Case Highlight for 2015 UN International Day in Support of Victims of Torture

Torture is a pervasive problem in China. To mark the UN International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, HRIC has translated the below case seeking compensation for the alleged torture of a man who died in police custody in China.  The case is a concrete, individual example of the issues people face in China’s criminal justice system, including:

• The ability of police to extend detention periods without charges for over a month
• A tendency to think of torture only as physical harm
• A lack of transparency in the interrogation process
• The burden being on victims to prove torture rather than on authorities to prove torture was not used

The UN Committee against Torture, an independent expert monitoring body, raised these and other issues in its preliminary questions to China prior to its full review in November 2015 (see e.g., paras 1, 3(a)&(c), 13(c), 14, 15 and 22).   For more information on the upcoming review and how to participate, see here.

Z and 4 others versus Xichuan County Public Security Bureau Notification of Dismissal of Appeal in Relation to State Compensation Case (excerpt)

2. The question of the use of torture.

On the one hand the Xichuan County Public Security Bureau, has, in accordance with your request, and with the approval of its leaders, watched with you video surveillance footage of the time period from Cheng X's loss of consciousness right through to his delivery to the hospital for emergency medical treatment.  You did not discover torture during this process surrounding Cheng X's death and an external examination of his body after death did not show signs of external injury. The objection is therefore not sustained. Meanwhile, in a circumstance where there is no other evidence that proves [that torture occurred], you again propose that if the detention center has not permitted you to watch other video surveillance outside of the footage of Cheng X's death, then this itself shows that the detention center engaged in torture. Moreover you have taken the body away without permission and are refusing to permit an autopsy, meaning that any causes for Cheng X's death outside of a sudden death from heart-related issues cannot be investigated, and you should take responsibility for these unfortunate consequences. The reasons which you have put forward do not establish this ground of appeal. See more. 

Z等四人与淅川县公安局违法拘留赔偿案驳回申诉通知书 (摘要)

2、关于刑讯逼供问题。

一方面淅川县公安局根据你们的要求，经有关领导批准，与你们共同观看了程X在狱室昏迷到送往医院救治过程监控录像后，你们对程X死于心脏病及该过程中无发现有刑讯逼供行为和其死后尸表检验无外伤，不持异议。同时，在没有相关证据证明的情况下，又提出如果看守所不允许你们观看程X死亡过程以外的其他监控录像，就说明看守所有刑讯逼供行为，且你们私自将尸体拉走并拒绝解剖，使程除心源性猝死死因外有无其他原因无法查明，该不利后果应由你们承担。你们所称该条理由也不能成立。（更多）