Supplementary memorandum submitted by
the Great Britain-China Centre
Mr Anderson invited those of us giving oral
evidence yesterday at the inquiry into the role and policies of
the FCO in China to follow up with further information if we felt
that appropriate.
Our evidence in answer to a question on human
rights in China was unfortunately cut short by time. I felt it
would be useful for the Committee to know that as far as the Great
Britain-China Centre is aware, through its very many exchanges
with a whole range of legal and judicial organisations, that there
is a lot of private debate about what we would term human rights
issues. Some of this becomes public, as for example the beginnings
of a debate on the death penalty in some of the legal press in
China about 18 months ago but which was summarily stopped. But
much of which is forced to remain private.
However one way in which it is easier for Chinese
parties to address difficult issues is for the debate to appear
as academic research. So, for example, the Institute of Law of
the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, which sends its reports
directly to the State Council, is running a research project on
freedom of expression and the need for a mass communications law.
Part of this project involves exchange with Britain and research
on freedom of expression in this country.
I feel very strongly that the way to encourage
and inform this kind of debate in China is by increasing the number
exchanges with the UK so that the next generation of officials
and leaders do have an understanding of what is meant by internationally
accepted norms for human rights even if China is still not in
a position to implement these rights.
| 
