- cross-posted to:
- europe@feddit.de
- cross-posted to:
- europe@feddit.de
For at least ten years, the Chinese Communist Party has been abducting its overseas citizens on EU territory and forcibly returning them to China - violating the rule of law and public security in Europe - a new report finds.
Full report: https://safeguarddefenders.com/sites/default/files/pdf/Chasing Fox Hunt.pdf
Archived version: https://archive.ph/lEYCn
EDIT: The discussion shifted to off-topic and insults. Post locked.
Source? From my experience, US goes in the opposite direction. They keep inventing new reasons to kick people out. Their Title 42 is a perfect example of how they circumvent their Title 8 protections.
Probably a false equivalence to the prisoner population, as if China doesn’t have any prisons and it wasn’t an entirely different issue
https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/prisoners-2022-statistical-tables
Well, you and I use a different definition of abduction. While I’ll give you that some of those people are probably imprisoned wrongly, the majority are there because of their own actions. I wouldn’t fault China imprisoning someone for breaking their laws (even if I disagree with the law), I also don’t fault US for imprisoning people for breaking their laws. Treatment of those prisoners is a different question altogether.
Your definition of abduction apparently includes persuading people to go somewhere, so I think there are many lacks in terms of definitions here.
Asking under a threat of harm is no longer called persuasion, it’s a crime.
The link 404s for me, so I can’t really look at the details, but more information would be required to establish it as actually being criminal. Saying, and I’m just producing an arbitrary example, “Come here to attend a court case or you will be tried in abstentia (and therefore probably found guilty), which will result in fines that, if ignored, will be satisfied by asset forfeiture in the form of us seizing your shit” is consistent with your description of “asking under threat of harm” while also being an extremely normal thing for a country to do and not a crime.
There is an archived version, and I attached the full report to the post.
The article is worthless, turns out, and looking at the report, it doesn’t really help because so many of its critical claims (i.e. actual, specific instances of collective punishment that weren’t countered by Chinese courts) just have citations to other reports by the same group. I’m just here to procrastinate on school work rather than read through a collective 500 pages of histrionics (seriously, the stylization of this whole thing is laughable).
Here’s the definition I use, it’s quite common
Now compare that to imprisonment. One is legal action, another is illegal action. One can argue about the morality of that, but the distinction is clear.
The difference between imprisonment and abduction is not, in fact, legality. I have no idea how you could come to the conclusion that legality has anything to do with the definitions of those words. Average liberal word salad.