China Expands Usage of Exit Bans Amid Human Rights Concerns

China has reportedly increased the application of exit bans, extending them to human rights defenders, their families, and individuals connected to investigations, according to a recent report. The term “exit ban” witnessed a surge in mentions on the Supreme People’s Court database, rising from under 5,000 in 2016 to 39,000 in 2020, as highlighted by rights group Safeguard Defenders on Tuesday.

The report, titled “Trapped — China’s Expanding Use of Exit Bans,” reveals that China has broadened the legislation authorizing exit bans, passing four new laws between 2018 and 2022. Notably, the Supervision Law permits exit bans on anyone under investigation or linked to an investigation, even if not a suspect. Another recent law, the counterespionage law, set to be effective from July 1, also allows exit bans against individuals under investigation.

With these new laws, China now possesses at least 15 laws and numerous regulations, legal interpretations, and documents covering exit bans. The report suggests that these bans have been increasingly utilized since Xi Jinping assumed power in 2012, extending beyond legal justifications to target activists, foreign journalists, and individuals facing transnational repression.

The cases cited in the report include that of Chinese human rights lawyer Tang Jitian, who discovered he was barred from leaving the country on national security grounds when attempting to travel to Japan to visit his ailing daughter. The report emphasizes that exit bans are often used to silence activists, coerce family members to return to China for investigations, intimidate foreign journalists, and as a tool for hostage diplomacy.

While exit bans have been a longstanding tool used against Chinese citizens, there is a growing indication that they are being deployed against foreigners. The report points out that Chinese law permits exit bans related to civil business disputes, potentially constituting a significant proportion of total exit bans. The case of Irish executive Richard O’Halloran, who faced a three-year exit ban due to a civil business dispute, exemplifies this aspect.

Despite documented cases, the difficulty in obtaining reliable data suggests that the actual number of exit bans may be higher. Concerns continue to grow regarding the impact of exit bans on human rights and the potential use of this tool for diplomatic leverage.

Find the latest supply chain report news at The Supply Chain Report. For international trade tools, see ADAMftd.com.

#ChinaExitBan #HumanRightsDefenders #SafeguardDefenders #ExitBanIncrease #ChinaLaws #XiJinping #SupervisionLaw #CounterespionageLaw #TransnationalRepression #HostageDiplomacy #ActivistsInChina #ForeignJournalists #CivilBusinessDisputes #ChinaNationalSecurity #HumanRightsImpact #DiplomaticLeverage #LegalRepression #ChinaJustice #GlobalRights #HumanRightsAbuses