Day: January 19, 2022

A Vietnamese man on Wednesday returned home after serving a five-year prison term for protesting a 2016 toxic waste spill, as lawyers for the victims of what is the country’s worst-ever environmental disaster continue to press for compensation.

Police arrested Nguyen Van Oai and dozens of others in January 2017 during a crackdown on people who demonstrated against the Taiwan-based Formosa Plastics Group. The company owned a steel mill that discharged toxic chemicals into the ocean, devastating more than a hundred miles of coastline in four central provinces of Vietnam.

In September 2017, Oai got a five-year sentence for resisting officers on duty and disobeying a court verdict. After serving his time, he arrived at his home in the central province of Nghe An.

“I have mixed feelings, both happy and sad,” he told RFA’s Vietnamese Service Wednesday.

“I am happy because I am free from that small prison, but I return to the large prison,” he said, referring to daily life in Vietnam.

Oai said his five-year sentence was in injustice.

“Look at the two charges. ‘Disobedience of court verdict,’ and ‘resisting officers on official duty.’ I realize they did a lot on my case, from creating false files, forging signatures, to try to prove I did all the things they accused me of,” he said.

Oai said that at the time of his arrest, police thought he had played a pivotal role in organizing the protests against Formosa.

Oai’s mother, Tran Thi Lieu, told RFA that she was happy he was finally home.

“I was sad and worried when he was in prison, but I knew that he had sacrificed himself for a cause shared by everyone,” she said.

The five-year sentence was Oai’s second jail term. His first was from 2011 to 2015 after he was arrested for participating in protests for causes such as China’s rising influence in Vietnam, the need for stronger environmental protections, and support for a free press.

Taiwan lawsuit

In June 2019, three years after the Formosa disaster, nearly 8,000 people filed a lawsuit in Taiwan against Formosa with the help of environmental organizations in that country, as well as in Vietnam, the U.S., France and Canada.

Now the plaintiffs are asking Taiwan’s Supreme Court to reconsider a requirement that they get formal authorization to participate in the case.

The Formosa Monitoring Coalition, which has been assisting the affected Vietnamese, said during a news briefing in Taipei, Taiwan, on Monday the plaintiffs would face harassment by their single-party government if they were made to file paperwork at the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Hanoi.

“We made this call because this can really put the plaintiffs in danger. It’s very likely, with around 90-95% certainty, that they could be harassed, arrested or even investigated. They could even be detained and imprisoned, and similar incidents have occurred in the past,” Peter Nguyen Van Hung, director of Vietnamese Migrant Workers and Immigrants Office in Taipei, and a member of the coalition, told RFA.

“So, we are calling on the Taiwan Supreme Court to have a lenient view on the authorization in order to give the plaintiffs, who are also the victims, the opportunity to keep their lawsuit valid and to have their case tried in Taiwan,” he said.

Taiwan courts have rejected the Vietnamese victims’ claims twice, but in December 2020, the Taiwan Supreme Court requested a review of the case.

But the court required that they notarize their authorizations for legal representation, as they are foreign persons in a case filed in Taiwan.

“That requirement is unfeasible, and I think politics has interfered with this requirement from the Taiwan Supreme Court,” Hung said. 

Formosa in 2016 admitted that toxic chemicals discharged from their massive industrial plant caused one of largest environmental disasters in Vietnam’s history and offered $500 million in compensation after a Vietnamese government investigation into the spill determined that the release of toxic chemicals including cyanide from the plant caused considerable environmental damage.

Though the $500 million was for clean up and to support people along the coasts whose livelihoods were destroyed by the spill, critics say the money did not do enough for the victims and are seeking additional compensation through Taiwanese courts.

Translated by Anna Vu. Written in English by Eugene Whong.

The trial on treason charges of Cambodian opposition leader Kem Sokha went ahead as scheduled on Wednesday, with the court allowing opening statements before postponing the proceedings for another week.

Speaking to reporters before the trial began, the former opposition party chief said he still hopes that a political solution can be reached in his case, and that the charges against him will be dismissed.

“I hope today that the court will drop the charges against me so that Cambodia can move forward toward national reconciliation. We must have national unity so that we can develop the country together,” he said.

Kem Sokha, then president of the Cambodia National Rescue Party, was arrested in September 2017 over an alleged plot backed by the United States to overthrow the government of Hun Sen, who has ruled Cambodia for more than 35 years.

Cambodia’s Supreme Court dissolved the CNRP two months later in a move that allowed Hun Sen’s Cambodian People’s Party to win all 125 seats in Parliament in a July 2018 election and drew U.S. sanctions and the suspension of trade privileges with the European Union.

Kem Sokha declined on Wednesday to say if he will stand for election in local polls this year or in a national election in 2023.

Though not questioning Kem Sokha directly, the court heard opening statements from his lawyers and from government lawyers prosecuting the case. The court also allowed the playing of an edited 30-minute excerpt from the video of a speech given by Kem Sokha in Australia in 2013.

Defense lawyer Chan Chen told reporters after the court adjourned that he had asked that the entire unedited video be played in order to prove Kem Sokha’s innocence. “As you know, there was no collusion with foreigners to commit violent acts or to topple the government,” he said.

Diplomats and other outside observers were not allowed to attend Wednesday’s session. NGOs urged the court to televise proceedings so that more people could monitor the trial.

Chan Chen criticized the court’s decision to wait until Jan. 25 to resume, asking that trial sessions be held at least five days a week.

Government lawyer Ky Tech said that the case against Kem Sokha would end quickly if he confessed to the charges made against him. “If the person charged in this case acknowledges that crimes were committed and then confesses to those crimes and takes responsibility for them, the case can be quickly ended,” he said.

A political solution to the case against Kem Sokha can still be achieved, though, said Ny Sokha, director of the Cambodia-based rights group Adhoc, calling the charges filed against him a result of the dispute between the CNRP and the ruling Cambodian People’s Party.

“The ruling party can still find ways to compromise to resolve political conflicts,” Ny Sokha said.

Reported by RFA’s Khmer Service. Translated by Samean Yun. Written in English by Richard Finney.

Authorities in China’s Qinghai province are forcing Tibetan nomads to replace the prayer flags they set up near their camps with China’s national emblem in what critics see as an example of the government’s effort to wipe away Tibetan cultural and religious practices.

The campaign was launched at the beginning of the year in Matoe (in Chinese, Maduo) county in Qinghai’s Golog (Guoluo) Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, a Tibetan living in exile told RFA, citing contacts in the region.

“Nomads living scattered around Matoe are being forced to attend political education sessions,” RFA’s source said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “And the Chinese government is putting up the national flag in places where Tibetans usually perform traditional religious ceremonies.

“They are also removing Tibetan prayer flags hung on the hilltops, saying they are not environmentally friendly, and are demolishing the furnaces used to perform smoke offerings used in purification ceremonies,” he said.

China’s campaign in Matoe follows the destruction of visible symbols of Tibetan culture and religious belief reported by sources in other Tibetan areas, including Tibet’s regional capital Lhasa, where China in November 2020 banned fragrant smoke from the burning of juniper boughs at the city’s iconic Jokhang Temple.

Also speaking to RFA, Pema Gyal — a researcher at London-based Tibet Watch — called China’s new drive in Matoe a politically motivated effort intended to “monitor and control the thoughts of local Tibetans.”

“There are huge concerns regarding how the Chinese government conducts these political education sessions for Tibetan nomads, forcing them to raise the Chinese flag and place portraits of Chinese Communist leaders in their homes,” Gyal said.

The destruction of prayer flags and the restrictions at the Jokhang and other religious sites signal a growing pattern of Chinese control over traditional Tibetan religious practice and increasing attempts by Beijing to recast Tibetan Buddhism as a Chinese faith, experts and observers say.

Formerly an independent nation, Tibet was invaded and incorporated into China by force 70 years ago.

Tibetans living in Tibet and in Tibetan areas of western Chinese provinces frequently complain of political, economic and religious discrimination as well as human rights abuses and say they fear Beijing is pursuing ever more aggressive policies aimed at eradicating their national and cultural identity.

Translated by Tenzin Dickyi for RFA’s Tibetan Service. Written in English by Richard Finney.

Tens of thousands of Hong Kong residents have been emigrating to the democratic island of Taiwan since the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) imposed a draconian national security law on the city in July 2020, ushering in a crackdown on public dissent and political opposition.

The process isn’t without its limitations, according to many recent migrants, but those who were born in China, whose government has repeatedly threatened to annex Taiwan in recent years, are finding it tougher than most.

A recent investigation by RFA revealed at least 40 applicants from Hong Kong who want to move to Taiwan, but are facing hurdles due to their place of birth and a lack of clear communication from the island’s labrynthine immigration bureaucracy.

Some have complained that being born in China under CCP rule wasn’t something they chose, and won’t protect them if they are pursued alongside native Hongkongers for crimes like sedition, subversion and “collusion with foreign powers” if they run afoul of the authorities there.

While Taiwan formally amended its immigration rules in 2020 to allow those born in China to apply alongside other residents of Hong Kong and Macau, many are still being rejected.

One applicant surnamed Lee said he and his wife applied for investment immigration to Taiwan in 2019 to run an online retail outlet, but were rejected for a residence permit in October 2021. Lee’s birthplace in mainland China was cited as one of the reasons for the decision.

“They are a government, and they need to follow the rules, not be capricious and keep moving the goalposts,” Lee told RFA. “People are planning their whole lives around this stuff, and it’s a huge disruption.”

He brushed aside the authorities’ fears that CCP agents might infiltrate Taiwan under the guise of investors, as has previously happened, saying he was miserable during the 30 years he spent living in China “being persecuted by the CCP.”

Lee applied amid the 2019 mass protest movement against extradition from Hong Kong to mainland China and its calls for fully democratic elections, knowing that “this time, the CCP wasn’t going to go easy” on the city.

Now that his investment visa has fallen through, Lee is back in Hong Kong, trying to find another way to leave.

A fellow Hongkonger surnamed Mak, a teacher who was also born in China, said she has tried to take the same immigration route as Lee.

Like Lee, she started making plans to move to Taiwan around the time of the 2019 protest movement, but never thought she would run into so many obstacles.

“I chose to move to Taiwan, because I like it there,” Mak told RFA. “But I feel like I was accused of being a spy, and I’m innocent.”

Mak said she hasn’t been granted any right of reply to the opaque immigration decision-making process, unlike someone accused openly of a crime.

“If you want to find someone guilty, you should have to provide evidence,” she said. “They seem to be saying that we’re spies just because we were born in China, but is everyone who was born in Hong Kong a safe bet?”

“This rule is ridiculous.”

‘Asking myself who I am’

Mak said she is also regarded as a mainlander in Taiwan, despite having no household registration in China any longer, and has been educated in Hong Kong since the second year of primary school.

“I only lived in the mainland for seven or eight years, but I have lived in Hong Kong for more than 40 years, so where would you say my home is?” she said.

“I would never have even thought of myself as a mainland Chinese if I hadn’t come to Taiwan,” Mak said. “Now I’m even asking myself who I am.”

A Taiwan interior ministry official told RFA said people are generally turned down if they haven’t lived long in Hong Kong as permanent residents, they have a mainland Chinese spouse, or their investment plan doesn’t closely match their actual business activities.

Rejected applicants can appeal to the Executive Yuan, but publicly available statistics show that no appeal has ever been successful.

Immigration consultant Chang Hsiang-liang said she was unaware that China-born applicants are still being turned down.

“A lot of people were affected by this [at the end of 2020 and the beginning of 2021] when they were still revising the law, but now maybe they might review those decisions and grant residency,” Chang said.

“It could take six or nine months or even a year for the whole process to happen,” she said. “I think if [these applicants] want to reapply for settlement, they will need to redo their business plans and put in a lot more work over the next year or two.”

Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) said applicants should be given permission to immigrate as long as there were no national security concerns, and that those rejected could consider reapplying.

More than 11,000 people traveled to Taiwan for the purposes of settlement in 2021, compared with around 10,800 in 2020, according to immigration statistics.

But while around 1,600 Hong Kong residents were granted residency in each year, neither the MAC nor the immigration authorities would respond to requests for the number of applicants rejected for the scheme who were born in China.

Current immigration rules allow for former CCP members, officials or members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to be barred from residency.

Translated and edited by Luisetta Mudie.

Edward Leung, a prominent Hong Kong politician who advocated “separation” between the former British colony and mainland China, has been released at the end of a six-year jail term for “rioting” during 2016 unrest in Mong Kok.

A former spokesman for the now-disbanded group Hong Kong Indigenous, Leung was released from Shek Pik prison on Lantau Island at around 3.00 a.m. on Wednesday.

“I was released this morning and am back home safe with my family,” Leung said in a post to his Facebook page.

“As required by law, I am subject to a supervision order upon release,” he wrote. “I must keep a low profile and deactivate my social media accounts.”

His family later posted a warning to supporters not to try to visit Leung, and announced the deletion of Leung’s Facebook account, which was unavailable on Wednesday evening local time.

Leung was sentenced to six years in prison in 2018 for “rioting” and “assaulting a police officer” during the 2016 “Fishball Revolution” clashes in Mong Kok.

Hong Kong barrister and former lawmaker Siu Tsz-man said supervision orders are sometimes issued to released prisoners involved in violent crimes, including murder and manslaughter, and require the former prisoner to maintain contact with supervision officers and remain at a stable residence.

But Siu said the order to stay away from the spotlight was unprecedented.

“I have never heard of this happening before,” Siu said. “My staff have never heard of a supervision order under which the person isn’t allowed to give interviews to the media.”

Siu declined to comment on whether the order was appropriate without knowing the details of the case.

“The point of a supervision order isn’t to confine someone at a certain location and not let them leave,” he said.

Some drew parallels between Leung’s release and the continuing controls on released political prisoners in mainland China.

Hong Kong current affairs commentator Johnny Lau said the treatment of prominent Chinese dissidents has varied greatly in the past, depending on the level of political sensitivity of their cases, as viewed by the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

Stability maintenance

Mainland Chinese rights lawyer Wang Yu said the mainland Chinese authorities often negotiate terms with released dissidents, including telling them to stay quiet after their release.

“This can be done through the detention center, through the courts, or the local police department or state security police, or even neighborhood committees,” Wang told RFA. “Anyone can be pressed into service as a stability maintenance officer.”

“These deals may or may not involve something in writing.”

Fellow rights attorney Bao Longjun said Leung’s experience shows that Hong Kong has gradually moved away from the rule of law.

“The Hong Kong government’s continual expansion of the way it interprets and implements [existing laws] has seriously violated the rule of law and the interpretation of the freedom of speech as granted by the constitution,” Bao told RFA.

Video footage of the riots showed a large crowd throwing bricks and other objects at riot police, who fought back with pepper spray and batons, injuring an unknown number of people. Others set fire to debris in the street, while business owners reported damage to property.

Judge Anthea Pang said while passing sentence that “political pleas” could never justify violence. Leung, a by-election candidate for the localist group Hong Kong Indigenous at the time, said he went to the scene to try to act as a buffer zone in the clashes, but later admitted giving in to anger.

Former colonial Hong Kong governor Lord Patten of Barnes criticized Leung’s sentence as politically motivated at the time, saying public order legislation was being used politically under CCP rule to hand out extreme sentences to democratic politicians and other activists.

Translated and edited by Luisetta Mudie.