ZHOU Qiang*

 

Abstract: Review and analysis of China’s human rights white papers provide a valuable perspective for summarizing human rights discourse and changes that reflect official standpoints. Observing their structural style, the previous white papers can be divided into three types: the mixed model, the five-in-one model and the rights-listing model. The rights-listing model is more unified and standardized and also accords with China’s reality by listing rights. In previous white papers, content about the right to subsistence has been gradually reduced and content about the right to development has been improved and further highlighted. In the 2013 white paper, there was a single chapter on social security rights, which prominently reflects the priority placed on the people’s livelihood in China’s social development and on human rights protection. The right to development and the livelihood aspect of human rights protection are a new focus of human rights discourse in China.

 

Keywords: human rights discourse    human rights white papers   the right to subsistence   the right to development      social security rights

 

Human rights white papers are official documents on human rights. According to statistics shown on the website of the State Council Information Office, as of the end of 2014, the Chinese government had issued 14 human rights white papers over more than two decades. These white papers show the governmental stand on human rights issues. Through analyses and comparisons of materials, classification, discourse and expression, people can achieve a better understanding of China’s human rights discourse and its changes.¹

 

 

Since 1991 when the Chinese government issued its first human rights white paper, China’s Human Rights Condition, until 2014 when it issued the white paper China’s Human Rights Progress in 2013, the government has issued 14 such white papers.² Considering the difference in structure, content and other relevant factors, this article mainly studies cross-year and annual white papers on human rights.[page]

 

The structural style of previous human rights white papers can be divided into three types, as shown in Table 1.

 

 

 

This model was initiated in the white paper China’s Human Rights Condition in 1991. The main structure and basic idea of this model was followed until the white paper in 2009.[page]

 

There were a few changes and revisions. In 1991, the white paper mentioned only the right to subsistence but not the right to development. After that, the rights to subsistence and development were developed as a classic expression. The 1991, 1998 and 2000 white papers used “political rights” in their titles whereas the 1996 white paper used “democratic rights.” In discourse analysis, both political rights and democratic rights have similar implications, referring to China’s fundamental political institution (the people’s congress), basic political system (multi-party cooperation and political consultation led by the Communist Party of China (CPC)), and grassroots democratic construction (urban and rural democracy). The 2003, 2004 and 2009 white papers used “civil rights and political rights,” which is a standard expression in international human rights conventions. Fifty Years of China’s Human Rights Development, published in 1995, used “civil and political rights.” In terms of economic and social rights, the 1991 white paper used “economic, cultural and social rights.” In the 1995 and 1996 white papers, similar rights were referred to as labor rights, such as workers’ rights and benefits, and educational rights. Since 1998, the white papers have always had chapters on “economic, social and cultural rights,” which is in agreement with international human rights laws. Meanwhile, labor rights and educational rights have not been listed individually. In terms of rights for particular groups, beginning in 1995 the white papers always included chapters on women and children’s rights, until 2004 when no such individual chapterswere included. From 1996 until 2000, rights for the disabled were not listed as an individual chapter.

 

Nevertheless, such changes did not alter the basic structure or idea of the white papers. The mixed model is characterized by: a) a mixture of different types of human rights; b) a mixture of rights and rights protection; and c) a mixture of expression. Civil and political rights, and economic, social and cultural rights, whose formulation comes from international human rights law, are regarded as first and second generation human rights, according to the three-generation system of human rights discourse.⁶ Civil rights and political rights includethe right to life, the right to freedom and the right to elections. Economic, social and cultural rights include the right to work, the right to social security, the right to education and the right to health. The right to development, which is juxtaposed to civil rights and political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights, is categorized as a third-generation collective right. As for the right to subsistence, it has unique Chinese characteristics.⁷ Judicial protection for human rights is a kind of protection for human rights, rather than a type of right such as economic, social and cultural rights or a right of certain groups such as ethnic minorities or the disabled. The white papers have inserted judicial protection of human rights between civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights, which shows the mixture of different types of human rights. The rights to subsistence and development are reserved for “the people” while no such term is used in the discussion of civil and political rights or economic, social and cultural rights. Referring to the disabled, white papers have used the term quanyi (权益, usually translated as “rights and interests”) rather than the term quanli (权利, usually translated as “rights”).In discussing human rights protection for ethnic groups, such terms as equal rights or special protection were used. Different verbal formulations embody and convey different meanings.[page]

 

In general, this structure, after adjustment over the years, has gradually become stable, thus laying a basic structure and pattern for human rights white papers and influencing human rights discourse in China.

 

 

The white paper on human rights in 2012 was issued in May 2013. It followed the five-in-one strategy referred to in the political report to the 18th CPC National Congress in November 2012 for pushing forward socialism with Chinese characteristics. Except for the final chapter on international exchange and cooperation in human rights, the main body of the white paper followed almost exactly the main structure of the political report in describing the five-in-one strategy. It divided human rights protection into economic, political, cultural, social and ecological civilization construction and elaborated on human rights advancement in these five areas.

 

The model is concise and unified. It represents a new way of thinking and avoided some problems of the mixed model. Placing a priority on the development of ecological civilization and highlighting the protection of environmental rights led to an individual chapter on environmental rights in the 2012 white paper. This model is quite different from the earlier pattern of white papers and related human rights discourse. This style is very unique, having almost no similaritywith other white papers and was subsequently abandoned.

 

 

China’s Human Rights Development in 2013 was issued in May 2014. It followed neither the five-in-one model nor the mixed model. Some changes worth noting were included in the new model.

 

The white paper listed various rights under different categories of rights or social groups. Modifiers for rights were simplified, such as “rights of ethnic minorities” rather than “equal rights and special protection for ethnic minorities,” which was used in the mixed model. There were no subjects listed before a given right, such as in “the people’s rights to subsistence and development” in the 2009 white paper, or “citizens’ economic, social and cultural rights” in the 2000 white paper. The expression “rights and benefits” in “women and children’s rights and benefits” in the 2003 white paper and “disabled rights and benefits” was replaced simply by“rights.” There was no reference to judicial protection for human rights. Instead, the white paper discussed rights concerning personal freedom. The formulation of rights was more standardized and unified, and its form was well ordered.[page]

 

The white paper did not rigidly follow conventional theory and practice by employing the three-generation human rights model for categorizing rights. The white paper added or deleted content based on conventional theories and human rights discourse and taking into account the reality of human rights protection in China. The white paper replaced the right to subsistence with the right to development and included the rights to employment, labor, education and culture. The environmental right was mentioned separately, which shows this field is quite important and the Chinese government attaches great importance to it. The white paper did not use the term economic, social and cultural rights. Instead, it specifically mentioned the right to social security. There were no expressions such as “civil rights and political rights,”or “judicial protection for human rights.” Related content was categorized as the right to democracy, the right to freedom of speech and the right to personal freedom. The white paper did not elaborate on institutional construction of the National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, paying more attention to the realization of the right to elections, consultative democracy and rights relief, thus making the overall style of the white paper more consistent.

 

This model represents both changes from the mixed model as well as continuity with that model. The main change was that the categorization of rights was more standardized and unified. The basic concept still follows the three-generation categorization, but it is more detailed rather than generalized. The rights to development and environmental rights belong to collective rights; the right to social insurance belongs to economic, social and cultural rights; and the rights to democracy, freedom of speech and personal freedom fall within the category of civil and political rights. The white paper adopted a standardized and unified categorization of such rights, rather than combining generalized rights and specific rights as was done in the mixed model. Continuity was shown in following the concept of the three-generation categorization and continuing to have three chapters on the rights of ethnic minorities, the rights of the disabled, and international exchange and cooperation in human rights, respectively.[page]

 

In general, this model is more standardized, has more substantive content, is more focused, is more distinctive, is closer to the reality of China’s human rights condition and is more pragmatic. Will those features continue in white papers to come? How does it change the human rights discourse in China? How will it influence human rights research and work in the future? All these issues must be studied and deserve further attention.

 

 

The right to subsistence has long been a core of China’s human rights discourse. In terms of formulation and content, however, there have still been some changes in white papers in this regard. The 1991 white paper referred to the right to subsistence. Subsequently, the right to subsistence and the right to development were always placed together, except for the 2012 white paper. In the 2013 white paper, the right to subsistence appeared in the preface, but not in any heading.

 

The first part of the 1991 white paper mentioned that the right to subsistence is the primary human right and has been fought for by the Chinese people for a long time.⁸ The white paper not only pointed out the concept of the right to subsistence from the very beginning, it also highlighted the nature and status of the right to subsistence. Its status as the main human right was shown bywhere this content was placed in the white paper. The subject of the right to subsistence is “the Chinese people.”For any state or nation, the primary human right is the right to subsistence.⁹ This conclusion means that the right to subsistence is something universal, not distinctive to China. The theoretical issue represented China’s conception and understanding of human rights, constructing important content for Chinese human rights discourse and the Chinese concept of human rights.[page]

 

The 1991 white paper defined the right to subsistence as having enough food and sufficient clothing. Therefore, “after such problems were solved, the right to subsistence would basically be achieved.”¹⁰ It is understandable that having enough food and sufficient clothing is a minimum requirement. The 1991 white paper noted that the right to subsistence was still a key problem.¹¹ The 1995 white paper said that the overwhelming majority of rural people had enough food and sufficient clothing.¹² The 2000 white paper said the Chinese people generally had moved from just being fed and clothed well to being betteroff.¹³ The 2004 white paper related “having enough food and sufficient clothing” to rural people in poverty and the disabled. In the 2009 white paper, there was only one reference to “having enough food and sufficient clothing” and this was in a section discussing the rights of ethnic minorities. There was no mention of this under the heading of the right to subsistence, but rather was discussed in connection with improving the working and living conditions of people in poverty.^{14 I}n the 2013 white paper, there was neither a chapter on the right to subsistence, nor mention of “having enough food and sufficient clothing.” When discussing the right to development, the white paper proposed earnestly advancing poverty-relief efforts in rural areas, and discussed pensions, medical insurance, catastrophic illness insurance and subsistence allowances under the heading of social security rights.

 

A few conclusions may be drawn regarding changes in the right to subsistence in human rights white papers. 1) The right to subsistence is an important part of China’s human rights theory and discourse. The first and foremost human right is the right to subsistence. 2) The right to subsistence is fundamentally about having enough food and sufficient clothing, which is a minimum requirement. Therefore, the right to subsistence is an issue thatis suitable to certain stages. 3) In the area of social and economic development, China has moved from not having enough food or sufficient clothing to working to achieve a better-off society. Since the problem of having enough food and sufficient clothing has generally been solved, the right to subsistence is no longer the main problem and focus of attention. Therefore, the right to subsistence is no longer a theme of China’s human rights discourse. 4) With regard to individual or local problems or brief and temporary difficulties concerning not having enough food or sufficient clothing, the government can effectively deal with these problems through certain mechanisms. The core expression of human rights is social security rights, rather than the right to subsistence.[page]

 

The above analyses of human rights white papers show that the trajectory of change in understanding or expressing the right to subsistence shows a transformation in human rights discourse and the human rights concept.

 

 

 

The 1991 white paper had no heading regarding the right to development. Content related to the right to development was placed under the category of economic, social and cultural rights. The paper said, “The Chinese government attaches great importance to safeguarding the realization of state, national and individual rights to economic, cultural, social and political development.” It also said,“Socialist China eliminated the system of exploitation, providing all working people with equal development rights.”¹⁵ The 1995 white paper for the first time placedthe right to development, along with the right to subsistence, in its own chapter - the first chapter, which was entitled “The People’s Rights to Subsistence and Development.” Many later white papers followed this model. The 2013 white paper listed the right to development in its own chapter.[page]

 

The right to development mentioned by human rights white papers covered such topics as urban and rural people’s income, consumption standards, mortality, poverty relief, housing, health and medical care, life expectancy, disaster relief, work safety, food safety, social relief, environmental rights and interests, and the public health system. In past white papers, the right to development was closely associated with economic, social and cultural rights as well as labor rights. The 1991 white paper did not single out the right to development. Both the 1995 and 1996 white papers listed the rights to development and subsistence in one single chapter, without singling out economic, social and cultural rights. Issues related to economic, social and cultural rights, particularly social security rights, were included in the right to development and labor rights. Since 1998, the white papers have steadily listed both the right to development and economic, social and cultural rights. At the same time, labor rights have not been singled out but have been included in the right to development and in economic, social and cultural rights. The 2013 white paper singled out social security rights, which integrated elements from economic, social and cultural rights. Some aspects of economic, social and cultural rights were merged into social security rights while the majority were included in the right to development. In the 2013 white paper, the right to development covered the right to education, culture and labor or employment. Social relief and assistance, medical insurance, catastrophic illness insurance, social security and subsistence allowances were all listed under social security rights in a single chapter. At the same time, environmental rights were separated from the right to development. The concept of the right to development may still change.

 

 

The expression of the right to development has been gradually developed and placed at the beginning of white papers since its inclusion. The right to development has become increasingly important and diverse, covering income, living standards, employment and labor rights, low-income housing, poverty relief, education and culture. As Chinese society has developed from having enough food and sufficient clothing to being betteroff, the right to subsistence has been replaced by the right to development.[page]

 

 

Social security rights protection was singled out in the 2013 human rights white paper, replacing economic, social and cultural rights. In terms of the order of the white paper, social security rights came after the right to development. In the 1991, 1998 and 2000 white papers, social rights were listed second; in 1995, civil and political rights were listed second; in 1996, democratic rights were listed second; in 2003, 2004 and 2009, civil rights and political rights were listed second. All the aforementioned fall under the category of civil rights and political rights according to international law, with some variation in different periods. Economic, social and cultural rights were usually ranked fourth, after judicial protection for human rights. But in the 2013 white paper, social security rights, deriving from economic, social and cultural rights, were not only singled out, but also were ranked second. The rights to democracy, freedom of speech and personal freedom were listed in the third, fourth and fifth places, respectively.

 

In terms of human rights, China begins with issues that most concern the basic interests of the people.While combining traditional culture and the realities of socialist modernization, China focuses on, highlights and prioritizes people’s livelihood, in order to push forward economic and social development as well as human rights protection.¹⁶ The unexpected rise of social security rights protection reflects the development of people’s livelihood and achievements made by the Chinese government in institutionalizing human rights protection. Social security rights were singled out from economic, social and cultural rights, which was a refinement and localization of economic, social and cultural rights deriving from international human rights law. The white paper developed a universally accepted human rights idea into a Chinese expression of human rights discourse, based on Chinese realities and focal areas. None of the white papers restricted themselves to a fixed framework, but innovated human rights discourse and developed the human rights concept. Social security rights may become a core discourse for China’s human rights, together with the right to development.[page]

 

The issuance of the white papers allows for a review of China’s human rights work. The structure and compilation of the white papers show changes in China’s human rights discourse and concept. It is expected that human rights discourse will be further developed in white papers, in a continuous and standardized way.

 

* ZHOU Qiang (周强)， Ph.D. in law and is affiliated with the Social Service Department of China  Zhigong Party.

 

1. Human rights discourse in a given country includes not only official discourse, but also public discourse, which is represented by discourse in the academic, media and general public spheres. The national human rights white papers represent official discourse.

 

2. Statistics from the State Council Information Office.

 

3. See China’s Human Rights Progress in 2009 (white paper).

 

4. See China’s Human Rights Progress in 2012 (white paper).

 

5. Ibid.

 

6. In 1979, Karel Vaska of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization initiated the three-generation human rights concept. First-generation human rights refer to civil rights and political rights, the second generation refers to economic, social and cultural rights. The third generation refers to collective rights such as the right to self-determination right, the right to development, environmental rights, and the right to peace and security. Xu Xianming, International Human Rights Laws, Law Press, 2004, at 6.

 

7. The right to subsistence basically complies with the right to an “adequate standard of living,” as stated in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: “The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions.”[page]

 

8. See Human Rights in China (white paper), 1991.

 

9. Ibid.

 

10. Ibid.

 

11. Ibid.

 

12. Progress in China's Human Rights in 1995 (white paper).

 

13. Progress in China's Human Rights in 2010 (white paper).

 

14. Supra note 3.

 

15. Supra note 8.

 

16. Luo Haocai, “China’s human rights construction with people’s livelihood as focus,” Human Rights, No 3, 2013.