U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

74–235PDF 2012

CHEN GUANGCHENG: HIS CASE, CAUSE, FAMILY,

AND THOSE WHO ARE HELPING HIM

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, 

AND HUMAN RIGHTS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

MAY 15, 2012

Serial No. 112–145

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

RON PAUL, Texas 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

DAVID RIVERA, Florida 

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania 

TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York 

RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina 

ROBERT TURNER, New York 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

DENNIS CARDOZA, California 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

FREDERICA WILSON, Florida 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

YLEEM D.S. POBLETE, Staff Director 

RICHARD J. KESSLER, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, AND HUMAN RIGHTS

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York 

ROBERT TURNER, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Pastor Bob Fu, founder and president, ChinaAid Association ............................. 5

Mr. Wei Jingsheng, founder and chairman, Overseas Chinese Democracy 

Coalition ................................................................................................................ 15

Ms. Reggie Littlejohn, founder and president, Women’s Rights Without Frontiers ....................................................................................................................... 27

Ms. Chai Ling, founder, All Girls Allowed ............................................................ 33

Ms. Mei Shunping, victim of forced abortion ........................................................ 41

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Pastor Bob Fu: Prepared statement ....................................................................... 9

Mr. Wei Jingsheng: Prepared statement ............................................................... 21

Ms. Reggie Littlejohn: Prepared statement ........................................................... 30

Ms. Chai Ling: Prepared statement ....................................................................... 37

Ms. Mei Shunping: Prepared statement ................................................................ 44

The Honorable Christopher H. Smith, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of New Jersey, and chairman, Subcommittee on Africa, Global 

Health, and Human Rights: Status of relatives and supporters of Chen 

Guangcheng .......................................................................................................... 49

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 58

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 59

(1)

CHEN GUANGCHENG: HIS CASE, CAUSE, 

FAMILY, AND THOSE WHO ARE HELPING HIM 

TUESDAY, MAY 15, 2012

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH,

AND HUMAN RIGHTS, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1 p.m., in room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Christopher H. Smith 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. SMITH. The subcommittee will come to order. I want to thank 

you all of you for joining us for this hearing to examine the status 

of Chinese human rights defender Chen Guangcheng, and that of 

his family and others who have been targeted by Chinese officials 

in connection with this case. 

This hearing will also focus on Chen’s cause. Chen Guangcheng 

is among the bravest defenders of women’s rights in the world. 

Chen defended thousands of women from the ongoing, most egregious systematic state-sponsored exploitation and abuse of women 

in human history—pervasive forced abortion, and involuntary sterilization as part of China’s one-child-per-couple policy—and suffered, as a result of his defense, cruel torture, degrading treatment, 

unjust incarceration, and multiple beatings. 

The sheer magnitude of this exploitation of women has been 

largely overlooked and trivialized by many, and even enabled. 

United Nations Population Fund has, for over 30 years, supported, 

defended and whitewashed the crimes against women and children 

Chen struggled to expose. That is why President Reagan, and more 

recently President Bush, defunded the U.N. Population Fund. In an 

indefensible reversal, the Obama administration has provided approximately $165 million to the UNFPA. 

Mr. Chen, as we know, who was blinded by a severe fever as an 

infant, is a self-taught lawyer. He garnered international attention 

in 2005 when he organized a class-action lawsuit against local officials who were forcing women to undergo abortions and sterilizations to comply with China’s one-child-per-couple policy. There 

were as many as 130,000 involuntary abortions and sterilizations 

performed in Linyi County in a single year. In response to his heroic efforts to defend women and men from forced sterilization and 

women from forced abortion, Mr. Chen was sentenced to 51 months 

in prison on trumped-up charges and then subjected to extralegal 

house arrest where the beatings continued. 

2

In response to his incredible escape on April 22nd and the events 

that followed, I chaired an emergency hearing about Mr. Chen, 

with the Congressional-Executive Commission on China in this 

same room on May 3rd. During that hearing, which took place just 

days after—after Mr. Chen left the U.S. Embassy in Beijing, Mr. 

Chen spoke to us from his hospital bed in Beijing over Mr. Bob 

Fu’s cell phone. Mr. Chen indicated that he wanted to come to the 

United States for some time of rest, as he put it, noting that he 

had not had rest for the past 10 years. He asked for a face-to-face 

meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was in Beijing at the time. Regrettably, that didn’t happen. He also expressed 

fear for the life of his family members, and said that he was most 

concerned about their safety, especially that of his mother and his 

brother. He was extremely concerned about their welfare, as well 

as their whereabouts. 

In that context Mr. Chen noted that security officers had installed seven video cameras and even an electric fence around his 

house in Shandong Province, saying that they ‘‘want to see what 

else Chen Guangcheng can do.’’ As soon as the authorities learned 

of his escape, they refused to allow his daughter to attend school. 

For these reasons, he was justifiably worried about the villagers 

and others who were helping him and what they were being subjected to, including severe, life-threatening retribution. 

Reports that we have received since are corroborating Mr. Chen’s 

fears. Following his escape from house arrest, Chinese officials 

started breaking into the homes of his family in the same village 

and rounding up those who had assisted him for interrogations. 

When local officials and thugs broke into the home of Mr. Chen’s 

brother, Mr. Chen’s nephew, Chen Kegui, reportedly tried to defend 

himself with a kitchen knife. He is now in a police detention center. I am extremely concerned, as is Chen Guangcheng, for his welfare, as well as that of other family members. 

The day after the emergency hearing on May 4, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted on their Web site the statement that 

‘‘[a]s a Chinese citizen, [Mr. Chen] may apply like other Chinese 

citizens according to the laws and normal procedures of the relevant departments.’’ The U.S. Department of State also issued a 

press release announcing that ‘‘[t]he Chinese Government stated 

today that Mr. Chen Guangcheng has the same right to travel 

abroad as any other citizen of China. Mr. Chen has been offered 

a fellowship from an American university, where he can be accompanied by his wife and two children. The Chinese Government has 

indicated that it will accept Mr. Chen’s applications for appropriate 

travel documents. The United States Government expects that the 

Chinese Government will expeditiously process his applications for 

these documents. . . .’’

Now, 11 days later, Mr. Chen is still in the same hospital room 

with his wife and two children under de facto house arrest. Although Mr. Chen is under the impression that his application for 

a passport was made last Sunday when he was visited by a Chinese official, and under Chinese law blind persons are supposed to 

be able to apply orally for travel documents, he has not been notified of any further action on the application. With the exception of 

the half-hour each morning and afternoon that the children are esVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:57 Jul 10, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\AGH\051512\74235 HFA PsN: SHIRL
3

corted outside by one of the nurses, he and his family are not allowed to leave the hospital, and no one is allowed to see them. 

Anyone who attempts to see Mr. Chen risks severe retaliation. 

For example, on May 2nd, human rights lawyer Jiang Tianyong attempted to visit Mr. Chen in the hospital. He was forcibly taken 

away by police officers. It was later reported that Mr. Jiang was 

beaten so severely that he lost his hearing in at least one ear, and 

has been forced to move from Beijing to Hebei Province until after 

the 18th Party Congress. 

Mr. Jiang was here in the United States in October 2009 and testified twice before the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, an 

amazingly heroic man. Mr. Wolf chaired one of those hearings, and 

I chaired the other. One of his recommendations was that President Obama should speak with President Hu Jintao and Premier 

Wen Jiabao about freeing a number of political prisoners, including 

Chen Guangcheng, who was imprisoned at that time. Now Mr. 

Jiang himself must be included in the list of those on whose behalf 

the United States advocates for. 

Chinese nationals are not the only ones being prohibited from 

trying to meet Mr. Chen. The Foreign Correspondents Club of 

China reported in early May that officials threatened to revoke the 

visas of foreign journalists who entered the hospital without permission. I would note here that many journalists have demonstrated amazing courage and laudable perseverance in publicizing Mr. Chen’s plight. It is largely due to their promotion of Mr. 

Chen’s case that has reached this stage of a possible travel to the 

United States. I would earnestly ask them not to forget Mr. Chen 

and his family, and extended family, and others, like He Peirong, 

who are risking their security and their lives on his behalf. 

The story, unfortunately, is far from over. 

Before I turn to our panel of distinguished witnesses to discuss 

the current events, I would like comments by my fellow colleagues, 

some of whom are en route, to be made a part of the record, without objection. 

I would like to now ask our witnesses if they would come to the 

witness table, and I will introduce them to the subcommittee. 

Beginning first with Pastor Bob Fu, who was a leader in the 

1989 student democracy movement in Tiananmen Square and later 

became a house church pastor and founder along with his wife. In 

1996, authorities arrested and imprisoned them for their work. 

After their release they escaped to the United States in 2002 and 

founded the ChinaAid Association. ChinaAid monitors and reports 

on religious freedom in China, and provides a forum for discussion 

among experts on religion, law and human rights in China. Pastor 

Fu is frequently interviewed by media outlets around the world 

and has testified at U.S. congressional hearings, including the one 

on Chen Guangcheng, held by the China Commission. It was Bob 

Fu, whose cell phone and translation made that very important 

connection with Chen Guangcheng on May 3rd. 

We will then hear from Mr. Wei Jingsheng, who served two jail 

sentences totaling more than 18 years in China for his pro-democracy work. He was forced into exile in 1997, but continued to advocate for human rights and democracy in China. In 1998, Mr. Wei 

founded and became the chairman of the Overseas Chinese DemocVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:57 Jul 10, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\AGH\051512\74235 HFA PsN: SHIRL
4

racy Coalition, an umbrella organization for many Chinese democracy groups. He is also president of the Wei Jingsheng Foundation 

and the Asian Democracy Alliance. He has written numerous articles and regularly speaks about human rights and democracy in 

China, including broadcasts via Radio Free Asia. 

I would note parenthetically that I first met Wei Jingsheng when 

he was released very briefly in 1993. He was such a highly prized 

human rights advocate that China thought if they released one dissident, they would procure the 2000 Olympics. When that didn’t 

happen, he was rearrested and brutally beaten and tortured until 

his eventual release because he was close to death. So this is a 

truly remarkable man. 

And when I met him in China, he said that when Americans and 

Westerners coddle and treat in a kowtowish way the Chinese Government, they beat us more in the Chinese laogai and prison 

gulags. When you are tough and transparent and say what you 

mean and mean what you say, they beat us less. And I will never 

forget that lesson. He said that in a hotel in January 1994 when 

we had dinner together. So a great man, and that was before his 

re-arrest. 

We will then hear from Ms. Reggie Littlejohn, who is founder 

and president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, an international coalition that opposes forced abortion, gendercide, and sexual slavery in China. She has legally represented Chinese refugees 

in numerous political asylum cases and testified before the European and British Parliaments, the White House, and Congress. Ms. 

Littlejohn serves as the expert on China’s one-child policy for the 

ChinaAid Association and has issued several groundbreaking reports from inside of China about the incalculable suffering caused 

by the coercive enforcement of the one-child-per-couple policy. 

We will then hear from Ms. Chai Ling, the founder of All Girls 

Allowed, an organization dedicated to restoring life and dying with 

dignity to girls and mothers, and to revealing the gross injustice of 

China’s one-child policy. Chai Ling also established the Jenzabar 

Foundation and serves as one of its board members. The foundation supports the most inspirational and influential humanitarian 

efforts of students through grant opportunities. A key student herself during the 1989 Tiananmen Square movement, one of the most 

wanted by the Chinese Government, and a very heroic character, 

Chai Ling was subsequently named Glamour Woman of the Year 

and nominated twice for a Nobel Peace Prize. She is the author of 

the book, ‘‘A Heart for Freedom,’’ and has already saved a number 

of little girls who would have been subjected to sex-selection abortions in China, who are now living today because of her intervention and that of her organization. 

We will then hear from Ms. Mei Shunping, who was born in 

1958. Because of the Cultural Revolution, she was unable to finish 

school. She and her husband were married in 1981, just after the 

one-child-per-couple policy was implemented. As a factory worker 

in a textile facility, she was forced by the Family Planning Commission to undergo five forced abortions. She came to the U.S. in 

1999 and lives with her husband in New England. Ms. Mei has one 

son, who also lives in the United States. Her dream is to return 

to school and to finish her education. 

5

And I now yield to Mr. Carnahan. 

Mr. CARNAHAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for really putting together this very important hearing and for your continued work in 

championing human rights everywhere. 

I join you in concern for the outstanding issues in the case of 

Chen Guangcheng, as well as ongoing human rights issues in 

China. The case of Mr. Chen not only highlights these abuses, but 

also the need to evaluate the current status of U.S.-China relations. Although still unfolding, Mr. Chen’s affair appears to mark 

a watershed moment for U.S.-China relations. 

Despite the many serious remaining concerns, I believe it is important to stress the significance of the U.S. reaching two deals on 

a sensitive crisis with the Chinese, as well as engaging in the annual Strategic and Economic Dialogue as planned. These talks underscore the vast array of national and economic security issues in 

which the U.S. and China must collaborate. We must continue to 

work toward greater understanding with regard to North Korea, 

Iran, the South China Sea, intellectual property rights protections, 

and currency manipulation, just to name a few. 

I believe efforts to improve cooperation officially and through enhanced public diplomacy will allow us to better address areas of 

mutual interest and those of disagreement, including the myriad of 

security challenges and the serious cases of human rights abuses 

like the ones that Mr. Chen has endured and those revealed in the 

course of his brave work. 

Beyond bilateral engagement to address these issues, the U.S. 

must also continue to pursue engagement through multilateral 

fora, including the U.N., to affect positive change in China. It is important to note, in fact, that the U.N. Population Fund in China 

was among the first organizations to raise Mr. Chen’s rights and 

abusive practices in Linyi with Chinese Government officials. I look 

forward to hearing more about the status of Mr. Chen, and ways 

the U.S. and international community can ensure the safety of his 

family and his supporters. 

With China facing a generational leadership change later this 

year, coupled with major societal, economic, and humanitarian 

issues as a result of its one-child policy, I also hope we consider 

what the deal on Mr. Chen reflects about the internal political situation in China and appropriate U.S. actions. 

In closing, I once again want to thank the chairman for calling 

this important hearing and the witnesses for being here today to 

share their stories. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH. Russ, thank you very much. 

I would like to now ask Pastor Bob Fu if you would proceed. 

STATEMENT OF PASTOR BOB FU, FOUNDER AND PRESIDENT, 

CHINAAID ASSOCIATION 

Pastor FU. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your leadership. Thank you for your continuous support on behalf of a Chinese family. 

While we are still waiting for a real progress report about Chen 

and his close family members, any plan, or about the issuance of 

a passport from the Chinese Government, today I want to focus on 

6

the plight of his extended family members and his supporters. And 

especially I am deeply concerned about the Chen’s nephew, Chen 

Kegui, and I want to really give you an updated report after talking with at least two of his lawyers and another legal representative in the past few days. 

Here is a chronology for what had happened to Mr. Chen Kegui. 

Of course, he has been under criminal detention since April 30, and 

then on May 9, he was formally arrested with the trumped-up 

charge called ‘‘intentional homicide.’’

This is how the so-called homicide happened: After Chen 

Guangcheng’s escape last month, the local official who has been directing the persecution of Chen, the town mayor Zhang Jian, led 

a group of people in a raid on the home of Chen’s brother, Chen 

Guangfu, that began at about 11:30 p.m. on April 26th and continued to dawn. Without showing any IDs, they broke down the door, 

and jumped over the walls of Chen Guangfu’s home, and then seriously beat Chen Guangfu and then his wife, Ren Zongju. 

And their son, Chen Kegui, thought some bandits had come to 

rob them. So, after he walked out of his bedroom, he was violently 

attacked for at least 3 hours, and according to the eyewitnesses 

and his own report, he was bleeding from his face, from his head, 

and out of those circumstances, it was purely out of self-defense 

and witnessing how his parents were violently beaten up, he injured several of the attackers with a kitchen knife. 

And then early morning of April 27, he himself, in a conversation 

recorded by a reporter for 50 minutes, he was talking about how 

he was violently attacked. He said he was waiting. He called the 

Chinese police, telephoned the equivalent of 9–1–1. He wants to 

surrender himself, but after waiting for a few hours, he was afraid 

for his life, so he walked away to another neighboring county, actually in the nearby Province of Jiangsu—the county’s name is called 

the Xinyi county—and there he was trying to surrender to the 

neighboring province. And at least from my conversation with one 

of his lawyers, the attorney Liu Weiguo from Jinan, the capital city 

of Shandong Province, on April 29, that in a conversation he had 

with attorney Liu Weiguo, he said, you know, I am waiting, and 

I was waiting to go to that detention center to surrender myself. 

And then on April 30, obviously, he was under criminal detention, 

and later on he was charged with intentional homicide. 

And almost all of the lawyers who were waiting to handle Chen 

Kegui’s’s case, have lost their freedom of movement, or had their 

lawyer’s license confiscated or are being held by the authorities. 

And some of them had been simply kidnapped. And I talked with 

Dr. Teng Biao, a professor of law at the Chinese University for Political Science and the Law, last night, and he said he just tried 

to go to Beijing where—that is his home—on May 12, and only 

found he was kicked out on May 13. That is the latest. 

And attorney Liu Weiguo, is losing his freedom of movement, so 

he is not allowed to travel to either Beijing or Shandong at all. And 

another attorney from Guangzhou, attorney Wu Chen—let us see, 

Wu Chen, only after he—the same day when he announced he will 

be the attorney for Chen Kegui, his license was being held by the 

Chinese Government, so he is not allowed to represent Mr. Chen 

Kegui’s case. Based on the experience of Mr. Chen Guangcheng’s 

7

trial or pretrial in 2005, we cannot have confidence that Mr. Chen 

Kegui will receive any fair trial. 

And let me just talk a little bit a few other cases about those 

supporters of Mr. Chen, who have experienced tremendous persecution in the past week or so just simply for being associated with 

Mr. Chen, or for raising awareness. One of them, his name is Lu 

Haitao, netizen from Beijing, just because he tried to visit Mr. 

Chen, he and his wife, who was 2 months pregnant, and kept being 

harassed and invited and forced to have tea with the public security officers since May 10, and then because of that harassment 

and the threat, on May 13, Mr. Lu Haitao’s wife, Yang Lanlian, 

had a miscarriage. Their 2-month-old baby is gone. 

And, of course, the other individuals like Mr. Jiang Tianyong, 

who has testified before you, Mr. Chairman, was beaten, and was 

also removed from Beijing as well. 

And there is another individual whose name is Song Ze. He is 

a member of Beijing’s NGO, Gongmeng, who has been just raising 

awareness for Mr. Chen. But he, on May 6, this month, he had 

been put under criminal detention. Right now he is being held at 

the Fengtai District detention center. 

And another activist, Liu Guohui, who has been an advocate, and 

also a constant visitor, or trying to visit Mr. Chen in the past couple of years, and her passport recently was even declared invalid. 

So she has no way to even travel to overseas. And other lawyers, 

most of them who are not able to have any freedom of movement. 

So I am very, very concerned that the Chinese Government, especially the local authorities, will make trumped-up charges; based on 

this trumped-up charge, they will make a fake trial, expeditiously 

hand him a very severe sentence, and possibly if he is convicted, 

he could be sentenced to death. 

Where is the way out for Chen Guangcheng? Despite the fact 

that the United States and China have reached an apparent agreement and are committed to Chen Guangcheng’s freedom and security, and Chen Guangcheng remains under de facto house arrest in 

the Chaoyang Hospital. And I talked with him pretty much twice 

a day, until last night and this morning we lost contact. 

And all the visitors are barred, including the U.S. diplomatic representatives are not allowed to visit him, and some of the Chinese 

supporters and friends who just tried to visit him were barred, or 

tailed and beaten. 

So all of this shows that the implementation of the agreement 

and the realization of the commitments are far more important 

than the agreement and the commitments themselves. I hope that 

Congress will do more in monitoring and urging the administration 

to ensure the civil rights of Chen Guangcheng and his family members are protected by the law, and Chen Guangcheng was allowed 

to enter the U.S. Embassy. Members of the Obama administration, 

including the Assistant Secretaries Kurt Campbell and Michael 

Posner, the State Department legal advisor Harold Koh, and Ambassador Gary Locke all made a great active efforts, and, of course, 

sacrificed sleep during the negotiation time. 

And although some aspects of the events that followed certainly 

were not handled properly by the administration, we are nonetheless pleased to see that high-level American and Chinese officials 

8

have promised to help Chen Guangcheng and his family come to 

the United States so they can rest and have further studies at a 

U.S. institution. And this shows that our country recognized that 

it is responsible, you know, for the outcome of the fate of Chen 

Guangcheng. 

We hope that Members of Congress can provide all of the tools 

that the administration needs to back their commitment and to follow through, and we are certainly looking forward that day when 

Chen and his wife and two children to touch the soil in the United 

States of America very soon, hopefully. 

Mr. SMITH. Pastor Fu, thank you so very much for your testimony and for your insights. 

[The prepared statement of Pastor Fu follows:]

9


74235a-1.eps
10


74235a-2.eps
11


74235a-3.eps
12


74235a-4.eps
13


74235a-5.eps
14


74235a-6.eps
15

Mr. SMITH. And I now yield to Wei Jingsheng, again, a political 

prisoner for 18 years, the father of the Democracy Wall movement. 

STATEMENT OF MR. WEI JINGSHENG, FOUNDER AND 

CHAIRMAN, OVERSEAS CHINESE DEMOCRACY COALITION 

[The following testimony was delivered through an interpreter.] 

Mr. WEI. In January 1994, I met with Representative Chris 

Smith in Beijing for 3 hours, and then he was obviously concerned 

with the situation of the American policies about the Chinese 

human rights. So, he advised then-Secretary of State Warren 

Christopher to meet with me in Beijing in that spring. 

Since then, there was a very important negotiation going on, and 

that negotiation had not only affected the human rights situation 

in China, but also affected the U.S.-China relationship. At this 

point there aren’t too many people that have the full knowledge of 

this history. And I think it is very important to reflect the full accounts of that negotiation, and because it will make a good reference for what is going on at the present now. So therefore, I give 

you a reflection of the history then, and because it is kind of long, 

so I will have my assistant read out my statement to you. Thank 

you. 

In September 1993, I was released half a year ahead of schedule 

with conditions restricting my personal freedoms. Such a release is 

called as a controlled release by Chinese law. The supervision 

would not end until March 29, 1994, until the end of my 15-year 

sentence. 

After being released from prison, I had done the following work: 

(1) helped to collect donations for individuals and organizations 

subjected to political prosecutions; (2) purchase bank stock shares 

as preparation for facilitating money transfers; (3) planned to establish independent workers union for workers; (4) planned to set 

up a nongovernment organization for artists to relieve them from 

exploitations of the government; (5) assisted in offering 1 billion 

Chinese yuan worth of stock in state-owned enterprises, and in 

proving with the facts after making huge profits that the government had been manipulating the stock market to exploiting mass 

investors. 

I met with Representative Chris Smith in January 1994, and we 

had talked for 3 hours in a restaurant in Beijing. And I give him 

the advice and we exchanged ideas as regarding how to push for 

human rights and democracy progress in China. 

On February 27, 1994, following the meeting with Chris Smith, 

I met with the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State John Shattuck privately in a restaurant. He asked me if I was willing to meet Warren Christopher, the U.S. Secretary of State, to discuss human 

rights issues in China when Christopher was to visit China in the 

following month. Shattuck mentioned about the debates in the U.S. 

Congress on decoupling human rights from trade issues and the potential risks of this meeting. 

I thought if my opinions would have some effect in preventing 

the U.S. from moving backwards on human rights issues in China, 

I would be willing to take such risks and meet with the Secretary 

of State. Shattuck mentioned that my opinions has been passed on 

to President Clinton by Senator Kerry, and already had a positive 

16

effect on the setup of Radio Free Asia. He hoped that my views 

would help the Secretary of State Christopher. We discussed and 

agreed on some details of the meeting with the Secretary of State 

Christopher during his visit. 

In the morning, about 2 or 3 days later, police who had been in 

charge for my surveillance come to my home and said their superior would like to talk to me. Later they brought me to a resort 

hotel near the Ming Tombs Reservoir, saying that I should relax 

here and wait for their superior. I asked whom I would meet and 

what to discuss, but got no answers. 

On the next day, an official came, who claimed to be a senior official representing the highest authority in the Chinese Government. 

By observing the way he casually dismissed the police officer to 

have a private talk with me, I could tell that his status should be 

true. Based on the fact that he had to leave for 1/2 hour after our 

talk, then come back with responses, I would assume there were 

officials with higher rankings nearby who monitored our conversation and then made the decisions. 

At the very beginning of the talk, this official said that it was 

a negotiation because they needed my help. He said that he knew 

that I had an appointment to meet the U.S. Secretary of State and 

also knew my opinions. ‘‘We could not change your opinions and 

will not want to do so, but we wish you would not meet the U.S. 

Secretary of State.’’

I said that that is not possible. Because I had agreed to meet, 

I could not break the promise. He said that they could offer things 

in exchange. ‘‘We know what you want to do,’’ he said. ‘‘If only you 

will not meet the U.S. Secretary of State, we will agree to what you 

want.’’

I said I did not believe things could be so simple. Why was it so 

important for me to meet or not with the U.S. Secretary of State? 

Why would you agree to let me to do the things that you had been 

prohibiting us from doing, just because of this? 

He said, ‘‘You might not know how important that the Sino-U.S. 

trade is to us; taking away those false figures, 70 percent of our 

real profit was from the foreign trade, and the 70 percent of that 

come from the Sino-U.S. trade because of the U.S. market’s profit 

was higher. You might think we, the Communist Government, 

would collapse without American profit, which is true. I would 

want to do the same, if I were you, but the Chinese people would 

suffer, and many Chinese companies would go bankrupt. Since you 

love the people so much, we had guessed that you would agree to 

our offers.’’

I said, ‘‘Not really. I believe that the collapse of the Communist 

Government and the establishment of a democratic system would 

be more beneficial to the Chinese people. It will be the lesser of two 

evils. And the interests of Chinese would be better compensated in 

the future.’’

He said, ‘‘You have described the issue too simple. You were once 

in our internal circle and should know our politics. Do you really 

think it would lead to trade sanctions?’’

I said, ‘‘Why not?’’

He said that the interests of both China and the United States 

have dictated that the trade sanctions, if any, would be short-lived. 

17

The businesses of countries would not allow them to continue to 

the degree that I would need; that is, resulting in the collapse of 

the Communist Government. 

I said, in that case, you had no need to negotiate with me. You 

also know that I would rather stay in prison than give up the principles. 

He said, ‘‘We knew that. We understand you better than your 

comrades, but we also hoped that you could think about that carefully. Someone would have to hold the responsibility for even shortterm sanctions, and the highest authority would be forced to step 

down because of that. That is why someone wanted to make a fuss 

on you and why we had to protect you from getting into trouble.’’

He also said, ‘‘You might laugh at me for such a low-level lie, but 

I have to tell you that it was the truth. You are now standing at 

the focal point of the Sino-U.S. relationship. If you were in trouble, 

whether real or false, the highest authority would bathe in shit. 

Only after he steps down could someone take this position. Therefore, some people are eager to get you in trouble to achieve their 

own objectives. When they reach their goals, they would cooperate 

with the U.S. Government to resolve the trade issues, but you 

would lose your chance to reach your own goals. You should know 

better than the stakes in this deal.’’

I said, ‘‘I still do not believe in your promises. I will need an assurance. The stepping down of Jiang Zeming, might not be a bad 

thing, and the person replacing him might want to compromise 

with us as well.’’

He said, ‘‘We would agree with the several things that you want 

to do. Would you think about it again? I have something to do and 

will come back in 1⁄2 hour.’’

He gave me a piece of paper with the offers listed on it. The first 

thing was to release political prisoners, including a list with 35 

names. The next three were also what I really wanted to do; that 

is, establish workers’ unions, establish artists’ own businesses, and 

purchasing bank shares and help with receiving and transfer of humanitarian donations. 

After more than an hour, the official, whose last name was Guo, 

came back and asked how I thought about that. I said, ‘‘What you 

agree to means nothing. The establishment of a workers’ union requires approval from the Ministry of Civil Affairs. An artist’s company requires approval from the Ministry of Culture, and the purchase of bank shares requires approval from the People’s Bank. 

Those were not under the authority of the judiciary branch. Therefore, all of what you have said sounds like lies.’’

He said, ‘‘I repeat again that I am representing the highest authority to negotiate with you. All these items are within our scope 

of power. When the time comes, I will help you to complete all the 

procedures.’’

I still say that I could hardly believe what he just said. 

He said, ‘‘How about this: We will offer you one more offer that 

you would be able to see. In addition to releasing the political prisoners, providing that you do not betray your promise, we will not 

arrest any of your people,’’ by which he means all pro-democracy 

activists. 

18

I said, ‘‘But you just detained a number of pro-democracy activists recently who were not on your list. What about them?’’

He said those who got detained recently had not get into the 

legal procedures yet. ‘‘If you give me 1 day, I will get all of them 

released. We could decide tomorrow whether you would accept our 

offer. Tomorrow you could make phone calls to verify if we had the 

ability to keep our promise.’’

The next day I called several friends and verified that all of those 

detained were indeed released without either conditions nor explanations, but I was still inclined not to accept their offers. 

This official seems very anxious and almost lost his posture and 

told me that ‘‘you must know that we are already bearing a great 

deal of risk. We have also explained it within the Communist 

Party. If you still disagreed, then we will have to arrest you, which 

would just be playing into the hands of the other side, and all of 

the offers to you would be blown away.’’

Then he added, ‘‘The Americans are not as reliable as you might 

think, and could ultimately reach a compromise with a new leader. 

Then political prisoners would be round up as usual, and then you 

would not be able to complete anything that you want to do. You 

should think about what is at stake. Let me give you a worst-case 

scenario. Even if we recanted in the future, you at least got the 

benefit of having the political prisoners released. The other side 

might not even give you this benefit.’’

After that time, I felt the credibility of his words were pretty 

high, so I accepted their offers, and I made a detailed plan for me 

to leave Beijing to seek medical treatment, and I politely declined 

to meet Secretary of State Christopher. I felt that I definitely 

would not get those offers through the meeting with the Secretary 

of State. And if the U.S. were to insist on checking on the human 

rights issues in China, it would not have canceled the annual review of the Most Favored Nation status. 

The offers included the provision that immediately after Secretary of State Christopher had left Beijing, I could go back to the 

city and continue to do what I wished to accomplish, and they 

would fulfill their remaining offers. 

On March 29, 1994, while I was Jinan, they notified me two 

things: First, I had completed my prison sentence and would no 

longer be under their control, and all my civil rights were restored. 

Second, although Secretary of State Christopher had already left 

China, the situation had changed somehow, and they hoped I 

would spend some time relaxing in the South and return to Beijing 

after 1 or 2 months. I rejected the second request, and insisted on 

going back to Beijing according to our original conditions. I thought 

that by doing so, I could verify if they had the ability to fulfill their 

promise. 

Two days later I entered the highway from Tianjin to Beijing, 

but the entire highway was closed with just the car carrying my 

friend and me and four police cars surrounding us. When arrived 

at the exit of Tong County we were blocked by more than 100 police officers, including agents from several different departments of 

the Public Safety Bureau, and officials from the State Security Bureau, and the prosecutor’s office. 

19

A police officer, who I was familiar with, and who has been in 

charge of my surveillance for many days, told me that the current 

situation was too complicated, and they did not know what was 

going on either. He asked me not to make a big scene, and then 

they were doing backroom negotiations. Later a policeman who I 

did not recognize came and showed me the subpoena. They took me 

and the businessman who was going to transfer stock shares of 1 

billion Chinese yuans’ worth to a counterfeit antique-making company in Tong County. 

I slept until the afternoon and then heard the policeman I knew 

arguing with someone. I heard a strange voice saying that we got 

orders that no one was allowed to meet this man alone. The policeman I knew said, ‘‘We got the instructions from our superior that 

we must meet with him alone. You have no authority to listen to 

our conversation, and your superior has agreed to this.’’

Then they made phone calls. After that, the police officer I knew 

took me to a private room outside the restaurant and told me that 

after departure of the Secretary of State Christopher, the debate 

within the Communist Party got more heated. The other side did 

not believe the Americans, and also did not believe that I did not 

influence the Americans. They insisted on handling me by the dictatorship theory of the Communist Party, and they did not think 

that they should abide by terms of agreement with me; otherwise, 

it would be a loss of the spirit and principle of the Communist 

Party. Their boss was dealing with this conflict, and they asked me 

to be more patient. I said I did not know that internal affairs, but 

my patience has a time limit. 

On the third day, I formally informed the police who were guarding me that according to the Law of Criminal Procedures, a subpoena for interrogation could not last longer than 3 consecutive 

days. Unless they got an arrest warrant, I would leave by my own 

this evening. They said, ‘‘You just wait. We will go immediately to 

the prosecutor’s office to get an arrest warrant.’’

At the evening, I asked if they got the arrest warrant. They said 

they have not yet. The prosecutor’s office will not issue an arrest 

warrant. But they already had a residential surveillance certificate 

issued by the Public Safety Bureau, which did not need approval 

from the prosecutor office. 

I said, ‘‘Residence under surveillance means that I would stay in 

my own house, and that there would be no restrictions for my personal freedom. I just cannot leave your surveillance. What are you 

going to do? It is illegal detention.’’

They laughed at me and said I should not try to use their legal 

loopholes. Their laws would be interpreted by them, not by my own 

understanding. Although there was none, they could create a procedure, create a precedent for me in regarding this residence under 

surveillance. And because it did not get into the legal procedure, 

they did not even need to notify my family members. I would not 

have any rights provided by the law. 

They started an illegal detention against me that lasted for 18 

months, without newspapers and TV, without any contacts with 

the outside world. 

From what I learned later, at least by the summer of 1995, the 

promise of releasing political prisoners and no arrest of my people 

20

had indeed been kept for about 1 year. I think it was because the 

trade sanction would not be lifted as smoothly, and that the American people still cared about human rights situation in China. Otherwise Jiang Zemin would not be able to get a compromise between 

the trade and the theory of dictatorship under the Communist 

Party. 

From this procedure we can learn several features concerning negotiation with the Chinese Communist regime. One, they are only 

restrained by their interests, but are not bound by their promises. 

This is because fundamentally they do not recognize the common 

knowledge and reason, but only their great ideals. This is the same 

as all evil cults. Therefore, by insisting on staying in China, Mr. 

Chen Guangcheng made a wrong judgment due to a lack of common knowledge, and the U.S. Government did not let him learn 

such a common knowledge and thus brought to him the trouble 

that will come up. 

Two, the Chinese Government is not a whole, but consists of various interest groups. The struggles within those factions lack rules, 

and national interests often become bargaining chips between their 

own negotiations. Promises made by one faction often become targets to be attacked by other factions. Noncompliance of agreement 

is a common happening in China. The U.S. Government, by believing in promises made by one particular faction without any assurance, has made the mistake of political judgment. 

Three, taking a hostage first and then making negotiations is a 

traditional way of negotiation by the Chinese Communists. In their 

ideology, obtaining maximum benefit regardless of the means is a 

legitimate method against those who are deemed as not fit to their 

ideals. They would use any means to advance their interests, which 

is their official theory. By returning Mr. Chen Guangcheng to the 

hands of Chinese police, the U.S. administration has made yet another mistake of political judgment, and the world will pay an 

extra price for it. 

I am sorry I used the extra time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wei follows:]

21


74235b-1.eps
22


74235b-2.eps
23


74235b-3.eps
24


74235b-4.eps
25


74235b-5.eps
26


74235b-6.eps
27

Mr. SMITH. Thank you for that very, very comprehensive look. 

And I think part of what your testimony helps to do is to ask the 

question, the very pertinent question, ‘‘How highly do we value political prisoners, human rights, democracy?’’ and that the Chinese 

Government and the leadership weighs the resolve and the commitment of the U.S. side in its bilateral relationship? And if we are 

not committed, all in, if you will, on human rights, they take the 

measure of our resolve or the lack thereof and respond accordingly. 

And I think you talked about, you know, the leadership and especially that it is not monolithic. There are people inside the government who might even want to do the right thing, but if we are now 

folding or not extending our very serious resolve to all players, 

Chen, his wife, his two children and the others, we, unwittingly 

perhaps, but we nevertheless give up what we might otherwise obtain. 

So I would like to now ask Ms. Reggie Littlejohn if she would 

present her testimony. 

STATEMENT OF MS. REGGIE LITTLEJOHN, FOUNDER AND 

PRESIDENT, WOMEN’S RIGHTS WITHOUT FRONTIERS 

Ms. LITTLEJOHN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Honorable members of the subcommittee, ladies and gentlemen, 

I am grateful for this opportunity to address the subcommittee here 

during this very sensitive time of negotiations on behalf of Chen 

Guangcheng, his family, and his supporters. I have been asked to 

testify concerning two of his key supporters. One is He Peirong, 

also known as Pearl, and the other one is Jiang Tianyong, one of 

his key leaders of his legal team. 

Pearl, as many of you know, has played a key role in organizing 

the support for Chen Guangcheng for years. And last time I testified, which was on May 3rd, she had been detained for almost a 

week, and I voiced a concern that she might be tortured, that the 

Chinese Communist Party might be pressuring her to disclose the 

other members of her network. But we raised the issue of her case 

very strongly in that hearing. Congressman Smith raised it very 

strongly, and the very next day she was released. 

So I have Skyped with her twice now, the day after she was released and then also on Saturday, and she has asked me to read 

a statement to the committee thanking everyone for the way that 

her case has been raised in visibility, which she believed is what 

has resulted in the fact that she was not tortured during that detention. 

And as Congressman Smith just said, echoing what Wei 

Jingsheng has said, that this kind of accommodation of kowtowing 

to the Chinese Communist Party and trying to basically exercise 

quiet diplomacy is very ineffective, but it is rather when you have 

transparent, powerful advocacy that people are protected. 

So Pearl said,

‘‘I would like to thank everyone who fights for our freedom, activists, Congressman and Congresswomen, as well as the U.S. 

Government, the State Department, Secretary Clinton and the 

United States. I hope I will visit this great country one day, 

but now I just want to stay with my friends in China. What 

I want is for all my friends to be safe.’’

28

Now, that is very courageous on her part, because even though 

Pearl was not tortured during this most recent detention, she has 

suffered significant violence. Specifically, on January 10, 2011, she 

drove to Chen’s village where plain-clothes guards smashed her car 

outside of his home. Then on May 30, 2011, she went to Yinan 

County for Chen’s case, and plain-clothes guards kidnapped, 

robbed, and beat her. And, in fact, they struck her face 30 to 40 

times. She was subjected to a painful position for 4 hours while she 

was being driven in a car, and then she was dumped on the road. 

Then on June 6, 2011, she went to Yinan County again for 

Chen’s case, and the local officials again kidnapped her and robbed 

her. Plain-clothes guards drove her for over 4 hours and kicked her 

out of the car into a field, where they tried to stuff her socks into 

her mouth. Then they tied her up and touched her breasts. 

Despite the violence that she has suffered, Pearl wants to remain 

in China for the protection of her friends, and I just think that her 

courage and commitment is to be commended and admired. 

Jiang Tianyong has taken up several sensitive legal matters and 

has long been a member of Chen’s legal team, and for this he has 

suffered violence on a number of occasions. Most recently, according to media reports, Jiang Tianyong, simply tried to visit Chen 

Guangcheng and was beaten so severely that it appears that he 

has lost hearing in one of his ears. Then after he was severely 

beaten, and it became clear that Chen’s nephew, Chen Kegui, was 

being charged with intentional homicide, which carries a death sentence, Jiang Tianyong stood up for Chen Kegui and said that the 

charge of homicide with intent has been trumped up, and that it 

really should be wounding with intent. 

So this is, again, he had just been beaten, and he is immediately 

standing up publicly for Chen’s nephew. I just can’t even fathom 

the kind of courage that these people have. 

So he has now reached an agreement with officials that he will 

not try to visit Chen again; that he will not meet with foreign 

media; and as you know, he has left Beijing and is now in Hebei. 

This is not the first time that Chen Guangcheng has suffered violence. On November 10, 2009, Jiang Tianyong and I both sat on a 

panel at a hearing before the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, as it was called by Congressman Smith, and we both testified 

on the one-child policy. Jiang Tianyong testified concerning the 

cases that he was assisting Chen on, the ones for which Chen was 

detained. And Women’s Rights Without Frontiers released the 

Chen Guangcheng report on Chen’s birthday on November 10, 

2011, and then at this hearing in English on December 6, 2011. 

But Jiang Tianyong was telling about these cases where a 

woman had been forcibly aborted up to the 9th month of pregnancy, where people were sleeping in the fields to avoid family 

planning police, where forced sterilizations were taking place. It 

was just suicide. There was all sorts of horrible things that he was 

reporting on. His testimony and my testimony were similar in the 

sense of the gravity of the cases that we were exposing, but that 

is where the similarity ended. I was able to go home safely to my 

family. 

At the end of that hearing, Congressman Smith kindly invited 

the various people who were testifying up to his office. And at the 

29

end of that meeting, Jiang Tianyong said, ‘‘Look, I am really worried. If anything happens to me, will you please watch out for my 

wife and my child?’’ And that statement just struck my heart, of 

the courage that these people have, people who live in China, to 

come to the United States and testify. They are risking not only 

their own safety but that of their families, to expose the truth of 

what is going on there, not simply so that we will know what is 

happening but so that we will take effective action to try to help 

free the people of China from these horrific human rights abuses. 

Several days later, when Jiang Tianyong did return to China, his 

fears materialized. He was beaten, dragged away by four cadres 

right in front of his daughter, who was screaming, and his wife was 

beaten. And so then I got a call from Congressman Smith and immediately flew back to Washington to speak at a press conference 

for him to be released. 

Despite this violence, Jiang Tianyong has persisted in his bravery. In February 2011, Chen Guangcheng and his wife, Yuan 

Weijing, released through the China Aid Association a video showing the horrific conditions of their house arrest, and for that they 

were severely beaten and left without medical attention. And then 

soon after that, a group of Chen’s lawyers got together to try to 

talk about how they might help him. And you have to understand 

also that the Arab Spring and the Jasmine Revolution are a backdrop to this conversation, as well. But many of those lawyers were 

detained, including Jiang Tianyong and Teng Biao. 

Jiang Tianyong was detained for 60 days, and he endured beatings, shouts, shackles, blindfolds, and no sunlight during those 60 

days. And, according to a media report, he was banged in the head 

so severely that it caused significant memory loss. And apparently 

what they did was they would use water bottles to beat him in the 

head. And he had so much memory loss he could not even remember his Skype password or how the furniture was arranged in his 

bedroom when he got out. 

I believe that the systematic persecution, detention, and torture 

of Chinese human rights lawyers appears to be a deliberate decimation of the Chinese human rights bar. And as an attorney myself, I am very, very concerned about China and the rule of law. 

How can China say that they care about the rule of law or that 

there even is a rule of law when people who are trying to uphold 

the rule of law are themselves detained and tortured and have 

their licenses revoked? 

Although Pearl and Jiang Tianyong appear safe for the moment, 

who knows whether the Chinese Communist Party will retaliate 

against them if and when Chen is able to come to the United 

States. Women’s Rights Without Frontiers calls upon the United 

States Congress and the Department of State to raise the issue of 

the safety of Chen’s supporters, who are heroes in their own right. 

Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Littlejohn, thank you very much for that testimony. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Littlejohn follows:]

30


74235c-1.eps
31


74235c-2.eps
32


74235c-3.eps
33

Mr. SMITH. I would like to now ask Chai Ling if she would 

present her testimony to the subcommittee. 

STATEMENT OF MS. CHAI LING, FOUNDER, ALL GIRLS 

ALLOWED 

Ms. CHAI. Thank you, Chairman Smith. Thank you for your persistent 30-plus years of fight to defend the victims in China and 

uphold the human rights conditions in China. Thank you for giving 

me this opportunity to share today about the cause that Chen 

Guangcheng has fought to uphold. 

By now, you have heard much about Chen Guangcheng’s miraculous escape. As the media firestorm surrounded him last week, and 

you probably read details about his journey to Beijing, you learned 

about the twists and turns in the diplomatic saga that followed. Incredibly, U.S. officials fretted about the timing of Chen’s arrival at 

the Embassy. After he left, they downplayed his concerns for his 

family’s safety. Several days ago, an American official casually told 

The New York Times, ‘‘The days of blowing up the relationship 

with China over a single guy are over.’’ Maybe they prefer the days 

of, you know, Mr. Wei Jingsheng. 

But anyway, seeking genuine protections for Chen and his family 

should hardly have blown up the relationship. But more to the 

point, it grieves me to hear Chen dismissively referred to as a single guy. He is one man, it is true, but he is a symbol, a hero, in 

the eyes of women, children, and the poor in China. Why? Because 

he defended them when it was costly and when no one else in 

China would. He has lived out the words of the prophet Isaiah, who 

said, learn to do right, seek justice, defend the oppressed, take up 

the cause of the fatherless, and plead the case of the widow. 

Often missing from last week’s news stories was the cause that 

defined Chen Guangcheng’s work and led to his imprisonment. It 

explains why he is a hero to so many in China today. I want to 

highlight this cause. It is the one that we share with Chen through 

our work at All Girls Allowed. The one-child policy formally sanctions violence against women. Chen knew this. Chinese authorities 

jailed him in 2006 after he filed a class action lawsuit on behalf 

of the women who had undergone forced abortions and sterilizations because of the policy. 

I would like to share some of the stories and images that will 

show you what is happening in China right now even as I speak. 

I should warn you that these stories are disturbing. They will give 

you a personal glimpse at the gendercide, or systematic elimination 

of girls, taking place in China, where men outnumber women by 

40 million. They show the brutality of forced abortions. They show 

why Chinese women face a climate so oppressive that a woman 

takes her life every 3 seconds in China. 

The first story illustrates how severely the one-child policy can 

affect a single family. This is Deng Lourong, the picture you can 

see on the PowerPoint presentation on the screen, who lives in 

Anhui Province. She is the second daughter of two parents who violated the one-child policy because they desperately wanted a boy 

after Lourong’s birth. So in her family they had three girls. 

But after Lourong’s birth, officials demolished the family home 

and confiscated their belongings. Two years later, Lourong’s mother 

34

again gave birth to a girl and disappeared 3 days later. Her father 

fled from the family planning officials and left the three girls in the 

care of their grandmother. Undeterred, officials detained the girl’s 

grandmother in 2002 and left them without a guardian. During the 

night, a man broke into their room and raped the 12-year-old 

Lourong. Her sisters managed to obtain the release of their grandmother after this, but the elderly woman died a month after she 

returned home. The rapist, meanwhile, was sentenced to a mere 5 

days in administrative detention. 

Within 3 years, Lourong was sold as a child bride to a man twice 

her age. Her sisters were also sold by traffickers and have not been 

found as of today. When a German reporter and Chinese volunteers 

found Lourong’s father last November, he told them that Lourong’s 

husband had turned her into a prostitute to earn income for him. 

He beats her frequently and sold her body to bachelors in that 

area. Deng was in a poor mental state. She would roam the mountains for over a week sometimes before returning to the house. 

Remember, all of this was set into motion by the enforcement of 

the one-child policy upon this family and the lack of value assigned 

to girls and women in China. 

A second story is Ma Jihong. Last October, officials dragged Ma 

into a van. That is Ma Jihong’s picture. When she was heavily 

pregnant with her third child, she died during a forced abortion 

procedure. That is the picture. It is kind of gruesome. And her family did not know hours afterwards. Her husband and two surviving 

daughters have no real resources to take. The third picture is—I 

believe that is her picture. Yeah, that is her family. And they make 

under $2 a day as a cotton farmer. 

A final story came out less than 2 months ago on Weibo, a Chinese version of Twitter. It is just an image, but a chilling one. A 

9-month-old baby is dropped into a bucket of water following a fullterm forced abortion. According to the source, the infant’s parents 

did not have a permit for their second child. You can see in that 

image in the water bucket, that is the baby’s body. 

So I wish I could tell you these stories were rare, but they are 

not. They are a mere glimpse into the dark environment that the 

one-child policy created for women. This is a darkness into which 

Chen Guangcheng tried to shine a light. 

I want to challenge you, honorable Members of Congress, to view 

your callings as servants of the people in light of these words from 

Isaiah. ‘‘If you do away with the yoke of oppression, with the pointing finger and malicious talk, and if you spend yourselves on behalf 

of the hungry and satisfy the needs of the oppressed, then your 

light will rise in the darkness and your night will become like the 

noonday.’’ This challenge also applies to President Obama and Secretary Clinton. It is my fervent prayer that your light will rise in 

the present darkness that consumes many at this very moment in 

China. 

Please continue to press for Chen Guangcheng’s freedom and the 

assurance of safety for his family and his supporters. Their freedom is not secure yet, and you are in a position to act. I urge you 

to compel China to honor its word and its own laws. 

If you are concerned that such a cause is not realistic or pragmatic enough—I know you are present here because you are not 

35

thinking that way, but we know there are leaders thinking that 

way who are not present here—I humbly ask you to do what is 

right. It was not economically pragmatic for William Wilberforce to 

seek an end to the British slave trade. It was not expedient for 

Martin Luther King to speak out against injustice and then land 

in a Birmingham jail. Ronald Reagan was not acting with calculated diplomacy when he said, ‘‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this 

wall.’’ I can think of many instances in history where men and 

women sacrificed pragmatism for the sake of higher principle. 

Somehow, they always end up on the right side of history. I hope 

America would stand on the right side of history in confronting this 

largest injustice in our time, and God will honor your courage. 

Finally, though we are sitting here in the halls of power, we can 

take heart in the fact that our power is weakness when compared 

to the strength of our God. We can face injustice without fear because we serve a God who is just, hears our prayers, and can overcome any power. Jesus said, ‘‘You may ask me for anything in my 

name, and I will do it.’’

We have long prayed for these injustices in China to cease. We 

know that God is faithful. The only reason why these injustices 

still happen is that he chose to raise a man and woman among us 

to end them, and he is patient with us. God can and will end this 

injustice of forced abortion and the one-child policy. We know that. 

It may be our generation of privilege to carry out his task. 

Here is a final story that gives hope. It shows that God does answer prayers. Last year, Nie Lina was arrested for being 4 months 

pregnant with a permit. Our team met and prayed for her release, 

knowing that a forced abortion was imminent. But family planning 

officials, you know, decided not to go through the procedure at the 

last minute, and she was released. Nie Lina gave birth to a baby 

girl 5 months later. So that is her baby girl. 

But on the night of December 5, 2011, we learned Nie Lina was 

arrested again, this time for petitioning the government about her 

property, which officials had confiscated. She, her 70-year-old 

mother, and her 3-month-old baby was in the illegal ‘‘black jail.’’ 

The guards were hardly feeding her, and her baby was crying from 

hunger because she could not produce enough milk. The guards 

told her that she would be there for another 6 months at the least. 

You all probably remember that there was a hearing the next day 

on December 6 on behalf of Liu Xiaobo. You allowed us to all pray 

for Nie Lina and Chen Guangcheng and Liu Xiaobo. Many of you 

all joined us in this prayer. Thank you, Brother Bob Fu, Sister 

Reggie Littlejohn, for all of your prayers. 

This is what happened 20 hours later at midnight on the next 

day in China, because they were watching us at 4 o’clock a.m. their 

time. Nie Lina was blindfolded, together with her mom was blindfolded, and was drove off and dropped off outside of Beijing 2 hours 

away and released alongside together with her baby and her mother. It was a dramatic answer to our prayers. And Chen 

Guangcheng—despite the fact that Chen Guangcheng has not obtained the full freedom, but his ability to escape from a massive 

prison was no less a miracle either. 

Your words are so important. Media attention is also so important, and prayers are very important as we speak publicly. As Ms. 

36

Reggie Littlejohn also reminded us, the Chinese Government 

watches us, the world watches us, and acts in response to our conviction. So, with your permission, I would like to end this testimony with a prayer. 

Heavenly Father, you, Lord, hear the desires of the afflicted and 

you encourage them and you listen to their cry. You hear the cries 

of people in China calling for your justice and mercy. You hear our 

cries as we, too, plead for your justice to roll down like a mighty 

river. Today, we lift Chen Guangcheng and his family and his supporters up into your care, for we know you will finish what you 

have started and you will surely one day bring them to complete 

freedom. 

We lift up to you these leaders here, these servants of the people. 

I pray to you for raising them up and bringing them here today. 

I ask you to move their hearts and inspire them to assist the families and friends of our brave friends in China. 

Lord, please protect us all from being indifferent when we are 

suffering. You say that if a single sparrow falls, you notice. How 

much more do you notice the plight of your daughters, Ma Jihong, 

Deng Lourong, and the millions of other women and the babies oppressed by the one-child policy? 

Please inspire the men and women here today to use their authority in a way that serves the least of these in the world you 

have created. And unto Him, who is able to do immeasurably more 

than all we can ask or imagine, according to His power there is at 

work within us, to Him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus 

throughout all generations forever and ever. Amen. 

Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Chai, thank you very much for your extraordinary testimony and the importance of prayer, because they certainly need it, and we all do. So thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Chai follows:]

37


74235d-1.eps
38


74235d-2.eps
39


74235d-3.eps
40


74235d-4.eps
41

Mr. SMITH. I would like to ask Ms. Mei if you would proceed. 

STATEMENT OF MS. MEI SHUNPING, VICTIM OF FORCED 

ABORTION 

[The following testimony was delivered through an interpreter.] 

Ms. MEI. Mr. Chairman and honorable Members of Congress, I 

am very grateful for the opportunity to testify today before Congress to expose America and the world to how the one-child policy 

in China destroys lives and the rights of women. 

My name is Mei Shunping. I had an assumed name, a name 

called Liuping. I was born in 1958 in Tianjin, China, and arrived 

in the United States in 1999. Before coming to America, I worked 

in a state-owned textile factory in Tianjin. The majority of the 

workers in the factory were young women, so the family planning 

policy was implemented strictly. I am only one of these many 

women whose lives were destroyed by the policy—the women that 

Chen Guangcheng tried to help so courageously. 

I got married in 1981 and gave birth to a son 2 years later. According to the policy at that time, women who gave birth were required to have an IUD implanted or one of the spouses was required to be sterilized. At that time, I had swelling in my right kidney for undiagnosed reasons so doctors refused to implant an IUD 

in me. Without the IUD, I became the prime target for surveillance 

by the factory’s family planning commission. 

Without the IUD, I became pregnant. From 1983 to 1990, because of the one-child policy, I had to have five forced abortions on 

the following dates: September 28, 1984; December 17, 1985; 

March 20, 1986; May 5, 1989; and December 14, 1990. All the operations were recorded in my medical history. I suffered greatly because of the inhumane one-child policy. 

There were many severe methods of surveillance and punishment to prevent unplanned pregnancies and above-quota births. 

My factory’s family planning commission used three levels of control: At the factory level, in the factory clinic, and on the factory 

floor. If one worker violated the rules, all women would be punished. Workers monitored one another. Women of reproductive age 

accounted for 60 percent of my factory floor. Colleagues were suspicious and hostile to each other because of the one-child policy. 

Two of my pregnancies were reported by my colleagues to the family planning commission. When discovered, pregnant women would 

be dragged and to undergo forced abortions. There was no other 

choice. We had no dignity as potential child bearers. 

By order of the factory’s family planning commission, every 

month during their menstrual period women had to undress in 

front of the birth planning doctors for examination. If anyone 

skipped the examination, she would be forced to take a pregnancy 

test at the hospital. We were allowed to collect a salary only after 

it was confirmed that we were not pregnant. 

The day of my fifth and last abortion—December 14, 1990—was 

the saddest of my life because I was unable to prove that I wasn’t 

pregnant within a 10- to 15-day period. The birth planning doctor 

in the factory clinic found out about my pregnancy that day. Officials from the factory family planning commission drove to City Police Hospital and forced me to have an abortion in the birth planVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:57 Jul 10, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\AGH\051512\74235 HFA PsN: SHIRL
42

ning department. It was my first operation in that hospital. All my 

previous abortions happened in the Central City Hospital. 

After the abortion, the doctors, without my knowledge, implanted 

a metal IUD in my uterus. When I learned of the procedure, I protested that I had a kidney disease and could not keep the IUD, but 

they completely ignored me. The doctors just gave the bill to my 

husband and told him to pay. 

While my husband argued with the doctors, I was recovering in 

the hospital bed. When I left the operating room, still weak, I could 

not find my husband. I was told that he had been arrested. I collapsed, crying, from the physical toll of the two operations and the 

emotional shock. A kind nurse tried to comfort me, but she was 

pushed away by a man who also threatened to have me arrested 

by the police. I felt alone, sick, and weak. 

Afterwards, I learned that my husband had been sentenced to 

criminal detention without a trial for violating and obstructing the 

one-child policy, disturbing the normal operations of a hospital, and 

disturbing social peace. My husband was released 15 days later. 

I was in great pain from the metallic IUD and the weakness of 

the abortion and almost did not want to live. The arrest of my husband deprived me of care of my family. My young son did not know 

what was happening and kept crying for his father. I did not know 

what to do and could only hold my son and cry with him. Even now 

when I think of all of this, my heart shudders and the pain throbs. 

Those painful 15 days of separation became the catalyst of my 

eventual failed marriage. My body suffered great damage from all 

the forced abortions. I gradually grew afraid of a family life with 

my husband. I tried to find excuses to refuse any intimate demands 

from my husband. I grew to hate him after the IUD was inserted 

because I blamed my suffering on his unwillingness to be surgically 

sterilized. 

After the fifth abortion and the IUD insertion, my factory also 

gave me a serious administrative warning and fined me 6-months’ 

wages. Afterwards, I had to go to the factory clinic every month for 

exams to make certain that I had not privately taken out the IUD 

or become pregnant. I carried this IUD in my body for over a decade before I came to America. 

My husband’s detention accelerated the demise of our marriage. 

He was suspended from his job and censored and then lost his job 

in 1991. Our family immediately sunk into financial difficulty. We 

argued frequently. I was laid off at the end of 1995. 

I was still considered of reproductive age. The family planning 

commission of my neighborhood commission took up the job of monitoring me. In early 1997, I spent 40 days taking care of my terminally ill mother and missed a monthly pregnancy check. Agents 

from the family planning commission waited at my home to drag 

me to the exam. When they pushed me to the ground, I fell and 

hurt my neck vertebrae. My spirit completely collapsed after this. 

I attempted suicide but was stopped by family from jumping out of 

the building. 

With the help of old friends, in 1999 I escaped the China that 

humiliated and destroyed me and came to the free soil of America. 

My husband came to the U.S. a year later. We were unable to 

mend our past grievances and divorced in 2001. 

43

I became extremely depressed after the divorce. But at the suggestion of my friends, I started attending church, where I felt the 

warmth of Christ’s family. And then Lord Jesus led me to give up 

the bitterness in my heart bit by bit. I reunited with my husband 

in 2009, and we joined together again after I was baptized last 

year—I think 2 years ago. 

Now we live in the great family of Christ in the free land of 

America. I feel happiness but know that back in China there are 

millions of women who are suffering like I did. Every day, thousands of young lives are being destroyed. I beg everyone to save 

them and wish everyone to join me in prayer for them. 

Let the love of our Heavenly Father, the grace of Jesus Christ 

and the Holy Spirit fill their hearts and release them from the hellish suffering. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, we pray. 

Amen. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you so much, Ms. Mei. Thank you for your 

courage in bringing every woman’s story in China to the attention 

of this subcommittee. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Mei follows:]

44


74235e-1.eps
45


74235e-2.eps
46


74235e-3.eps
47

Mr. SMITH. And by extension—and I am very grateful that C–

SPAN is here—that men and women in their homes will hear what 

every woman goes through in China and has been going through 

since 1979 when the one-child-per-couple policy was first instituted. 

I think it is very important to point out that, in China, brothers 

and sisters are illegal, and women are treated as criminals if they 

have a child without explicit government permission. I know Chai 

Ling herself has suffered the gross exploitation of being forcibly 

aborted. And so many women, by the millions, by the tens of millions, have suffered this degrading and this horrific abuse of 

women. And, again, that is what Chen Guangcheng’s mission was, 

and that is what his cause was. And for that, he has been so brutally mistreated. And so I do, again, want to thank you for that. 

I would like to now turn to my distinguished colleague, Ann 

Marie Buerkle, who is a registered nurse. She is also a lawyer, a 

former assistant attorney general for the State of New York. And 

she also chairs the Subcommittee on Health for the Veterans Affairs Committee. 

But I understand Bob Fu is going to join us in a moment. We 

do have Chen Guangcheng on the phone. And then we will go to 

Ann Marie Buerkle. Again, he joined us on May 3 and provided 

very useful insights, to say the least. And so we will yield to him 

momentarily so he can speak from his hospital bed again in China. 

Ann Marie, if you wanted to say a few words before we begin. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I want to thank the chairman for his steadfast pursuit of 

human rights throughout the world. As you mentioned, 30 years, 

he has just been vigilant for all human rights. 

And I want to thank all of you for being here today, for your pursuit of justice and human rights in China. Future generations—you 

talked about some of the past, with Martin Luther King and Ronald Reagan—future generations are going to look at you for your 

devotion to creating a free China. So thank you all very much for 

your courage, for your willingness to be here and testify before us. 

We so appreciate all that you do, and we just want to work with 

you to shed a light on this terrible injustice that exists in China. 

Mr. SMITH. We will go to questions momentarily, but you know, 

Ms. Mei mentioned how her husband was detained. Again, I think 

for the purposes of understanding the depravity of the one-childper-couple policy, I invited, with the help of Harry Wu, a woman 

who ran a program in Fujian Province. She went under the pseudonym of Mrs. Gao. 

When she came here, she said, you don’t understand, America 

and the West and really the rest of the world, what a priority it 

is to the government to impose this one-child-per-couple policy and 

to use and employ forced abortion and forced sterilization. She selfdescribed before this committee in this room just several years ago 

at a hearing that I chaired, she said, ‘‘By day I was a monster, by 

night I was a wife and mother of one child.’’ And she said that they 

used detention against family members, the way Ms. Mei talked a 

moment ago, to hold family members, to put them in prison, as 

they looked to find a woman who was trying to escape the family 

planning cadres. That is the reality that goes on every day in 

48

China that is so grossly under-appreciated by so many of us in policymaking positions. 

And, again, when you talk about that kind of abuse of women 

that is unprecedented in world history, where an entire couple of 

generations now of Chinese women have been made to suffer that 

cruelty, with barely a peep of dissent from the Obama administration, from many of our friends in the European Union and elsewhere, and then when you get groups like the UNFPA, the U.N. 

Population Fund, who say repeatedly that the program in China is 

totally voluntary, when it is totally involuntary, it is a whitewash 

that has no comparison either. 

So thank you for sharing that detail that is so extremely important, that it is not just, if that wasn’t enough, the mother herself, 

the woman herself who is so hunted and degraded by the Chinese 

dictatorship, they also look at the rest of the family in a way that 

parallels what is going on with Chen Guangcheng. It is not just 

him and his family, it is the rest of his family, the extended family. 

And, without objection, I will put in the record a list of nine 

members of his family, and a list of six friends, who we are deeply 

concerned about—and that is not the extent of it; some other 

friends might be in trouble, as well—that we know the government 

has either arrested, detained, beaten. 

[The information referred to follows:]

49


74235f-1.eps
50


74235f-2.eps
51


74235f-3.eps
52


74235f-4.eps
53

Mr. SMITH. And then including friends like He Peirong, which 

Reggie Littlejohn spoke so passionately about, and Jiang, who has 

suffered so much, including the loss of his hearing. And that was 

just a few weeks ago, just a few weeks ago. 

We do now have Chen Guangcheng on the line, and I would like 

to—Ann Marie, would you join us? 

Mr. Chen, you are on. Welcome back again. 

Mr. CHEN. [Mr. Chen’s testimony and answers to member questions were delivered via teleconference and through an interpreter.] 

I just want to talk about what had happened to my other family 

members after I escaped from my own home. 

On April 26, around midnight, a group of Chinese Government—

the local government hired thugs, led by the local township leader 

Mr. Zhang Jian, raided my elder brother Chen Guangfu’s home at 

midnight. Around midnight, this group of thugs by the Chinese, the 

local authorities, just broke into my elder brother’s home and started beating him violently. And my elder brother was taken away by 

these thugs without any reasoning. 

And then they came back and started beating up my nephew, 

Chen Kegui. They used sticks and violently beat him up. And then 

for 3 hours he is bleeding on his head and his face, was not 

stopped. And so this was so violent that Chen Kegui, according to 

my knowledge, had to defend himself. This charge against my 

nephew, Chen Kegui, for so-called intentional homicide, is a totally 

trumped-up charge. And for himself at his own home to be accused 

of committing this crime of intentional homicide against the intruders is totally absurd and irrational, unreasonable. 

So this guy, this township leader, Mr. Zhang Jian, had led from 

40 to sometimes 80 officials, guards and thugs, raided my home in 

the past year and beat me and my family seriously. And so this is 

a pattern already. It is not the first time he had—against my family. 

After my nephew was beaten up and he actually was waiting to 

surrender himself, the police came back again and violently beat up 

my sister-in-law. So my brother, of course, was taken away without 

any reasoning by the authorities. And then the attorney, Si 

Weijtang, who has already got the commission paper signed by my 

nephew’s wife, went to Yinan County, and even though he had the 

signature by Chen Kegui’s wife, the detention center and the public 

security officers in Yinan county refused for him to meet with Chen 

Kegui by calling that document as a fake document, although they 

know it is true. And also they just want to have my nephew’s wife 

to come and to surrender herself. 

And what has been done by these Yinan public security officers 

is a total violation against the Chinese Constitution and the Chinese criminal law. And, of course, those charges against my nephew for self-defense is in contradiction of Chinese law, as well. The 

same tactic of the Yinan County that was used against me in 2006 

when they tried every way to prevent my attorneys from defending 

me at my trial, is now being used again against my nephew, Chen 

Kegui. And I do think those charges are trumped-up charges. And 

those people in Yinan County have already been on the wrong side, 

on opposite side of the rule of law in China. 

54

And this is so far what I have learned about my extended family 

members in Yinan County. So right now I am not able to communicate with them anymore because all their communication tools 

were confiscated already. 

Thank you for your attention. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chen, very briefly, I have invited to the dais the 

people who are testifying today on your behalf: First, Bob Fu; the 

great Wei Jingsheng; Reggie Littlejohn; Chai Ling; and Ms. Mei. 

And we are also joined by Congresswoman Bass and Congresswoman Buerkle from New York. 

Briefly, the focus of the hearing has been about your safety and 

your wife and children, with a particular emphasis on your cause, 

fighting as you did so bravely to defend women from forced abortion, and to rally congressional support and hopefully executive 

branch support and hopefully worldwide support for your extended 

family as well as your friends like He Peirong. 

If I could ask you very briefly, has the United States Government, our Embassy, been able to in any way make contact with 

your extended family and your friends who are at grave risk and 

are suffering beatings? 

Mr. CHEN. For that question, I am not very clear on the specifics, 

but I do know, however, the U.S. Embassy has been communicating with me every day. 

Mr. SMITH. If I could, your wife and your children, how well are 

they doing under this enormous burden? 

Mr. CHEN. They are doing fine, especially my two children. They 

kept telling my wife and I that this is such a wonderful place, we 

can play outside. You can tell, from what they told my wife and I, 

how terrible they have been back to our hometown. They were only 

allowed to have a 1-hour outing every day. 

Because my wife and of course children had been under such a 

long time of difficulties with malnutrition and with low blood pressure when I saw them under these circumstances, I felt very saddened. 

TRANSLATOR. One suggestion from the panel of the witnesses is 

to suggest to Mr. Chen to hire his own lawyers, not to accept the 

government-appointed lawyers for his family members. 

Ms. LITTLEJOHN. This is Reggie. 

I am wondering whether there is any lawyer that has been accepted to be the lawyer for Chen Kegui. I mean, we have heard 

that there are 13 who offered some—at least 1 has been beaten and 

at least 1 has had his license revoked. And I am wondering specifically about Teng Biao. I understand that he has offered, and I am 

wondering how he is doing. We haven’t had much news of him. 

Mr. CHEN. I do know that many lawyers are waiting and wanting to go, and I feel they will be able to go. They are planning to 

go. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chen, Ann Marie Buerkle just asked, do you 

know that all of America is listening to your voice right now? There 

are large numbers of people from the media here, and C–SPAN is 

broadcasting this throughout America. What would you like to tell 

the American public? 

Mr. CHEN. I want to extend my gratitude and thankfulness to all 

those who cared and loved my family and myself and our situation, 

55

especially to American people who have shown that you care about 

the equality and justice. These are universal values. And I am 

very, very grateful to all of you. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chen, Chai Ling would like to say something. 

TRANSLATOR. I think the question from Ms. Chai was, we are 

very proud of you as a hero of America and Chinese, and the many 

millions of Chinese women are very encouraged by your courageous 

act. 

And what Mr. Chen just answered, he said, ‘‘I am not a hero, I 

just do what my conscience asks me to do. I cannot be silent and 

cannot be quiet when facing these evils against women and children. And so this is what I should do.’’

And Ms. Chai Ling said, ‘‘Many, many Christians all over the 

world have been fasting and praying for you.’’

And Mr. Chen said, ‘‘What I have done is just out of my conscience and conviction. I cannot be silent when we see and face 

these kind of evils.’’

And Ms. Chai said, ‘‘You are the first man to stand up for this 

30 years of Chinese one-child policy, on behalf of the 400 million 

Chinese babies who are forcibly aborted and killed. So we praise 

you and we thank you and appreciate you.’’

Ms. CHAI. We will stand with you until the very end, and you 

will be set free. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chen, thank you so very much. We will continue—this is the third hearing. The first one was last November 

when we thought you had disappeared. This is the third hearing. 

And I can assure you, as chairman of both the Congressional-Executive Commission on China and as chairman of the Africa, Global 

Health, and Human Rights Subcommittee of the House of Representatives, we will never cease in our advocacy for you, your family, your extended family, your friends, and the very important 

human rights cause that you espouse, defending women from the 

crime of forced abortion and forced sterilization. So thank you so 

very much. 

Mr. CHEN. Thank you. 

I want to let you know I have been praying for you. And your 

courage has inspired all of our women, and we have been praying 

for you every day and one day that this evil one-child policy will 

be abolished soon. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chen, thank you. 

Mr. CHEN. I have a final word that I want to emphasize. What 

had happened to my family and to my extended family members 

are just a total violation of the Chinese own law, including Chinese 

relevant law about the family planning system. And so what they 

have done is just totally in violation of the Chinese own law. So 

they should be held accountable by the Chinese own laws. 

So that is what I want to emphasize. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you so much, Mr. Chen. 

I think we are close to concluding this hearing. And I want to 

thank our very distinguished witnesses and ask them if perhaps 

they might have some final comments they would like to make. 

I do—and I say this with all due respect to the President of the 

United States. I am concerned when the United States Government, when President Obama was asked about Chen Guangcheng 

56

specifically and human rights, he said, ‘‘No comment on Chen,’’ and 

that, human rights, ‘‘it comes up.’’ My hope is that we are in the 

process of a game-changing reappraisal of our deprioritization of 

human rights in China, and perhaps elsewhere in the world but absolutely in China, where, wittingly or unwittingly, we have enabled 

this terrible crime of forced abortion and forced sterilization to 

occur while we have looked askance and acted as if it wasn’t happening. 

Chen Guangcheng reminds us in a very powerful way, in the suffering that he has endured, that he stays in solidarity with the 

women of China, as do I, as does Ann Marie Buerkle, as do so 

many Members of Congress, as does this panel. 

So if you would like to make any concluding statements, because 

I think we have heard it all with Chen’s own voice just a moment 

ago. So would anybody want to make any final statement before we 

conclude the hearing? 

Ms. CHAI. Yeah, I would just like to say, Chairman Smith, you 

are such a hero and inspiration to all of us too. There is no one 

else in this country that has fought and stood together with the victims like Mei Shunping and Chen Guangcheng for the past 30 

years. Thank you for your persistence. May God bless you and all 

the work you are doing. 

And we do believe this year China’s one-child policy and genocide 

will come to an end. So we encourage the American leaders, including President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and other congressional 

leaders to join us, join the people, and to bring about an end to this 

horrific, the largest crimes against humanity on earth in this year. 

Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. I want to thank our distinguished witnesses. 

We will continue pursuing, obviously, Chen’s case until it is resolved successfully. And the focus that he has brought on the hideous one-child-per-couple policy will increase in terms of focus, 

scrutiny. And, God willing, it will end. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:05 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(57)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

58

f


74235n.eps
59

Æ


74235m.eps