Chinese authorities have sentenced two women in their 70s to a year’s ”re-education through labour” following their application to hold a protest demonstration during the Beijing Games, a relative said on Wednesday.
Officials said this week they had not approved a single permit for a demonstration, despite designating three parks as protest zones.
The International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) communications director said she would look at the women’s case, but stressed the Games were ”not a panacea for all ills”.
Wu Dianyuan (79) and her neighbour, Wang Xiuying (77) sought to protest about their forced eviction from their homes in 2001. They went to the Beijing Public Security Bureau (PSB) four times this month to request permission to demonstrate in the zones — created for the Olympics to counter criticism about restrictions on political expression in China.
Their applications were neither granted nor denied, but on their first trip PSB officers interrogated them for 10 hours, Wu’s son, Li Xuehui, told the New York-based group Human Rights in China.
On August 17 the two women received an order dated July 30 from Beijing’s Re-education Through Labour Commission, sentencing them to one year for ”disturbing the public order”.
It places restrictions on their movements and warns that if they breach any of the requirements they will be sent to a labour camp.
The system does not require formal hearings or allow appeals.
Li told the Associated Press the women were now at home under the observation of a neighbourhood committee. No cause had been given for the order. When Wu and Wang returned to the PSB on August 18, officers said they could not apply to protest because of their sentence.
Sharon Hom, executive director of Human Rights in China, said: ”Punishing Wu and Wang after they applied for protest permits, and actively petitioned the government, demonstrates the official statements touting the new Olympics ‘protest zones’ were no more than a show.”
On Monday the official news agency, Xinhua, reported that 77 applications had been made. But, citing a PSB spokesperson, it added that 74 were withdrawn because the problems ”were properly addressed by relevant authorities or departments through consultations”, two had been suspended for giving insufficient information, and one rejected because it violated laws by including a child.
Protests that might harm ”national unity” and ”national, social or collective interests” are forbidden, and permit forms request details ranging from the applicant’s work unit to slogans to be chanted and the size and content of banners.
Neither the PSB nor officials from the e-education through labour system responded to the Guardian‘s requests for further information.
With no demonstrations pending at Beijing’s World Park, perhaps the most surreal choice for a protest zone, tourists happily traipsed past miniature models of the Pyramids and Houses of Parliament this week.
In the Ritan and Purple Bamboo parks, local residents played chequers and chatted. The only sign of the parks’ special status was the increased security.
Wang Wei, vice-president of the Beijing organising committee, told reporters they should be ”satisfied” with the protest zones. ”The idea of demonstration is that you are hoping to resolve issues, not to demonstrate for the sake of demonstrating. We are pleased that issues have been resolved through dialogue and communication — this is how we do it in Chinese culture,” he told a press conference.
He added: ”We want everyone to express their opinion. Everyone has the right to speak; this is not the same as demonstrating.”
Giselle Davies, the IOC’s director of communications, said she would look at Wang and Wu’s case, but added: ”The Olympics are about sport. We are aware of the wider issues but opening the door through the Olympics is a catalyst for development here. That catalytic effect is happening. But the Olympics are not a panacea for all ills.” —