Interim Report - Report No 275, November 1990

1. 323. The Committee has examined this case twice before, at its November 1989 and February 1990 meetings. (See 268th Report, paras. 668 to 701, and 270th Report, paras. 287 to 334, approved by the Governing Body at its 244th and 245th Sessions, respectively.)
2. 324. At its May 1990 meeting, the Committee adjourned its examination of the case, urging the Government to provide the information requested as soon as possible so that this case could be examined at its next meeting. (See 272nd Report, para. 7, approved by the Governing Body at its 246th Session.)
3. 325. The Government sent its observations in a communication dated 11 October 1990.
4. 326. China has ratified neither the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) nor the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examinations of the case

1. 327. The allegations presented by the ICFTU in June 1989 stemmed from the measures taken by the authorities against the Workers' Autonomous Federations (WAFs), organisations created in several Chinese provinces, their leaders and activists; the banning of the organisations; the death of a number of leaders following an attack by the armed forces; the sentencing to death and execution of workers; and arrests. In support of its allegations the ICFTU had supplied a long list of workers said to have been arrested or executed, which the Committee annexed to its May 1990 Report.
2. 328. The Committee noted that the statements of the complainant, on the one hand, and of the Government, on the other, differed considerably with regard to the nature and objectives of the WAFs. According to the ICFTU, the WAFs were independent and democratic organisations which were seeking ways to legalise their organisations within the constitutional order, whereas the Government claimed that they were illegal organisations which had never applied for registration and whose declared aim was to overthrow the socialist system and the Government. To this end, according to the Government, they had fomented trouble and resorted to violence and could not therefore be considered to be trade union organisations.
3. 329. In this respect, the Committee recalled that the meaning given to the term "organisation" by the ILO covers all organisations of workers or employers created to promote and defend the interests of the workers or employers. In this particular case the Committee noted that, according to the ICFTU, the main thrust of the statutes of the Beijing WAF was that the organisation should be autonomous, independent and democratic and that it should serve the principles of representing and defending the workers' interests. Furthermore, according to the complainant, the grievances voiced by the WAFs concerned the lack of workplace democracy, the lack of genuine workers' representation, the poor working conditions and the deterioration of the workers' purchasing power. These claims were not denied by the Government, which itself recognised that the Provisional Memorandum of the Beijing WAF accepted the Constitution and the law of the country, although it stated that this had subsequently proved not to be true. In the Committee's opinion, the WAFs' grievances referred to by the ICFTU were part of the normal activities of workers' organisations seeking to promote and defend the interests of their members. The WAF organisations would therefore appear to have been workers' organisations in the sense given to them by the ILO.
4. 330. As to the argument that the WAF organisations had not applied for registration, the Committee was of the opinion that the absence of such an application did not necessarily mean that the workers did not wish to create organisations, especially as the legislation appeared to provide for a trade union monopoly that did not leave any room for organisations outside the existing trade union structure. The 1987 Provisional Regulations on the Handling of Labour Disputes in State Enterprises, for example, refer only to "the trade union committee", which would seem to exclude the existence of several trade union committees. In the present case, the Committee noted that the Government had relied on the fact that the WAFs had not been registered as a pretext for declaring them illegal. In this respect the Committee pointed out that, if the conditions for granting registration are tantamount to a requirement that the prior permission of the public authorities must be obtained for the establishing or functioning of a trade union, this would undeniably constitute an infringement of the principles of freedom of association.
5. 331. In addition, the Committee expressed its deep concern that the information supplied by the Government showed that the legislative provisions in force in China clearly infringed the right of workers to set up and join organisations of their own choosing, and the right of trade unions to organise their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes of action. In particular, the Committee pointed out that the Government cited the alleged opposition of the WAFs to the constitutional provisions concerning the leading role of the Communist Party and to the establishment of a socialist regime as justification for the measures taken; and the Government had explained that all reactionary organisations which threatened the interest of the State were banned. The Government also stated that one of the Beijing WAF's leaders was accused of having incited the population to oppose the Government and of having created a trade union of his own choosing. The Committee pointed out that unity within the trade union movement should not be imposed by the State through legislation, for that would conflict with the principles of freedom of association. The Committee felt bound to conclude that these basic principles had not been respected in this particular case. Consequently, the Committee urged the Government to take the measures necessary to guarantee, both in law and in practice, the right of workers to set up organisations of their own choosing and the right of these organisations to function freely.
6. 332. As regards the acts of violence said to have been committed by the WAFs and their leaders, the Committee noted the information supplied by the Government. However, it noted that all the examples of violence cited in the reply (setting fire to military vehicles, blocking roads and preventing access to public buildings) concerned events that had occurred when the WAFs had been reduced to operating illegally.
7. 333. In this respect, the Committee considered that for a trade union contribution to be fully useful and credible, it must be able to engage in its activities in a climate of freedom and security. This implies that, in a situation in which, in their opinion, they lack the essential freedoms to perform their functions effectively, trade unions would be justified in demanding that these freedoms and the right to exercise them be recognised and that these demands be considered as coming within the scope of legitimate trade union activities.
8. 334. As regards the deaths and detentions of and ill-treatment inflicted on the WAFs' leaders and activists, the Committee expressed its grave concern at the seriousness of these allegations concerning which the Government had not yet supplied sufficiently detailed replies.
9. 335. The complaint referred to the death of WAF leaders in the course of the assault on Tiananmen Square by the armed forces during the night of 3 to 4 June 1989. The Government had not responded to these allegations. The Committee therefore requested it to send its observations on this point and, inter alia, to indicate the exact circumstances surrounding the alleged deaths.
10. 336. The Government confirmed that three workers from Shanghai had been sentenced to death and executed for setting fire to railway carriages and police vehicles and preventing the fire-fighters from doing their work in the course of events that occurred in the night of 6 to 7 June 1989. The Committee deplored the extreme rapidity with which the sentences had been pronounced and carried out, since the executions had taken place two weeks after the incidents concerned, during which the case had been tried on two occasions - once by a court of first instance and again on appeal. The speed of the proceedings implied that the accused had not been able to enjoy the usual judicial guarantees. The Committee expressed the firm hope that such summary proceedings would not be resorted to again.
11. 337. The Government also confirmed that nine workers from Changchun had been arrested and seven of them had been sent to labour education camps. To justify these measures the Government indicated that the persons concerned had committed murder, theft and rape, or had incited to strikes, blocked roads or carried out activities hostile to the Government. The Committee requested the Government to supply precise information on the events on which these accusations were based, including the text of the judicial decisions involved.
12. 338. As regards the arrest of WAF leaders and activists, the Committee noted that those found guilty had been sent to labour education camps and that a re-education policy had been adopted for those WAF leaders who had not violated the law. The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the reasons for and the nature and objectives of this education through labour which was imposed on these trade unionists. In addition, the Committee noted the Government's statement that its policy had been tolerant and that only a small minority of criminals had been punished. The Government referred to the activities of one of the Beijing WAF's leaders, Hang Dongfang, without specifying whether he had been sentenced. On the other hand, it did not supply any information on the leaders and members of the WAFs who were alleged to be on a "wanted" list or under arrest. The Committee therefore requested the Government to send its observations on this matter as well as on the situation of all the other workers cited in the list attached by the ICFTU. The Committee also requested the Government to supply its observations on the allegations of ill-treatment of certain detainees, in particular Hang Dongfang and Liu Qiang.
13. 339. At its May 1990 Session, the Governing Body approved the following recommendations of the Committee:
    • "(a) The Committee expresses its deep concern at the seriousness of the allegations in this case which include deaths, detentions and ill-treatment of WAF leaders and activists, and concerning which the Government has not supplied sufficiently detailed replies.
    • (b) The Committee recalls that the right of workers to establish organisations of their own choosing implies, in particular, the effective possibility of forming, in a climate of full security, organisations independent both of those which exist already and of any political party. The Committee deplores that this basic principle has not been respected in this particular case. The Committee expresses its deep concern that the constitutional and legislative provisions currently in force in China are in clear contradiction with the right of workers to set up organisations of their own choosing and with the right of these organisations to function freely. It urges the Government to take the measures necessary to guarantee these rights, both in law and in practice.
    • (c) The Committee draws the Government's attention to the principle that, if the conditions for granting registration of a trade union are tantamount to obtaining prior permission from the public authorities, this would undeniably constitute an infringement of the principles of freedom of association.
    • (d) The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the exact circumstances surrounding the death of leaders of the WAFs said to have occurred during the night of 3 to 4 June 1989 during the attack on Tiananmen Square.
    • (e) The Committee deplores the extreme rapidity of the proceedings in the case of the three workers from Shanghai who were sentenced to death and executed, which implies that the accused were not able to enjoy the normal judicial guarantees. The Committee expresses the firm hope that such summary procedures will not be resorted to again.
    • (f) With regard to the sentences passed on nine workers from Changchun, the Committee requests the Government to supply detailed information on the actual events on which the sentences for murder, theft and rape (mentioned in the reply) were based, and in particular to supply the judgements involved. As for the workers accused of organising strikes, the Committee recalls that strikes are one of the essential means that workers and their organisations should have to further and defend their economic and social interests.
    • (g) The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the reasons for and the nature and objectives of the labour re-education measures imposed on trade unionists.
    • (h) The Committee once again requests the Government to send its observations on the arrest of leaders and members of the WAFs (the grounds for their arrest, the nature of any proceedings instituted against them and their current situation) and, specifically, of Bai Dong Ping, Liu Qiang, Quian Yunin, Chen Yinshan, Hang Dongfang, all five from Beijing; Zhang Qiwang, Chen Shangfu, Wang Miaogen, Wang Hong, Shen Zhigao, Li Zhiguo, from Shanghai; and Li Guiren from the Province of Shaanxi; as well as on the grounds for placing Ho Lili on a police "wanted" list and the present whereabouts of this worker. It also requests the Government to supply information on the situation of all the other workers cited in the list attached by the ICFTU to its latest communication."

B. The Government's reply

1. 340. In its communication dated 11 October 1990 the Government reaffirms that in its earlier reports the Committee did not seriously take the Government's position into account and that it relied solely on the irrational charges and misleading information of the ICFTU. Accordingly, the Government is absolutely unable to accept the Committee's conclusions and recommendations. The Government maintains that China, one of the founder Members of the ILO, remains faithful to its commitments towards the ILO. Confronted by an unjustified interference in its domestic affairs, the Government states that it feels bound to react vigorously. Nevertheless, in order to reply once again to the ICFTU's mistaken points of view and throw light on the misleading account of the facts, the Government wished to submit some additional comments.
2. 341. As regards the death of the leaders of the Beijing WAF, the Government states that the ICFTU's allegations are utterly baseless. One year after the events which had occurred in Beijing the truth has come to be known throughout the world. The Government recalls that in a letter of January 1990 it gave full particulars of the crimes committed by the WAF - an illegal organisation - in connection with the disturbances and the rebellion, and of the action taken by the Government, in conformity with the Constitution and the legislation, for restoring calm and crushing the rebellion.
3. 342. The Government states that nobody - whether student or worker - was killed when Tiananmen Square was cleared on 3 and 4 June 1989. This is a fact that has been confirmed by a large number of Chinese and foreign witnesses. No WAF leader died at the time when the rebellion was crushed.
4. 343. The Government states that the Chinese public security services did indeed investigate the cases of a very small number of criminals, including some leaders and militants of the WAF, because they had taken part in the rebellion and had carried out criminal acts, such as disorderly conduct, sabotage, looting, arson and killings, in breach of the criminal law. Their arrest and the investigation of their cases were absolutely necessary and in conformity with the law. This in no case constitutes a violation of freedom of association or of trade union rights.
5. 344. So far as the WAF is concerned, the Government considers that its two earlier replies adequately explained the illegal character of that organisation. In order to dispel any misunderstanding, the Government wishes to explain the content of the regulations in force in China concerning the registration of social organisations. The Chinese Government has at all times upheld the principle of freedom of association and protects organisations and associations established pursuant to the law as well as their activities in keeping with the Constitution and the legislation. The purpose of the requirement that a social organisation must submit its application for registration to the appropriate authorities is to ensure that its establishment is in conformity with the Constitution and with the legislation, and to ensure that neither national, social or collective interests nor the liberty or legitimate rights of other citizens are prejudiced. In accordance with the spirit of Article 2 and Article 8, paragraph 1, of Convention No. 87, this requirement should not be construed as meaning that the appropriate authorities' permission amounts to a prior condition. The WAF did not begin the registration procedure. Hence its establishment is not lawful from the point of view of the Constitution and the legislation, quite apart from the unlawful acts it committed in provoking and taking part in the disturbances and the rebellion. In the Government's opinion, the WAF is not a workers' organisation but a small group of criminals set up in haste in the name of the "workers". It does not represent the workers' interests and has not done anything of benefit to the workers. All it has done was to rouse the masses in order to incite them to rebellion and to carry out criminal acts such as rioting, sabotage, looting, arson and killings with the object of overthrowing the legitimate Government. This conduct is in serious breach of the Constitution and the law and is in conflict with the fundamental interests of the Chinese people. In the Government's view, the suppression of this small criminal group and the punishment of criminals who offended against the law are consequently perfectly legitimate, lawful and necessary.
6. 345. The Government reaffirms that its policy with respect to the members of the WAF was to apply penalties or to show mercy, depending on the case, in the light of the facts and on the basis of the law, to bear down hard on persons guilty of offences under the ordinary law and to apply a policy of re-education with respect to the offenders.
7. 346. In keeping with this principle, the persons held in custody who had not committed any act in breach of the criminal law - even though they had taken part in the disturbances and in the rebellion - or who had committed only minor offences with minor consequences, or who have adopted a correct attitude of remorse, were released after re-education or had their sentences remitted. These persons include: in Beijing, Bai Dongping, Yang Fugiang, Zhang Jun, leaders of the WAF, Liu Huanwen, organiser of the WAF's inspection group, Yang Shizeng and Zhao Yetang; Peng Jing and Yang Gechuang (province of Hubei), Zhou Yong (leader of the WAF at Changsha in the province of Hunan) and Liu Zhaixing (province of Hunan), Bao Hongjian, Chang Zimin, Ren Xijing, Xu Ying and Zhao Demin (all members of the WAF of the province of Shaanxi), Xu Bingli, Gong Chencheng, Jiang Deyin, Chen Shengfu and Wang Miaogen (WAF of Shanghai), Zhu Guanghua (leader of the WAF at Hangzhou, province of Zhejiang), Yu Yungang, Liu Xiaolong, Zhu Lin, Wang Jianjung, Wei Yongbin, Li Tao and Pang Xiaobing (all members of the WAF of the province of Shaanxi), Gao Yunming and Li Mingxian (province of Liaoning).
8. 347. A handful of criminals who had committed serious offences were prosecuted under the provisions of the Penal Code on the basis of proven evidence. For example, in Beijing, Gong Chuangchang was sentenced to a 15-year term of imprisonment for looting; Liang Zenguo to a 13-year term of imprisonment for looting; Sun Yancai to a life term for looting; Wang Lianxi to a life term for arson; Luan Jikui was sentenced to death for arson, subject to a two-year stay of execution; Lin Zhaorong, Zhang Wenkui, Zhu Jianjun, Chen Jian and Wang Hanwu were sentenced to death for arson having caused serious damage; Lue Hongjun was sentenced to death for serious looting; Ban Huijie was sentenced to death for very serious assaults on women with aggravated circumstances; Meng Duo was sentenced to death for murder. In Shanghai, Zhu Genbao was sentenced to a three-year term of imprisonment for destroying transport equipment; Zun Jihong to a five-year term of imprisonment for arson; Song Ruiying, Sun Mahong, Zhang Renfu and Zheng Liang were sentenced to five-year terms of imprisonment for having sabotaged transport equipment; Shan Guoquang and Huang Jianhua to a three-year term and a 4 1/2-year term of imprisonment, respectively, for disturbing the public peace; Ai Qilong and Yuan Zhimin to ten-year terms of imprisonment for sabotaging public transport and causing serious damage; Zhao Jianming was sentenced to a 12-year term of imprisonment for sabotaging public transport and causing serious damage; Peng Jiamin and Wei Yinchen were sentenced to life terms for the same offence. In the province of Hubei, Chen Wei was sentenced to a three-year term of imprisonment for having disturbed the public peace; Jin Tao to a three-year term for looting; Hu Lingbing to a life term for arson with aggravated circumstances. In the province of Sichuan, Zhang You was sentenced to a life term for arson, looting and disturbing the public peace. In the province of Zhejiang, Gao Jintang and Li Xiaohu were sentenced to three-year terms of imprisonment for disturbing the public peace; and in the province of Shandong, Zhang Xinchao was sentenced to a three-year term of imprisonment for disturbing the public peace. Xu Dianwei, Xu Xianglu, Ma Jianguo and Xu Jianlei, who had committed larceny, murder and looting and who had been fugitives since committing a murder and serious looting offences in September 1988 were arrested in May 1989. These cases are not connected with the events in Beijing.
9. 348. The Government adds that the trials were conducted and the judgements handed down in strict conformity with the procedure prescribed by the law, and that the death sentences were ordered after specially prudent consideration. The persons concerned and their legal representatives exercised their right of appeal, and the court of appeal did not give its final ruling until after it had carried out a scrupulous and thorough inquiry. All the facts show that the investigation of the cases of the suspects and the penalties ordered by the judicial authorities against the offenders were in conformity with the law and hence are unrelated to these persons' membership of the WAF or to freedom of association.
10. 349. The Government points out, moreover, that a number of persons whose names appear on the ICFTU's list, e.g. Yang Wei, Wang Fusshun, Li Meihu, Yang Hengwu, Li Jiang, You Diangsi, Jing Weidong, Sun Ruozhong and Wang Weilin, from Beijing; Li Zhibao, Yang Xiao, Chang Qiyang, Tian Wei, Zhong Quancheng and Dong Langjun, from Shanghai; Pan Haihong, from the province of Guanxi; Zhang Lishan, Wen Lihua, Cai Shi, Bao Huilun and Yang Xudon, from Inner Mongolia; Liu Chongxi, Xu Tao and Tang Zibin, from the province of Shaanxi, have not been arrested and their cases have not been brought before the judicial authorities.
11. 350. With reference to the Committee's recommendation that "the legislative provisions currently in force in China are in clear contradiction with the right of workers to set up organisations of their own choosing and with the right of these organisations to function freely", the Government states that this is a unilateral and arbitrary affirmation. The Government has at all times attached special importance to the democratic rights and freedom of all Chinese citizens, including trade union freedom. Article 35 of the Chinese Constitution provides: "Every citizen of the People's Republic of China has freedoms of expression, publication, meeting, association and demonstration." The Chinese workers, who are the country's masters, enjoy the full benefit of these rights and freedoms. The Government stresses that it is continuing its efforts to build socialist democracy and socialist legislation, with a view to better guaranteeing the people's rights and freedoms. All the relevant international Conventions and treaties are taken into account. For example, the Government ratified, last September, the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) and the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144). The Ministry of Labour has devoted large human and financial resources to translating and publishing recently a select collection of international labour Conventions and Recommendations, including some important Conventions concerning human rights, e.g. Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. At the same time, the Ministry of Labour of China has on many occasions invited the International Labour Office to organise in China a tripartite seminar on international labour standards. All this proves, in the Government's opinion, that it attaches special importance to the safeguarding of the workers' rights and freedoms and to their effective application by all possible means. Accordingly, any allegations that China has "violated human rights" or "the freedom of association" is unjustifiable.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 351. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its latest communication. The Committee notes with regret that the Government maintains the position it had upheld in its earlier replies, viz. that the events referred to in the ICFTU's complaint are an internal Chinese affair. In this respect, the Committee must point out that when a State decides to become a member of the Organisation, it accepts the fundamental principles of the Organisation, such as those set out in the Constitution and the Declaration of Philadelphia, including those relating to freedom of association. Consequently, the Committee considers that allegations of violations of trade union rights cannot be considered as an internal affair of the State concerned, as the Government claims. The Committee has been presented in this case with a complaint that is perfectly receivable from the procedural point of view and hence it is its duty to examine it with all necessary attention. For this purpose it will take into consideration, as is its invariable practice, both the particulars submitted by the complainant organisation and those communicated by the Government.
2. 352. In its reply, the Government stresses once more the illegal character of the WAFs, in that they did not observe the registration procedure prescribed by the legislation. In this connection, the Committee stresses that it is not its intention to consider as inconsistent with the principles of freedom of association all registration procedures, which exist, indeed, in many countries. Nevertheless, while it is true that the founders of a trade union ought to respect the formalities prescribed by the legislation, these formalities should not be such as to jeopardise the freedom to organise. In this particular case, the Government itself, in its reply of January 1990, stated that one of the fundamental principles of the Chinese Constitution was the leading role of the Communist Party and that the registration of organisations engaging in reactionary conduct should be cancelled and the organisations banned. In the light of these factors, the Committee considers that the registration procedure prescribed by Chinese legislation is more than a mere formality and, in practice, amounts to a kind of prior permission by the authorities, which is inconsistent with the principles of freedom of association. On this point, the Committee refers to the opinion expressed by the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations in its General Survey of 1983 (see Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, para. 115) according to which the administrative authorities should not be able to refuse registration of an organisation simply because they consider that the organisation could exceed normal union activities or that it might not be able to exercise its functions. Such a system would be tantamount to subjecting the compulsory registration of trade unions to the previous authorisation of the administrative authorities.
3. 353. In view of the requirements laid down for the registration of trade union organisations the Committee appreciates that the WAFs were unable to apply for registration, for under the Chinese legislation such an application was bound to be rejected, as the Government itself implied in its communication of January 1990, in which it stated that "the fact of setting up the WAF itself violated Notice No. 136 issued by the Beijing Municipal Government". The Committee recalls that it has examined the provisions of the statutes of the Beijing WAF, the text of which had been supplied by the ICFTU, and the nature of its grievances, and that, on that basis, it considered that these were in keeping with the normal activities of a workers' organisation promoting and defending the interests of its members. None of the elements contained in the Government's latest reply influences the Committee to change its opinion on this point. In addition, the Committee notes that, according to the information supplied by the Government itself, the WAFs were set up in numerous Chinese provinces and they could not therefore be considered as a spontaneous "small group". Accordingly, it must reiterate that the right of workers to establish organisations of their own choosing implies, in particular, the effective possibility of setting up, in a climate of complete security, organisations independent both of any existing organisations and of any political party. Consequently, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the workers' right to establish organisations of their own choosing and these organisations' rights to function freely are guaranteed both in law and in practice.
4. 354. As regards the factual aspects of the case, the Committee notes that the Government has provided information concerning some of the persons said by the ICFTU to have been executed or arrested. These particulars, however, concern only 91 persons out of the 130 or so expressly mentioned by name by the complainant organisation.
5. 355. According to the information provided by the Government, some of the workers (24) mentioned by the complainant as being in custody have not been arrested and their cases have not come before the judicial authorities. Thirty others who had not committed any offences or who had committed only minor offences or who had shown "remorse" have had their penalties remitted or have been released. Further information communicated by the Government concerns 37 persons sentenced by the courts, including nine sentenced to death and six to life imprisonment, for offences of arson, looting, sabotage of transport, murder and, more generally, breaches of the public peace.
6. 356. While noting that, for the first time, the Government has given substantial information about a large number of persons referred to by name in the complaint, the Committee must express its profound concern at the extreme severity of the sentences handed down against workers whose actions - according to the complainant - occurred in the context of participating in the establishment of independent organisations. The Committee emphasises that, in a situation in which workers' organisations consider that they do not enjoy the freedoms essential for the performance of their functions, they would be justified in claiming the recognition of these freedoms and that such claims ought to be regarded as consistent with legitimate trade union action.
7. 357. The Committee is particularly disturbed to note the nine death sentences reported by the Government. The Government does not state whether the persons sentenced to death have been executed or not (it mentions only a two-year stay of execution in the case of one of the workers, Luan Jikui). If these sentences have not yet been carried out, the Committee urges the Government to stay the executions and to reconsider the cases of these persons. The Committee requests the Government to supply information in this respect.
8. 358. As regards the sentences of imprisonment, the Committee gathers from the Government's reply that these sentences have already been upheld on appeal, which implies that these decisions were pronounced with a rapidity that throws serious doubt on the respect of the normal judicial guarantees in the proceedings. In view of all these factors and of the severity of the convictions, the Committee also requests the Government to reconsider these cases and to keep it informed of any action taken on this request.
9. 359. The Committee observes moreover that the Government has not provided any information on a number of persons said by the ICFTU to have been executed or arrested (see the Annex hereto). The Committee requests the Government to provide particulars of these cases (reasons for arrest, proceedings instituted, if any, and present situation of the persons concerned).
10. 360. Nor has the Government reacted to the Committee's request, made at its previous session, for information on the conviction of workers from Changchun, seven of whom have been sent to re-education-through-labour camps. The Committee therefore reiterates its request to the Government to supply precise information about the reasons, nature and objectives of the re-education-through-labour measures to which some trade unionists are subjected.
11. 361. The Committee notes furthermore that, while the Government has provided some information about two leaders of the Beijing WAF - Hang Dongfang and Liu Qiang - it has not stated whether these persons have been convicted, nor has it answered the allegations concerning the ill-treatment which they are said to have suffered. The Committee asks the Government for its observations on this.
12. 362. So far as the events in Tiananmen Square are concerned, the Committee notes that the complainant organisation's allegations and the Government's reply are totally contradictory. According to the ICFTU, on the one hand, many of the WAF's representatives were reportedly killed when the army took the Square by assault in the night from 3 to 4 June 1989. The Government, on the other hand, contends that nobody died when the Square was cleared. In view of these totally conflicting statements, the Committee is unable, from the information at present at its disposal, to draw any conclusions on this aspect of the case. Accordingly, it asks the complainant organisation to provide details of the identity of the persons said to have been killed on that occasion.

Z. ANNEX

• List of workers and independent trade unionists who are said by the ICFTU to
• be in custody or to have been executed and concerning whom the Government has
• not yet given a reply
• BEIJING
• In custody
• Hang Dongfang, leader of WAF;
• Quian Yunin, member of WAF, arrested on 29 May 1989;
• Chen Yinshan, leader of WAF, arrested on 30 May or 1 June 1989;
• Xiao Bin, arrested on 10 June, charged with counter-revolutionary propaganda
• and sentenced on 13 July to a ten-year term of imprisonment;
• Guo Yaxiong, member of WAF, arrested together with four other unidentified
• members of WAF;
• Tian Bomin;
• Li Weidong, charged with the murder of a policeman;
• Lu Zhongshu, arrested on 10 June, charged with having set fire to army
• vehicles and with having attacked soldiers. May have been executed;
• Liu Qiang, member of the WAF committee;
• Ho Lili, sought by the police.
• Executed
• Wang Hangwu, executed on 22 June.
• HANGZHOU
• Gao Jingtang, Zhu Guanghua, Li Xiaohu, leaders of WAF, arrested on 10 June.
• SHANGHAI
• Zhang Qiwang, member of WAF, arrested on 8 June;
• Wang Hong, member of WAF, arrested on 9 June;
• Weng Zhengmin, arrested on 10 June;
• Dian Hanwu;
• Zhou Shaowu, responsible for liaison with the Students' Autonomous Federation;
• Cai Chaojun, member of WAF.
• NANJING
• Zhu Huiming, Li Huling, members of WAF, and Rui Tonghu, leader of piquets,
• arrested on or before 10 June.
• TIANJIN
• Zhou Endong (alias Zhou Bo), member of WAF, arrested on 9 June.
• JIANGSU
• Du Weng and Yang Yongmin, leaders of the Autonomous National Salvation
• Federation, arrested on or before 11 June.
• LIAONING
• Zheng Chuanli and Jiao Zhijn, arrested at Dalian on or before 14 June;
• Zhu Wenli, arrested on 12 June at Shenyang;
• Xiao Bin, charged with spreading rumours and with having organised a riot,
• arrested on or before 19 June.
• SHAANXI
• Li Guiren, arrested on 17 June for having incited a strike;An Baojin and Liu
• Congshu, members of WAF.
• SHANDONG
• Liu Yubin, Che Honglian, Shao Lianchen and Hao Jinguang, members of the
• Federation of Autonomous Groups of Jinan, arrested on 15 June.
• SZECHUAN
• Yan Quingzhong.
• CHANGSHA
• He Zhaohui, Li Jian, Liu Xingqi, Yang Xiong and Zhang Xudong, members of WAF.