Interim Report - REPORT_NO401, March 2023

1. 270. The Committee last examined this case (submitted in February 2016) at its March 2022 meeting, when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body [see 397th Report, paras 114–141, approved by the Governing Body at its 344th Session (March 2022)]. 
2. 271. The complainant sent additional observations and new allegations in a communication dated 6 October 2022.
3. 272. The Government forwarded its observations in communications dated 30 September and 11 October 2022.
4. 273. China has not ratified either the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 274. At its March 2022 meeting, the Committee made the following recommendations [see 397th Report, para. 141]:
   • The Committee requests the Government to clarify more specifically that Mr Meng’s identification documents have been delivered to him, that he is no longer being prosecuted on the charges of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” and that he is no longer under any measure of supervision by the authorities.
   • (b) The Committee urges the Government to transmit without further delay a copy of all relevant judicial decisions in cases of Messrs Meng, Wu Lijie, Zhang Zhiyu, Jian Hui, Wu Guijun, He Yuancheng, Song Jiahui, Yang Zhengjun, Wei Zhili, Ke Chengbing, Mi Jiuping, Liu Penghua, Yu Juncong and Li Zhan.
   • (c) The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on all steps taken to facilitate constructive and inclusive dialogue with the social partners with a view to ensuring complete respect for freedom of association and to ensure the right to peaceful demonstration for workers and employers.
   • (d) The Committee once again urges the Government to transmit a copy of the investigation report into the allegations of harsh treatment of the labour activists while in custody which had revealed that Mr Zeng and others were not subject to cruel treatment while in detention.
   • (e) The Committee once again urges the Government to carry out an investigation into the allegations of beatings or injuries suffered by workers and their representatives at the shoe factory without further delay and to keep it informed of the outcome.
   • (f) The Committee recalls that the right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing implies, in particular, the effective possibility of forming, in a climate of full security, organizations independent both of those which exist already and of any political party and once again calls upon the Government to ensure this right for all workers.
   • (g) The Committee once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure adequate protection against anti-union discrimination in law and in practice and to provide a copy of the report on the outcome of the investigation to which it had referred and detailed information on the alleged dismissals of Messrs Mi Jiuping, Li Zhan, Song Yiao, Kuang Hengshu, Zhang Baoyan and Chang Zhongge.
   • (h) The Committee once again urges the Government to submit a detailed reply on each of the allegations of arrests, detention, ill-treatment and disappearance of labour activists and their supporters, as set out in Appendix I, as well as criminal charges laid against some and sanctions imposed.
   • (i) The Committee requests the Government to confirm that Lan Zhiwei, Zhang Zeying and Li Yanzhu (mentioned in Appendix II) have not been arrested, detained or prosecuted for having supported Jasic workers.
   • (j) The Committee once again requests the complainant organization to furnish any additional information it may have in relation to the persons referred to in the above recommendations (h) and (i).
   • (k) Recalling that such grave allegations as examined in this case figure among the terms set out in paragraph 54 of the special procedures for the examination in the International Labour Organization of complaints alleging violations of freedom of association, the Committee expects the Government to make additional efforts necessary to submit the remaining information requested without further delay so that the Committee will have available to it all necessary information to examine this case in full knowledge of the facts.
   • (l) The Committee invites the Government to accept a direct contacts mission to understand better the situation on the ground and resolve any pending matters.

B. The complainant’s additional allegations

1. 275. In its communication dated 6 October 2022, the ITUC indicates at the outset that despite the Committee’s repeated requests, the Government of China has failed to provide full information on the arrest, detention and prosecution of workers and labour activists and that its own attempts at collecting this information have been unsuccessful due to the high degree of fear of reprisals or retaliation and intimidation among the concerned workers and activists, who are reluctant to share information or details. The ITUC therefore considers that this case should be deemed serious and urgent and requests the Committee to reiterate its previous invitation to the Government to accept a direct contacts mission to understand better the situation on the ground and resolve any pending matters.
2. 276. According to the ITUC, there is a near complete absence of civic space for independent public advocacy or collective labour actions in China, which is exacerbated by digital surveillance and stringent restrictions on and suppression of civil liberties and freedom of expression – including under the zero-COVID policy applied throughout the country since 2020. The ITUC alleges that methods deployed by the authorities consisting of resorting to public security crimes, forced disappearance, arbitrary detention, surveillance, threats to prosecute labour activists and intimidation of their family members remain the same and refers in this respect, to the arrest of labour activist Mr Wang Jiangbing on 19 September 2021.
3. 277. The ITUC explains that Mr Wang is an independent labour activist advocating for workers’ rights in non-profit development and labour organizations in China. In early 2018, he became the director of Guangzhou Tianhe District Peer Volunteer Service Station – a non-profit labour organization that provides support services to workers with occupational diseases, especially pneumoconiosis. Mr Wang has led research on the conditions and needs of workers with pneumoconiosis, organized victimized workers in Guangzhou and Shenzhen municipalities and community-based victim support networks and provided paralegal services to injured and sick workers to make compensation claims. Between 2018 and 2019, Mr Wang regularly organized health and psychological counselling workshops for hundreds of workers and paid visits to patients in occupational disease hospitals to distribute guidebooks on rights, rehabilitation and public services, as well as health management for workers with pneumoconiosis. In 2019, before being forced to quit the Service Station, Mr Wang was frequently visited and questioned by public security officials who demanded details of his work and relations with other domestic and foreign organizations. As of October 2020, due to the anti-COVID-19 measures in place, such as the suspension of hospital visits and the tightened travel restrictions, Mr Wang could only continue to organize workers with pneumoconiosis as an independent labour activist online. On 19 September 2021, Mr Wang and his girlfriend, Ms Huang Xueqin, were taken away by unidentified public security officers at Guangzhou airport at 3 p.m. while their apartment and personal belongings were searched. The public security authorities summoned and interrogated around 40 people who, according to the CCTV footage, had been involved in gatherings at the said apartment. They were asked to provide details on Mr Wang’s activist networks, the content of discussions at the gatherings, and to match the names and photos of participants. They were required to unlock their mobile phones and their homes were also searched, with files from their electronic devices being copied by police and public security officers. The ITUC further alleges that on 20 September 2021, police officers went to Mr Wang’s hometown in Tianshui City, Gansu Province to threaten his parents against talking about their son’s situation. Between 28 and 30 September 2021, Mr Wang’s family members went to the police, the public security authorities, and the Guangzhou City Prosecutor’s Office to ask about their son’s whereabouts. On 30 September 2021, they were questioned by the municipal public security authority, who informed them of Mr Wang’s official arrest without providing information on the charges against him or his whereabouts. They were again threatened against disclosing the details of the case or seeking public assistance. On 21 October 2021, family members and their lawyer went to the Guangzhou Public Security Bureau to request bail and a meeting with Mr Wang, but to no avail. On 5 November 2021, Mr Wang’s family received the arrest notice issued by the Guangzhou Public Security Bureau stating that he had been arrested on 27 October 2021 on charges of inciting subversion of state power under article 105 of the PRC Criminal Code, and that he was still being held at Guangzhou Detention Centre No. 1. His lawyer was not allowed to meet with Mr Wang on 19 November 2021 or to obtain a response to his bail application. On 1 April 2022, Mr Wang’s lawyer was allowed to meet virtually with his client. According to the lawyer, Mr Wang was held in solitary confinement for five months in an unknown isolated location and was only transferred to Guangzhou Detention Centre No. 1 on notice of arrest in March 2022. He was in poor health and suffered from digestive problems, mental torment, and depression. To date, he has not been allowed to meet with his family. On 21 July 2022, Mr Wang’s lawyer was informed during the meeting with Mr Wang in detention that the prosecution had referred the case for further investigation, while, pursuant to article 175 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the PRC, the one-month deadline for such referral had been prescribed. The Prosecutor’s Office has yet to make a decision and Mr Wang remains in pre-trial detention.
4. 278. The ITUC indicates that, in May 2022, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention called on the Government to release Mr Wang, to provide compensation for his deprivation of liberty, and to repeal article 105 of the PRC Criminal Code (A/HRC/WGAD/2022/9). According to the ITUC, the Working Group considered that Wang’s case is indicative of the systematic problem of arbitrary detention in China and called on the Government to agree to a visit of the Working Group to the country.

C. The Government’s reply

1. 279. In its communications dated 30 September and 11 October 2022, the Government indicates that it has continued to make the utmost effort to collect relevant information in this case.
2. 280. The Government provides the following information on the individual cases:
3. 281. The Government recalls that in December 2014, a labour dispute erupted in Lide Shoe Factory in the Panyu District of the city of Guangzhou and indicates in this regard that both the municipal and district level governments have quickly intervened so as to mediate between the two parties and facilitated the settlement of the dispute. No beating of workers happened, and the public security organ received no reporting of, or dealt with, such cases.
4. 282. The Government further provides information on the four allegedly dismissed employees of the Shenzhen Jasic Technology Co. Ltd, namely Messrs Kuang Hengshu, Zhang Baoyan, Chang Zhongge and Song Yiao. According to the Government, in July 2018, the former employees illegally gathered and forcibly entered the factory and workshop, resulting in the disruption of the normal business and production order of the company. On 28 July 2018, the Shenzhen public security organ imposed criminal detention measures on them ipso jure on suspicion of disrupting public order and later substituted it by the measures of obtaining a guarantor pending trial. In August 2019, the public security organ lifted the detention measures on Messrs Kuang, Zhang and Chang after the period for obtaining a guarantor pending trial expired, while in July 2019, it imposed criminal detention measures on Mr Song ipso jure on suspicion of disturbing public order. In December 2019, the detention imposed on Mr Song was replaced by a measure to obtain a guarantor pending trial, which was lifted when it expired in December 2020. The Government reiterates information on the role of the Jasic Technology Trade Union and indicates that the trade union effectively plays its institutional role, dedicates its efforts to enhancing capacity-building, and casts a solid foundation to perform its duties and responsibilities. Its main work revolves around the organization of events and meetings in which workers’ basic democratic rights and demands are discussed, assessed, and answered. Over the past two years, the Union has received about 280 demands from workers, all of which have received feedback or have been followed-up through coordination.
5. 283. The Government concludes by reiterating that the constitution and the laws of the country fully guarantee the freedom of association to the citizens and provide strong legal safeguards for the workers to join and organize trade unions, but points out that, like in any other nation, Chinese workers and their organizations shall abide by the relevant provisions of national laws, in particular laws and regulations on social governance, in exercising the aforementioned rights under the premise of safeguarding the social and public order and ensuring the legitimate rights of other people and organizations. The Government indicates its willingness to maintain communication with the ILO in this regard.

D. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 284. The Committee recalls that this case concerns allegations of arrest and detention on charges of “gathering a crowd to disturb public order” of advisers and paralegals who have provided support services to workers and their organizations in handling individual and/or collective labour disputes.
2. 285. The Committee recalls, in particular, that Mr Meng, one of the advisers, sentenced to imprisonment on the above charges, had allegedly had his identification documents withheld by the authorities following his release from prison. The Committee further recalls that it had previously noted with concern the allegation that Mr Meng was under police surveillance to prevent him from assuming his role as a worker activist. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates its previous indication that on 7 October 2019, the public security organ lifted the measure imposed after the period of obtaining a guarantor pending trial expired. Noting the Government’s indication that Mr Meng’s identity document was not seized, the Committee once again requests the Government to confirm that Mr Meng is not being prosecuted on charges of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” and that he is no longer under any measure of supervision by the authorities.
3. 286. The Committee recalls that it had previously urged the Government to transmit without further delay a copy of all relevant judicial decisions in the cases of Messrs Meng, Wu Lijie (convicted of the crime of illegal business operation and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment and a fine of 30,000 yuan renminbi on 13 November 2019), Zhang Zhiyu, Jian Hui, Wu Guijun, He Yuancheng, Song Jiahui (all five were convicted of the crime of assembling crowds to disturb public order and sentenced to various terms of probation on 24 April 2020), Yang Zhengjun, Wei Zhili, Ke Chengbing (all three were tried on 24 April 2020 on suspicion of provocative offences and sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with a three-year probation term), Mi Jiuping, Liu Penghua, Yu Juncong and Li Zhan (all four were sentenced, in April 2019, to one year and six months imprisonment with a three-year probation for the crime of assembling crowds to disrupt public order). The Committee notes with deep regret that the Government did not provide copies of the relevant judicial decisions. The Committee recalls that in cases where the complainants alleged that trade union leaders or workers had been arrested for trade union activities, and the governments replies amounted to general denials of the allegation or were simply to the effect that the arrests were made for subversive activities, for reasons of internal security or for common law crimes, the Committee has always followed the rule that the governments concerned should be requested to submit further and as precise information as possible concerning the arrests, particularly in connection with the legal or judicial proceedings instituted as a result thereof and the result of such proceedings, in order to be able to make a proper examination of the allegations. The Committee recalls that in many cases, it has asked the governments concerned to communicate the texts of any judgments that have been delivered together with the grounds adduced therefor [see Compilation of decisions of the Committee on Freedom of Association, sixth edition, 2018, paras 178 and 179]. Observing once again the general nature of the accusations against the above labour activists as described by the Government, the Committee once again urges the Government to transmit without further delay copies of the judicial decisions in the cases of Messrs Meng, Wu Lijie, Zhang Zhiyu, Jian Hui, Wu Guijun, He Yuancheng, Song Jiahui, Yang Zhengjun, Wei Zhili, Ke Chengbing, Mi Jiuping, Liu Penghua, Yu Juncong and Li Zhan.
4. 287. Further in this connection, the Committee recalls that it had previously noted the complainant’s general allegation that it was not possible for workers and labour activists to participate in a legitimate strike or demonstration without violating the law that prohibits the disturbance of public order; and that it was common for the prosecutor and the court to view industrial action taken by workers as public security violations rather than as the exercise of fundamental rights. The Committee had noted the Government’s general observation that the Law on Assemblies, Processions and Demonstrations was a special law that regulated the demonstrations of Chinese citizens enacted to serve two purposes: (1) safeguard citizens’ exercise of their right to assembly, procession and demonstration according to law; and (2) maintain social stability and public order. The Committee observed that while some of the specific requirements relating to demonstration would clearly be in conformity with the principles of freedom of association (such as the ban on weapons, controlled cutting tools or explosives and the use of violence), several others appeared quite broad in nature and their implementation could give rise to a violation of freedom of association. In particular, the Committee observed with concern the Government’s indication that no citizen shall, in a city other than their place of residence, start, organize or participate in an assembly, a procession or a demonstration of local citizens. Recalling that workers should enjoy the right to peaceful demonstration to defend their occupational interests [see Compilation, para. 208], the Committee considered that this geographical restriction placed by legislation on the right to demonstrate is not in conformity with the freedom of peaceful assembly and requested the Government to indicate all steps taken to facilitate constructive and inclusive dialogue with the social partners with a view to ensuring complete respect for freedom of association and to ensure the right to peaceful demonstration for workers and employers. The Committee had further recalled that the right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing implied, in particular, the effective possibility of forming, in a climate of full security, organizations independent both of those which exist already and of any political party and once again calls upon the Government to ensure this right for all workers. The Committee regrets that once again the Government’s reply is limited to the reiteration that the constitution and the laws of the country fully guarantee the freedom of association to its citizens and provide strong legal safeguards for the workers to join in and organize trade unions, but points out that like in any other nation, the Chinese workers and their organizations shall abide by the relevant provisions of national laws, in particular laws and regulations on social governance, in exercising the aforementioned right under the premise of safeguarding the social and public order and ensuring the legitimate rights of other people and organizations. Noting the Government’s indication that it is willing to maintain communication with the ILO in this regard, the Committee urges the Government to take all steps, with the technical assistance of the Office, to facilitate constructive and inclusive dialogue with the social partners with a view to ensuring complete respect for freedom of association, including the right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing, which implies, in particular, the effective possibility of forming, in a climate of full security, organizations independent both of those which exist already and of any political party, and to ensure the right to peaceful demonstration for workers and employers. It requests the Government to indicate all measures taken or envisaged in this respect.
5. 288. The Committee further recalls that it had requested the Government to transmit a copy of the investigation report into the allegations of harsh treatment of the labour activists while in custody which had revealed that Mr Zeng and others were not subject to cruel treatment while in detention. Noting with regret the absence of any information in this respect, the Committee is obliged to once again urge the Government to transmit a copy of the investigation report to which it had previously referred.
6. 289. The Committee recalls that it had previously requested the Government to carry out an investigation into the allegations of beatings or injuries suffered by workers and their representatives at the shoe factory. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that in December 2014, a labour dispute erupted at the factory, that both the municipal and district level governments quickly intervened so as to mediate between the two parties, and that they facilitated the settlement of the dispute; no beating of workers happened, and the public security organ received no reporting of, or dealt with, such cases.
7. 290. With regard to its previous recommendation regarding the dismissal of workers of the technology company, the Committee notes with regret that the Government provides no information regarding the alleged dismissals of Messrs Mi Jiuping, Li Zhan, Song Yiao, Kuang Hengshu, Zhang Baoyan and Chang Zhongge and that instead, it reiterates the information on measures pending trial imposed on Messrs Li Zhan, Song Yiao, Kuang Hengshu, Zhang Baoyan and Chang Zhongge by the public security body on suspicion of disrupting public order. The Committee recalls that it had previously noted the Government’s indication that following investigations it was ascertained that two other workers, Messrs Liu and Yu, were dismissed for fighting with their colleagues and absenteeism, respectively, and that the civil case of Mr Yu’s dismissal was suspended due to him being involved in a pending criminal case. The Committee requested the Government to provide a copy of the report on the outcome of the investigation and recalled that adequate protection against all acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of employment, such as dismissal, demotion, transfer or other prejudicial measures is fundamental to the principle of freedom of association (see Report No. 389, June 2019, para. 259). The Committee regrets that the Government provides no information regarding measures taken to ensure adequate protection against anti-union discrimination in law and in practice. In light of the above, the Committee urges the Government to provide information on all measures taken or envisaged to ensure adequate protection against anti-union discrimination in law and in practice, to provide a copy of the report on the outcome of the above-mentioned investigation (cases of Messrs Liu and Yu) and detailed information on the alleged dismissals of Messrs Mi Jiuping, Li Zhan, Song Yiao, Kuang Hengshu, Zhang Baoyan and Chang Zhongge.
8. 291. The Committee once again observes with deep regret that no information has been provided by the Government in relation to the whereabouts, charges, judgments, or convictions of any of those individuals mentioned in Appendix I, as previously requested. The Committee finds itself bound to once again urge the Government to submit a detailed reply on each of the allegations of arrests, detention, ill-treatment and disappearance of labour activists and their supporters, as set out in Appendix I, as well as criminal charges laid against some and sanctions imposed. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding Ms Zhang Zeying and Messrs Lan Zhiwei and Li Yuanzhu, the three workers whose names were mentioned in Appendix II (list of individuals detained or disappeared submitted by the ITUC in its communication dated 11 February 2020), and, in particular, of the Government’s indication that security measures against them have expired and that they there are leading a normal life. The Committee requests the Government to provide information regarding Mr Wang Ji’ao, mentioned in Appendix II.
9. 292. The Committee notes the ITUC allegation of a near complete absence of civic space for independent public advocacy or collective labour actions in China, which is exacerbated by digital surveillance and stringent restrictions on suppression of civil liberties and freedom of expression – including under the zero-COVID policy applied all over the country since 2020. The ITUC alleges that methods deployed by the authorities consisting of resorting to national and public security crimes, forced disappearance, arbitrary detention, surveillance, threats to prosecute labour activists and intimidation of their family members remain the same and refers in this respect, to the arrest of labour activist Mr Wang Jiangbing and Ms Hiang Xueqin on 19 September 2021. The Committee notes that according to the ITUC, Mr Wang Jiangbing, is a labour activist advocating for workers’ rights, including in labour organizations. The Committee recalls that it has been examining this case against the background of significant legislative obstacles to the full guarantee of freedom of association in the country [see Report No. 380, para. 233], where in the absence of free and independent workers’ organizations, the representation of workers and their organization for furthering and defending their rights and interests is carried out by independent labour advisors. The detention of Mr Wang Jianging is therefore being examined in respect of his role as a labour activist, being a necessary form for freely chosen representation in a context where independent trade unions cannot exist.
10. 293. The Committee regrets that the Government has provided no observations regarding the arrest of the labour activist. The Committee takes note of Opinion No. 9/2022 concerning Mr Wang Jianbing adopted on 31 March 2022 by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention of the Human Rights Council at its 93rd session, 30 March–8 April 2022. It notes, in particular, that the Working Group concluded that the detention of Mr Wang Jiangbing was arbitrary and lacked a legal basis; that Mr Wang’s arrest and detention resulted from the exercise of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by articles 18 (freedom of thought), 19 (freedom of opinion and expression) and 20 (freedom of peaceful assembly and association) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; that Mr Wang’s right to legal assistance was denied and his right to a fair trial was violated; and that the arrest and detention was thus arbitrary. The Working Group was “disturbed by the uncontested allegations that Mr Wang continues to be held incommunicado and that all contact with his family has been denied”. The Committee notes that in its Disposition:
11. 294. In view of the arbitrary nature of Mr Wang’s detention for allegedly advocating for workers’ rights in an environment where, as previously concluded by the Committee, the exercise of freedom of association is severely restricted in law and in practice, and in view of the absence of any information on the part of the Government, the Committee urges the Government to ensure the immediate release of this labour activist and to provide detailed observations on the ITUC allegations, including on the situation of Ms Hiang Xueqin.
12. 295. The Committee notes the complainant’s indication that its own attempts at collecting information in this case have been unsuccessful due to the high degree of fear of reprisals or retaliation and intimidation among the concerned workers and activists, who are reluctant to share information or details. The ITUC therefore considers that this case should be deemed as serious and urgent and requests the Committee to reiterate its previous invitation to the Government to accept a direct contacts mission to understand better the situation on the ground and resolve any pending matters.
13. 296. The Committee had previously recalled that such grave allegations as examined in this case figure among the terms set out in paragraph 54 of the special procedures for the examination in the International Labour Organization of complaints alleging violations of freedom of association. The Committee expresses its concern that the facts of this case, under examination since October 2016, indicate a systemic problem which has been seen to have had an impact on workers’ freedom of association by virtue of the numerous persons arrested, disappeared, and intimidated for having tried to defend workers’ collective interests and for whom the Government has consistently failed to provide the detailed information requested by the Committee, including as to whether charges are still pending against any of the labour activists and on the steps taken to ensure complete respect for freedom of association. In light of the persistent failure by the Government to provide detailed information on the above and to take steps to address the Committee’s longstanding recommendations, the Committee finds itself obliged to draw the Governing Body’s attention to the serious and urgent nature of this case. The Committee expects the Government to make additional efforts necessary to submit the remaining information requested without further delay so that the Committee will have available to it all necessary information to examine this case in full knowledge of the facts and once again invites the Government to accept a direct contacts mission to understand better the situation on the ground and resolve any pending matters.

Appendix I

1. 1. Mr Mi Jiuping: the technology company worker, detained since July 2018, charged with “gathering a crowd to disrupt social order”. He is being held at the Shenzhen Municipal No. 2 Detention Centre. Mi’s first two lawyers were forced to withdraw from his case. On 1 October 2018, a request by a new lawyer to meet with Mi was denied on the grounds that Mi’s case involved state secrets. Not reachable.
2. 2. Mr Yu Juncong: the technology company worker, detained since July 2018, charged with “gathering a crowd to disrupt social order”. He is being held at the Shenzhen Municipal No. 2 Detention Centre. After meeting with Yu on 30 August 2018, Yu’s lawyer was pressured to withdraw from the case. Yu’s requests for a meeting with his new lawyer have not been accepted after 30 August 2018. Not reachable.
3. 3. Mr Liu Penghua: the technology company worker, detained since July 2018, charged with “gathering a crowd to disrupt social order”. He is being held at the Shenzhen Municipal No. 2 Detention Centre. Liu told a lawyer who met with him in September 2018 that he had been beaten. Further requests to meet with his lawyer have been denied. Not reachable.
4. 4. Mr Li Zhan: former technology company worker and worker supporter, detained since July 2018, charged with “gathering a crowd to disrupt social order”. He is being held at the Shenzhen Municipal No. 2 Detention Centre. After meeting with Li on 18 September 2018, Li’s lawyer was pressured to withdraw from his case. Not reachable.
5. 5. Ms Shen Mengyu: graduate of Sun Yat-sen University. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
6. 6. Ms Yue Xin: graduate of Peking University, forcibly disappeared on 24 August 2018. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
7. 7. Ms Gu Jiayue: graduate of Peking University, taken from her home on 24 August 2018, charged with “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” and is being held under “residential surveillance at a designated place”. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
8. 8. Mr Xu Zhongliang: graduate of University of Science and Technology Beijing, detained since 24 August 2018, charged with “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” and is being held under “residential surveillance at a designated place”. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
9. 9. Mr Zheng Yongming: graduate of Nanjing Agricultural University, detained since 24 August 2018, charged with “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” and is being held under “residential surveillance at a designated place”. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
10. 10. Mr Shang Kai: editor of a leftist media website Hongse Cankao, taken away by Guangdong police on 24 August 2018 from the office of Hongse Cankao. Still missing.
11. 11. Mr Fu Changguo: staff member of a workers’ centre, Dagongzhe, detained since August 2018, charged with “gathering a crowd to disrupt social order”. Unable to identify where he was detained since his arrest. Denied access to lawyers and his family.
12. 12. Mr Yang Shaoqiang: graduate of University of Science and Technology Beijing, taken from his home in August 2018, charged with “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”. Whereabouts unknown. No further information.
13. 13. Mr Tang Jialiang: postgraduate student at Beijing Institute of Technology, forcibly disappeared since early September 2018. Still missing.
14. 14. Mr Zhang Shengye: graduate of Peking University, taken from campus and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
15. 15. Ms Sun Min: graduate of Peking University, taken away in Guangzhou and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
16. 16. Mr Zong Yang: graduate of Peking University, taken away in Beijing and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
17. 17. Mr Liang Xiaogang: worker supporter, taken away in Shanghai and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018.
18. 18. Mr Tang Xiangwei: worker supporter, taken away by police in Wuhan for supporting Jasic workers and forcibly disappeared on 11 November 2018. No further information.
19. 19. Mr Zheng Shiyou: worker supporter, taken away in Wuhan on 11 November 2018. Arrested for inciting subversion of state power. No indictment. Not reachable.
20. 20. Ms Zheng Yiran: graduate of Beijing Language and Culture University, taken away in Beijing and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
21. 21. Mr Lu Daxing: graduate of Nanjing University of Science and Technology, taken away in Beijing and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
22. 22. Ms Li Xiaoxian: graduate of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, taken away in Beijing and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. Arrested for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
23. 23. Mr He Pengchao: graduate of Peking University, founder of Qingying Dreamworks Social Worker Centre, taken away in Beijing and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. Arrested for inciting subversion of state power. No indictment. Not reachable.
24. 24. Ms Wang Xiangyi: graduate of Peking University, founder of Qingying Dreamworks Social Worker Centre, taken away by police in Shenzhen and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. No further information.
25. 25. Ms Jian Xiaowei: graduate of Renmin University, staff member of Qingying Dreamworks Social Worker Centre, taken away by police in Shenzhen and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. No further information.
26. 26. Ms Kang Yanyan: graduate of University of Science and Technology Beijing, staff member of Qingying Dreamworks Social Worker Centre, taken away by police in Shenzhen and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. No further information.
27. 27. Ms Hou Changshan: graduate of Beijing Foreign Studies University, staff member of Qingying Dreamworks Social Worker Centre, taken away by police in Shenzhen and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. No further information.
28. 28. Ms Wang Xiaomei: graduate of Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, staff member of Qingying Dreamworks Social Worker Centre, taken away by police in Shenzhen and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. No further information.
29. 29. Ms He Xiumei: supporter of Qingying Dreamworks Social Worker Centre, taken away by police in Shenzhen and forcibly disappeared on 9 November 2018. No further information.
30. 30. Ms Zou Liping: local trade union staff member, detained in Shenzhen on 9 November 2018, charged with “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”. Taken away by police. Forcibly disappeared. No further information.
31. 31. Mr Li Ao: local trade union staff member, detained in Shenzhen on 9 November 2018, charged with “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”. Taken away by police. Forcibly disappeared. No further information

Appendix II

1. 1. Mr Jia Shijie: Peking University student, arrested on 23 September 2018 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
2. 2. Mr Lan Zhiwei: worker, arrested on 2 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
3. 3. Ms Zhang Zeying: worker, arrested on 2 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
4. 4. Mr Zhan Zhenzhen: Peking University student, arrested on 2 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
5. 5. Mr Li Yuanzhu: worker, arrested on 3 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
6. 6. Mr Feng Junjie: Peking University student, arrested in January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
7. 7. Mr Wang Ji’ao: Renmin University canteen worker, arrested on 18 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
8. 8. Ms Li Ziyi: Peking University student, arrested on 21 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
9. 9. Mr Ma Shize: Peking University student, arrested on 21 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
10. 10. Mr Yan Zihao: Renmin University student, arrested on 21 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
11. 11. Mr Li Jiahao: graduate of Peking University, arrested on 21 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
12. 12. Mr Huang Yu: graduate of Peking University, arrested on 21 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
13. 13. Ms Sun Jiayan: Peking University student, arrested on 21 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
14. 14. Mr Zhang Ziwei: Peking University student, arrested on 21 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
15. 15. Ms Chen Ke Xin: Renmin University student, arrested on 21 January 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.
16. 16. Mr Wu Jia Wei: graduate of Renmin University, arrested on 16 February 2019 for supporting Jasic workers. Not reachable.