Tag: InternationalNews

The joint letter contained a request for recommendations to stop discrimination against Shincheonji Church, a new Christian denomination headquartered in South Korea, and a UN ECOSOC-affiliated organization named Heavenly Culture, World Peace, Restoration of Light (HWPL).

The representative of this letter, the director and founder of FREE WATCH AFGHANISTAN, Mobeenullah Aimaq, said that he agreed with the UN’s concern for the persecution of minorities and vulnerable groups as well as human rights violations that continue to occur in the pretext of fighting the coronavirus. To solve this problem, he proposed a joint letter to young people around the world to appeal to the international community.

He strongly urged that the Korean Government should knock off the prosecution of Shincheonji Church and HWPL in South Korea. “Prosecuting Shincheonji Church and HWPL should be immediately stopped so that the international reputation of the government, known as a proponent of peace in the globe, will be saved,” he added.

In the letter, they reported the several acts of unfair discrimination and oppression of the Korean government and the media against these organizations by citing the concerns of UN Secretary-General regarding “disproportionate effects on certain communities, the rise of hate speech, and the targeting of vulnerable groups”.

According to the report, there have been over 5,500 instances of human rights abuses of members of the Shincheonji Church during this period of the ongoing pandemic. Among the cases include two female members’ death in suspicious circumstances. Many of these victims are promising young people who are now facing increased discrimination in workplaces and schools, violence at home, and even forced deprogramming.

The letter highlights that the members of Shincheonji Church are also victims who were unfortunately infected with the virus despite following the government’s guidelines related to the pandemic.

Furthermore, the unprecedented custody investigation against 89-years-old Chairman Man Hee Lee of Shincheonji Church and HWPL was recently determined. The charters of these two groups have been revoked by the government and they have been subject to rigorous tax investigations. Those in leadership positions within the organizations also have been taken into custody for questioning.

In the Korea Times column titled “Can unpopular sect expect justice?”, Michael Breen, CEO of Insight Communications, referred the current investigation into Shincheonji Church as a “witch-hunt” by saying that Shincheonji is a safe target for politicians and others who comment in public since it is unpopular.

“I’m sitting in Kigali Rwanda where had wars and genocide. And Rwanda has come out to be a country that now is sharing with the rest of the world about peace. we have learned how to have peace makers or peace forces worldwide. As a person, I would you like to contribute to initiative and effort of persuading the government of South Korea, not to persecute HWPL, or the Shincheonji Church.” Said Natty Dread, the reggae artist from Rwanda.

In the joint letter, they urged that cases of human rights, social and religious repression, such as the ones occurring in South Korea, must be put to an end in order to build “more effective and inclusive solutions for the emergency of today and the recovery for tomorrow.”

11 NGOs including European Coordination of Associations and Individuals for Freedom of Conscience (CAP-LC) submitted a report for “annual report for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights” to the UN Secretary-General at the 44th session in the UN Assembly Human Rights Council. The report is titled “scapegoating members of Shincheonji for COVID-19 in the Republic of Korea.”

By referring to the report from the United States of America Commission of International Religious Freedom, the report to the UN said, “Shincheonji was suffering harassment from the South Korean government and society. Although some government measures appeared to be driven by legitimate public health concerns, others appeared to exaggerate the church’s role in the outbreak.”

“The government of Seoul locked down Shincheonji churches in the capital and some mainline Protestant groups have accused the church of deliberately spreading the disease,” it continued.

The report stated, “The virus cannot be an excuse to violate human rights and religious liberty of hundreds of thousands of believers. Intolerance, violence, and discrimination against Shincheonji should be put to an end.”

Religious communities initiated to issue statements to advocate improvements in the unequal treatment against Shincheonji.

“I implore the South Korean Government and other relevant authorities to immediately drop all charges and lawsuits and rather support the efforts of the Shincheonji Church in encouraging other recoverees to donate their plasma” said Swami Vedanand Saraswati, Spiritual Head of Arya Samaj South Africa.

“Although many Countries in Africa continent where I live are practicing similar oppression to all institutions, a developed country like South Korea is unbelievable to practice such an old System left for undeveloped Countries. Parliament, Government and International Community shouldn’t only put an Eye but to react for both sides Wing and Wing agreement to end suffering.” said Mr. Aleu Goi Dimo, CEO of Supporting Volunteers Community Based Organization in South Sudan.

Recently, Chairman Lee of Shincheonji Church of Jesus encouraged the members who recovered from the COVID-19 to voluntarily join in the donation of plasma. Around 4,000 recovered members said they are willing to donate plasma for research on a new treatment.

He said that there has been political motives in the persecution of Shincheonji Church of Jesus and HWPL (a peace NGO) by “using us (Shincheonji), the victims of COVID-19, as their scapegoat in order to hide their own faults.” He added, “Persecuting peace organizations, religious organizations, and violating human rights must be stopped in Korea.”

First, the National Security Law for Hong Kong SAR is a sound legal framework establishing at the national level and an enforcement mechanism for safeguarding national security in Hong Kong SAR to meet people’s aspiration.

Article 23 of the Basic Law authorizes Hong Kong SAR to enact laws on safeguarding national security. However, 23 years after Hong Kong’s return, nothing has been done and there is no legal framework or enforcement mechanism in terms of national security in Hong Kong SAR. As a result, the city is left “defenseless” against the anti-China forces seeking chaos and disruptions.

For some time, internal and external hostile forces have openly clamored for “Hong Kong independence” and “self-determination”. They have taken actions such as beating, smashing, looting, arson, confronting police enforcement with violence, and storming the Legislative Council of Hong Kong SAR. They have even cried for “waging armed revolution to gain independence”. Such activities trampled on rule of law, undermined social stability, and hit the economy hard. Hong Kong has become a notable source of risk to China’s national security.

Like any other country, the Chinese Central Government is responsible for upholding national security and cannot just sit by and do nothing. The National Security Law is about restoring order and responding to the outcry of the Hong Kong for chaos to be stopped. Only within eight days in late May, nearly three million Hong Kong people signed the petition in support of the Law.

Second, the National Security Law for Hong Kong SAR not only is in line with “One Country, Two Systems”, but also ensures the sustained implementation of this policy.

China’s guiding policy for the governance of Hong Kong is still “One Country, Two Systems”. This has not changed and won’t change in the future. Hong Kong is part of China. We have to defend our own country’s unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity. This is what is meant by “One Country”. And within the framework of “One Country”, on the basis of secure and stable “One Country”, “Two Systems” can prosper in parallel and together. This is the real meaning of “One Country, Two Systems”.

The new law is intended just for that purpose, to maintain and safeguard “One Country, Two Systems”, to make Hong Kong more stable, more secure for everybody, for the Hong Kong residents as well as for foreign investors. People could have a more predictable, safer environment to do their business and enjoy life in Hong Kong.

Third, the National Security Law for Hong Kong SAR has no impact on Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy, the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents. It targets a very narrow category of acts that seriously jeopardize China’s national security.

According to the Basic Law of Hong Kong, its capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for 50 years. This will be better ensured, not changed, by the national security law. The four offences and their corresponding penalties are precisely prescribed in the law, namely, secession, subversion, terrorist activities, collusion with foreign countries or external elements to endanger national security. This means that the law is highly targeted. It bans such criminal activities and protects the rule of law in Hong Kong and legitimate rights and freedoms of the people there.

Finally，one important task of the National Security Law for Hong Kong SAR is to prevent, suppress and punish collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security.

Hong Kong is a special administrative region of China. Hong Kong affairs are China’s internal affairs and allow no external interference. No one should underestimate the firm determination of China to safeguard its sovereignty, security and development interests. Attempts to disrupt or obstruct the implementation of the National Security Law for Hong Kong SAR will be met with the strong opposition of 1.4 billion Chinese people.

The National Security Law for Hong Kong SAR is the fundamental solution that will end the chaos and restore order in Hong Kong. We, the Chinese are confident that, under the strong leadership of the Central Government of China, with the concerted efforts of all the Chinese people, including Hong Kong compatriots, and with the strong safeguards of the National Security Law for Hong Kong SAR, Hong Kong will become a safer, better and more prosperous place.

{{RAO Hongwei
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of
the People’s Republic of China to the Republic of Rwanda
}}

But the allegation doesn’t hold water on five counts.

The issue should be analyzed in terms of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which was concluded in 1969 and came into force in 1980, and the United Kingdom and China both are state parties to it. The VCLT is reflective of customary international law, which governs the treaty relations between and among non-state parties. This is important because China did not accede to the VCLT until Sept 3, 1997. In other words, China was not a state party to the VCLT when the Sino-British Joint Declaration was concluded in 1984.

{{Joint Declaration should be interpreted in good faith}}

According to Article 2 of the VCLT, “treaty means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation”. As such, the Sino-British Joint Declaration meets the definition of “treaty”, its formal title notwithstanding.

First, the Sino-British Joint Declaration was concluded between China and the UK, both sovereign states, and the text of the instrument itself indicates it is an agreement between China and the UK. The Joint Declaration consists of eight paragraphs and three annexes, with each part having the same status. In particular, Paragraph 8 avers that “this Joint Declaration and its Annexes shall be equally binding”. Also, the Joint Declaration is “governed by international law”, as it stipulates the sovereign and administrative arrangement of Hong Kong during the transitional period. Hence, it is safe to conclude that the Sino-British Joint Declaration is a bilateral treaty between China and the UK.

The Chinese government has acknowledged the legal status of the Joint Declaration as a legally binding treaty. And the instrument, including the Sino-British Joint Declaration per se and three annexes, was registered as a treaty at the United Nations by the Chinese and British governments on June 12, 1985.

Since the Joint Declaration is a bilateral treaty, the rights and duties of the parties to it should be examined according to the provisions of the VCLT, especially those relating to treaty interpretation. Article 31 of the VCLT says a treaty must be interpreted in good faith and in the light of its object and purpose, and Article 26 enshrines the principle of pacta sunt servanda (agreements are binding and should be implemented in good faith).

The purpose of the Joint Declaration is reflected in its preamble: to reach a “proper negotiated settlement of the question of Hong Kong, which is left over from the past”. The UK acquired Hong Kong Island in 1842 and the Kowloon Peninsula in 1860, and leased the New Territories in 1898 for 99 years by unequal treaties with the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911) when China was weak. Therefore, the overarching purpose of the Joint Declaration is to ensure a smooth transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong, Kowloon and the New Territories from the UK to China in 1997, and correct the historical injustice; and this is vital to understanding the rights and duties of the parties to the treaty.

{{Key provisions of treaty need in-depth study}}

Paragraph 1 of the Joint Declaration is a unilateral statement of the Chinese government, which says China would resume the exercise of its sovereignty over the Hong Kong area (including Hong Kong Island, Kowloon and the New Territories, hereinafter referred to as Hong Kong) from July 1, 1997, which incorporates the principal right of the Chinese government under the instrument. And Paragraph 2 is a unilateral statement of the British Government, which says the UK would hand over Hong Kong to China on July 1, 1997, which, correspondingly, reflects the principal duty of the British government hereunder. The two paragraphs are complementary, and together constitute the key provisions of the instrument.

Paragraph 3 is a unilateral statement of the Chinese government, which sets forth the basic policies of China regarding Hong Kong in 12 subparagraphs. The policies set out in this paragraph are elaborated in Annex I. Paragraphs 4 to 6 and Annexes II and III stipulate arrangements during the transitional period. And Paragraphs 7 and 8 are about the Joint Declaration’s implementation and entry into force.

However, Paragraph 3 is unique in terms of its content and nature. It is different from Paragraphs 1 and 2 because it is “self-governing” and its performance is not dependent on any other paragraph. To be more specific, though Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 are unilateral statements of one party, Paragraphs 1 and 2 are dependent on each other, as they each cannot be fulfilled without the simultaneous performance of the other. But Paragraph 3 is distinct, as the Chinese government can fulfill it unilaterally and independently without the British government playing any role at all.

Also, Paragraph 3 is different from Paragraphs 4 to 8, since the latter reflect the common agreements of both parties, rather than being unilateral statements by one party alone. So the following conclusions can be drawn:

・ After the smooth transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong, Kowloon and the New Territories from the UK to China on July 1, 1997, Paragraphs 1 and 2 had been fulfilled;

・ After the NPC promulgated the Basic Law of the SAR, which incorporates the basic policies of China regarding Hong Kong, China had fulfilled its duties under Paragraph 3 and Annex I;

・ By maintaining the economic prosperity and social stability of Hong Kong during the transitional period, both parties fulfilled their duties under Paragraph 4;

・ After the Sino-British Joint Liaison Group, set up to ensure smooth transition post-handover, was disbanded in 2000, both parties had completed their duties in line with Paragraph 5 and Annex II;

・ After the Land Commission, established immediately after the Joint Declaration came into force, was dissolved on June 30, 1997, the conditions of Paragraph 6 and Annex III had been fulfilled;

・ And after the Sino-British Joint Declaration was signed by the Chinese premier and British prime minister on behalf of their respective governments, came into force with the exchange of instruments of ratification on May 27, 1985, and registered by the Chinese and British governments at the UN on June 12, 1985, the two sides had fulfilled their duties pertaining to Paragraphs 7 and 8.

{{UK, other states not entitled to supervise HK affairs}}

Since the Joint Declaration is a bilateral treaty between China and the UK, after all its requirements were fulfilled, the UK has no sovereignty, jurisdiction or “right of supervision” over Hong Kong. This is not to deny the UK’s entitlement to require China to respect the Joint Declaration. As the parties to the instrument, both China and Britain have the right to ask each other to honor it. But Britain’s right to ask China to respect the Joint Declaration is not absolute; instead, it is subject to the limitation of international law.

To begin with, when requiring China to respect the Joint Declaration, the UK should also abide by pacta sunt servanda. In other words, the UK should exercise such right based on good faith, not on arbitrary interpretation of the Joint Declaration. So the UK’s allegation that China’s decision to promulgate the national security law in the SAR conflicts with China’s international obligations under the Joint Declaration is baseless.

In fact, given that the “one country, two systems” principle is enshrined in the Basic Law of the SAR and the Chinese central government has reiterated that it respects the principle, and it will not be changed or undermined by the national security legislation, anybody with just basic knowledge of international law would conclude that the allegations are not based on facts.

Also, the UK should not violate the principle of non-interference in another country’s internal affairs when it requires China to respect the Joint Declaration. The principle of non-interference in another country’s internal affairs is part of international law and enshrined in the UN Charter (Article 2.4). The International Court of Justice was unambiguous when it ruled on the Nicaragua case that” (T) he principle of non-intervention involves the right of every sovereign State to conduct its affairs without outside interference; though examples of trespass against this principle are not infrequent, the Court considers that it is part and parcel of customary international law… (and) international law requires political integrity… to be respected”. (ICJ Reports 1986, p.106, para. 202)

{{One state cannot interfere in another state’s internal affairs}}

It went on to say that “the principle forbids all States or groups of States to intervene directly or indirectly in the internal or external affairs of other States” and that “a prohibited intervention must accordingly be one bearing on matters in which each State is permitted, by the principle of State sovereignty, to decide freely. One of these is the choice of a political, economic, social, and cultural system, and the formulation of foreign policy.”

Therefore, under no circumstances should the UK impose its unilateral interpretation of the Sino-British Joint Declaration on China, and vice versa. On issues that fall within the domestic affairs of China, the UK has no right to interfere, directly or indirectly. And since national security, in essence, is part of a sovereign country’s domestic affairs, the UK has no right to meddle in China’s decision to promulgate the national security law in Hong Kong.

Apart from the UK, some other Western countries, the United States in particular, have also been interfering in Hong Kong affairs. In 1992, the US passed the Hong Kong Policy Act, which was amended by the so-called Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2019. Under the framework of these acts, the US State Department is required to submit an annual report on recent developments in Hong Kong to the Congress, allegedly to “support the high degree of autonomy and fundamental rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong, as enumerated by the Joint Declaration”.

The situation in Hong Kong has also been an important part of the annual reports of the US Congressional Executive Commission on China and the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission. The maxim pacta tertiis nec nocent nec prosunt (a treaty binds the parties and only the parties, it does not create obligations for a third state) is the fundamental principle of a treaty. Yet the US has been monitoring the implementation of the Joint Declaration despite not being a party to the treaty and therefore having no right to supervise the implementation of the Joint Declaration.

As the prohibition of intervention “is a corollary of every state’s right to sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence”, according to L.F.L. Oppenheim who is considered the “father of international law” by many, the US is not allowed by international law to interfere in Hong Kong affairs. Consequently, the US is not entitled to interfere in China’s decision to promulgate the national security law in Hong Kong on the grounds of the Joint Declaration or any other international treaties.

{{China’s Constitution is the legal basis for HK Basic Law}}

Some Western countries argue that the Basic Law of the SAR is a product of the Joint Declaration. However, such argument is baseless, because the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China is the legal basis for the Basic Law of the SAR.

First of all, China’s Constitution makes it clear that it is the legal basis for the establishment of special administrative regions and the formulation of the Basic Law of the SAR. The current Constitution of China was enacted by the NPC in 1982, two years before the conclusion of the Sino-British Joint Declaration.

The preamble to the 1982 Constitution states “it is the fundamental law of the state and has supreme legal authority”. Especially, Article 31 of the Constitution states: ” (T) he state may establish special administrative regions when necessary. The systems to be instituted in special administrative regions shall be prescribed by law enacted by the National People’s Congress in the light of specific conditions”. As such, China’s Constitution is the legal basis for the establishment of special administrative regions and the formulation of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong SAR as well as the Macao SAR.

Second, the Joint Declaration itself proclaims that China’s Constitution is the legal basis for the Basic Law of Hong Kong. As mentioned before, Paragraph 3 of the Joint Declaration is a unilateral statement of the Chinese government which sets forth the basic policies of China regarding Hong Kong.

The central government has elaborated those basic policies in Annex I thus:” (T) he Constitution of the People’s Republic of China stipulates in Article 31 that ‘the state may establish special administrative regions when necessary. The systems to be instituted in special administrative regions shall be prescribed by laws enacted by the National People’s Congress in light of the specific conditions.’… The National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China shall enact and promulgate a Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China in accordance with the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China …”

This establishes without any doubt that China’s Constitution, not the Sino-British Joint Declaration, is the legal basis of the Basic Law of Hong Kong.

And third, the Basic Law of Hong Kong affirms that China’s Constitution is its legal basis, as the last paragraph of its preamble states: ” (I) n accordance with the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, the National People’s Congress hereby enacts the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, prescribing the systems to be practiced in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, in order to ensure the implementation of the basic policies of the People’s Republic of China regarding Hong Kong”.

Therefore, the promulgation of the Basic Law of Hong Kong by the NPC reflects China’s performance of its duties under the Joint Declaration. But the Joint Declaration, an international treaty, is not, and cannot be, the legal basis or source of the Basic Law of Hong Kong. China’s Constitution, as the fundamental law of the State and having supreme legal authority, is the legal basis for the establishment of special administrative regions and the Basic Law of Hong Kong.

{{Conclusion}}

After systematically examining the Sino-British Joint Declaration in terms of international law, one can safely conclude that the Joint Declaration is not relevant to national security legislation in Hong Kong. As long as the law is enacted and promulgated pursuant to China’s Constitution and the Basic Law of Hong Kong, its legitimacy cannot be challenged. And foreign countries, including the UK and the US, have no right to question China’s decision to promulgate the national security law in Hong Kong on grounds of the Joint Declaration or any other international treaty.

{The author is a professor of law at China University of Political Science and Law. The views don’t necessarily reflect those of China Daily.}

‘The Hunger Virus,’ reveals how 121 million more people (globally) could be pushed to the brink of starvation this year as a result of the social and economic fallout from the pandemic including through mass unemployment, disruption to food production and supplies, and declining aid.

In the Horn, East and Central Africa (HECA) region, over 47 million people were already food insecure due to the triple crises of floods, locust infestation and now COVID-19.

Lydia Zigomo, Oxfam’s HECA Regional Director said: “DRC, Ethiopia, Sudan, and South Sudan were all already facing humanitarian emergencies and urgently needed funding when the pandemic hit. Continuing debt, at a time when many HECA governments are already economically devastated and responding to the pandemic, mean efforts to curb hunger will be extremely challenged. Donor governments should fully fund the UN’s COVID-19 humanitarian appeal to mitigate
the additional food security impacts of COVID-19.The G20 Finance Ministers, meeting later in July 2020 must take bold and urgent action to ensure that private creditors and multilateral lenders cancel all debt payments in the region for 2020 and 2021.

The briefing reveals the most severe hunger hotspots in the HECA region. For example:

• {{In DRC,}} where 15.6 million people are food insecure, the price of locally produced goods, such as maize, cassava and sorghum, had risen nearly 50% by April 2020, compared to the same month the previous year.

•{{ In Ethiopia,}} where 8 million people are food insecure, an estimated 356,000 metric tons of cereal crops and 1.3 million hectares of pastureland have been lost to locusts to date. Movement restrictions slowed measures to control the swarms and impacted the food supply chain.

•{{ In Sudan,}} where 5.9 million people were already food insecure in 2019, COVID-19 has contributed to hunger. In the current period of June to September 2020, an estimated 9.6 million people are experiencing high levels of acute food insecurity and need urgent action.

•{{ In South Sudan}}, where 7 million people are already food insecure, seven years of protracted conflict and violent extremism has forced millions from their homes and had a devastating impact on domestic food production in a country where 80% of people rely on agriculture for their livelihoods. More recently, swarms of desert locusts have been devouring crops and pasture, with fears that the plague − already in the hundreds of billions − will grow further.

With the humanitarian response underfunded, declining tax revenues, and falling prices of commodities such as oil, currently available funds are not sufficient to address the deepening hunger crisis. Oxfam is calling for the cancellation of all external debt payments due to be made in 2020 and 2021 as the fastest way to free up resources needed to save millions from hunger and ensure livelihoods are rebuilt.

Mama Fatuma Muhumed Kanyare, a farmer from Tana River in Kenya, told Oxfam: “When the locusts attacked my farm, they took everything green. Then floods came too and washed away irrigation pumps and destroyed farm produce. My firstborn who was supporting us lost his job due to the economic downturn caused by the pandemic. I can no longer enjoy three meals because of COVID-19, floods, and locusts. Sometimes we forgo breakfast or lunch because of the hardship.”

“Governments must also ensure that additional loans and any relief due to debt suspension or cancellation, is channelled towards programs that help those most impacted. They should ensure accountability and transparency in the use of funds, and that expanded social protection and increased funding for agriculture are among the priorities,” said Corinne N’Daw, Oxfam’s Country Director in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

In April, the G20 approved a one-year debt suspension to some countries in the region. While this provides some relief for governments and frees up funds to support recovery, this suspension is inadequate. It should be extended to all forms of multilateral and privately held debt. Rather than suspending payments, lenders should cancel payments for 2020 and 2021.

Even a small discrepancy will lead to a great error. Malicious lies will, still worse, result in huge misconception and misunderstanding.

In this connection, we have compiled What’s False and What’s True on China-related Human Rights Matters, with the purpose of setting the record straight with facts.

Falsehoods find no market among the fair-minded, as we are confident that people will tell right from wrong!

1. {{False: }} The legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong will undermine the human rights and basic freedoms of Hong Kong residents, and violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

{{True:}}

◆The Law of the People’s Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region clearly stipulates that human rights shall be respected and protected in safeguarding national security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The rights and freedoms, including the freedoms of speech, of the press, of publication, of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration, which the residents of the Region enjoy under the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as applied to Hong Kong, shall be protected in accordance with the law.

◆The legislation only targets four types of offences, namely, secession, subversion, terrorist activities and collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security. It is designed to deter and sanction a small minority in Hong Kong who are involved in offences seriously jeopardizing national security. It aims to protect the great majority of law-abiding Hong Kong residents, and safeguard their safety and lawful rights and freedoms.

◆It is spelt out in the constitutions of over 100 countries that the exercise of basic rights and freedoms shall not endanger national security. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights makes it clear that freedoms of religious belief, expression and peaceful assembly, the right to public trial and other rights may be subject to restrictions that are necessary to protect national security, public order and so on. There are similar provisions in the European Convention on Human Rights.

2.{{ False:}} The legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong may include vaguely defined offences, and be abused by China’s national security authorities to oppress the people.

{{True:}}

◆The legislation only targets four types of offences that seriously jeopardize national security, much less than the dozens of crimes involving national security listed in countries such as the US and the UK. The legislation sets clear limits on related law enforcement activities. It requires that all law enforcement efforts be conducted in strict accordance with legal provisions and statutory mandates and procedures, without prejudice to the lawful rights and interests of any individual or organization. It also provides that the Office for Safeguarding National Security of the Central People’s Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall perform its mandate in strict compliance with the law and be subject to supervision in accordance with the law. The staff of the Office shall abide by the laws of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region as well as national laws.

◆Countries such as the US, the UK, Canada, and Australia have all established rigorous legal frameworks for safeguarding national security, which shows no mercy in combating offences endangering national security.

3. {{False:}} The legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong will make it difficult for foreign businesses in Hong Kong to fulfill their responsibility to respect human rights under the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights of the UN.

{{True:}}

◆The legislation only targets four types of offences, namely, secession, subversion, terrorist activities and collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security. Clearly, these offences are not what law-abiding businesses and residents in Hong Kong would ever engage in. Law-abiding trans-national businesses all want to see a Hong Kong back to stability and order. The implementation of this Law will help them better fulfill their responsibility to respect human rights.

4. {{False:}} The Hong Kong police have gotten away with the excessive use of force (such as using chemicals against protesters, committing sexual harassment and assault on female protesters at police stations, and harassing medical workers).

{{True:}}

◆During the turbulence over the amendment bill, the Hong Kong police dealt with hundreds of violent incidents in accordance with the law and police guidelines for months. Yet the radical protesters kept upgrading their equipment, from stones and iron bars to steel-ball slingshots, knife-attached umbrellas and dangerous chemicals. Even so, the police all along demonstrated the maximum level of calm, rationality, and restraint, and refrained from the first use of force. They only used force correspondingly to stop violent attacks or other illegal acts threatening the life and safety of other people on site, which is totally in line with international practice. They acted in a restrained, civil and highly professional manner even when their own lives and safety were threatened by dangerous weapons and violent and illegal activities. In fact, not a single protester in Hong Kong had died because of the law enforcement activity of the police. Yet over 590 police officers had been injured on duty by the end of May.

◆In sharp contrast to the restrained and professional performance of duty by the Hong Kong police, there are many reports about the US police killing people with violence and guns in the course of law enforcement. The year 2019 alone saw 1,004 such cases. By mid-June, at least 13 people had lost their lives in demonstrations over the death of George Floyd, in addition to hundreds of injuries and over 13.5 thousand arrests. For example, Linda Tirado, a 37-year-old freelance writer and journalist, has been left permanently blind in one eye after being shot with rubber bullets by the police during her coverage of protests in Minneapolis.

5. {{False:}} The Chinese government has suppressed the protests and the promotion of democracy in Hong Kong.

{{True:}}

◆What has happened since the return of Hong Kong proves that the freedoms of speech, of the press, of publication, of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration enjoyed by Hong Kong residents in accordance with the law have been fully protected.

◆Since the turbulence over the amendment bill in June last year, some radical protesters have deliberately stirred up violent incidents. Their actions have gone far beyond the scope of peaceful demonstration and freedom of expression, and turned into extremist, violent and illegal acts. Such violent acts have blatantly violated laws, posed serious threats to the safety of Hong Kong citizens and openly challenged the sovereignty and dignity of the State. The malicious nature of their acts has been laid bare by clear facts and solid evidence.

◆Peaceful and reasonable expression of demand is a basic requirement and an intrinsic part of a culturally advanced society based on the rule of law. Having said that, rights must be exercised within the framework of the rule of law, and no demand should be expressed by illegal means, let alone resorting to violence. The rule of law is the core value of Hong Kong and the cornerstone for its long-term stability and prosperity. Ensuring observance of laws and prosecution of lawbreakers is a manifestation of the spirit of the rule of law. Only by taking zero tolerance toward violence and rioters, can Hong Kong’s law and order be protected and the rule of law upheld. Supporting and conniving at violence and rioters represents a flagrant infringement of democracy, freedom and the rule of law.

6. {{False:}} The legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong violates China’s commitments and obligations under the Sino-British Joint Declaration.

{{True:}}

◆The legal basis for the Chinese government to govern Hong Kong is the Chinese Constitution and the Basic Law of the Hong Kong SAR. The Sino-British Joint Declaration is not relevant in this regard. As China resumed the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong in 1997, all provisions concerning the UK under the Joint Declaration had been fulfilled. The UK has no sovereignty, jurisdiction or “right of supervision” over Hong Kong after its return.

◆The basic policies regarding Hong Kong stated by China in the Joint Declaration are not commitments to the UK, but China’s declaration of its policies, which have since been fully embodied in the Basic Law enacted by the National People’s Congress (NPC). These policies have not changed; they will continue to be upheld by China.

7.{{ False}}: The legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong has been unilaterally imposed on Hong Kong by the Central Government of China.

{{True:}}

◆National security legislation has always been a matter concerning the sovereignty of the State and within the purview of the Central Authorities. The Central Government of China assumes the primary and ultimate responsibility for safeguarding national security. As the highest organ of State power in China, the NPC has established and improved, at the State level, the legal system and enforcement mechanisms for safeguarding national security in Hong Kong. This is vital for plugging the legal loopholes relating to national security in Hong Kong and effectively protecting national security. It is also a fundamental measure for ensuring the steady and sustained implementation of the policy of One Country, Two Systems.

◆Article 23 of the Basic Law stipulates that the Hong Kong SAR shall enact laws on its own to safeguard national security. Nearly 23 years after Hong Kong’s return to China, however, the relevant legislative process is still not materialized due to the sabotage and obstruction by anti-China, destabilizing elements in Hong Kong as well as hostile forces from the outside. Faced with the grave situation in safeguarding national security in Hong Kong, the Central Government has both the power and the responsibility to promptly plug the loopholes and strengthen the weak links.

◆The Macao SAR passed in early 2009 its Law on Safeguarding National Security, and has conducted, in a well-ordered manner, relevant law enforcement work and study of supportive legislation for safeguarding national security. In 2018, the Macao SAR Government set up a committee for safeguarding national security to coordinate and enforce local initiatives relating to national security. It has continued to improve its legal system, institutions and enforcement mechanisms for safeguarding national security.

◆The UK applied the Treason Act to Hong Kong with specialized enforcement agencies during its colonial rule. But now it is making groundless accusations against the legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong enacted by China’s central authorities. This is pure double standards.

8. {{False}}: No meaningful consultation over the legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong was held with the people in Hong Kong. Therefore, the legislation lacks public support.

{{True:}}

◆The legislative process fully demonstrates the shared will of all Chinese people, including the Hong Kong compatriots. In drafting the Law, the Central Authorities and relevant departments had solicited through various means and channels opinions and suggestions from the Chief Executive and other principal officials of the Hong Kong SAR Government, the President of the Legislative Council, representatives from the legal community of Hong Kong, members of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Basic Law Committee, NPC deputies, members of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), etc. In the revision and refinement of the draft, the views and suggestions from the Hong Kong SAR Government were carefully studied and accepted as much as possible, and Hong Kong’s actual conditions were fully considered. Thanks to these efforts, the legislative process was carried out in a well-conceived and democratic way and in accordance with law.

◆Relevant departments of the Central Authorities held 12 symposiums in Hong Kong, at which 120 representatives from, among others, the political, legal, business, financial, educational, scientific, cultural, religious, youth and labor sectors as well as social and local organizations in Hong Kong candidly expressed their opinions. The Liaison Office of the Central People’s Government in the Hong Kong SAR received more than 200 written opinions from 36 Hong Kong deputies to the NPC and 190 Hong Kong members of the CPPCC National Committee in a short period of time. People from all walks of life in Hong Kong were also able to express their opinions via email, letters or the official NPC website.

◆The relevant Decision of the NPC received support from representatives of all sectors in Hong Kong immediately after its release. Nearly three million people in Hong Kong have signed a petition in support of the enactment of the Law, and more than 1.28 million have signed an online petition opposing the interference by the US and other external forces.

9. {{False}}: The legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong marks the end of One country, Two systems and deprives Hong Kong of its high degree of autonomy.

{{True: }}

◆The NPC decision makes it clear, from the very beginning, that the State resolutely, fully and faithfully implements the policy of One Country, Two Systems under which Hong Kong people administer Hong Kong with a high degree of autonomy. This commitment was reaffirmed in Article 1 of the legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong. The goal of this legislation is to close the critical loophole in national security in Hong Kong, cement the foundation of One Country, and provide maximum safeguard for Hong Kong to harness the strengths of Two Systems on the basis of upholding One Country.

◆The enacted legislation will not affect the rights and freedoms enjoyed by Hong Kong residents under the law. It will not affect the HKSAR’s independent judicial power, including that of final adjudication. There will be no change to the policy of One Country, Two Systems, the capitalist system, the high degree of autonomy, or the legal system of the Hong Kong SAR.

10.{{ False:}} The legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong will jeopardize Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability.

{{True:}}

◆Quite the contrary, the legislation on safeguarding national security in Hong Kong will contribute to Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability. Since the turbulence over proposed legislative amendments last June, the “Hong Kong independence” groups and violent terrorist acts have dealt a heavy blow to Hong Kong’s rule of law, economy and livelihood. The city’s business environment and international image has also been severely damaged. The legislation is designed precisely to reverse that situation. It will help Hong Kong sustain a favorable business environment, consolidate and elevate its status as a financial, trade and shipping center, and bolster the confidence of foreign investors. After its adoption, the NPC decision received explicit support from many Hong Kong-based foreign-invested corporations, including HSBC, Standard Chartered, Swire and Jardines. They are all convinced that the legislation will contribute to the lasting stability of Hong Kong, and serve as the very foundation and prerequisite for all development.

◆Around the globe, be it New York or London, no international financial center will see its business environment undermined by the enforcement of a national security legislation. A recent survey by the American Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong shows that more than 70 percent of companies don’t have plans to move capital, assets, or business operations from Hong Kong, and more than 60 percent of the respondents personally don’t consider leaving the city. No businesses will turn against opportunities and profits.

◆The Macao SAR passed its national security legislation in 2009 in accordance with Article 23 of its Basic Law. From 2009 to 2019, Macao’s GDP soared by 153 percent, its number of tourists up by 81 percent, and its overall unemployment rate down to a ten-year low.

11. {{False:}} China tried to cover up COVID-19, resulting in its spread across the world with over 10 million infections.

{{True: }}

◆The Chinese government adopted the most comprehensive, stringent and thorough measures in the shortest possible time. The infections were largely kept within Wuhan with the chain of transmission effectively cut off.

◆On 9 May, researchers from Yale University and the Jinan University found in a joint study that the measures China has taken, including city lockdown, closed management of communities, quarantine and family outdoor restrictions, have significantly decreased the virus transmission rate. Thanks to these measures, the spread of the virus was effectively curbed in mid-February. China’s national and provincial public health measures may have prevented over 1.4 million infections and 56,000 deaths outside Hubei Province by 29 February. A report published by the journal Science estimated that China’s rigorous measures resulted in about 700,000 fewer infections, or 96% of cases.

◆On 25 February, the China-WHO Joint Mission consisting of 25 Chinese and international experts elaborated on the response measures taken by China and their effectiveness at a press conference in Geneva. The Mission pointed out that the usual epidemiological trajectory would be a surge in cases following an outbreak like COVID-19. China, with its robust intervention, significantly bent the curve. The Chinese people, with their resilience and sacrifice, have remarkably slowed the spread of the virus and won a precious window of opportunity for the world.

◆On 23 January, when Wuhan went into lockdown, the US counted only one confirmed case. On 2 February, when the US shut down its border to China, its official case count was merely eleven. According to news reports, statistics from countries including Canada, France, Russia, Australia, Singapore and Japan indicate that most of the cases in their countries did not come from China.

◆As Governor Cuomo of the State of New York pointed out, a research by the Northeast University of the US shows that the first strain of the novel coronavirus entered his state not from China. As reported by the New York Times, many US experts have confirmed that Asia was not the main source of the outbreak in New York. Canada’s provincial data also suggest that the country’s early coronavirus cases came from American travelers.

◆On 21 May, Dr. Pavan K. Bhatraju from the the Harborview Medical Center, University of Washington published a paper on the New England Journal of Medicine involving 24 severe cases in nine medical facilities in Seattle between 24 February and 9 March. None of the patients had recently traveled to China, the ROK, Italy or Iran, or had known exposure to a returning traveler. The source of infection in those cases was unidentifiable.

◆A report released on 8 June by Oxford, Edinburgh University and Cog-UK, an academic research organization, detected at least 1,356 independent transmission lineages based on more than 20,000 genome sequencing in the UK. Only 0.08% of the transmissions could be traced to China, an impact almost negligible. The report found that the contribution of China and other Asian countries to the number of importations in the UK was “very small”.

◆A recent NYT article “Why Is the United States Exporting Coronavirus?” pointed out that the US, with the largest number of coronavirus cases in the world, is continuing to deport thousands of illegal immigrants, many infected with the coronavirus. In late April, the government of Guatemala reported that nearly a fifth of the country’s coronavirus cases were linked to deportees from the US. For instance, 71 of the 76 deportees on one flight tested positive.

12.{{ False:}} The Wuhan lockdown measures violated citizens’ right to personal liberty.

{{True:}}

◆Wuhan, the capital of Hubei Province, was the first to report novel coronavirus cases. At the most critical moment against the virus, Wuhan enforced temporary travel restrictions in accordance with the law, which mainly include suspension of public transportation, such as city buses, subway services, ferries and coaches, and temporary closing of transport links, including airports, train stations and expressways. These important measures strictly contained the infections at the source, cut off the chain of transmission, and effectively forestalled massive spread of the disease. These measures helped reduce case exportation to other parts of China and the rest of the world, playing a positive role in the containment of COVID-19.

◆For a mega-city like Wuhan with more than 11 million people, restrictions on inbound and outbound travel pose an enormous challenge. The Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Chinese government took a string of measures to minimize the impact. Essential travel and much-needed key supplies were ensured, with priority given to people’s daily necessities. President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang traveled to Wuhan during the city’s battle against COVID-19. They visited local communities for first-hand information on the life of the residents, stressing that people’s essential needs must be ensured.

◆Thanks to the timely, most comprehensive, rigorous, and thorough containment measures taken by the Chinese government, the chain of transmission was effectively cut off. What China did was widely recognized by the science community. In an interview on 25 January, Dr. Gauden Galea, the WHO Representative in China, said that Wuhan’s lockdown measures would effectively curb the spread of the virus, and the temporary sacrifice would be a strong contribution to global public health security.

◆Recognizing the right to life as the most fundamental human right, the Chinese government is committed to putting people and life first. To protect people’s life and health, China put its socio-economic activities on hold, decisively adopted measures such as quarantine and followed WHO’s professional recommendations. Guided by science, China stopped the virus in its tracks and committed itself to saving lives at all costs. From a 108-year-old man to a 30-hour-old newborn baby, every patient was treated with no effort spared. To date, more than 3,000 senior patients aged 80 or above, including seven centenarians, have recovered after treatment in Hubei. In fact, some critically-ill elderly patients were brought back to life from the verge of death. There was a case of a 70-year-old patient who might not have survived COVID-19 had it not been for the many weeks of intensive treatment and care from about a dozen health workers. The expenses of the treatment, nearly 1.5 million yuan, were fully covered by the government.

◆In contrast, the US government has ignored science, played down the threat of the virus, and even resorted to blame shifting. This resulted in massive domestic outbreaks that cost the lives and health of many Americans, plunged the economy into recession and led to social turbulence. It was a typical example of putting political self-interests first. By 30 June, the US reported over 2.68 million confirmed cases and nearly 130,000 deaths, or 387 deaths per million. They are 30, 27, and 129 times the numbers in China. According to USCDC Director Robert Redfield, the number of coronavirus infections in the US could be 10 times higher than the confirmed case count. In other words, the number of infections in the US may have exceeded 20 million.

◆Vulnerable groups in the US are struggling to survive under COVID-19. The NYT website on 11 May reported that at least 28,100 residents and staff at nursing homes and other old-age care facilities across the US had died of the coronavirus, accounting for a third of the death toll in the US. According to USCDC statistics, as of 13 May, 22.4 percent of the country’s COVID-19 fatalities were African Americans, much higher than their 12.5 percent share in the US population. Hispanic Americans also suffered higher infection and fatality rates. Data from the city of New York in early April recorded 34 percent of COVID-19 deaths as Latinos.

◆In comparison to other countries’ COVID-19 response, China’s control measures have proven to be most effective at saving lives. As reported by the NYT website on 20 May, a study from the Columbia University suggests the delay in imposing travel restrictions claimed at least 36,000 American lives. Had the US government acted one week earlier, 36,000 lives could have been saved. Had the restrictions been introduced two weeks earlier, 83 percent of the deaths could have been avoided.

13{{. False:}} During COVID-19, the Chinese government cracked down on journalists and medical workers as they exercised their right to freedom of speech on the Internet, resulting in lack of information transparency.

{{True:}}

◆All countries have strict regulations on the confirmation and information release of infectious diseases. This is an international common practice. In China, the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Prevention and Treatment of Infectious Diseases stipulates rigorous reviewing procedures and requirements concerning the reporting, verification and information release of infectious diseases.

◆Open and transparent information is key to tackling epidemics. China’s National Health Commission collects and releases, on a daily basis, data of confirmed cases of all provinces to ensure that the data is accurate and reliable. Any cover-up or under-reporting is strictly held accountable. At the same time, the Chinese government exercises law-based management over the Internet, including social media. Heated debates among different views are easily found online in China. The Chinese government welcomes oversight by the public and media, while at the same time opposes illegal acts of starting and spreading rumor, creating panic or disrupting public order.

◆In China, no one gets punished or penalized simply because of making remarks. China’s criminal law clearly stipulates what actions constitute crimes. Violating the criminal law is a prerequisite of conviction. A handful of people, out of their hidden agenda, purport to have been convicted for speaking out in China. Their claim has no factual basis.

◆The Chinese government has all along conducted its COVID-19 response in an open and transparent manner, and has made widely recognized achievements. China is a country under the rule of law. Whether during the fight against the virus or in other times, China’s public security authorities handle cases and illegal activities in strict accordance with law.

14.{{ False:}} China detained Dr. Li Wenliang and other whistle-blowers.

{{True:}}

◆Li Wenliang was an ophthalmologist. He was not a whistle-blower and was not detained. Dr. Zhang Jixian, a respiratory doctor, was the first to report COVID-19 cases, and was awarded for this contribution.

◆On the afternoon of 30 December 2019 (three days after Dr. Zhang Jixian reported cases of unknown infection and one day before Wuhan released the relevant information), Dr. Li Wenliang sent a message to his alumni WeChat group. He claimed that there were “seven confirmed SARS cases”, and asked the group not to spread the information. However, leaked screenshots of the conversation spread quickly on the Internet and caused panic.

On 3 January 2020, Wuhan’s local police authorities asked Dr. Li to a police station for inquiry, and issued him a letter of reprimand as a means of persuasion.

In mid-January, Dr. Li started to show symptoms of infection. And on 31 January, he was confirmed to be infected with COVID-19.

On 7 February, Dr. Li passed away after all rescue measures were exhausted. On the same day, the National Health Commission publicly expressed condolences over his death. The National Supervisory Commission decided to send an inspection group to Wuhan to investigate issues related to Dr. Li.

On 19 March, the inspection group released its findings and held a press briefing. Wuhan’s Public Security Bureau announced the decision on the matter, pointing to the misapplication of relevant legal provisions in Dr. Li’s case, and revoked the reprimand letter.

◆On 5 March, Dr. Li Wenliang was named a “national model healthcare worker in fighting COVID-19”. On 2 April, he was honored as a martyr. On 28 April, he was awarded the 24th “May Fourth Medal”.

◆Dr. Li Wenliang was a good doctor and a member of the CPC. Labeling Dr. Li Wenliang as an “anti-establishment hero” or “awakener” is highly disrespectful to Dr. Li and his family. It is pure political manipulation without decency. On 30 May, responding to the bills introduced by US lawmakers to rename the street outside the Chinese Embassy in Washington, D.C. “Li Wenliang Plaza”, Dr. Li’s wife Fu Xuejie issued a statement on Weibo that said, “Wenliang was a CPC member. He loved his country deeply. Should he know about this, he would never allow anyone to hurt his motherland in his name.”

15. {{False}}: China has taken advantage of COVID-19 to conduct large-scale surveillance with big data, violating its citizens’ privacy.

{{True:}}

◆COVID-19 struck during China’s Spring Festival, the annual travel peak on a scale rarely seen elsewhere in the world in this country with 1.4 billion people. This created unprecedented challenges for disease control. China has harnessed big data, artificial intelligence, 5G and other technologies, and devised a smart technology app called “health code” for virus containment. This app helped avert the risk of infection, and facilitated transportation and reopening of the economy. The “health code” app has been used in other countries as well, and tens of thousands of users downloaded it on the first day of its overseas launch. We have also noted that quite a number of countries have drawn on China’s experience and practice in this regard in their COVID-19 response.

◆The Chinese government attaches great importance to protecting citizens’ privacy and has been working to improve relevant laws and regulations. Clear stipulations on the collection, use and protection of personal information are set out in China’s General Provisions of the Civil Law, the Cybersecurity Law, the Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on Strengthening Internet Information Protection and other laws and regulations.

◆China has long been deeply concerned about the large-scale electronic surveillance and personal data collection worldwide and violations against national sovereignty and human rights, especially the right to privacy, conducted by certain countries. China advocates that the United Nations take concrete measures to stop the certain countries from making such moves. Illegal or arbitrary surveillance over communications and collection of personal data not only violate people’s privacy, but also affect their right to exercise freedoms of expression, association and assembly and right to know. Because of the highly globalized nature of communication technologies represented by the Internet, large-scale electronic surveillance not only infringes upon the human rights of a country’s own citizens, but also flagrantly violates the human rights of people in other countries, seriously undermines the sovereignty of other countries, and goes against the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, including respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity and non-interference in internal affairs.

◆The USA Patriot Act introduced after the September 11 incident requires that Internet companies provide user information on a regular basis. According to information exposed under the PRISM program, Americans have no privacy in their phone calls, correspondence, documents and voice mails, which are all under the surveillance of intelligence agencies. Phone calls by the leaders of US’s once-close allies have long been wiretapped by the US as well. As it turns out, it is the US that has carried out the largest-scale cyber surveillance and cyber theft worldwide. This country is the world’s largest “empire of hackers”. In this regard, the United Nations adopted a resolution on the right to privacy in the digital age proposed by European countries.

◆Cybersecurity threats and risks are increasing by the day, with privacy infringements and other cybercrimes occurring from time to time. China places importance on strengthening data security management and personal information protection through legislative and technological means. Relevant laws such as the Cybersecurity Law have clear stipulations on the collection, use and storage of personal information and the protection of data security. China cracks down on data theft, privacy infringement and other related illegal and criminal activities in accordance with law. China is committed to enhancing dialogue and cooperation with other countries on the basis of mutual respect and trust to jointly address cybersecurity threats and challenges and build a cyberspace community with a shared future.

16{{．False: }} The vocational education and training centers in Xinjiang are “concentration camps” detaining over one million Uyghurs.

{{True:}}

◆The vocational education and training centers, established in accordance with law in Xinjiang, are no different in nature from the community corrections in the US, the Desistance and Disengagement Programme (DDP) in the UK, and the deradicalization centers in France. All of them are useful measures and positive explorations for preventive counter-terrorism and deradicalization, and are in line with the principles and spirit of the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and other counter-terrorism resolutions.

◆The education and training work in Xinjiang is guided by the spirit of the rule of law as well as international principles on counter-terrorism and deradicalization. It has solid legal basis and follows well-defined legal procedures, and is done in a way that makes no linkage to any specific region, ethnic group or religion. There is no such thing as “suppression on ethnic minorities” or “persecution of Muslims”.

◆The claim that “nearly one million Uyghurs are detained”, an outright rumor, is based on two highly dubious “studies”.

The first “study” was done by the US government-backed Network of Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) with interviews of only eight people. The CHRD applied the estimated ratio shown in this absurdly small sample to the whole of Xinjiang, drawing a crude conclusion that one million people were detained in the “re-education detention camps” and two million were “forced to attend day/evening re-education sessions”.

The second “study” was done by a far-right fundamentalist Christian Adrian Zenz, a.k.a. Zheng Guoen. According to The Grayzone, a US-based independent news website, Zenz is a senior fellow in China studies at the far-right Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation established by the US government in 1983, and a senior member in a research group set up with the masterminding of the US intelligence community to study Xinjiang’s vocational education and training centers. He believes he is “led by God” on a “mission” against China.

In September 2018, Zenz wrote an article published in the Central Asian Survey journal, concluding that “Xinjiang’s total re-education internment figure may be estimated at just over one million.” According to The Grayzone, Zenz based this conclusion on a single report by Istiqlal TV, a Uyghur exile media organization based in Turkey. Far from a journalistic organization, Istiqlal TV advances separatism while playing host to an assortment of extremist figures. One such character who often appears on Istiqlal TV is Abduqadir Yaqupjan, a leader of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM). Maybe it was because the reference he cited was too absurd even to himself, that Zenz admitted that “there is no certainty” to his estimate. But Zenz “bumped up” his estimate again in November 2019, claiming China was detaining 1.8 million people.

17.{{ False:}} The vocational education and training centers in Xinjiang carried out “political indoctrination and intimidation” over the Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities.

{{True:}}

◆The vocational education and training centers in Xinjiang provided courses on standard spoken and written Chinese language, legal knowledge, professional skills and deradicalization, to address the inadequate language proficiency, lack of legal literacy and job skills, as well as the varying degrees of religious extremism influence among their trainees. The purpose of the centers is to tackle terrorism and religious extremism at the root, not so-called “political indoctrination and intimidation” by any means.

◆Through all-round learning, the trainees have freed themselves from the influence of terrorism and religious extremism. Their overall capacity has been improved, as evidenced by a markedly increased understanding of the law, the ability to speak and write in standard Chinese, acquisition of practical skills and the general improvement in employability. Most of them have found jobs that give them a stable income, and notably improved their families’ living standards.

18. {{False}}: The vocational education and training centers are poorly conditioned and lack medical facilities. The trainees are subjected to forced political indoctrination and torture, and are deprived of their rights to exercise religious customs, use local ethnic languages among others.

{{True:}}

◆The vocational education and training centers strictly follow the basic principle of respecting and protecting human rights enshrined in China’s Constitution and other laws. The trainees’ basic rights and personal dignity are well protected, and insults or abuse against the trainees in any manner are prohibited. The centers fully guarantee the personal freedom of trainees. The centers are managed as boarding schools where trainees may go home on a regular basis and ask for leave to attend to personal matters, and enjoy the freedom of correspondence.

◆Trainees’ freedom of religious belief is fully respected and protected at the centers. Those with a religious belief can decide on their own whether to take part in legal religious activities when they are at home.

◆The centers fully respect and protect the customs of all ethnic groups and provide a rich variety of nutritious halal food free of charge.

◆The trainees’ right to use the spoken and written languages of their own ethnicity is fully protected at the centers. All regulations, curricula and canteen menus at the centers are written in both standard Chinese and local ethnic languages.

◆The centers have well-equipped facilities. Dorms are furnished with radio, television, and air conditioning or electric fans. Medical facilities are set up to provide free health counseling services and treatment for trainees. There are also venues for basketball, volleyball, table tennis and other sports, cultural venues such as reading rooms, computer rooms and cinemas, as well as venues for performances like auditoriums and open-air stages. Singing and dancing performances of different ethnic groups, sports games and other extra-curricular activities are often held to meet trainees’ learning, living and entertainment needs to the greatest extent possible.

◆Legal counseling rooms are set up in the centers to help address trainees’ law-related difficulties and questions promptly. There are psychotherapy rooms to provide psychological counseling services and care for trainees’ mental health. All trainees are covered by old-age, medical and other social insurances and free medical check-ups.

19.{{ False:}} Detainees in the mass internment camps in Xinjiang include permanent residents of the US and Australia.

{{True}}:

◆The vocational education and training centers in Xinjiang have never received trainees who are not Chinese nationals.

20. {{False}}: Xinjiang’s special operations against violent terrorist activities aim to suppress ethnic minorities under the pretext of fighting terrorism.

{{True:}}

◆Xinjiang had suffered long and deep from terrorism and extremism. Statistics show that from 1990 to 2016, ethnic separatists, religious extremists and violent terrorists plotted and conducted several thousand violent terrorist cases and incidents, killing a large number of innocent civilians and several hundred police officers, and causing immeasurable property losses. These incidents inflicted untold sufferings on the people of various ethnic groups in Xinjiang.

◆In the face of a grave and complicated counter-terrorism situation and the urgent demand from people of all ethnic groups for suppressing violence and terrorist crimes and protecting life and property safety, China’s Xinjiang region has taken a series of active measures. Responding to the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and other counter-terrorism resolutions, Xinjiang has upheld the principle of not linking terrorism with any particular region, ethnic group or religion, and acted in accordance with the law to crack down on violence and terrorist activities that violate human rights, endanger public security, undermine ethnic unity and aim at separating the country. Since 2014, a total of 1,588 violent and terrorist groups have been taken out, 12,995 violent terrorists arrested and 2,052 explosive devices seized. Such operations have effectively curbed the rising trend of frequent terrorist activities and protected people’s right to life, right to health, right to development and other basic rights to the maximum extent. These measures have received full support from people of all ethnic groups in Xinjiang.

◆Through law-based counter-terrorism, deradicalization and vocational education and training, Xinjiang has not seen a single violent terrorist case in the past three-odd years. Extremist infiltration has been effectively curbed, public security significantly improved and people’s sense of fulfillment, happiness and security markedly enhanced.

◆In October 2019, more than 60 countries spoke in support of China’s Xinjiang policy at the United Nations General Assembly. Among them, over 30 are Islamic countries. In contrast, none of the few countries criticizing China’s Xinjiang policy are Islamic countries.

◆Since late December 2018, more than 1,000 people from over 90 countries visited Xinjiang in 70-plus groups. They include UN officials, foreign envoys to China, representatives of relevant countries to Geneva, journalists and members of religious groups. After their visits, they expressed the view that Xinjiang’s counter-terrorism and deradicalization efforts are in line with the purposes and principles of the UN in fighting terrorism and upholding basic human rights and that these efforts deserve to be fully recognized and emulated by others.

21. {{False:}} China restricts the freedom of communication and movement of Uyghurs in Xinjiang in the name of counter-terrorism and deradicalization.

{{True: }}

◆Xinjiang has never restricted the freedom of movement of Uyghurs or people of any other ethnic group. In Xinjiang, anyone from any ethnic group, except those prohibited from leaving the country for suspected crimes, can exit and enter China freely. Several hundred thousand people from Xinjiang are now overseas.

◆Xinjiang has never restricted Uyghurs or people of other ethnic groups from contacting their overseas relatives. They can do so not only through international phone calls, but also through voice and video chats on instant messaging apps such as WeChat and QQ. They can also do business and trade with people in other countries through various communication means.

22. {{False:}} Xinjiang conducts large-scale surveillance on local ethnic minorities.

{{True:}}

◆It is an international common practice to harness modern technology and big data in improving social governance. For example, there were 4.2 million surveillance cameras installed in the UK as early as 2010, the highest number in the world then. Today the country has about six million cameras, one for every ten people. In the United States, facial recognition is conducted in the top 20 airports against passengers. The city surveillance system built by New York police has devices covering every neighborhood of the city watching people and vehicles on the street and tracking and screening information on people’s mobile phones. What Xinjiang has done in this respect pales significantly in comparison with these two countries.

◆The cameras in urban and rural public places, main roads and transport hubs in Xinjiang are installed in accordance with the law for the purpose of improving social governance and forestalling and combating crimes. These measures make people feel safer and are widely supported by people of all ethnic groups. The measure does not target any specific ethnicity, not to mention that cameras by themselves identify or target no specific ethnicity. They are there to deter bad guys and protect good people.

23. {{False:}} Mass forced labor against ethnic minorities is taking place in Xinjiang.

{{True:}}

◆According to a US news website the Greyzone, the forced labor stories were in fact a PR blitz orchestrated by anti-China forces from the US and Australia.

◆The stories were cooked up by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) which has long been funded by the US government and American arms dealers. To serve the interests of its sponsors, the institute blatantly spread disinformation to vilify and demonize China, particularly on Xinjiang-related issues. Together with anti-China forces in the US, the ASPI made up baseless and biased stories to smear and attack Xinjiang’s counter-terrorism and deradicalization efforts. The institute has no credibility whatsoever. Former Australian Ambassador to China Geoff Raby sees the ASPI as “the architect of the China threat theory in Australia”. Former Qantas Airways CEO John Menadue said the institute “lacks integrity and brings shame to Australia”.

◆Ethnic minority workers from Xinjiang are part and parcel of the country’s labor force. They have the rights to be employed, sign labor contracts, obtain labor remunerations, take rest and vacations, acquire labor safety and health protection, and enjoy social insurance and welfare as prescribed by law. They have the freedom to choose their occupation. Their personal freedom has never been restricted.

◆There are only limited job opportunities in the four southern Xinjiang prefectures (Hotan, Aksu and Kashi prefectures, and Kizilsu Kirgiz autonomous prefecture) as industrialization and urbanization there are underdeveloped. The government of the Xinjiang Autonomous Region has taken measures based on the wishes of local people to help them find jobs in their hometowns, nearby cities or other areas of Xinjiang, or in the provinces and cities that have pair-up assistance programs with Xinjiang, thus ensuring peoples’ right to work to the maximum extent. Since 2018, Xinjiang has helped 151,000 surplus rural workers from poor families in the southern prefectures to find employment elsewhere. With an average annual income of over 45,000 yuan, these workers have all been lifted out of poverty.

◆China has been improving its legal system and its State Council has established an inter-agency mechanism to crack down on crimes such as human trafficking and forced labor. Such efforts have proven effective. China earnestly fulfills its international obligations and has ratified 26 international conventions on human rights. China will continue to strengthen exchanges with all parties and fight forced labor and other crimes together.

24. {{False:}} Xinjiang has demolished a large number of mosques.

{{True: }}

◆Xinjiang has seen sound development of the religion of Islam. The number of mosques in Xinjiang has grown from some 2,000 at the beginning of reform and opening-up in the late 1970s to 24,400 today, more than 10 times that in the United States. In Xinjiang, there is a mosque for every 530 Muslims on average.

◆Xinjiang takes the preservation and maintenance of mosques very seriously. Some cramped and dilapidated mosques, those with poor layout designs and those inconvenient for religious activities have been rebuilt, relocated or expanded in light of the needs and wishes of local Muslim communities. Such adjustments have been welcomed by religious leaders and believers.

25. {{False:}} Graveyards of ethnic minorities are demolished in parts of Xinjiang.

{{True:}}

◆Under the regulations of the local authorities, the government does not promote cremation for ethnic minorities observing traditional ways of interment. On the contrary, it takes concrete measures to help preserve the tradition, by designating burial ground and building dedicated cemeteries. Besides, there is no restriction on other ethnic customs followed in weddings, funerals, and name-giving ceremonies.

26. {{False:}} The “Pair Up and Become Family” program is designed to monitor ethnic minorities in Xinjiang.

{{True: }}

◆Since 2016, an extensive ethnic unity campaign has been conducted among government officials and people of different ethnicities in Xinjiang. Some 1.1 million officials have paired up and made friends with 1.6 million local people, treating each other like family members. They have respected and helped each other, and forged deep bonds through close interactions. The officials leveraged their expertise to help local people explore ways to shake off poverty and address difficulties in their lives, such as access to medical services, job opportunities and education. The campaign, with its real, substantial benefits to the public, has been well received by the people of all ethnic groups.

27. {{False}}: The local government sends Uyghur children to boarding schools and separates them from their parents.

{{True: }}

◆The boarding school system is an effective means to improve education in China’s remote areas and ease the burden on students and their families. In Xinjiang, students of all ethnicities attend schools closest to their homes. Those living near the campus can be commuter students. For those living further away, schools provide them with free accommodation, plus free meals for those from rural families. It is up to the students and their parents to decide whether to live on or off campus.

28.{{ False:}} The Chinese government forces sterilization, abortion and birth control on Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in Xinjiang.

{{True: }}

◆The Chinese government protects the lawful rights and interests of all Chinese without distinction of ethnicity. Over the years, the Uyghur people and other ethnic minorities have enjoyed a preferential population policy. In the four decades between 1978 and 2018, the Uyghur population in Xinjiang increased from 5.55 million to 11.68 million, accounting for 46.8% of the total population of the autonomous region.

◆To put things into perspective, let’s look at the situation in the United States. Racial and ethnic minorities in the US have long been the targets of bullying, exclusion, and widespread and systemic discrimination in the political, economic, cultural and social aspects of their lives. Take Native Americans as an example. For quite a long period of time, the US government had been enforcing a policy of genocide, segregation and assimilation against Native Americans. For nearly a century after its founding, the US was uprooting and killing American Indians in its Westward Movement. The Native American population plunged from 5 million in 1492 to 0.25 million in the early 20th century. It now accounts for a mere 2 percent of the US population. Another example, African Americans. African Americans have a COVID-19 infection rate five times that of white Americans, and a much higher mortality rate as well. This highlights the racial inequality in the US. The recent death of an African American George Floyd and the massive protests that followed once again shows that the systemic racial discrimination in the US has reached a point where racial and ethnic minorities “can’t breathe”. It calls for an urgent solution.

29.{{ False:}} The Chinese government’s brutal crackdown on Muslims is a human rights violation not seen since World War II.

{{True:}}

◆One of China’s five ethnic minority autonomous regions, the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region is home to 25 million people of different ethnic groups who live and work in harmony. Among them, ten ethnic groups, including Uyghur and Hui, consist mainly of Muslims. The Muslim population has been growing steadily, accounting for nearly 60% of the total local population.

◆Under a system of ethnic regional autonomy, China treats all ethnic groups equally and pursues prosperity and development for people of all ethnicities. It ensures that ethnic autonomous areas exercise the power to self-govern in accordance with law, and protects the legitimate rights and interests of ethnic minorities. In Xinjiang, every chairperson of the People’s Congress, the autonomous regional government, and the CPPCC regional committee is from ethnic minority groups. Ethnic minorities take 64.2% of the seats in the 13th Xinjiang People’s Congress, and 46.7% of the seats in the 13th CPPCC Regional Committee of Xinjiang.

◆Xinjiang fully implements the policy of freedom of religious belief. The freedom of religious belief of all people, regardless of their ethnicity, is fully protected in accordance with law. Believers and non-believers enjoy the same political rights and economic, social and cultural rights.

◆On 25 May, George Floyd, an African-American, was killed in Minneapolis in a brutal assault by a white police officer. His death triggered massive demonstrations and protests across the country, throwing into sharp relief the public outcry and anger over the systemic racism long in existence in the country. The UN Human Rights Council held an urgent debate and adopted a resolution voicing strong condemnation and urging concrete measures from the US to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of Africans and of people of African descent.

30. {{False:}} The Chinese government uses COVID-19 to “wipe out” Muslims.

{{True:}}

◆Thanks to the joint efforts of the people of all ethnic groups in Xinjiang, COVID-19 has been effectively contained in the region. As of 29 June, a total of 76 confirmed cases had been reported in Xinjiang, including 73 cured cases and three deaths. With no new confirmed cases for over 130 days, Xinjiang has resumed full normalcy in economic and social activity early on and is back on track for economic and social development.

◆On 9 December 2019, Shohrat Zakir, Chairman of the Government of Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, announced that all the trainees at the vocational education and training centers had completed their studies. There is no risk of cluster infections at these centers.

31.{{ False:}} In media reports or social media posts about “missing persons”, overseas Uyghurs tell stories about their “families” and “friends” in Xinjiang who have “lost contact” or “gone missing”.

{{True:}}

◆Xinjiang has never curtailed the freedom of travel of Uyghur people or people of any other ethnic groups. Nor is there any restriction on communication with relatives abroad.

◆It has been verified by the relevant authorities that the so-called “missing persons” mentioned by overseas East Turkistan elements are either living a normal life or simply non-existent.

In an ABC News (Australia) report, Azmat Omar, a Chinese citizen living in Australia, claimed that he had lost contact with his family members in Xinjiang, including his father, stepmother, three brothers, two sisters and over 20 nephews. It later became clear that all his family members in China are living normal lives and enjoy full personal freedoms.

During a UN Human Rights Council session in February 2020, the World Uyghur Congress put up photos of the so-called “Uyghurs persecuted by the Chinese government” in the square with the Broken Chair in front of the Palace of Nations in Geneva. The photos have proved to be fake. Separatist groups got hold of the pictures and personal information of Uyghur officials and residents living normal lives in Xinjiang and misrepresented them to spread rumors.

32. False: China uses denial of passport renewal as a weapon to force overseas Uyghurs to return to China, where they face extrajudicial detention.

True:

◆In China, a country governed by the rule of law, the citizens’ personal freedom and right to leave and enter the country are protected by law. Chinese diplomatic missions abroad protect the lawful rights and interests of overseas Chinese, including ethnic minorities from Xinjiang, in accordance with laws and regulations including the Exit and Entry Administration Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Passport Law of the People’s Republic of China. Anyone who holds the Chinese nationality, recognizes oneself as a Chinese national, and has not violated Chinese laws and regulations can apply to the Chinese embassy or consulate in the place of residence for passport renewal or re-issuance.

◆Xinjiang follows a fact- and law-based approach in managing exit and entry affairs and cracking down on crimes of violence and terrorism and activities of religious extremism. Most applications for passport renewal or re-issuance from Xinjiang natives have been received and approved by Chinese embassies or consulates. The very few who have their applications rejected are suspected of involvement in terrorist activities in violation of Chinese laws and regulations.

33. {{False:}} The research paper titled The Karakax List:
Dissecting the Anatomy of Beijing’s Internment Drive in Xinjiang

{{True:}}

◆The so-called research paper was produced by Adrian Zenz, a key figure in the so-called Xinjiang’s Internment Camps Research Group set up and controlled by US intelligence agencies. The paper is based on a name list of “students sent to re-education who are family members of those who went abroad and have not returned.” The list itself was cooked up by ETIM members from inside and outside China.

◆The majority of the 311 people on the list live in Bostan Street in Moyu (Karakax) County. They live and work just like most other people do, and have never received vocational education and training. Only a very small number of those on the list have been sent to vocational education and training in accordance with the law for being influenced by religious extremism and committing minor crimes. Only 19 out of the 311 people have relatives abroad, but none of them have received the vocational education and training.

34. {{False:}} 30 relatives of Rebiya Kadeer have been detained without trial.

{{True:}}

◆No one from Rebiya Kadeer’s family has been implicated. All her relatives live and enjoy freedom in Xinjiang. They want her to stop spreading lies and disturbing their peace.

35. {{False:}} Family members of Furqat Jawdat, Arapat Arkin, Zumrat Dawut and other so-called “activists” have been “harassed, imprisoned or arbitrarily detained.”

{{True:}}

◆Both Furqat Jawdat and Arapat Arkin are members of the World Uyghur Congress, an organization notorious for its violent, terrorist and separatist agenda. They make a living by fabricating stories and splitting their motherland. Their relatives, who are leading a normal life in Xinjiang, feel ashamed of having people like them in the family.

◆Furqat Jawdat’s mother is living a normal life in Xinjiang and has regular contact with him.

◆Arapat Arkin’s father was sentenced for taking part in violent and terrorist activities, but his mother and younger brother and sister are all living a normal life. None of them have been taken into custody. His mother has repeatedly urged him not to follow his father’s path, “Your father did harm to our society. He is being punished for his wrongdoing. He is very sorry for what he has done. So please stop telling lies and leave the World Uyghur Congress before it’s too late.”

◆Regarding the claim that “Dawut’s elderly father, who had been detained and interrogated multiple times by the local authorities in Xinjiang, recently passed away under unknown circumstances”, here is what really happened: Dawut’s father had been living with his children all these years, without ever being “interrogated” or “detained”. Suffering from a serious heart condition for many years, the octogenarian passed away in hospital in October 2019 after all medical treatment had failed. During his last days in hospital, the old man was attended by Dawut’s older brothers and other relatives who stayed by his bedside.

36.{{ False}}: Mutallip Nurmamat died nine days after his release from an internment camp. Prominent Uyghur writer Nurmamat Tohti died in an internment camp. Sayragul Sawutbay saw people tortured in a detention camp before fleeing China. Uyghur musician and poet Abdurehim Heyit was sentenced to eight years in prison and died in the second year of imprisonment.

{{True:}}

◆Mutallip Nurmamat never studied in a vocational education and training center. In December 2018, he died from acute alcohol poisoning, alcoholic encephalopathy, respiratory failure and acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage triggered by alcohol abuse.

◆Nurmamat Tohti never studied in a vocational education and training center. He had had coronary artery disease for over 20 years and spent most of his time receiving treatment in hospital or recuperating at home. On 31 May 2019, after suffering an acute myocardial infarction at home, he was taken to hospital but passed away despite emergency rescue efforts.

◆Sayragul Sawutbay is suspected of fraud. To flee justice, she crossed the border illegally into Kazakhstan. She never stayed in any vocational education and training center in China, and was never detained before her illegal escape. Her words about seeing people tortured cannot be true.

◆Abdurehim Heyit, arrested on suspicion of endangering national security, is in good health. On 10 February 2019, Heyit said in a published video, “I am under investigation for suspected violations of law. I am in very good health, and I have never been abused.”

37. {{False: }} A comic book titled What has happened to me: A testimony of a Uyghur woman recounts the experiences of Mihrigul Tursun, a Uyghur woman who allegedly escaped a vocational education and training center. She claimed to have seen the death of nine women while in custody, and that her younger brother was abused to death in a vocational education and training center.

{{True:}}

◆Mihrigul Tursun, an ethnic Uyghur, used to live in Qiemo County of Bayingol Mongolian Autonomous Prefecture in Xinjiang. She was detained for 20 days in April 2017 by the Public Security Bureau of Qiemo County over suspicion of inciting national enmity and discrimination. In 2018, she voluntarily relinquished her Chinese citizenship and left China with an Egyptian passport. She had never been imprisoned in China, nor had she studied in any vocational education and training center.

◆Akbar Tursun, her younger brother, said publicly, “My sister Mihrigul is full of lies. She not only said I am dead, but also lied about seeing others die.”

The Ad5-nCoV is one of China’s eight vaccine candidates approved for human trials at home and abroad for the respiratory disease caused by the new coronavirus. The shot also won approval for human testing in Canada.

China’s Central Military Commission approved the use of the vaccine by the military on June 25 for a period of one year, CanSino said in a filing. The vaccine candidate was developed jointly by CanSino and a research institute at the Academy of Military Science (AMS).

“The Ad5-nCoV is currently limited to military use only and its use cannot be expanded to a broader vaccination range without the approval of the Logistics Support Department,” CanSino said, referring to the Central Military Commission department which approved the military use of the vaccine.

CanSino declined to disclose whether the innoculation of the vaccine candidate is mandatory or optional, citing commercial secrets, in an email to Reuters.

The military approval follows China’s decision earlier this month to offer two other vaccine candidates to employees at state-owned firms travelling overseas.

The Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials of the CanSino’s vaccine candidate showed it has the potential to prevent diseases caused by the coronavirus, which has killed half a million people globally, but its commercial success cannot be guaranteed, the company said.

Separately, AMS received an approval earlier this month to test its second experimental coronavirus vaccine in humans.

No vaccine has yet been approved for commercial use against the illness caused by the new coronavirus, but over a dozen vaccines from more than 100 candidates globally are being tested in humans.

The amount of blood will be about $83 billion worth if the 4,000 patients donate 500ml individually, according to the current transaction in the United States. “It is difficult to accelerate developing a medicine for COVID-19 with only 200 recovered patients who expressed their will to donate blood. The massive donation from the recovered patients in the Shincheonji Church will solve the problem of the lack of blood for research,” said an official from Green Cross Pharma, a biopharmaceutical company in South Korea.

For the first quarter of this year, the rapid virus spread hit the church members in Daegu of South Korea, where the early signs of the crisis appeared with the controversy over the massive visitors from China before the infection of church members.

Mr. Man Hee Lee, founder of the Shincheonji Church, said that members of the church are advised to donate plasma voluntarily. “As Jesus sacrificed himself with his blood for life, we hope that the blood of people can bring positive effects on overcoming the current situation,” said Mr. Lee.

“We had a discussion with the health authorities and tried to establish a plan with details for donation. Some of the recovered members have already donated individually, feeling thankful for the assistance from the government and medical teams. They expressed their will to make contribution to the society,” said an official in the church.

Some local governments in South Korea recently brought lawsuits against the church with allegations that the church did not cooperate with the authorities by not submitting the full list of church facilities and members.

“No evidence has been found that Shincheonji supplied missing or altered lists. And there were only minor differences,” said Kim Kang-lip, vice-minister of Health.

Academic researches on Shincheonji and COVID-19 stated that the church “provided the list of its South Korean members six days after it was requested” and “it was initially unclear whether shut down facilities and properties should be included” when the government asked for the lists of real estate.

(Shincheonji and Coronavirus in South Korea: Sorting Fact from Fiction – A White Paper https://www.eupoliticalreport.eu/covid-19-and-the-shincheonji-church-in-south-korea-a-white-paper-reveals-the-truth/)

A Shincheonji media coordinator said the church will cooperate fully with investigations from government agencies.

South Korea reported 12,535 confirmed cases and 281 deaths from COVID-19.

The world economy is projected to shrink to 4.9% below zero in 2020, at a rate of less than 1.9% below zero compared to the IMF’s standstill in April and economic recovery will not be slow.

Gita Gopinath, Chief Economist at the IMF, said that compared to the April forecast, it shows a slowdown in the economy in 2020, and will continue in 2021.

She went on to say that the world economy in two years will lose $ 12 billion due to Coronavirus.

The World Bank released a report this month stating that global gross domestic product by 2020 will fall to 5.2% below zero. Developed countries will be reduced by 7% below zero; of the European Union using the euro will fall by 9.1% below zero.

U.S. gross domestic product will fall 6.1% below zero; the Japanese down 6.1% below zero; the Chinese reach a rate of 1% above zero. Sub-Saharan Africa’s gross domestic product will fall by 5% below zero.

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed Ali, who took part in the virtual extraordinary China-Africa summit on solidarity against COVID-19 on Wednesday, mainly emphasized the need to strengthen solidarity among African countries and China in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic.

The summit, held via video link, was jointly proposed by China, South Africa, the rotating chair of the African Union (AU), and Senegal, the co-chair of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC).

Leaders of African countries, including members of the AU Assembly of Heads of State and Government and rotating chairs of major African sub-regional organizations, and the chairperson of the AU Commission, attended the summit.

“Solidarity has been key between China and African countries during these unprecedented times,” the Ethiopian Prime Minister’s Office quoted Ahmed as saying during the summit.

The Ethiopian prime minister also stressed that “building on our existing partnership is key as we work to overcome the pandemic-induced threats to our health and economic systems.”

Recalling the eight major initiatives announced by China during the Beijing Summit of the FOCAC, which was held in September 2018, the Ethiopian premier also called for the initiative to give major priority and focus to health care.

The secretary-general of the United Nations and the director-general of the World Health Organization also attended the meeting as special guests.

Costantinos Bt. Costantinos, who served as an economic advisor to the AU and the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, also told Xinhua that at the summit, China further transformed the crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic into an opportunity to strengthen global cooperation and solidarity.

“China is probably the only nation that can address the challenges faced by African countries and beyond in the Global South in terms of improving economic governance, rebuilding societies from crisis and polities and addressing the impact of climate change adaptation, curtailing corruption, and economic and social sustainability of developing nations,” Costantinos added.

According to Costantinos, as China’s COVID-19 cases decline, Beijing strives to take the lead in the containment of the global pandemics, and this is the first international crisis where China is actively taking a global leadership role and it stands in particular contrast to the U.S., which has disdained international cooperation.

Costantinos, who is also professor of public policy at the Addis Ababa University in Ethiopia, further stressed that despite criticism from some countries, “China is an able and willing partner of Africa. Africa can learn from the Chinese development and pandemic management system. What does seem clear is that the performance of the Chinese system offers Beijing a unique chance to steal a march on the future.”

According to the latest figures from the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), the number of confirmed COVID-19 positive cases across the African continent reached 259,036 as the death toll from the pandemic also rose to 6,999 as of Wednesday.

The Africa CDC also said that some 114,308 people who were infected with COVID-19 had recovered across the continent so far.

Amid the rapid spread of COVID-19 across the African continent, the highly affected African countries include South Africa, Egypt, Nigeria, Ghana and Algeria, it was noted. Enditem