China’s Illegal Network of International Police Stations
By Jake Babbish
The Chinese Communist Party (“CCP”) is carrying out illegal, transnational policing operations around the world, targeting Chinese citizens living abroad.[1] Chinese law enforcement is utilizing threats and implementing “persuasion” techniques aimed at returning suspects to China to face justice.[2] The Chinese police are currently running at least fifty-four (54) overseas police service centers in foreign countries, carrying out operations on foreign soil.[3] Since July 2022, the CCP claims that 230,000 nationals suspected of fraud have been “persuaded to return.”[4]
Beijing has sought to play down the reports of policing overseas.[5] The Chinese Foreign Ministry office claims that the offices merely provide administrative services to Chinese citizens abroad.[6] However, such Chinese “service stations” also have the double aim of cracking down on all kinds of illegal and criminal activities committed by Chinese nationals living abroad.[7] As part of a massive nationwide campaign to combat the growing issue of money fraud and telecommunication fraud by Chinese nationals living abroad, Chinese authorities use these overseas offices to carry out police operations on foreign soil, and “persuade citizens to return” to face criminal proceedings in China.[8]
The Anti-Telecom and Online Fraud Law (“ATOFL”), passed on September 2, 2022 includes extraterritoriality provisions for Chinese citizens.[9] Article 3 states that, “[t]he Law shall apply to fighting the telecom and online fraud in China’s territory, or telecom and online fraud overseas committed by Chinese citizens.”[10] It also stipulates that “overseas organizations or individuals engaging in or assisting in telecom and online fraud against people in China’s territory shall be held accountable.”[11]
The Chinese Foreign Ministry continues to rebut any illegal activity, stating that, “Chinese public security authorities strictly observe the international law and fully respect the judicial sovereignty of other countries.”[12] The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations agrees that “an international convention on diplomatic intercourse, privileges, and immunities would contribute to the development of friendly relations among nations, irrespective of their differing constitutional and social systems.”[13] The Vienna Convention also realizes that “the purpose of such privileges and immunities is not to benefit individuals, but to ensure the efficient performance of the functions of diplomatic missions as representing states.”[14]
Article 36 of the Vienna Convention rules that consular officers should be free to communicate with their nationals and to have access to them.[15] This means that China must notify consular officers of the State they are requesting extradition from “without delay,” if a national is arrested or held in custody pending trial or otherwise detained.[16] Any communications from the detained foreign national to their consular officials are to be forwarded without delay.[17] Consular officers of foreign nationals have the right to visit a national of their State who is imprisoned, or otherwise detained, and to arrange for their legal representation.[18] The Vienna Convention acknowledges that such rights of communication and access by consular officials are to be exercised in conformity with all national laws and regulations, but goes on to clarify that national laws must not be used as a workaround to deny consular access.[19]
The Chinese embassy in the Netherlands said it was “not aware” of and “not involved” with the offices described in the reports of secret policing stations.[20] A spokesperson from the Dutch government stated, “China’s judicial and law-enforcement authorities strictly abide by international rules and fully respect the judicial sovereignty of other countries[.]”[21] Officials in Beijing, for their part, insist that the whole thing is just a big misunderstanding, and that the offices serve legitimate consular approved purposes[22]
However, according to the Vienna Convention, an international pact signed by both China and the Netherlands, states that administrative matters are to be handled by consulates.[23] Chinese police attempting to set up policing operations on foreign soil, without proper coordination, violates sovereignty and circumvents standard judicial and law enforcement cooperation processes.[24] Additionally, under Article 3 of the Vienna Convention, “the functions of a diplomatic mission consists of protecting in the receiving state the interests of the sending state and of its nationals, within the limits of international law[.]”[25]
China and its political borders. Courtesy of Christian Lue via unsplash.com.
Evidence of direct corroboration from Chinese authorities that illegal policing operations are indeed being used to “convince” alleged criminals to return to China to face justice has also been reported in Spain.[26] The official, from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Shanghai, told Spanish reporters that, “[t]he bilateral treaties are very cumbersome and Europe is reluctant to extradite to China. I don't see what is wrong with pressuring criminals to face justice.”[27]
Despite China’s insistence on the establishment of bilateral extradition treaties investigations and briefings, it rarely uses these legal international procedures.[28] Chinese law enforcement officials continue to ignore the proper channels for international cooperation, as civil rights organizations have found,
[r]ather than cooperating with local authorities in the full respect of territorial sovereignty, it prefers – as reiterated frequently in the articles cited in this investigation – to cooperate with (United Front-linked) overseas “NGOs” or “civil society associations” across the five continents, setting up an alternative policing and judicial system within third countries, and directly implicating those organizations in the illegal methods employed to pursue “fugitives.”[29]
This strategy further allows Chinese police to circumvent international principles such as “the non-derogatory principle of non-refoulement[30] under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and the UN Convention on the Protection of Refugees, or the guarantees established under international mechanisms such as the UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime and the Protocols.”[31] For example, under the United Nations Convention Against Torture, “[n]o state party may expel or extradite a person to a state where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.”[32] Therefore, countries that are parties to the UN Convention Against Torture are obligated to refuse extradition when torture is a concern for the suspect.[33]
Amnesty International has documented cases of torture and other ill treatment in China since 2010.[34] A report noted that torture and other ill-treatment remained widespread in detention and during interrogation, largely because of shortcomings in domestic law, systemic problems in the criminal justice system, and difficulties with implementing rules and procedures in the face of entrenched practices.[35] Torture is particularly severe in major cases with multiple suspects, such as in organized or triad-related crimes.[36] In a 2015 UN report, China admitted that between 2008 and 2015, 279 people were convicted on extracted confessions through the use of torture.[37] Examples of torture that prisoners have had to endure include beatings with clubs and other blunt objects, overstretching of the limbs, isolation, forced feeding, hangings, starvation, sleep deprivation, and exposure to the elements.[38]
Holding China accountable for its flagrant disregard for firmly established international law must be a priority for nations with large at risk populations of Chinese foreign nationals.[39] Simply put, “[t]he rapidly expanding global practice poses a severe threat to national sovereignty and individual rights everywhere . . . [n]ational awareness and investigations, as well as targeted actions to counter these operations and protect those most at risk are key to upholding the international rules-based order.”[40]
It is up to individual nations to educate their law enforcement officers and judicial authorities on the means and methods used in China’s illegal methods for conducting policing operations abroad.[41] These nations could also establish proper reporting channels for targeted individuals at risk of foreign threats.[42] Non-governmental Organizations have proposed measures such as educating law enforcement officers and political officials on the methods utilized by the CCP for involuntary returns, as well as to create support networks for targeted Chinese national to rely on in the event they are at risk of any harm.[43] Countries should also consider suspending active extradition agreements and treaties with China given the danger of abuse and torture.[44] Coordinated action by international governments must be targeted at uncovering the network of Chinese police stations as well as holding Chinese agents responsible for violating international law.
Ultimately, China is skirting international rules and channels set in place to protect the civil rights of Chinese citizens living abroad in order to exert power and influence outside of their domestic borders. Therefore, in the face of Chinese international transgression, a combined effort and international response is necessary in order to uphold international law and stability, while also ensuring the protection and promotion of basic human rights.
[1] Hsia Hsiao-hua, China runs illegal police operations on foreign soil via ‘overseas service centers’, Radio Free Asia (Sep. 3, 2022), https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/police-overseas-09162022095838.html.
[2] Id.
[3] Id.
[4] 110 Overseas Chinese Transnational Policing Gone Wild, Safeguard Defenders (Sep. 2022), https://safeguarddefenders.com/en/110-overseas.
[5] Francesco Collini et. al., China’s Secret Police Stations in Europe, Spiegel (Nov. 4, 2022), https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/beijing-s-long-arm-china-s-secret-police-stations-in-europe-a-d6732094-ca32-4c0a-8e6f-58b395b946aa.
[6] Leylan Cecco, Police investigare claims of secret Chinese police stations in Canada, The Guardian (Oct. 27, 2022), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/27/canada-secret-chinese-police-stations-investigation.
[7] Id.
[8] 110 Overseas Chinese Transnational Policing Gone Wild, supra note 4, at 3.
[9] Id.
[10] Lui Dong, Anti-Telecommunication Network Fraud Law of The People’s Republic of China, [中华人民共和国反电信网络诈骗法] (promulgated by the standing Comm. Nat’l People’s Cong., Sep. 9, 2022) Standing Comm. Nat’l People’s Cong. Gaz. (China) https://www.creditchina.gov.cn/zhengcefagui/zhengcefagui/zhongyangzhengcefagui1/202209/t20220905_301274.html.
[11] Id.
[12] Mike Corder, China accused of creating overseas ‘police stations’ to target dissidents, PBS News Hour (Oct. 27, 2022), https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/china-accused-of-creating-overseas-police-stations-to-target-dissidents.
[13] Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Apr. 24, 1963, 596 U.N.T.S. 261, https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_1_1961.pdf.
[14] Id. at preamble.
[15] Id. at art. 1.
[16] Id.
[17] Id.
[18] Id.
[19] Id.
[20] Collini et. al., supra, note 5.
[21] Cecco, supra, note 6.
[22] Id.
[23] Id.
[24] 110 Overseas Chinese Transnational Policing Gone Wild, supra note 4, at 19.
[25] Vienna Convention, supra note 13, at Art. 3(b).
[26] Zigor Aldama, The ‘secret’ operations of the Chinese police in Spain, El Correo (Oct. 17, 2022), https://www.elcorreo.com/internacional/asia/operaciones-secretas-policia-20221009175227-ntrc.html.
[27] Id.
[28] 110 Overseas Chinese Transnational Policing Gone Wild, supra note 4, at 19.
[29] Id.
[30] Non-refoulment prohibits States from transferring or removing individuals from their jurisdiction or effective control when there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be at risk of irreparable harm upon return, including persecution, torture, ill-treatment, or other serious human rights violations.
[31] 110 Overseas Chinese Transnational Policing Gone Wild, supra note 4, at 19.
[32] Hans Danelius, Convention against Torture and other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment, U.N. Audiovisual Libr. (2008), https://legal.un.org/avl/ha/catcidtp/catcidtp.html.
[33] Id.
[34] China: Torture and forced confessions rampant amid systemic trampling of layers rights, Amnesty Int’l (Nov. 12, 2015), https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2015/11/china-torture-forced-confession/.
[35] Id.
[36] Id.
[37] List of issues in relation to the fifth periodic report of China, Comm. Against Torture (CAT) (Jun. 15, 2015), https://www.refworld.org/docid/564ed6854.html.
[38] Torture methods in the People’s Republic of China, Int’l Soc’y For Hum. Rts. https://ishr.org/torture-methods-in-the-peoples-republic-of-china/ (last visited Sep. 10, 2023).
[39] 110 Overseas Chinese Transnational Policing Gone Wild, supra note 4.
[40] Involuntary returns–report exposes long-arm policing oversees, Safeguard Def. (Jan. 18, 2022), https://safeguarddefenders.com/en/blog/involuntary-returns-report-exposes-long-arm-policing-overseas.
[41] 110 Overseas Chinese Transnational Policing Gone Wild, supra note 4.
[42] Id.
[43] Policy Recommendations: Transnational Repression, Freedom House, https://freedomhouse.org/policy-recommendations/transnational-repression (last visited Sep. 10, 2023).
[44] Id.