10.10.2007 - Source: Congressional-Executive Commission on China

Government continues to enforce restrictions on citizens' right to travel, in violation of international human rights standards ("Annual Report 2007") [ID 21407]

"The Chinese government continues to enforce restrictions on citizens' right to travel, in violation of international human rights standards.31 The Law on Passports, effective January 2007, articulates some beneficial features for passport applicants, but gives officials the discretion to refuse a passport where ``[t]he competent organs of the State Council believe that [the applicant's] leaving China will do harm to the state security or result in serious losses to the benefits of the state.'' 32 Authorities restrict travel to penalize citizens who express views they deem objectionable. The Chinese government initially failed to approve democracy activist Yang Jianli's passport application,33 which he submitted after his release from prison in April 2007.34 In August, however, authorities allowed Yang to travel to the United States. Authorities had detained Yang in 2002 when he crossed into China on another person's passport. Authorities had earlier refused to renew his passport and had barred him and other activists from entering the country.35 Chinese officials have prevented other activists from traveling abroad, including rights defender Tang Jingling, whose passport was confiscated by Guangdong border authorities in September 2006 as he was en route to New York. Tang brought an administrative lawsuit against the government in December 2006.36 In February 2007, the government prevented a group of writers from participating in a conference in Hong Kong by denying visas to some writers, warning others not to attend, and directly preventing some from passing through border controls into Hong Kong.37 [See Section II-- Freedom of Expression for more information.] In June 2007, authorities intercepted human rights defenders Yao Lifa and Zeng Jinyan at the airport and prevented them from traveling to an overseas human rights conference.38 In July, authorities rejected Mongol rights advocate Gao Yulian's passport application on the grounds of ``possible harm to state security and national interests.'' 39 In August, Shanghai authorities denied the passport applications of rights defense lawyer and former political prisoner Zheng Enchong and his spouse Jiang Meili.40 The same month, authorities in Beijing prevented Yuan Weijing, spouse of imprisoned rights activist Chen Guangcheng, from traveling overseas to accept an award for her husband.41 In 2007, authorities also denied passport applications from the family members of defense lawyer Gao Zhisheng."

Document(s): Open document

26.06.2006 - Source: Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada

Query response on exit procedures for leaving China; whether one passenger may present a passport of another person when proceeding through exit controls, thereby permitting exit of the country without having to speak to any exit control official ("Exit procedures for leaving China; whether one passenger may present another's passport when proceeding through exit controls, thereby permitting exit of the country without having to speak to any exit control official [CHN101465.E]") [ID 21974]

Document(s): Open document

04.2005 - Source: UK Home Office

Country Report April 2005 - Passports ("Country Report - April 2005") [#31975],  [ID 3608]

"6.244 According to the USSD Report 2004, “The Government permitted legal emigration and foreign travel for most citizens. Passports were increasingly easy to obtain in most places, although those whom the Government deemed to be threats, including religious leaders, political dissidents, and some ethnic minority members continued to have difficulty obtaining passports.” [2j] (Section 2 d.)

6.245 As noted in the previous year’s USSD Report (2003) report:

“During the year [2003], the Government expanded from 25 to 100 the number of cities in which residents can apply for a passport. Many local governments abolished regulations requiring residents to obtain written permission from police and employers before applying for a passport. The Government continued to use political attitudes as criteria for selecting persons for government-sponsored study abroad; however, the Government did not control privately sponsored students, who constituted the majority of citizens studying abroad. Business travelers who wished to go abroad could obtain passports relatively easily.” [2d] (Section 2d.)

6.246 As reported by the official People’s Daily newspaper on 28 October 2003, biometric information such as fingerprints and DNA will be added to new Chinese passports. The source gave no date for implementation. [12j] (See also Section 6.C/Hong Kong SAR)

6.247 According to a report by the Canadian IRB dated 6 February 2001:

“The exit control system at Beijing Airport is computerised and all names are supposed to be checked through the computer system. Like any system, errors can be made or names not entered correctly so, people who are wanted should not be able to depart, but it could happen (5 Feb. 2001).” (Based on information from an official at the Canadian Embasy in Beijing) [3d]"

Document(s): Open document

10.2003 - Source: UK Home Office

Country Assessment - October 2003 - Legal and illegal emigration ("Country Report - October 2003") [#49232],  [ID 3609]

"Legal Chinese Emigration

6.A.242. The Chinese Government routinely permits most legal emigration, most recently in 2000 to Serbia [4nu], and most private foreign travel. Individuals are often required to obtain a passport, an exit permit, a visa and a second exit permit. Both exit permits are issued by the Public Security Bureau. Written permission from the work unit is a pre-requisite. The purpose of the second exit permit has seemed not to be to "control exit" (the stated purpose of the first form) but rather to allow for an exiting emigrant to be de-registered from neighbourhood, work unit and other records.[2a][4gg]

6.A.243. Special exit permit requirements imposed after the 1989 Tiananmen massacre were lifted after a couple of years. Regulations adopted in 1994 permit a Chinese citizen to exit the country without an exit permit if the traveller has travelled abroad at least once before for the same purpose.[2a] The US Government's response to the post-Tiananmen special exit permit requirements (in short, of a readier acceptance of People's Republic of China [PRC] claimants, and a 1991 amnesty for Chinese irregulars in the US) was arguably a factor in the growth of people-trafficking from Fujian. (10ay)

6.A.244. In March 2000, the exit procedures for private citizens for leaving PRC were simplified, in line with a relaxation of application to exit conditions in April 1999. The range of people permitted to visit friends and family abroad has been widened. 'Laid off employees of state enterprises ... may apply for a passport if they can submit a photocopy of a letter of invitation from abroad and a photocopy of a valid piece of identification belonging to the person making the invitation or submit a foreign employer's written job offer.' The regulations surrounding passport replacement have been simplified as well. [3ac]

6.A.245. In the Far East, Hong Kong, Bangkok, and Kuala Lumpa are all nodal points for a pattern of legal entry to and then illegal exit from. [19g] Legal emigration is being and has been abused, most notably emigration to Serbia in the late 1990s, with illegal emigration to the EU. One route is a land route via Hungary, with Hungarian police picking up 100 to 150 illegal immigrants per month. [4nu]

Illegal Chinese Emigration

6.A.246. Illegal emigration in this context means the exiting of the PRC without the Chinese authorities' authorisation. This is a condition routinely claimed by UK and other recipient country asylum claimants, who typically present themselves as being without any official documentation. Technically, the act of exiting mainland China without permission is an offence. If this is the only unlawful act committed by the emigrant, then they are punished under Article 14 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Exit and Entry of Citizens (1981) and thus "may be given a warning or placed in detention for not more than ten days by a public security organ". [3l] Confusion over the penalties and conditions awaiting returnees is one of the difficulties faced by recipient countries' governments in returning to the PRC (see below, Returnees) and is exploited by the snakeheads as being as much a facilitation device as legal emigration from China."

Document(s): Open document

10.2003 - Source: UK Home Office

Country Assessment - October 2003 - Migration Issues ("Country Report - October 2003") [#49232],  [ID 3610]

"The Treatment of Returnees

6.186. The act of exiting Mainland China without permission is an offence punishable by detention “for not more than ten days” and the imposition of a fine ranging from 10,000 and 20,000 Yuan (Ł700 - Ł1400). [3l][2a] Those who are identified as people smugglers are liable to criminal prosecution. [2a] The case of Cheng Chu Ping ('Big Sister Ping') indicates that the Chinese, or in this case Hong Kong authorities will also extradite 'snakeheads' wanted for crimes committed abroad. [28j.]

6.187. The Chinese Government does not generally mistreat returnees, unless the person has been deported to China more than once. [3ao][18l][3l]

Other Migration Issues

6.188. On 18 July 2003, the official news agency (Xinhua) reported that the United Kingdom was now the most popular destination for Chinese students wishing to study abroad. It estimated that 60,000 Chinese students were now studying in the UK. [9gai.] President Hu Jinato has described students returning from abroad as “precious wealth”. Only around one in four Chinese students studying abroad return to the PRC. [15ah.]

6.189. That same month China's Ministry of Public Security (MPS) announced the introduction of new measures to make it easier for people in medium size cities to apply for passports on proof of need; from now on they'll only be required to produce an ID card and residence booklet(s). The Ministry estimates that as many as 100 million people will be eligible to apply."

Document(s): Open document

01.08.2003 - Source: Amnesty International

AI: Information response: Attatchment: Report of the South China Morning Post: Falun Gong blacklist held ("Stellungnahme vom 1.8.2003 an VG Mainz - 2 K 517/03.MZ -") [#14942],  [ID 3614]

"Artikel aus der South China Morning Post (Hongkong) vom 13.7.2002:

Visitor refused entry 'mistaken for sect member'

A Taiwanese visitor claims she and her two young children were held at Chek Lap Kok airport for 20 hours and refused entry after she was apparently mistaken for a Falun Gong member.

Lai Shu-lin, 34, claims she was under close surveillance and was not allowed to even close the toilet door during her detention, according to her husband, Mr Choy, who is from Hong Kong.

In a telefone interview from Kaohsiung, Taiwan, Mr Choy, who would not give his full name, told the South China Morning Post that his wife took their son, aged five, and daughter, seven, to Hong Kong on June 30 to visit relatives.

But on arrival at about 7pm the family was taken to a separate room by immigration officers.

Mr Choy claimed immigration officers refused to explain to his wife why she was denied entry and detained, but asked the family to take a 10am flight back to Taiwan the next day.

Mrs Lau was told by another person detained in the same room that she had probably been mistaken for a Falun Gong member who shared the same name.

The family was finally sent back on an afternoon flight at 3pm.

Mr Choy, who moved to Taiwan 10 years ago, accused the Hong Kong government of failing to carry out a thorough investigation before deporting innocent people.

"How can someone be refused entry or detained only because they share the same name of the people blacklisted by the government? That is ridiculous," he said.

Officials have always insisted there is no blacklist of Falun Gong members.

Mr Choy said he would not allow his family to visit Hong Kong in future unless immigration officials cleared his wife's name from the list.

The Immigration Department yesterday said it refused to comment on individual cases, but insisted nobody had been refused entry on religious grounds.

The number of people denied entry at Chek Lap Kok last year rose by almost 28 per cent on the previous year, despite a drop in travellers flying into the SAR.

Among those refused entry were 13 overseas Falun Gong members who wanted to join the group's SAR conference in January. More than 100 sect members were turned away in May during a visit by President Jiang Zemin."

Document(s): Open document

13.02.2003 - Source: New York Times

The New York Times: China has held U.S.-based dissident incommunicado since april for entering the country with a fake passport ("China Has Held U.S.-Based Dissident Incommunicado Since April") [#10916],  [ID 3613]

"More than nine months after his detention for traveling on a false passport, a United States-based dissident from China is still being held incommunicado and his relatives have received no formal notice of the charges.
[...]
Mr. Yang was originally detained for the false passport, but the authorities "discovered that Yang was suspected of other criminal activities," the response said. "The judicial department is now carrying on further investigation on him in accordance with the law," it said.
[...]
Mr. Yang moved to the United States in 1985 to pursue a Ph.D. in mathematics at Berkeley. But in 1989, as pro-democracy demonstrations around Tiananmen Square reached a climax, he rushed back to China to take part. After the bloody crackdown on June 4 of that year, he fled to the United States and has been on a Chinese government blacklist ever since, repeatedly denied permission to visit.
[...]
Last spring as worker demonstrations erupted in northeastern China, Mr. Yang decided to use a false passport and see things at first hand, his wife has said. He entered the country, but on April 26 he was detained in the southern city of Kunming. [...]"

Document(s): Open document
printer friendly version

21.03.2001 - Source: Amnesty International

Unlawful leave ("Verwaltungsstreitverfahren eines chinesischen Staatsangehörigen") [#2472],  [ID 3615]

"[...]
Die illegale Ausreise kann nach § 322 chinStGB strafrechtlich geahndet werden. Zwar ist die Wahrscheinlichkeit dafür, dass jemand allein wegen seiner illegalen Ausreise strafrechtlich verfolgt wird, gering, jedoch besteht eine beachtliche Wahrscheinlichkeit dafür, dass dies bei Vorliegen weiterer Straftatbestände als straferschwerend bewertet und mit geahndet wird.
[...]"

Document(s): 0790chi.doc