Introduction
The Chinese Olympics have been one of the most controversial sporting events in this decade. In fact, a series of individuals maintain that the Olympics have exposed the Chinese government and the doctrines they really stand for. Controversies that range from workers abuses, media freedom, The Tibetan clash and many other issues have been known to the world thanks to the Beijing Olympics. The Paper shall look at the Question of human rights abuses by the Chinese government through a case study and a verdict shall be made about the latter’s performance in International standards.
How the Chinese government has handled basic human rights in the lead up to the Beijing Olympics
Workers’ Rights abuses
The Chinese government also failed to respect the rights of its people by abusing workers rights. Numerous articles and columns have been written about the construction workers who were supposed to participate in the process of building certain structures for the Olympics. It was found that many people were migrants and most of them felt that they were not in a position to fight against the Chinese government. This forced them to put up with deplorable conditions. Such kind of treatment was totally absurd especially because if it was not for these workers, then their country would not have been ready to host the thousands if not millions of visitors who attended the Beijing Olympics. (Chan & Senser, 2008)
Many supporters of the Chinese government during the construction of the Olympic infrastructure claimed that the government had no other choice. First of all, they were working under a deadline; there was so much to do in very little time. Since supervisors in those construction sites were working under a deadline, then it would have been difficult for them to look out for some of the aspects revolving around human resource management. Consequently, this would have been the reason why the government chose to behave in the way that they did during the Olympics.
Many human right watch groups such as the Asian advocacy group have asserted that Chinese government failed to honor some of the most fundamental principles for countries hosting the Olympics. In fact, a large number of these individuals assert that the International Olympics Committee has failed to meet its obligations. This is because the latter group is supposed to ensure that countries hosting the Olympics adhere to their respective obligations. (Chan, 2007)
Additionally, the Chinese government cannot argue that they had little time to prepare for the Olympics hence necessitating the hurried and sometimes disrespectful manner in which they dealt with the construction workers. This can be seen as a sign of negligence because if the government had prepared as early as 2001, then there would be no need to engage the migrant workers in human rights abuses just so that they could meet their construction deadline.
Unfair treatment of marginal groups
The Chinese government has treated certain disadvantaged groups in society quite unfairly. Prior to the Olympics, the following categories of individuals were handpicked by the government and told to vacate Beijing. These were
Migrant workers
Petitioners
Sex workers
Beggars
Other ‘undesirables’
By behaving in such a manner, the Chinese government wanted to portray an image that was not in fact the true depiction of what Beijing or China truly was. Consequently, they had no right to tackle the situation in the manner that they chose to. (Parker, 2007)
Home Occupants’ abuses
Another issue that was discussed at length was the evacuation of individuals whose homes had to be torn down in order to accommodate new infrastructure for the Olympics. It can be argued that this was an inevitable part of the system. Many governments the world over have had to eliminate certain groups in order to look out for the greater good of their country. This is normally seen when slum dwellings or low quality houses are cleared in order to make room for better infrastructure. It is usually difficult to get rid of such occupants because that is usually the only way of life that they know. Such drastic changes are bound to create some sort of friction between change initiators and those who have been affected by it. Consequently, supporters of the Chinese government’s action during the demolitions assert that it is human nature to resist change. Such proponents claim that the people who spoke out against the government’s actions were simply those types of individuals who focused on the short term and who were not willing to embrace change.
Despite these latter arguments, one cannot ignore the fact that there were more humane ways of doing this. The Chinese government did not consider the fact that some of the buildings destroyed were the only homes that those victims knew, consequently, it would have been favorable if the government had taken the time to look for alternative settlements for these individuals and if they had created a situation in which the residents had been forewarned about the demolitions. This would have gone a long way in ascertaining that the rights of those respective individuals were respected. (Whitehouse, 2008)
It should be noted that the matter in question was not the actual demolition of people’s homes; the major problem is with the way the Chinese government opted to do it. One can either make or break their name by the way in which they execute certain matters. The Chinese government failed to show esteem for its own people yet they were the same group that wanted to show how they respected human rights. Consequently, one can assert that this was hypocrisy on the part of the Chinese government.
Freedom of Association abuses
One of the most common issues that analysts and human rights watch groups have discussed with regard to the Chinese government is the issue of freedom of association. Contrary to common expectations about stepping up human rights accordance in the Chinese population prior to the games, the Chinese government had instead gone the opposite direction. Many media companies, internet websites and other companies were hindered from expressing themselves freely prior to the Olympics.
Abuse of freedom of expression by the Chinese government was depicted through a series of instances. For example members who spoke against the treatment of other individuals prior to the Olympics were frequently arrested and even imprisoned without fair trials.
A case in point is a fifty three year old male human rights advocate known as Ye Guozhu. In 2004, the Chinese government was preparing to evict people out in order to make room for Olympic infrastructure. This individual opposed the government’s move and decided to do something about it. He went about organizing demonstrations in the street in order to make his objections known. (Foot, 2006)
The Chinese government responded very undemocratically to his actions. In fact, a substantial number of police officers were sent to the site of the demonstration and were instructed to arrest many of these demonstrators. Ye was convicted under the suspicious charge of disturbing order. He was given an extremely unfair form of punishment where he was supposed to remain in prison for 4 years.
Many people spoke against such behavior by the government claiming that there were hidden motives. They asserted that the Chinese government opted to keep Ye in prison for that long because they did not want him, to express his sentiments freely. Such kind of behavior should not be tolerated in a developed nation such as China. People ought to be free to speak their minds and the government should not deal with opposition by sweeping it under the carpet or throwing these advocates in prison. Additionally, the period which Ye served in prison was excessively long. All these actions brought out the fact that the Chinese government is not a true democracy. True democracies do not operate under the principle of fear or intimidation. By treating Ye in the manner that they did, the Government of China was trying to show other people that they could suffer the same fate if they fully exercised their freedom of expression.
Freedom of expression was also hampered prior to the Olympics when another person Mrs. Ni Yulan was imprisoned for a period of three years for protecting the rights of others who had been oppressed. Ni Yulan was a lawyer in her late forties; she felt that the Chinese government had gone about demolishing the homes of residents in an inhumane manner. Consequently, she decided to go to the demolition site and state her concerns.
While at the centre, Yi Nulan was forcibly arrested by police officers and when reported to court was charged with the offense of obstructing a police officer. This lawyer had earned a reputation as a reputable professional; however, all this went down the drain when the authorities decided to disbar her and also to take her to prison. To add insult to injury, Ni was also a victim of the demolition and was also hit by a brick during the construction process. Instead of sympathizing with her, the authorities stripped her off her license and took her to jail.
Many other developed countries have had oppositions to their actions. In fact, in New York, protests are a common sight. These rarely turn into arrests if conducted in a peaceful manner; the Chinese government still has much to learn with regard to giving their members a right to express themselves. (Callick, 2008)
Foreign personalities have also not been sidelined in these human rights abuses. The Chinese government has participated in censorship of foreign media especially during the Olympic period. A series of political and social issues have cropped up within the Chinese government prior to the Olympics. Since China felt that they would lose their reputation in the international arena if they allowed the media to show everything, then they decided to censor some of the coverage.
A case in point occurred when the government told international media not to cover any issue surrounding the Tibetan Clash. Consequently, foreign media were barred from accessing Lhasa as a region available to them. Consequently, it became increasingly difficult for the people of China or the rest of the world to fully understand the intricacies that were going on in their own country or in China for the case of the foreigners. (Sitaraman, 2008)
In close relation to the latter issue, the Chinese government also prevented many people from getting to know the truth behind certain death threats made against international media. At that time, the government was responsible for a campaign dubbed western media bias. They felt that the western media was being too harsh with the Chinese government especially with regard to the Tibetan questions. Consequently, this same government asserted that there were no death threats made against foreign media outlets consequently denying them any form of protection which one should be entitled to as a human being. The government’s sentiments were echoed by its Minister for Foreign Affairs who asserted that this was mere propaganda and heresy by the international media. One can see that even media houses that emanate from other parts of the world are also prevented from expressing themselves freely in China.
Wrongful arrests
There are so many names that tried to voice their concerns against the Chinese governments’ human rights abuses, but all these people were silenced. Instead of listening to what these groups had to say, the Chinese government instead opted to silence all of them. The following names are just some of the many Chinese natives that were abused or treated unfairly by the Chinese government during the Olympics
Yang Chunlin
Hu Jia
Huang Qi
Teng Biao
Cheng Guangcheng
Yang Chunlin was an activist who dwelt mostly on land rights. His major concern was with regard to land seizures. He had obtained ten thousand signatures to protest the government’s actions. The government arrested him and imprisoned him for five years because of alleged subversion of the state’s power. Hu Jia wanted the overall rights of the Chinese people to be protected. The government reacted to him by arresting him and charging him with subversion of power where he served a period of three and a half years in prison. (Simpson, 2008)
Additionally, Huang Qi was a human rights advocate prior to the Olympics. The government arrested him and imprisoned him after claiming that he possessed state secrets. As if this was not enough, the government arrested Teng Biao and disbarred him since he was a lawyer. The latter individual had spoken out against the government’s actions in Lhasa during the Tibetan Clash in the month of March 2007. Chen GuangCheng was also arrested by the government because he was voicing his complaints about human rights abuses in China prior to the Olympics. The Chinese government also opted to arrest him. (Jacobs, 2008)
Filtering media content
All the latter human rights abuses occurred some years prior to the Olympics. Even months before the elections, the Chinese Government was still stopping people from expressing themselves freely. The group that was largely targeted by this government were journalists. There are reports on the internet and international newspapers about how the government began conducting crackdowns on certain media elements that were perceived as threats to them. It is a known fact that in China, the Public security sector and the department  of Cyber police are all real sectors within the Chinese government. Most of them are given the mandate to censor media outlets in a hidden manner. (Leeman, 2008)
In China, a large number of media outlets are owned by the government. Consequently, most of them only report information that will portray the government in a positive light. Additionally, those groups that seem to be overly expressive are usually blocked from airing out their view. This is especially the case for internet websites. In order to do this, the government normally blocks one from accessing such websites whenever they are in China. Additionally, the same practice is carried forward to chat rooms.
As if the latter are not enough, the Chinese government has also been particularly vigilant about the issue of video sharing or visual websites. This government has instituted internet filters that are designed to capture either controversial pictures or key words that may ‘disturb the public’. Usually, when a web designer finds a way of surpassing these government filters, and they continue to spread their message, then chances are that one may have to come to terms with the full force of the law. In China, terms such as subversion, sharing state secrets and defamation are quite common. In fact, when one find themselves in such a situation, then chances are that they will get into a lot of trouble.
One should also note that in China, foreign media outlets or journalists are not allowed to employ Chinese nationals. This is especially the case when one needs to move around the country. During the Beijing Olympics, most of the people who were interested in knowing about the Chinese issue found themselves moving around the country alone because if they employed services of locals, then those troubles would have to face the full force of the law. (Audra, 2008)
Suppression of religious forces
It should be noted that when the Chinese government was trying to get permission for hosting the Olympics, they had been very clear about what they wanted with regard to these particular issues. In fact, most of the people who approve China as the official host country thought that things would take a turn for the better in subsequent years. Consequently, most of them felt that the Olympics were a chance for positive improvement.
However, this was far from the result, in fact few days after receiving official approval, the Country’s Deputy Minister was quoted saying that there should be eradication of the Falungong Spiritual movement. He asserted that this group was largely responsible for creating violent scenarios. He asserted that there should be a healthy life in China that would only be fostered by eliminating such forces. These words were then followed by a ban on the latter spiritual movement. Additionally, thousands of individuals were arrested and detained form this movement. It should be noted that about one hundred of these people lost their lives during the process of detention. All these go to show just intense and serious the problem of human rights abuses has become within China as a country.
It should be noted that the Chinese government has managed to defend itself against these human rights abuses especially with regard to wrongful arrests. For instance Hu Jintao, who is the country’s President, asserted that the Beijing Olympics’ success was a sign of triumph against anti-China forces. The government of China believes that there are certain forces within their country that oppose China as a state. Some of these forces disguise themselves as spiritual groups like the latter mentioned ones or the Dalai Lama’s religion. According to this individual, if the Chinese government did not step up its forces in dealing with these groups, then the Unity of China and the stability of the country as people knew it would be under threat.
In fact, the Beijing Olympics was a platform against which the world got to know about the problems of China. It should be noted that the latter doctrines were held even before the Olympics. In fact the Chinese government had been clashing with another religious group known as the Uyghurs. At that time, the government felt that this group was exercising separatism. Consequently, they opted to deal with them by offering to execute some of their authorities. In response to their actions, the government said that this group was exercising a form of separatism and was a threat to the unity of the government. (Cheng, Lucie and Woo, 2003)
Many human rights activists have called upon the International Olympics to do something about these human rights abuses. However, the latter committee has not been very responsive. Instead, the latter committee has caused greater abuses by requiring the government to ensure that there was adequate security in the Olympics. In response to this prompt, the Chinese government did the following;
Banning social protest movements
Encouraging grater censorship
Heightening arrests
Suppressing religious groups
Etc (Wang, 2006)
Conclusion
The Olympics are founded in the principles of peace and unity. However, the Chinese government has focused their attention on portraying these images instead of fostering them. Behind the wonderful smiles and beautiful infrastructure seen during the Beijing Olympics are several human rights abuses. The Chinese government has oppressed freedom of speech, it has blocked media contents, arrested human rights advocates, suppressed religious groups and perceived threats. Their justifications for these actiosn are not adequate enough because no excuse (even the Beijing Olympics) is adequate enough to justify human rights abuses. The Chinese government wanted to sweep matters under the carpet by looking for temporary solutions instead of tackling the problem from the roots. The Chinese government has violated numerous fundamental rights and these cannot be hidden any more.
References
Cheng, R., Lucie, A. and Woo, L. (2003): East Asian Law: Universal Norms and Local Cultures; Routledge
Foot, R. (2006): Human Rights in China and the Global Community; Oxford University Press
Sitaraman, S. (2008): Explaining China’s Continued Resistance Towards Human Rights Norms; ACDIS Occasional Paper
Wang, F. (2006): China’s Hukou System – Organizing through Division and Exclusion; Stanford University Press
Parker, M. (2007): The silent majority – Life in a Chinese village; The Economist, 23rd April
Audra, A. (2008): China has not approved Olympic protest requests; Associated Press
Simpson, P. (2008): Elderly pair punished for wanting to protest; The Morning Post
Jacobs, A. (2008): Two women sentenced to re-education in China; International Herald Tribune, 21st August
Leeman, P. (2008): Hundreds of websites still censored at Beijing Olympics: The Los Angeles Times 5th August
Callick, R. (2008): Games fell short of standards; The Australian; 26th August
Chan, A. (2007): China’s Workers under Assault; Journal of Human Rights Activists, 12, 3, 56
Chan, A. & Senser, R. (2008): China’s Troubled Workers; Foreign Affairs Report
Whitehouse, D. (2008): Chinese workers and peasants in three phases of accumulation; Colloquium on Economy, Nature and Society Paper, 2nd March