China must explain bookseller’s 10-year jail term
- Gui Minhai, a Swedish national and Hong Kong resident, was sentenced for ‘providing intelligence overseas’ in a case where the details are murky
The 10-year jail term handed down to Hong Kong bookseller Gui Minhai for “providing intelligence overseas” has understandably fuelled concerns here and abroad.
Over the past five years, the high-profile case has sparked a diplomatic row between China and Sweden and raised questions over the implementation of “one country, two systems”. Higher transparency is called for to address the negative perception of a judicial system that still has considerable room for improvement.
The “bookseller” episode in 2015 remains highly controversial, not just because it involves the right of foreign nationals on the mainland, but also allegation of individuals involuntarily brought back for criminal investigation by the Chinese authorities.
Along with four others who ran a Causeway Bay bookshop selling titles banned across the border, Gui, a Swedish national, went missing in Thailand and eventually reappeared on the mainland. Under custody, he said he “turned himself in” for a hit-and-run case in Ningbo years ago.
Upon release in 2017, he was kept under surveillance and arrested again while on his way to Beijing with Swedish diplomats.
China has its own judicial system. It is not unusual for cases to be tried behind closed doors, especially when the details are deemed to involve state secrets and security. Gui’s case appears to be in that category. But the practice should not prevent further explanation.
A brief statement by the Intermediate People’s Court of Ningbo only said Gui, who was also deprived of political rights for five years and would not appeal, had agreed to restore his Chinese nationality.
What happened to the booksellers has raised fears about cross-border law enforcement and curbs on free expression and publication. Five years on, the precise details remain unclear.
The sentencing of Gui does not seem to shed further light other than saying he was found guilty of providing intelligence to overseas agents, the details of which are still unknown. The Chinese judicial system still leaves much to be desired. But Beijing has stressed the importance of further reform.
Transparency aside, China should continue to demonstrate its commitment to the rule of law. This is especially important to a nation with increasing stature and responsibility on the international stage.
