Rules of redress redrawn
- Source: Global Times
- [03:32 November 13 2009]
- Comments
By Kang Juan
A call to control "abnormal petitioning" jointly released recently by several law-enforcement and judicial departments in the southern city of Shenzhen has drawn wide public attention and produced debate from law experts, who dispute its legitimacy and contribution to solving social contradictions.
The notice listed 14 petitioning actions including some not listed in a petition regulation issued by the State Council, such as lodging complaints by shouting slogans, waving banners, wearing clothes emblazoned with petitions, handing out leaflets or holding sit-ins at public places, according to a report in Wednesday's Southern Metropolis Daily.
Also banned are actions that "may cause public panic," such as self-mutilation, suicide and jumping off buildings, displaying corpses or funeral urns or spreading infectious viruses such as HIV, the announcement said.
The notice also pointed out some "politically sensitive" spots in Beijing that should be off limits for petitions, such as Tiananmen Square and the locations of the central government, the State Council, and embassies.
People who have a record of carrying out two 'abnormal petitions' will be detained if they attempt to hold a petition a third time, and those who have been detained for 'abnormal petitions' may be subjected to indoctrination through labor if they try again, the notice said.
The controversy of petitioning has intensified in recent years in China. There is a dilemma between the government's protection of the right to petition and repeated petitions for personal interest and even actions of confrontation.
Some experts suggested "malicious petitioning" should be restricted and even asked for its abolishment, calling the petitioning system part of "the rule of men by men." But their opinion has not gained support from the public, especially among Web users, who are accustomed to backing petitioners.
The issue of 'abnormal petitioning' became a focus on various Web forums after the report was published, with a number of questions and criticisms popping up.
"The notice is a further restriction of petitioners, but who should the petitioners turn to if they are not treated fairly?" the Oriental Morning Post said Thursday.
A comment on the Nanfang Daily's website argued that authorities should make more efforts to improve their working procedures and take the initiative to help resolve the problems of petitioners.
