From: ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU (IFCSS HQ)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: IFCSS HQ NR-4015: HQ Work Report, Protection, Shen Tong, etc.
Date: 9 Sep 92 01:02:10 GMT
Reply-To: IFCSS HQ <ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Comments: To: ccnl@utarlvm1.uta.edu, china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

**************************************************************
IFCSS Headquarters News Release No. 4015     September 8, 1992
      IFCSS HQ WORK REPORT: PROTECTION, SHEN TONG, etc.
**************************************************************
Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS)
   733 15th Street, N.W., Suite 440, Washington, D.C.20005
         Tel. (202)347-0017  Fax: (202)347-0018
                Email: ifcss@wam.umd.edu

                 IFCSS HQ Work Report
                 ====================
                 (September 8, 1992)


     1. PROTECTION BILL UPDATE:

     There are about 30 days left before the Congress ends
this session. We all feel the urgency to have the '92
Protection Bill pass the Senate in this month. Our lobby
team in D.C. (CCSA, the HQ, IFCSS Attorneys) have been
working on the leaders of the Senate hoping to bring the
bill to the Senate floor as soon as possible. When we need
help, we will send announcements to the networks.

     At this critical stage and in such a sensitive time,
we need to handle the protection lobby with care and
caution. We do not want the Protection bill be delayed
or overlooked, but we do not want to overdo it either.

     At the local level, we encourage local lobby groups
to contact Senators from your state. Just generally ask
the Senators to support the protection bill.

     2. REACTIONS TO INS DENIAL OF CHINESE ASYLUM CASE:

     A few days ago, the HQ received report that a Chinese
student, who has participated in pro-democracy movement in
the United States, has been denied asylum by the INS office
in Texas. The rejection was based on the argument that the
student could not prove that the Chinese government "is
aware, or could become aware," of his activities within the
United States and that the student could not prove the
Chinese government "is persecuting students who have
participated in anti-government activities within the
United States." (extracted from INS rejection letter.)

     The INS letter further asserts:"We differentiate here
between students who conducted their anti-government
activities within the geophysical boundaries of China
and those who have conducted their activities outside the
country. According to a speech given to the Asylum Officer
Corps at Artesia, New Mexico on March 3, 1991, Mr. Sidney
Jones, Director, Asia Watch, stated, `We don't have a
single case of a student who took an active role in pro-
democracy demonstrations outside China being punished upon
their return to China.' Further, according to a cable from
the U.S. Consul in Shanghai, China over 120 returning F-1
and J-1 visa applicants who were beneficiaries of the
Executive Order of April 11, 1990 and who had come to China
for various reasons were interviewed. Not one reported any
problem with the authorities."

     The HQ, after receiving the report, deemed it a
significant case. It is a serious threat to the safety
of not only the applicant but also the 80,000 Chinese students
and nationals now protected by the Executive Order. If this
decision is not challenged, the administration could easily
overturn its protection policy.

     The HQ believes: that the INS officers are not well-
informed of the human rights situation in China; that the
evidences presented by the INS are neither conclusive nor
convincing; that the arguments used by INS to deny the
asylum application are subjective and lacked sufficient
grounds; and that we have irrefutable evidences to prove
that the Chinese government is aware of the pro-democracy
activities in the United States and has been punishing
students who are engaged in such activities, (Miss Gong
Xiaoxia's rejection at the Chinese Customs, Shen Tong's
arrest, and numerous other cases.)

     The HQ has sent the report to several legal experts.
A formal document (reply to INS) is under preparation.

     If you have evidences, (government documents, letters
from China, personal experience, etc.) which can strengthen
our argument, please contact the HQ as soon as possible.

     3. SHEN TONG RESCUE:

     This afternoon, the HQ called Mrs. Li Yixian, Shen Tong's
mother in Beijing. She does not know the whereabouts of Shen
Tong. She thought last week that Shen Tong would be released
in about a week (the police never showed warrant. They told
Shen Tong when they entered Shen's home that they only wanted
to "chat" with him for a few minutes.) She said that she was
waiting for Shen's release, but now after one week, she
begins to worry and she is feeling outraged.

    Shen's mother told us that starting from tomorrow she
will openly appeal the government to release Shen Tong. She
will write open letters and visit government offices.

    The HQ expressed our concern over Shen Tong's safety
and our support for her actions. We told Shen's mother that
we have decided that beginning from tomorrow, the HQ will
organize an open-letter campaign to pressure the Chinese
government for the release of Shen Tong and his two
associates.

***************************************************************
         IFCSS Headquarters Office    Signature
***************************************************************
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china