CHINA: ARBITRARY DETENTION OF THE ETHNIC UIGHUR MAIMAITI ABULAITI

The International League Against Arbitrary Detention urges the Government of China to take all the necessary actions to implement the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention Opinion No. 38/2023 concerning Maimaiti Abulaiti, asking China to immediately and unconditionally release him and to accord him an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations in accordance with international law.

Read the full WGAD Opinion concerning Maimaiti Abulaiti (China): Opinion No. 38/2023.

ARRESTED WITHOUT A WARRANT AND SUBJECTED TO INCOMMUNICADO DETENTION

Maimaiti Abulaiti is a citizen of China, born on 16 January 1980. Mr. Abulaiti is an ethnic Uighur and is of Muslim faith, thus he is a member of a religious minority. He is a businessman and a store owner. He usually resides in Wensu County, Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. He is also a person with a disability.

Beginning in 2010, Mr. Abulaiti served as an assistant to the imam in the local mosque during his free time. At the time, that activity was approved by the Government. However, in 2016, Mr. Abulaiti stopped praying, reportedly because of the new oppressive policies of the Government. The authorities considered Mr. Abulaiti an unauthorised imam not registered by the Government.

Mr. Abulaiti was arrested three times. The first arrest was during Ramadan in 2015, following an Iftar gathering where he prayed with others, without any warrant or stated reason; he was released after 30 days spent in Wensu County Detention Centre. The second arrest occurred on 10 January 2018, again without a warrant or charge details, and he was released after 3 days of interrogation. The third arrest happened at his home on 20 January 2018, also without a warrant or reason, and leading to his incommunicado detention. Later that year, his family was only able to see him via a video link at an official location.

The Working Group reiterated that any deprivation of liberty without a valid arrest warrant, as in the present case, was arbitrary as lacking a legal basis. Moreover, Mr. Abulaiti was unable to challenge his detentions before a court. Consequently, his right to an effective remedy under article 8 of the UDHR was violated. 

The Working Group also found that as he was held incommunicado, Mr. Abulaiti was placed outside the protection of the law, in violation of article 6 of the UDHR. Besides, he was also not brought promptly before a judicial authority, which the Working Ground found in violation of articles 3 and 9 of the UDHR.

For the reasons set out above, the Working Group found that the Government failed to establish or assign a legal basis for Mr. Abulaiti’s detention, thus finding his detention arbitrary under category I.

DETAINED BECAUSE OF HIS RELIGIOUS BELIEFS

While Mr. Abulaiti's first arrest allegedly resulted from him praying illegally in a private residence outside the mosque, his subsequent arrests were motivated by his arrest record from 2015. Indeed, even though Mr. Abulaiti stopped praying in the mosque after his first arrest and announced that he was stopping all religious activity, the authorities have a habit to detain members of the Uighur community based on their past record dating as far back as 10 years. 

Considering this context, the Working Group recalled the importance of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the ability to change beliefs and practice religion publicly or privately, which are fundamental human rights protected by article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As such, the Working Group found the detention of Mr. Abulaiti to be due to his religious beliefs and activities, in violation of the above-mentioned article.

As a consequence, the Working Group concluded the detention of Mr. Abulaiti was arbitrary under category II.

VIOLATIONS OF HIS RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL

The source was unable to provide information concerning Mr. Abulaiti's trial proceedings. As for the Government, it only stated that Mr. Abulaiti had been sentenced to 16 years and 10 months in custody, without providing any further information. As such, considering the complete opacity of the proceedings against Mr. Abulaiti, the Working Group concluded that his right to a fair and public trial had been disregarded. The Working Group further emphasised that even in national security or terrorism cases, trials must not be secretive and must appear impartial to a reasonable observer.

Thus, the Working Group found that Mr. Abulaiti was denied a fair and public hearing by an independent tribunal and the fundamental right of habeas corpus, in violation of article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Besides, the Working Group also found that his rights to be recognised as a person before the law, to an effective remedy, to not being arbitrarily detained, and to the presumption of innocence, were all violated, under articles 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11 (1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Henceforth, the Working Group concluded that Mr. Abulaiti's detention was arbitrary under category III.

ARRESTED FOR BELONGING TO THE UIGHUR MINORITY AND BEING OF MUSLIM FAITH

Mr. Abulaiti belongs to the Uighur minority living in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region of China, and was of Muslim faith at the time of his first arrest.

The Working Group recalled the Special Rapporteur's findings on the practices of arbitrary mass and secret detention of Uighurs, highlighting ongoing credible reports of mass arbitrary detentions. It also recalled its own findings and the OHCHR's assessment of human rights concerns in Xinjiang, China.

Considering the above, the Working Group concluded that the arrest and detention of Mr. Abulaiti were based on discrimination, specifically on the basis of his belonging to the Uighur minority and due to his Muslim faith. As such, his rights to enjoy freedoms without distinction of any kind, to be protected before the law without any discrimination and not to be arbitrarily detained were all violated, under articles 2, 7 and 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Working Group therefore found that the detention of Mr. Abulaiti was arbitrary, falling under category V.

CONCLUSIONS OF THE UN WORKING GROUP AGAINST ARBITRARY DETENTION

In the light of the foregoing, the Working Group considered that the detention of Maimaiti Abulaiti was arbitrary and fell under categories I, II, III and V because his deprivation of liberty was in contravention of articles 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Working Group requested the Government of China to take the steps necessary to remedy the situation of Mr. Abulaiti without delay and bring it into conformity with the relevant international norms, including those set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Working Group considered that, taking into account all the circumstances of the case, the appropriate remedy would be to release Mr. Abulaiti immediately and accord him an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations, in accordance with international law. The Working Group also urged the Government to ensure a full and independent investigation of the circumstances surrounding the arbitrary deprivation of liberty of Mr. Abulaiti and to take appropriate measures against those responsible for the violation of his rights.