Publications

---

Racial Discrimination in Tibet (2000)

Discrimination in Public Representation

Village Self-Government and Neighbourhood Committees

In October 1983, the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese Government jointly decided to create a new tier of government at the township level - the lowest so far. Incorporated within this were the creation of village committees (VCs), which would act "to manage the public affairs and public welfare of the village, mediate disputes among villagers, help maintain law and order, and convey the villagers" opinions and demands and make suggestions to the people's government." At first glance, this would appear to be a perfect medium through which the voices and opinions of Tibetan people at the lowest level could finally be heard, given the failure of the CPPCC to deliver its promises. However, since its promulgation, provinces have interpreted the Organic Law very freely, and sub-provincial governments have introduced laws and regulations which sometimes contradict those passed by the provincial authorities. "Village self-government" has taken on a variety of shapes and forms across the Tibetan region, and has largely evolved more as state power organs at the grass-roots level than as a platform for the collection of feedback from the people. Party control over village government has remained fairly strong, as Sylvia Chan concludes:

"The village self-government is firmly under the thumb of the state, not only on such matters as taxation, procurement of agricultural produce and family planning; even on purely communal matters, such as village levies and their uses, the state imposes control, if it so chooses. Many townships governments and to a certain extent, county governments too, still treat the VCs simply as their subordinate agents and trample on their autonomy."

Similar things are true of the 100,000 plus "Neighbourhood Committees" set up by the state in urban areas of the PRC. Yet the discrimination is more apparent here, in that these committees are only to be found in the Tibetan residential areas of Lhasa. Each household is required to send one member to meeting of the NC, or face fines. Once again, the stated role of these committees is to lobby government to improve local services, dispute mediation as an alternative to court proceedings, etc, while in actual fact it fulfils the sole purpose of monitoring the loyalty of Tibetan citizens:

"We had to read propaganda material the Chinese gave us and then confess everything we have been doing wrong and also denounce people working for the independence of Tibet inside and outside Tibet. We also had to criticise the Dalai Lama, referring to him as the "Dalai reactionary."

The motivation for the state's introduction of village and neighbourhood committees is not therefore to offer Tibetans a greater level of autonomy in their lives, or a chance to express their own opinions/grievances, but to coerce them into traveling the socialist road. The opportunity of "making suggestions to the government" becomes redundant within this system, as it is largely a state agency in itself. If anything, the introduction of these committees has increased dependency on the state by further limiting the avenues through which Tibetans may complain of malpractice. As Sylvia Chan revealed,

"Villagers often think that their best protection against incompetent, corrupt or extortionist VCs is none other than the state, whose declared policy is against such malpractice. On the other hand, VCs also feel that they can rely on state assistance to subdue the unruly, by violence if need be, because it is in the interests of the state to do so."