentence extensions
42
while the rest remained in solitary for seven months, until
December 1998. The above information received this year
from Choeying and fellow inmates from new rukhag #3 refutes
the incessant rhetoric made by Chinese government.
With the average sentence during 2000 for females being
eight years 11 months, these acts of brutality take
a serious, often long-term, toll on the physical and
mental health of prisoners. Even seemingly lesser evils
are designed to impart extremely debilitating effects.
During the winter, work sessions replace the afternoon
exercise routine but even this seemingly more humane
programme is designed to the detriment of the inmates.
Under orders to spin a designated quantity of wool from
raw fleece, women are forced to forgo sleep to fulfil the
impossibly high quotas demanded. Such abuses inflict a
permanent scar on the mental well-being of prisoners.
Prisoners experiencing severe physical as well as
mental impediments during and after their release are
commonplace. Records of mentally unstable prisoners appear
to be on the rise.
Jangchup Dolma,
is clinically insane
due to the repeated prison maltreatment she received at the
hands of the prison authorities. During the Drapchi Prison
Protest, Dolma was incarcerated in solitary confinement
for three months. She suffers from ulcers and kidney pain
from the torture she has received in Drapchi. At one
stage, upon questioning prison officials regarding the
incarceration of a fellow inmate in solitary confinement
for "showing a bad expression", Dolma suffered six hours
of severe beatings. She was constantly subjected to these
torture sessions for her outspoken behaviour and lack of
respect for the prison officials, and consequently faced
constant scrutiny and punishment for many trivial matters,
until she finally became mentally unstable.
The provisions in Article 22 (2) of the Standard Minimum
Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners
43
which stipulates that, "Sick prisoners who require
specialist treatment shall be transferred to specialised
institutions or civil hospital" is blatantly ignored in
the majority of cases of ailing prisoners.
Following the Drapchi Protest,
Choekyi Wangmo
44
received an 18-month extension to her sentence and
suffered severe beatings. Subsequently, she was reported
to have gone insane, but was accused of "faking insanity"
and subjected to six months solitary confinement and
regular beatings. At no stage did she receive any medical
attention. Choekyi Wangmo was released from Drapchi Prison
on 31 December 1999, and is now in the care of her family;
however she does not even recognize them due to memory loss
caused by the beatings. She is mentally unbalanced, has
sustained many injuries and scars from her punishments,
and constantly falls over or collides with objects,
necessitating constant care and attendance by her family.
Testimonies describing the situation of female political
prisoners must be given full credence, as the many
political prisoners who arrived in exile during 2000
have all independently corroborated similar information.
This is further supported by the many cognate reports
received over previous years. These overwhelming
testimonies completely contradicts the claim made in 2000
by
Lobsang Geleg,
former warden of Drapchi and currently
head of the "TAR" Prison Administration Bureau, that,
"We have ensured the prisoners' basic legitimate rights
through legal and civilised management and a variety of
ways and forms of supervision, and there had been no case
of violating prisoners' rights in recent years."
45
Some political prisoners have died while undergoing
treatment since they were already in critical health
following beatings and other forms of torture. Information
received during 2000 about the death of
Jamyang Thinlay
in January 1997 confirmed that he sustained severe beatings
from the officials of Chamdo Prison. He was taken to
a public hospital in Chamdo for treatment where he died
three days later. Thinlay was only 28 years old at the
time of his death. There are many cases of political
prisoners dying shortly after their release. A case in
point is that of
Ngawang Jinpa
46
who died a little over a month after being released on
medical parole on 14 March 1999.
According to
Norzin Wangmo
47
"very often if the dead body of a prisoner is badly marred,
prison authorities do not hand over the body to the family
members, thereby preventing family members from performing
the last rites."
Sholpa Dawa,
a 60-year -old tailor from
Lhasa died while in detention on 19 November 2000. He
was reportedly, taken for a brief check up to a hospital
outside Drapchi Prison complex just a few days prior to
his death. His body was apparently not handed over to his
family to perform the last Buddhist rites.
Political prisoners normally experience
deteriorating health conditions during their terms of
imprisonment. Access to medical attention rarely exists,
and this is the most frequent complaint against prison
authorities by former political prisoners. Not only
are they refused medications and treatment for minor
illnesses or injuries, but serious cases are ignored and
exacerbated by further maltreatment and malnutrition.
Officials are only forced to act when the prisoner is in
a near death situation, and by then it is often too late.
Reports indicate that females are even denied access to
basic sanitary supplies and washing facilities.
48
Australian Senator,
Bob Brown,
released a report on
his November 1999 unofficial visit to Tibet in wich he
relates, "a young nun underwent abdominal, and presumably,
gynaecological surgery in a Tibetan prison without being
told why. The result has been a protracted and apparently
irremediable deterioration in her health. As a former
medical practitioner, I am horrified by the details of
the case."
49
Former inmates have expressed reasons for their reluctance
to avail themselves of medical treatment.
Lhundup Monlam,
a former political prisoner said a clinic existed in Drapchi
Prison but "I did not go there as they provided only
outdated medicine There was only one medicine prescribed,
whether we had a cold or headache. The political prisoners
could not get proper medicines."
50
One of the many negative outcomes of the Drapchi Protest
is the curtailment of communication for political
prisoners. While non-political prisoners can continue
to receive letters, this facility has been terminated
for political prisoners. This clearly undermines the
provision in the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment
of prisoners, which allows prisoners "under necessary
supervision to communicate with their family and reputable
friends at regular intervals, both by correspondence and
by receiving visits."
51
Surveillance cameras and bugs have also been installed in each cell.
There have also been cases where criminal prisoners are
kept with political prisoners to spy on them. The former
are often rewarded generously if they manage to acquire
information, and seriously reprimanded if they fail. This
results in non-political prisoners concocting stories in
order to either receive rewards or avoid reprisals.
The case of
Tseyang
and her unfortunate death is a classic
example. In 1995, Tseyang was sentenced to six years in
Drapchi Prison, old rukhag # 3 with other female political
prisoners. The notorious Pema Bhuti, head of unit # 3,
assigned her to spy on the nun prisoners. Tseyang was
pressurised to such an extent that she finally committed
suicide in the winter of 1995. She was only 15 years
old.
52
[ Next:
Chapter 2: Restricting Religious Freedom --> ]
[ Contents ]
[ Notes ]
[ Recommendations ]
|
