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.

As the Chinese government has the basic human rights of the Olympic Games in Beijing, worked out

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 certain disadvantaged groups in society are treated very unfairly. Before the Olympics the following categories of people who have been handpicked by the government and told to leave Beijing. They were

Migrant workers

What is the behavior of both the Chinese government wanted a picture that really does not represent faithfully what Beijing and China really was. Consequently, they do not have the right situation, so they decided to fight. (Parker, 2007)

Home mistreatment of prisoners

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.

One example is the 53-year-old man, of human rights activist Ye Guozhu known. In 2004, the Chinese government to prepare people to sell to make way for Olympic infrastructure. This single move against the government and decided to do something about it. He went on to demonstrate in the streets to express their objections. (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 is also blocked before the Olympic games, where the other person, Mrs. Ni Yulan for the protection of the rights for three years, was suppressed was imprisoned. Ni Yulan was a lawyer, his late forties, he felt that the Chinese government has gone over the inhumane way the demolition of the house. Therefore, they decided that the demolition of the city and the country would take their concerns.

Although the center, Yi Nulan was forced to prosecute the police and the courts as the fact that disability is a cop. This lawyer had earned a reputation for hard work, but it all went down the drain when the authorities decided to disbar him, and even her in jail. To add insult to injury, Ni was also a victim of the demolition and was hit by brick during construction. Instead, in order to understand him, the authorities pulled them out of your driver’s license and took him prisoner.

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)

China has a large number of media by the government. Therefore, most of them only the information that the government in a positive light. Moreover, these groups seem to be too expressive, it is usually blocked in airing their views. This is particularly true of Internet sites. To this end, the government is usually someone’s block access to such sites when they are in China. In addition, the same practice is over 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)

Prevention of religious persuasions

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 itself has failed to adopt human rights violations particularly in relation to illegal arrests. For example, Hu Jintao, President of the country, claimed that the Olympic Games in Beijing “triumph of the sign of the success of anti-Chinese forces were. The Chinese government believes that there are some Kr & # xE4; FTE oppose their country, China is the latent state. Some of the spiritual forces of R & # XFC; hmade, as if the last Dalai Lama, or religion. According to this individual, if the Chinese government does not have its forces in dealing with these IU ; hmade, then China’s unity and stability of the country, because people knew that would be threatened.

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;

Conclusion

The Olympic Games are the principles of peace and unity. But the Chinese government to provide its focus on those images, instead of promoting it concentrates. After seeing the beautiful smile and beautiful infrastructure during the Olympic Games in Beijing, several human rights violations. The Chinese government is freedom of speech was suppressed, it has blocked content, human rights activists were arrested, suppressed religious orders and the perceived risks. Their reasoning is actiosn fit enough to not be an excuse (even the Olympic Games in Beijing) is sufficient enough to justify human rights violations. The Chinese government wanted to sweep things under carpet, what to look for solutions, not temporary, roots of the problem. The Chinese government has a number of fundamental rights are being violated and it can not be concealed.

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 convicted of re-education in China, International Herald Tribune, August 21

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


Article Source:China Sourcing Blog

Popularity: unranked [?]