The United Nations Determines Niu Tengyu Suffer Arbitrary Detention
— A Mother’s Accusation and Appeal
Author: Mother of Niu Tengyu
Abstract: The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention determined that Niu Tengyu was subjected to arbitrary detention, demanding that the Chinese government immediately release him and provide remedies. His mother recounts her experience appealing the case and her years of ordeal, stating that she will continue to speak out and defend her son’s rights.
Editor’s Note: At its 105th session, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention adopted Opinion No. 10/2026 concerning Niu Tengyu, determining that the detention he suffered constitutes arbitrary detention and requesting the Chinese government to immediately release Niu Tengyu, accord him compensation, and grant other appropriate remedies. This article is a personal statement made by Niu Tengyu’s mother regarding her son’s case and her own experiences. Part of the specific individuals and related allegations mentioned in the text are documented in publicly available materials, as hereby noted.
Recently, the United Nations Human Rights Council Working Group on Arbitrary Detention adopted Opinion No. 10/2026 concerning my son Niu Tengyu at its 105th session, determining that the detention he suffered constitutes arbitrary detention, involving issues such as lack of legal basis, punishment for exercising freedom of expression, and severe violations of the right to a fair trial. The Working Group requested the Chinese government to immediately release Niu Tengyu, accord him compensation and other appropriate remedies, and initiate an independent investigation into the relevant violations.
Official website of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights: Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its 105th session | OHCHR
Previously, according to my understanding, relevant authorities in countries such as the United States and Germany had also raised this case with the Chinese side, calling for the release of Niu Tengyu.
In order to quell public outrage, certain personnel on the Guangdong side had considered releasing Niu Tengyu, but according to the information I possess, this matter was subsequently thwarted by powerful and influential interests. The Guangdong Higher People’s Court had also passed word to us, stating that after pleading guilty, Niu Tengyu could be released from prison through parole. However, judges from the Guangdong Higher People’s Court also revealed to us that for a long time, parole has rarely been granted to inmates serving sentences of over 10 years. Niu Tengyu was sentenced to 14 years; if he were to plead guilty for the sake of parole, I worry that the authorities would later refuse parole on the grounds that “there is no precedent,” while simultaneously causing Niu Tengyu to lose the room to continue insisting on his appeal of innocence. We cannot accept such an arrangement of exchanging a guilty plea for an uncertain release.
This case originated from the “Special Case 1902136.” According to the materials in my possession, relevant departments in Guangdong arrested a batch of young people during the handling of the case, and ultimately 24 individuals were sentenced. I have consistently maintained that these young people were treated unfairly, and Niu Tengyu was specifically designated to take the blame for Gu Yangyang as the so-called “prime culprit,” thereby becoming the primary target of torture. Based on the information I have grasped through years of rights defense, I believe that Gu Yangyang’s mother, Yang Ye, and the powerful network behind her exerted a significant influence on the case.
Between 2019 and 2020, Niu Tengyu was successively detained in various detention facilities across Guangdong, including a designated residential surveillance facility in Foshan City. According to accounts later learned by Niu Tengyu himself and his family members, during this period he was subjected to prolonged suspension in handcuffs, deprivation of sleep and normal diet, the “tiger bench,” pouring of scalding hot wax, continuous beatings, and other forms of torture, and was even injected with saline, after which he developed severe skin ulceration.
Niu Tengyu also accused Chen Quanhui, a Foshan public security officer, of subjecting him to sexual humiliation, using a lighter to burn his private parts, and taking nude photographs. Long-term suspension in handcuffs and abuse caused severe nerve damage to two of his fingers, restricting their movement. He was sent to the hospital for emergency treatment twice due to the severe deterioration of his physical condition, but he never confessed.
According to the information I possess, Yang Ye once demanded that Niu Tengyu continue to be dealt with severely. I also learned that Chen Quanhui threatened doctors not to administer treatment while Niu Tengyu was sent to the hospital for emergency treatment on two occasions. Regarding the subsequent suppression and even transfer of the relevant doctors from their posts, I have consistently demanded that the relevant authorities conduct an independent investigation. Ultimately, the Maoming court sentenced Niu Tengyu to 14 years of imprisonment, after which he was sent to Guangdong Sihui Prison to serve his sentence.
Following my son’s sentencing, suppression directed at me followed suit.
Over the years, I have continuously experienced being followed, 24-hour surveillance, wiretapping, harassment via phone calls and text messages, and intimidation of friends and relatives, and I was once even attacked with a nail-studded wooden club. Relevant personnel also attempted to frame me using so-called charges such as supporting the Hong Kong demonstrations, Xinjiang separatism, Falun Gong, and being an “American spy.”
During the pandemic, I also encountered a situation where individuals attempted to trick me into opening my apartment door through property management in an effort to forcibly take me away. I also suspected that someone had placed harmful substances in pumpkin seeds I purchased online; after consuming them, my health suffered severe issues, my liver and kidneys were damaged, and I was left with multiple sequelae. In addition, I have experienced the cutting off of water, electricity, gas, and internet services, the destruction of express packages, and the freezing of my accounts.
These years of continuous suppression have severely impacted my health, finances, and daily life, causing many friends and relatives to gradually distance themselves from me out of fear.
That an ordinary family must pay such a price simply for insisting on appealing for a young man sentenced to a heavy 14-year prison term is something I cannot accept. Today, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has officially determined that Niu Tengyu was subjected to arbitrary detention and has demanded that the Chinese government immediately release him. This shows at the very least that our appeals and calls over these years have not been without foundation.
I am just a mother.
Facing everything my son has suffered, I have no way back. As long as Niu Tengyu does not regain his freedom for even a single day, I will continue to appeal and continue to speak out until he returns home safely.
— An Open Letter to the Political and Legal Affairs System of Guangdong Province
Author: Mother of Niu Tengyu
Abstract: This open letter from the mother of Niu Tengyu to the Political and Legal Affairs System of Guangdong Province questions the numerous injustices present in the “Esu Wiki Case.” It calls for the rectification of this miscarriage of justice in accordance with the law, the exoneration of the 24 wrongly accused young individuals, and the safeguarding of their right to appeal.
This letter is dedicated to all participants in and victims of this case. May the injustice suffered by these children never again be concealed, ignored, or forgotten. May this letter serve as an eternal warning: resist all evil acts that trample upon human rights and the law, promote the progress of the rule of law, and never allow the tragedy of these 24 children to recur!
To the Leaders of the Political and Legal Affairs System of Guangdong Province:
Greetings!
I am the mother of Niu Tengyu, the alleged “prime culprit” in a major unjust case fabricated in Maoming, Guangdong that shocked the world—the “Esu Wiki Evil Syndicate Case.” The verdict of this case is riddled with loopholes, and its absurd and bizarre outcome caused an uproar in international public opinion, drawing intense concern and questioning from governments and the public worldwide.
This shocking case has attracted global attention: among the 18 Esu Wiki members arrested, some had been disassociated from the Esu website for over four years, while others had joined just one month prior; Gu Yangyang, who was recognized by 900 members as the actual prime culprit, was released, while the technician Niu Tengyu was made a scapegoat for Gu Yangyang and heavily sentenced to 14 years; 9 minors were used to make up the numbers, painting 24 young people as an “evil force,” while 3 children of the powerful elite were set free.
This case has surpassed the extreme limits of human imagination. Countless world-renowned media outlets have reported on it, turning it into a highly influential political case—the greatest miscarriage of justice of this century!
My son, Niu Tengyu, was unjustly sentenced, yet even his most fundamental right to appeal is difficult to guarantee. I successively retained more than ten lawyers for him, all of whom were pressured by the Judicial Bureau and forced to withdraw. Hiring defense counsel has been obstructed at every turn, and for an unjust, false, and wrongful case that has already drawn global attention, the re-examination procedure has not been initiated according to law. This severely violates judicial fairness and has completely eroded the judicial credibility of the People’s Courts.
Article 457 of the “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of the ‘Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China'” provides: “For appeal cases filed for review, a decision shall be made within three months, and at the latest, shall not exceed six months.” However, the Guangdong Higher People’s Court has paid no heed to the appeals filed by myself and Niu Tengyu, failing even to provide a response.
This makes the case a landmark matter that damages the construction of the rule of law in China. History has a memory, all the more so in the internet era. Every set of appeal materials I have mailed is recorded, and Niu Tengyu’s letters of appeal to the Higher Court are also recorded; it can all be traced to see who is intentionally obstructing the process and knowingly breaking the law! Nowadays, lifelong accountability for handling cases is emphasized. I believe the rule of law will become increasingly robust, and those who obstruct justice will eventually be held legally accountable.
This case concerns the rule of law in China as well as the overall image of the country. I hope you will not remain numb and will make a wise choice.
During the period these 24 children were secretly detained in Foshan, they were deprived of basic personal rights, and everyone—including lawyers and parents—was kept completely in the dark. Do you know the heart-rending, agonizing pain we parents suffered when we could not find our children? Many parents developed severe depression as a result, and some even contracted cancer…
Leaders, you are parents as well. Please put yourselves in our shoes.
Please strive to feel the sense of helplessness parents face when confronted with immense injustice; Please strive to feel the sense of powerlessness parents face when confronted with willful authority; Please strive to feel the sense of defenselessness parents face when confronted with humiliation and suffering; Please strive to feel the deep, piercing pain of myself, a single mother…
As I write to this point, my clothes are already soaked with tears…
I know that you hold immense power in your hands, and a weak, severely ill woman like me is far from a match for you. Power is in your hands, along with handcuffs and guns; you need only invent a charge to lock me away in a cage. Or, with a single order from you, the black and evil gang led by Wang Bing—which has already persecuted me for over a year—could strike me dead with a single blow. With a mere touch of your upper and lower lips, I might simply vanish from the earth… You possess countless ways to deal with me.
The path of my petitioning is strewn with the thorns you have planted. I feel an overwhelming fear, and my heart bleeds. Yet, through wave after wave of harassment, threats, and intimidation, tossed about to the point of being unable to care for myself in daily life, I no longer have anything to fear! As long as a single breath remains in me, I will persevere in defending our rights!
Here I supplement my statement: I do not possess the strength to confront you. I merely wish to express and strive for the rights that belong to us in my own way, nothing more.
I hope to awaken your conscience. As human beings, conscience should be our bottom line, and at no time should conscience be abandoned. Your power was meant to protect the rights and interests of the people, not to strip them away; your duty was meant to carry out righteousness, not to trample upon the scales of justice!
I believe in the future, whereas you only possess the present. How I wish that you, too, might possess a future!
General Secretary Xi said: “Do not look at how wildly you run today; beware of the settling of accounts tomorrow.” Examples of this are everywhere. After the Cultural Revolution, 17 personnel from the public security, procuratorial, and judicial systems in Beijing were secretly executed; they were all guards or interrogators whose hands were stained with the blood of revolutionary cadres. Wang Zhen and Feng Jiping personally went to supervise the site, and their families were subsequently notified that they had died in the line of duty.
In today’s highly developed information age, everyone uses mobile phones, telephoto lenses are widespread, and facial recognition as well as iris recognition technologies are gradually maturing. Even if one uses cash to purchase plane tickets, train tickets, or lodging, traces may still be left behind in computer systems, making human whereabouts increasingly easy to track through technical means. Many actions leave behind electronic records, which may persist in networks or databases for a long time.
To a certain extent, these technologies erode personal privacy, but they also make it easier for the hideous deeds of evil-doers to be exposed in broad daylight. The net of heaven is vast and wide-meshed, yet nothing escapes it. As long as you commit evil, when the time comes, the entire world will know your name and the names of your family members. Your evil deeds will be permanently recorded in the annals of history, and your descendants will be ashamed of you!
For the sake of promotions and wealth, you have thrown away all bottom lines, locking a group of children into cages, subjecting them to torture, forcing them into compliance, and tearing families apart. These monstrous crimes are intolerable to both heaven and earth.
According to online news reports, Sun Lijun and Gong Da’an were involved in this case. Where are they today? Please refrain from endorsing them any further, and correct these unjust, false, and wrongful cases immediately.
For the future of our children, for your own future, and for the future of the nation, only by acknowledging mistakes and correcting them can you obtain the forgiveness of the people!
Mother of Niu Tengyu July 4, 2022
Editor: Hu Lili Proofreader: Wang Bin Translator: Ge Bing
The Reality of the Threat to the World Posed by the CCP’s “Pervasive” Infiltration Model
Author: Yi Yong
On the eve of the 2026 Lunar New Year, a 69-year-old Hong Kong businessman died of illness at National Taiwan University Hospital in Taipei. The businessman, named Ding Xiaohu, superficially held prestigious titles such as member of the Overseas Chinese and Foreign Affairs Committee of the Changsha Municipal People’s Congress and Vice President of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry. While he frequently traveled to and from Taiwan under the guise of tourism and business, he was in reality the commander-in-chief of an espionage network in Taiwan operated by the Nanning Workstation of the Liaison Bureau under the Central Military Commission Political Work Department of the CCP.
As prosecutors and investigative agencies cracked the case, people were shocked to realize that this was by no means a simple case of death due to illness during imprisonment. In this espionage case that shook Taiwan, three core handler-level figures who held the most crucial backend secrets and were capable of exposing the broader organization died in rapid succession within a short span of just 11 months. First, in March 2025, He Shengying, a core cadre responsible for cultivating ties in Taiwan, died of illness. Soon after, in September, Zhang Zhiwei, a personal assistant who controlled financial transactions and key contact lists, also died in the hospital. By February 2026, the commander-in-chief, Ding Xiaohu, ultimately passed away while out on medical parole.
All three top-tier handlers experienced “natural deaths” before their trials could commence, while those who survived to be sentenced were exclusively low-level Taiwanese operatives recruited on the ground. Such a highly concentrated coincidence led legal experts and intelligence analysts to widely point toward a brutal truth: this was extremely likely a strategy of “decisive abandonment” and silence-by-elimination executed by the intelligence organization to prevent investigators from pulling on threads and exposing an even larger, unrevealed sleeper network.
Even more chilling is just how deep this network reached and how far it extended. Ding Xiaohu’s team poured in tens of millions of New Taiwan Dollars, infiltrating layer by layer through underground money exchanges. Their tactics encompassed not only traditional military domains but also cross-sector extensions into high-tech defense lines.
Catering to individual interests, Ding Xiaohu worked his way into religious circles, first making contact with relatives of senior officials in the national security system, and subsequently leveraging these connections to enter high-level social circles.
Riding on the networks of retired military officers, he successively recruited multiple active-duty lieutenant colonels and majors in the Army and Air Force (such as Wang Wenhao, Tan Junming, Qiu Hanlin, Yang Qianhui, and Yang Bozhi). Operatives even secretly uploaded classified data from military computers to cloud storage when colleagues stepped away from their desks, and recruits were instructed to incite subordinates toward “passive non-resistance” should war break out.
Upon decrypting Ding Xiaohu’s digital files, investigators discovered that the tentacles of infiltration even sought to extend into key semiconductor industries—planning to headhunt technical talent and steal critical confidential documents in an attempt to help mainland China build out its supply chains.
This case is by no means an isolated intelligence battle across the Taiwan Strait. The infiltration model and operational logic it exposed demonstrate a appalling level of pervasiveness and brutality.
There is a famous deduction in biology: when you spot one cockroach in the open, hundreds or thousands have already gathered in the dark. The unraveling of this espionage ring occurred not because Taiwanese counterintelligence agencies had already grasped the full picture, but simply because military internal checks accidentally uncovered a major behaving abnormally, which allowed investigators to pull the thread and drag out the entire line. This means that the case exposed today is likely just the tip of the iceberg; no one knows how many sleeper networks remain unexposed without a trace.
From religious indoctrination and emotional manipulation, to military secrets and high-tech semiconductors, and further to extremely covert online financial flows via WeChat and Alipay tipping codes to secretly fund self-media and public opinion outlets with specific political stances—this infiltration operates without a bottom line, nor is it limited to military means. At an extremely low cost and with high stealth, it comprehensively erodes the defense mechanisms of democratic systems from the societal fabric and economic lifelines to ideology and public opinion.
Everything happening in Taiwan today serves as a tactical template for the CCP’s rehearsals against global democracies. Whether it is the infiltration of political advisors in Europe, academic and commercial theft in North America’s high-tech sectors, or the financial manipulation of global Chinese-language communities and media spheres, the underlying logic is identical to that of the espionage case in Taiwan: exploiting the openness and freedom of democratic societies to locate human weaknesses and institutional loopholes, executing a quiet and imperceptible “hollowing out.”
Taiwan stands on the frontlines of this silent war, and this bizarre espionage case has sounded an alarm for the entire world. If the free world fails to recognize the cruel nature of this “pervasive” infiltration and construct strict, cross-border, and cross-sector lines of defense, the threat Taiwan faces today will become an unbearable burden for every democratic nation tomorrow.
Editor: Li Jing Proofreader: Kong Xiangqing Translator: Shen Meihua
Opposition Party Magazine — China Human Rights Watch Brief, Issue No. 39 (August 14, 2026)
Author: Zhang Weiqing
Featured Persecuted Individual: Shen Aibin, born in October 1973, native of Wuxi, Jiangsu Province. Military veteran, former CCP member, former civil servant, human rights defender, and citizen journalist. Formerly the Brigade Commander of the Urban Management Bureau in Xishan District, Wuxi City (previously served as Deputy Brigade Commander and Chief of the Legal Affairs Section).
Latest Status:
Following his release from prison, Shen Aibin continues to face normalized physical violence, harassment, and judicial restrictions:
1. October 2025: When he went to the local police station to negotiate, he was gang-beaten by individuals instructed by the deputy police chief, resulting in bilateral nasal bone fractures (classified as Second-Degree Minor Injury) and head trauma that caused him to lose consciousness. Instead of investigating the attackers, Wuxi police criminally detained him on suspicion of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” and subsequently placed him under residential surveillance.
2. May 2026: Authorities officially changed his measure to release on bail pending trial (guaranty pending trial), yet police unreasonably rejected his applications to seek outside medical treatment more than ten times.
3. August 2026: On August 4, police from the Guangyi Police Station forcibly raided his home, confiscating multiple mobile phones and hard drives. They subsequently placed him under a 5-day administrative detention on charges of violating administrative supervision rules (leaving the city to seek medical treatment). On August 9, upon his release at the expiration of his administrative detention, he was seamlessly intercepted and summoned by police right at the gate of the detention center. He currently remains under strict surveillance.
I. Personal Biography
In 1991, he enlisted in the military and successfully passed the military academy entrance examination to become an officer. In 2002, he was transferred from military service to the municipal urban management system in Wuxi. During his tenure, drawing on his professional background as the Chief of the Legal Affairs Section and his strong sense of justice, he provided free, long-term legal aid to vulnerable petitioners across the nation. He repeatedly participated in exposing and rescuing petitioners unlawfully detained by local state-security forces in hotels and farmhouses (known informally as “black jails”). His actions angered local interest groups, resulting in political retaliation: he was expelled from the Communist Party and dismissed from public office.
II. Political Stance
1. Firm Defender of the Constitution and Fundamental Civil Rights. He strongly emphasizes the freedom of speech, personal freedom, and the right to lodge complaints guaranteed to citizens under the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China. He advocates that only when a nation truly implements the rule of law and safeguards fundamental human rights can society achieve true fairness.
2. Opponent of Unlawful “Stability Maintenance” and Gang-Style Law Enforcement. He strongly resists and condemns local government practices of intercepting, tracking, house-arresting, and placing petitioners in extrajudicial “black jails,” characterizing these as gang-style law enforcement measures.
III. Arrests and Sentencing History
Due to his long-term engagement in human rights defense and his support for petitioners, Shen Aibin has been framed and sentenced three times:
1. First Sentence (2013–2015): For participating in the rescue of unlawfully detained petitioners, he was sentenced to 1 year and 6 months in prison by the Binhu District People’s Court of Wuxi City on the charge of “intentionally destroying property.”
2. Second Sentence (2016–2019): After his release, because he persisted in defending rights and exposing local corruption online, he was sentenced to 2 years and 6 months in prison on the charge of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.”
3. Third Sentence (2022–2025): For voicing support following the death of petitioner Mao Lihui and demanding accountability, he was sentenced in September 2023 to 3 years in prison for “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.” During his imprisonment, he reported experiencing severe persecution, including solitary isolation and electromagnetic radiation exposure, until his release upon completion of his sentence on April 30, 2025.
IV. Social and International Assessments
1. Social and Grassroots Assessment: He is hailed as the “leader of Wuxi’s human rights defense movement” and a “protective umbrella for grassroots petitioners.” He represents the conscience of the rule of law from within the establishment—a selfless and fearless solitary fighter whose fate serves as a microcosm of the criminalization and degradation of China’s grassroots stability-maintenance apparatus.
2. International and Human Rights Community Assessment: International human rights organizations have long included him on key monitoring lists for prisoners of conscience in China. The international community highly commends his peaceful struggle to defend citizens’ freedom of movement and oppose torture. His plight over more than a decade is viewed as concrete proof of the breakdown of China’s grassroots judiciary and the regression of the rule of law through the extreme abuse of the catch-all charge “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.” After his international letter for help was exposed in April 2026, it sparked strong condemnation from the international community regarding the phenomenon where Chinese political prisoners are “deprived of basic survival and medical rights after release.”
V. Appeals by the Human Rights Watch Department of Opposition Party Magazine
1. Immediately stop systemic political persecution and restore his personal freedom. We call on the Chinese authorities to abide by their constitutional commitments, immediately revoke all political charges against Shen Aibin, lift the bail conditions and disguised house arrest, and fully restore his civil liberties.
2. Cease the deprivation of the right to life and health, and guarantee his fundamental human right to unconditional medical treatment. We condemn the inhumane practice of local police utilizing restrictions on medical care as political punishment. The authorities must guarantee his fundamental right to survival, allowing him to seek treatment at professional medical institutions for his nasal fractures and pre-existing medical conditions.
3. Urget the international community and United Nations human rights bodies to urgently intervene and take action: We urgently call on United Nations human rights bodies and international forces of justice to continuously speak out, jointly resist, and condemn the systemic persecution executed by local Chinese authorities against human rights defenders.
Editor: Li Jing Proofreader: Kong Xiangqing Translator: Shen Meihua
A Record of the “802nd Jasmine Action” at Liberty Sculpture Park, California
Author: Tang Xin
Date: August 8, 2026
Location: Liberty Sculpture Park, Yermo, California (37570 Yermo Rd, Yermo, CA)
Participating Organizations: China Democracy Party, Chinese Democracy & Human Rights Alliance, Federation for a Democratic China (FDC), National Committee of the China Democracy Party, among others.
【Editor’s Note】
On August 8, 2026, temperatures in the Mojave Desert of Southern California surged above 40 degrees Celsius (104°F), as rolling heat waves scorched the desert ground. This day marked exactly nine years since the enforced disappearance of Gao Zhisheng, a renowned human rights lawyer widely hailed as the “Conscience of China,” at the hands of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) authorities.
Responding to the call of the “802nd Jasmine Action” organized by the Los Angeles Committee of the National Committee of the China Democracy Party, around 50 individuals—including members of democratic organizations such as the China Democracy Party, the Chinese Democracy & Human Rights Alliance, and the FDC, alongside Gao Zhisheng’s wife, Ms. Geng He, June 4th survivor and FDC President Mr. Fang Zheng, concerned members of the public, and several American friends sympathetic to the cause of Chinese democracy—drove across the desert to gather in front of the Gao Zhisheng commemorative sculpture, Look Up at the Starry Sky, to jointly show support and voice their protest.
I. Driving into the Desert: Diverse Forces Converge Before Look Up at the Starry Sky
At noon on August 8, as a member of the China Democracy Party, the Chinese Democracy & Human Rights Alliance, and the Federation for a Democratic China (FDC), I drove for over two hours along Interstate 15 across the vast Mojave Desert to reach Liberty Sculpture Park in Yermo.
The moment I stepped out of the car, the heat wave struck like a heavy punch. Yet, the atmosphere in the desert was solemn and resolute. Standing inside the park were giant monuments: the “64” numerical memorial, a heavy tank sculpture, and a replica model of the Tiananmen Gatehouse. Tucked in one corner of the park stood Look Up at the Starry Sky — Gao Zhisheng, a commemorative sculpture created by the famous sculptor Mr. Chen Weiming.
This large tower-like sculpture features a base built from rugged stone blocks. The central front side displays Gao Zhisheng’s writings alongside Lady Justice holding a sword and scales, while bas-reliefs on both sides depict groups of victims associated with Gao’s human rights advocacy. At the peak of the sculpture sits a giant bust of Gao Zhisheng, lifting his head to gaze toward the sky.
Ms. Geng He, wife of Lawyer Gao Zhisheng, and Mr. Fang Zheng, who traveled a long distance in his wheelchair to stand firm in the desert heat, both arrived before the sculpture. For onlookers, this was a deeply moving monument; for Geng He, the sculpture before her eyes represented the husband she had been unable to see for nine years; and for Mr. Fang Zheng and the colleagues present, it served as a firm oath spanning generations to jointly resist authoritarian power.
II. Dialogue Under the Scorching Sun: Preserving the Sparks and Awaiting a Historic Turning Point
According to the original plan, the commemorative gathering was scheduled to officially begin at 3:30 PM. However, the midsummer desert heat far exceeded everyone’s expectations. As three to four o’clock in the afternoon is the hottest period of the day for ground surface temperatures, the direct sunlight caused the on-site audio equipment, camera gear, and multiple mobile phones to automatically shut down one after another due to severe overheating. Mobile network signals were also temporarily lost.
Faced with unexpected equipment failures and the test of temperatures exceeding 40°C, not a single one of the nearly 50 participants chose to back down. Organizers and representatives from various groups consulted on site and decided to postpone the official rally to 7:00 PM—holding it after the sun set and temperatures cooled.
During the three-hour wait, everyone gathered under crude shade canopies, sharing bottled water and cold drinks while exchanging ideas. During this time, I had an in-depth conversation with Mr. Fang Zheng.I asked Mr. Fang Zheng: “Why is it that in the public eye today, you are almost the only victim disabled in the June 4th Massacre who still stands up and continues to speak out?”Mr. Fang Zheng replied candidly and gravely that this reflects the actual dilemma currently facing the democracy movement—many disabled survivors of June 4th whom he knows have chosen not to step forward anymore due to various pressures and realistic considerations.”What we are doing now is essentially ‘preserving the sparks,'” Mr. Fang Zheng pointed out profoundly. “Right now, the outside world is sometimes overly optimistic about the situation. The real historic turning point—when this regime might actually collapse—will only come when insiders within the CCP regime proactively seek us out to cooperate. Although urban middle-class citizens in China are beginning to align with democratic forces, this momentum is still far from sufficient. We must persevere. No matter how harsh the environment is, we must keep this spark alive.”
This conversation in the scorching desert carried immense weight, leaving all the colleagues present with a clearer and deeper understanding of the long-term nature, complexity, and strategic resolve required for the current struggle.
III. Singing in the Sunset Glow: Belting Out The Watcher in the Abyss and Roaring a Refusal to Forget
At 7:00 PM, as the sunset sank behind the distant desert mountains, the ground temperature gradually subsided, and the evening glow dyed half the sky red. The camera and audio equipment resumed operation. The 802nd Jasmine Action officially commenced in the cool breeze.
At the rally site, everyone gathered beneath the sculpture and sang together The Watcher in the Abyss, a song specially composed for Lawyer Gao Zhisheng. Ms. Geng He and Mr. Fang Zheng stood in front of the sculpture, singing along with the crowd. The sound of singing echoed across the vast, quiet Southern California desert, pushing the emotion of the event to its climax:
The Watcher in the Abyss (Full Text of Live Choral Performance)
A tiny beam of light pierces through the dark,
Shouts behind cold walls echo in the park.
Amidst despair, his conviction stands like steel,
To guard justice is the glory he can feel.
Iron bars cannot trap the soul’s soaring flight,
Fiery trials temper original resolve with might.
In silence, his outcry runs scalding hot,
Crossing through the years, writing justice on the spot.
Boundless is the abyss, yet he stands as a ridge,
Burning hope in solitude, building freedom’s bridge.
Conviction like fire melts away the frost,
For truth and faith, his life is the cost.
Even if alone, he shines like a beacon bright,
Lighting up the dark night, lighting up the dawn’s light.
For truth, his life echoes far and wide.
Amidst the singing and shouts, representatives from various groups put forward three clear and forceful core demands to the CCP authorities:
1. Release him immediately! Immediately account for Gao Zhisheng’s whereabouts and restore his personal freedom unconditionally.
2. Stop the persecution! Stop the illegal arrests and enforced disappearances of human rights lawyers and prisoners of conscience.
3. Defend human rights! Completely end state-sponsored terrorism tactics such as “black jails” (extralegal detention centers).
IV. Conclusion: As Long as Someone Keeps Asking, Gao Zhisheng Will Never Be Forgotten
Nine years—more than 3,280 days and nights. Nine years is long enough for countless trending news stories to fade from public view, and long enough for a name to be buried by new historical events. Yet for the nearly 50 companions who drove to Liberty Sculpture Park that day, remembering itself is a form of the most resilient resistance—a stance of refusing to forget.
Lawyer Gao Zhisheng once spoke out for vulnerable groups and the persecuted by his own solitary efforts, paying a tremendous price; after he lost his freedom, his family overseas, friends, and members of various democratic parties became his voice.
After the commemorative rally concluded that evening, night fell, the crowd eventually dispersed, and the desert returned to silence. However, the several-meter-tall Look Up at the Starry Sky sculpture still stands firmly in the desert, with Gao Zhisheng in the sculpture continuing to raise his head toward the sky.
Just as Mr. Fang Zheng said, as long as the spark is not extinguished, and as long as there are people publicly calling out and demanding answers, Gao Zhisheng will never be forgotten. That voice that has persisted for nine years continues to echo across the Mojave Desert and in the hearts of thousands upon thousands of people pursuing freedom:
“Gao Zhisheng, where are you?!”
Editor: Li Jing Proofreader: Kong Xiangqing Translator: Shen Meihua
Gao Zhisheng’s 9th Anniversary of Disappearance: Various Circles in San Francisco Demand Answers in Front of the Chinese Consulate:
Where Is Gao Zhisheng? Immediately Release Gao Zhisheng
On August 13, 2026, people from all walks of life held a protest in front of the Consulate General of the People’s Republic of China in San Francisco to mark the ninth anniversary of Gao Zhisheng’s enforced disappearance. (Photos in this article provided by Guan Yongjie)
By Lyu Xiaojing
[San Francisco] On the afternoon of August 13, 2026, calls demanding the revelation of the whereabouts of Chinese human rights lawyer Gao Zhisheng resounded once again in front of the Chinese Consulate General in San Francisco. That day marked the ninth anniversary of Chinese human rights lawyer Gao Zhisheng’s enforced disappearance once again. The San Francisco Branch of the China Democracy Party and the Chinese Democracy Education Foundation initiated the protest event. Gao Zhisheng’s wife Geng He, along with numerous pro-democracy activists, human rights lawyers, Falun Gong practitioners, and individuals concerned with human rights in China, arrived at the scene to demand that the CCP authorities immediately disclose Gao Zhisheng’s actual whereabouts and physical condition, cease the persecution of Gao Zhisheng and his family, and immediately restore his personal freedom.
Nine Years Have Passed, “This Matter Is Still Not Over”
Li Xiaolin, the planner and host of this event, stated in his opening remarks that after August 13, 2017, Gao Zhisheng was subjected to enforced disappearance once again. Nine years have passed, and his family does not know where he is, nor can the outside world learn about his actual situation and physical condition.
“Nine years is far too long for a family, and even more so for a person deprived of freedom.” Li Xiaolin stated that everyone standing here today is “not to commemorate a story that has already ended, but because this matter is still not over.”
On behalf of those present, he once again demanded answers from the CCP authorities: “Where is Gao Zhisheng?” He also demanded the disclosure of his actual whereabouts and physical condition, the restoration of his personal freedom, and an immediate end to the persecution and collective punishment targeting him and his family.
“Nine years have passed; this question must be answered.”
Gao Zhisheng’s wife Geng He spoke at the event site
Geng He: Let the song penetrate the dark night and high walls
Gao Zhisheng’s wife Geng He stated at the scene that today marks the ninth anniversary of her husband’s enforced disappearance. She thanked everyone for setting aside their work and personal lives to come to the scene despite their busy schedules, and expressed gratitude to those who have never forgotten Gao Zhisheng over the years. She also thanked fellow companions in San Francisco for composing and performing the song “Watchman of the Abyss.” Geng He stated that this song is dedicated to Gao Zhisheng, as well as to all those who remain in darkness yet still look up toward freedom and persevere in speaking out for truth and human rights. Geng He has publicly released this song on Twitter. She hopes that this song can “penetrate the dark night and high walls, allowing the truth to be seen and hope to never be extinguished.”
The significance of nine years is far more than just a number of time. For Gao Zhisheng’s family, it means that a wife has not known her husband’s whereabouts for nine years, and it also means that a family has been continuously waiting for the most fundamental answers: Where is he? Is he safe? When will he be able to return home?
The speaker holding the microphone on the right in the photo is Fang Zheng, Chairman of the San Francisco Branch of the China Democracy Party
Fang Zheng: What the CCP Fears Is the Courage Represented by Gao Zhisheng
Fang Zheng, Chairman of the San Francisco Branch of the China Democracy Party, stated that the CCP Consulate in San Francisco is a symbol of the CCP regime overseas, and everyone came here today precisely to “demand the truth” from the CCP authorities on the occasion of the ninth anniversary of Gao Zhisheng’s disappearance.
Fang Zheng believes that the reason why the CCP fears Gao Zhisheng is because the courage, perseverance, and spirit of resistance displayed by Gao Zhisheng can inspire more Chinese people. When more and more people break free from fear, begin to awaken, and courageously speak out, the very fear upon which authoritarian rule relies for its survival will also be shattered.
“Gao Zhisheng is a hero in our hearts.” Fang Zheng stated that they will continue, alongside Geng He, to demand answers regarding Gao Zhisheng’s whereabouts, and he called upon more people of conscience throughout the world to pay attention together, hoping that Gao Zhisheng will regain his freedom soon and be reunited with his family.
Chen Chuangchuang: His Perseverance Is Inseparable from His Faith
Human rights lawyer Chen Chuangchuang stated that he mainly wanted to discuss two issues today: why the CCP has long suppressed Gao Zhisheng, and what people can still do while waiting for Gao Zhisheng to regain his freedom.
Chen Chuangchuang believes that Gao Zhisheng’s perseverance over the past twenty-plus years is inextricably linked to his Christian faith. He once spoke out for Falun Gong practitioners and other persecuted individuals. Even after enduring torture and long-term separation from his family, with his family also paying a heavy price for it, he still did not choose to remain silent.
Chen Chuangchuang mentioned that although Gao Zhisheng appeared to regain his freedom after his release from prison in 2014, he remained under strict control. Under these circumstances, he continued to write and completed “Stand Up China 2017.” Chen Chuangchuang believes that precisely because Gao Zhisheng never ceased thinking and speaking out, the CCP fears that his ideas, faith, and courage will exert a broader social impact.
He called on people to continue writing open letters, publishing advertisements, reading and promoting “Stand Up China 2017” before Gao Zhisheng truly regains his freedom, so that more people will know Gao Zhisheng’s name and plight, and to continue speaking out for those who remain in darkness and have lost their freedom.
Multiple participants at the scene also individually expressed their support for Gao Zhisheng and his family.
Liu Jingtao, a member of the China Democracy Party, stated that Gao Zhisheng once sought justice for the wronged and provided legal aid to the persecuted, yet for this he paid the heavy price of losing his freedom. His family has likewise endured immense suffering, especially his wife Geng He, who over the past nine years has never ceased searching for her husband and speaking out on his behalf. He called upon the CCP authorities to release all detained prisoners of conscience, so that Gao Zhisheng may return home at an early date!
Lawyer Zhou Junhong stated that as an attorney who has similarly suffered persecution by the CCP, she deeply empathizes with the waiting and torment experienced by Gao Zhisheng’s family over the past nine years. She expressed specifically to Gao Zhisheng’s family: “You are not waiting alone.” Everyone will continue to remember Gao Zhisheng and continue to speak out for him until the truth comes to light.
Ren Mengxing, Deputy Secretary-General of the San Francisco Branch, put forward a most fundamental demand to the CCP authorities: If Gao Zhisheng is guilty, he should be tried publicly according to law, allowing the facts to be subjected to public scrutiny; if he is not guilty, he should be released immediately and his freedom restored. She emphasized that Gao Zhisheng has been missing for nine years, and the authorities cannot continue to remain silent, but must provide a clear accounting of his whereabouts and situation.
Li Shuqing, a member of the Democracy Party, stated at the scene that lawyer Gao Zhisheng has been subject to enforced disappearance for nine years, and the outside world has still not received clear news regarding his whereabouts; therefore, the truth must continue to be demanded. He stated that Gao Zhisheng has long defended rights for ordinary citizens, sacrificing his own freedom and personal safety to safeguard the rights and dignity of the people. He criticized the CCP authorities for suppressing rights defenders and disregarding the fundamental rights of ordinary citizens, demanding that the authorities immediately disclose Gao Zhisheng’s true whereabouts, provide a clear accounting to his family and the public, and allow Gao Zhisheng to regain his freedom.
Li Shuqing emphasized that as long as there is no news of Gao Zhisheng for even a single day, they will not stop demanding answers for a single day, and will continue to demand that the CCP authorities take responsibility for the persecution Gao Zhisheng has suffered. Finally, he expressed a strong demand to oppose CCP authoritarian rule and end Communist Party rule.
Lyu Xiaojing, Deputy Director of the Fremont Branch of the San Francisco Branch, stated that we should learn from Gao Zhisheng’s courage to dare to speak out, which is what the CCP fears the most. She said: Lawyer Gao, you are not fighting alone; behind you are thousands upon thousands of people supporting you, and we are with you. Lyu Xiaojing simultaneously called for attention to Gao Zhisheng’s whereabouts and for continued protests and speaking out until Gao Zhisheng regains his freedom and returns home safely.
Li Jin: Nine Years Have Passed; the Demand for Truth Will Not Disappear
Li Jin, a Falun Gong practitioner and host at Sound of Hope Radio Network, stated that Gao Zhisheng was merely doing what a lawyer ought to do—“speaking up for the vulnerable, voicing concerns for those who were wronged, and leaving a record for trampled conscience.” Li Jin mentioned that when Falun Gong practitioners were suffering persecution and smear campaigns by the CCP, Gao Zhisheng conducted in-depth investigations and interviewed Falun Gong practitioners, publicly speaking out on their behalf. Following this, Gao Zhisheng endured persecution including the revocation of his law license, surveillance, detention, and torture.
“Nine years have passed; our questioning will not disappear, our memory will not disappear, and our demand for the truth will vanish even less.” Li Jin stated that the CCP must provide an accounting to Gao Zhisheng’s family and the public. He also expressed that Sound of Hope Radio Network will continue to stand alongside Geng He and individuals concerned with human rights in China, broadcasting information toward mainland China via shortwave radio, and expressed his hope that everyone would share these tuning channels with relatives and friends in the mainland when opportunities arise.
“Every Ray of Light” Dedicated to Gao Zhisheng and All Prisoners of Conscience
At the event site, Ms. Zheng Yun, Secretary-General of the San Francisco Branch, and Mr. Lu Zhanqiang jointly recited the poem “Every Ray of Light,” dedicated to Gao Zhisheng and to all prisoners of conscience who, like him, lost their freedom for upholding their faith, conscience, and justice, while also paying tribute to those family members who have long waited, accompanied, and guarded them.
The poem reads that some write their names with their lives, while others exchange their freedom for the truth; and behind every ray of light, there is also another ray of light silently guarding it.
Through the poem, the reciters called upon people to persist in speaking the words that should be said when the world remains silent. Perhaps not everyone can become a high mountain, but one can become a spark, allowing courage and conviction to continue to be passed on.
“As long as there are still people looking up at the starry sky, as long as there are still people who believe in truth, the light will not be extinguished.”
Nine Roses, Nine Years of Waiting and Watching
Subsequently, the event held a flower-offering segment titled “Nine Years of Watching.”
The organizers prepared nine roses, symbolizing the nine years of Gao Zhisheng’s enforced disappearance. At the same time, each rose also represented a conviction that refuses to be abandoned: truth, freedom, peace, dignity, courage, conscience, watching, hope, and return. As the nine roses were offered one by one, those present once again reflected upon the nine years Gao Zhisheng lost his freedom. Nine flowers represent nine years of waiting, as well as nine years of watching. The “return” represented by the last flower embodies the most simple and yet most prolonged wish of this family—that one day, Gao Zhisheng can safely return to his wife and family.
Three Demands: Disclose Whereabouts, Restore Freedom, Stop Persecution
As the event neared its conclusion, Li Xiaolin formally read out three demands to the CCP authorities on behalf of the participants at the scene:
First, immediately disclose Mr. Gao Zhisheng’s actual whereabouts and physical condition;
Second, immediately restore Mr. Gao Zhisheng’s personal freedom;
Third, immediately stop the persecution and collective punishment targeting Mr. Gao Zhisheng and his family.
Li Xiaolin stated that these are “not excessive demands,” but the most fundamental rights of a person and a family. “Nine years is already too long. We want the truth, we want freedom, and we want Mr. Gao Zhisheng to return home safely.”
Launching the “TTT Truth Action”: Silence Cannot Bring Freedom
After reading out the three demands, Li Xiaolin announced on site the launch of a new initiative—”TTT Action—Tell the Truth.”
He stated that the reason the action was named “Tell the Truth” is that the experiences of far too many people have been covered up, far too many facts distorted, and far too many voices that ought to be heard forced into silence. “And the very first thing we can do is to speak out the truth.” Li Xiaolin stated that in the face of lies, there is an even greater need to persist in responding with truth, because what dictators fear most is the truth. He emphasized: “Silence cannot bring freedom; only speaking out can change the future.”
Subsequently, he led the on-site participants to demand answers aloud once more: “Where is Gao Zhisheng?” “Nine years is already too long.”
At the end of the event, those present faced the Consulate General of the PRC in San Francisco and collectively shouted slogans in Chinese and English: “Where is Gao Zhisheng? WHERE IS GAO ZHISHENG?”
“Where is Gao Zhisheng! Immediately release Gao Zhisheng! Nine years is already too long!”
Nine years can allow a child to grow up, and is enough to alter the life trajectory of a family. Yet nine years have passed, and Gao Zhisheng’s wife and family are still waiting for a few most fundamental questions to be answered: Where is he? How is his physical condition? When will he be able to return home?
The harm brought by enforced disappearances is never merely the deprivation of one person’s freedom. When a person’s whereabouts remain unknown for a long time, and family members cannot verify his condition and safety, the waiting itself becomes a prolonged torment.
In the day’s event, from Geng He’s nine years of watching, to the solidarity of fellow lawyers; from “Watchman of the Abyss” to “Every Ray of Light”; from the nine roses symbolizing nine years of waiting, to the words “you are not waiting alone”; ultimately, all voices converged in front of the consulate into question after question repeated over and over:
Where is Gao Zhisheng?
Nine years have passed, and this simplest of questions has still not received an open, credible answer.
And for the people at the scene, commemorating the ninth anniversary was not to look back at something that had already passed, but to remind the outside world: one person’s freedom has yet to return, and a family’s waiting has yet to end.
The last rose among the nine roses is called “Return.” This is perhaps also the simplest wish to which all demands of that day ultimately pointed:
Disclose the truth, stop the persecution, immediately release Gao Zhisheng. Let Gao Zhisheng return home.
Interviews, speeches, and scene silhouettes from the event.
Editor: Feng Reng Proofreader: Feng Reng Translator: Ge Bing
Abstract: This article recounts the author’s early experience of moving to live in Hong Kong. The author suffered a massive culture shock in Hong Kong and was referred to as an “illegal immigrant” by a taxi driver.
I remember back then the Luohu Bridge in Shenzhen was dilapidated and run-down. Carrying bags and bundles of all sizes, I walked to the midpoint line and stepped across to the opposite side with great hesitation—that was, after all, a national border line. Looking back, I saw the couplet on the bridge tower: “Love the Motherland, Defend the Homeland.”
A People’s Liberation Army soldier wearing a grass-green uniform yelled at me, telling me to hurry up and leave. His uniform looked quite shabby, and his attitude was extremely impatient. Standing on this side of the bridge was a female police officer wearing a black wool tunic uniform; she smiled at me and pointed with her finger to the path I should take.
In my hand, I held a “Two-Way Permit” printed in both Chinese and English, featuring traditional Chinese characters that I had not seen in a long time. It can be said that from childhood to adulthood, I had never seen such thick, sturdy paper. The immigration waiting hall was packed with people who had come from all over the country. At noon, everyone was issued a boxed lunch. I felt as though the staff were about to off work, yet my turn still had not come.
It turned out that my name had long been called over the loudspeaker many times. Because they were speaking Cantonese, I felt that “that person” had absolutely nothing to do with me.
With great difficulty, I boarded the train bound for Hung Hom, Kowloon. Back then, the train still carried both passengers and cargo mixed together; there were boxcars used for freight, as well as those for livestock and vegetables. Sitting down in a seat, I looked around in every direction; to me, all of this was so fresh and novel.
Sitting opposite me was an amiable, friendly middle-aged woman in her forties. She took the initiative to greet me, speaking Standard Mandarin even better than I did, and offered to help carry my luggage. At that time, “the string of class struggle” in my mind was pulled extremely tight, and I firmly refused her.
I remember people back then did not have today’s suitcases, and there were absolutely no wheels on the bottom of boxes. On the entire train, I was the most “lún jùn” (cantankerous and awkward in Cantonese), feeling as though everyone wanted to help me. That lady still proposed giving me one hundred Hong Kong dollars as a deposit…
Arriving at the Kowloon Terminus, it was all thanks to her help. Standing in the middle of the hall like an idiot, I did not know what to do, tightly holding in my hand that slip of paper written with a name, telephone number, and address, along with those mere twenty Hong Kong dollars I possessed. She was the one who placed a phone call to my maternal grandfather, whom I had never met before.
They were both speaking Cantonese. The general content was that my money might not be enough to pay for the taxi fare, and I refused any financial assistance. In those days, the Cross-Harbour Tunnel toll was five dollars per trip (and they even collected for the round trip). The destination I was going to was Causeway Bay, so she essentially asked my maternal grandfather to wait for me downstairs with money in hand.
Just like that, I left the Kowloon Peninsula and arrived on Hong Kong Island.
Previously, people said that the difference between Mainland China and Hong Kong was like the difference between black-and-white television and color television. What I felt even more was “culture shock.”
The taxi sped through the Cross-Harbour Tunnel, and the driver looked me over through the rearview mirror, as if thinking: Where did this person who “doesn’t know how to speak” come from? He was clearly taking a circuitous route; what should have been an adequate fare ended up leaving me owing him over a dozen dollars.
I handed the only twenty Hong Kong dollars I had over to him, and he grabbed my collar, shouting that he would call the police to arrest me and punish this “illegal immigrant” riding a taxi without paying the fare. Where was my maternal grandfather? How had I gotten into trouble the moment I arrived?
It turned out the place where my maternal grandfather was waiting was a “double yellow line,” where taxis were not allowed to stop. I could not understand the Cantonese they were arguing in either, but it was roughly that since it was originally an Island taxi, it should not collect double the tunnel toll (five dollars each way).
My only twenty dollars was gone just like that. That was money I had obtained only after running around for several days, visiting several different departments, and getting several red official stamps stamped; I still remember the exchange rate was 0.26 RMB to 1 HKD.
Before setting out back then, people who cared about me all came to see me off. Hearing that RMB was useless in Hong Kong, some gave me national grain coupons, while others said international grain coupons might be needed. I could not figure it out either—whether Hong Kong needed grain coupons or not.
My total family wealth left was a German violin that could be cashed in. Shell floral patterns were even inlaid on the violin’s fingerboard and tuning pegs; even if no one touched it, it was a very beautiful piece of artwork. That had cost half my parents’ life savings (valued at one thousand RMB in Shanghai at the time).
My teacher was the concertmaster of the Shanghai Film Orchestra, half Cantonese and half German. At that time, his family had a large Western-style house for sale; someone offered twenty-eight thousand, but the three siblings all disagreed, saying it was hard to split and insisting on thirty thousand, so that all three families could become “ten-thousand-yuan households.”
It is not easy being parents; they worried that their son, unfamiliar with the people and places in Hong Kong, might be down and out to the point of not even having enough to eat. They could think of even the worst-case scenario: hanging around bars to get a meal as a “foreign-violin ghost” (a foreign instrument musician), or playing the violin on the street corner to beg for help, where passersby would always throw some spare change into the violin case.
Because in the early days of the “Cultural Revolution,” “A-Liu-Tou,” the son of a Shanghai neighbor, had just returned from Hong Kong with hair grown even longer than a woman’s; I heard he played drums in bars. The lane committee cadres told him he could not sing foreign songs, so he ended up singing “The East Is Red” with a drumbeat rhythm, making it a very peculiar rock-and-roll version.
He and my grandfather often gathered together to chat in English, and whatever the content was seemed to require secrecy. Precisely because he said that having a technical skill in Hong Kong made it very easy to earn a living, I became a “musician” just like that.
My father said if I really could not make a living, I should sell this violin and buy an airplane ticket to come back. Through all the twists and turns on the train journey, plus the tedious customs clearances, I held this “precious baby” in my arms at every moment.
It was not only the value, but also an emotional bond; sometimes when I felt lonely, I even wanted to hold it to sleep, so how could I bear to sell it? After all, she accompanied me from Mainland China to Hong Kong, and then crossed the vast ocean to come to Canada.
Editor: Zhou Zhigang Proofreader: Xiong Bian Translator: Ge Bing
When a Single Mother Leaves Home in the Early Hours to Earn a Living, Who Looks After the Child?
Author: Yang Zhangbing
On August 15, a heartbreaking scene occurred in Danzhai, Qiandongnan, Guizhou.
Before dawn, a child woke up at an unknown hour and, finding their mother absent, unexpectedly climbed toward the window sill. The child ultimately became stuck in the window grilles, crying out desperately. There was no one else at home. Fortunately, a passerby noticed in time, climbed up the security cage with his bare hands, and securely held the child up, holding on until the police arrived to rescue the child from danger. This good Samaritan who acted courageously is, of course, worthy of our gratitude. However, while feeling relieved that the child is safe, I believe we should also ask: Why did such a hazard occur in the first place?
It was later learned that the child’s mother is a single mother. To earn money to support the household, she went out before dawn to take gig orders. She never expected that after the child woke up and could not find her, the child would climb onto the window sill alone.
Seeing this, many people’s first reaction might be: “How could a mother leave such a young child home alone?” This statement is not entirely without reason. An adult must indeed be responsible for a child’s safety.
However, if we stop at blaming the mother, it becomes easy to overlook another far more real question: For a mother raising a child alone who must also rely on her own labor to maintain the household, what else can she possibly do? If she does not go out to work, how will she pay for rent, food, milk powder, clothes, and various living expenses? If she goes out to work, who will look after the child?
If a society requires a single mother to work full-time to support her family while simultaneously demanding that she provide round-the-clock child care—without offering adequate childcare services, family support, or social guarantees—then the so-called “choice” is, in reality, likely no choice at all. This is also why the degree of civilization of a society cannot be measured solely by how high its GDP is, nor by where its economic aggregate ranks in the world. What truly deserves our attention is: When an ordinary person falls to the lowest point of life, does the society possess a safety net capable of catching them? Especially for those children who have no capacity to protect themselves.
Children do not choose their families, nor do they have the ability to determine their parents’ income, let alone comprehend why their mother must leave for work in the early morning. They should not have to bear additional risks that they ought not to bear simply because they were born into a single-parent or low-income family. Therefore, while we ought to thank the person who reached out to save the child, we should also reflect on how to make such “heroic rescues” happen less and less frequently.
What lies behind this issue actually involves not just a single family, but a series of matters including childcare, child welfare, employment security, and social assistance. For example, can low-income families gain access to more affordable childcare services? Can single parents receive sufficient temporary care support in their moments of greatest hardship? Can child welfare precisely cover the families that genuinely need it? When an individual temporarily loses income or experiences a change in family structure, can they obtain basic livelihood support?
These questions may appear to be cold policy issues, but ultimately, they correspond to concrete, real individuals. It is that mother who leaves home in the early morning to accept orders, striving desperately to make a living for her child. It is that child who wakes up before dawn and climbs onto the window sill because they cannot find their mother. And it is that ordinary person who happened to pass by and reached out to hold up the child. A truly mature society should not rely on the courage of good Samaritans to save individuals only after a tragedy occurs. A more ideal state is one where sufficiently sound institutions already exist before danger strikes to catch those who are in the greatest difficulty.
Economic development is certainly important, and GDP is certainly important. But what should GDP ultimately translate into? It should translate into a safer environment for children to grow up in, into the confidence of ordinary families when facing risks, and into allowing a hard-working mother to avoid being forced to make a cruel choice between “feeding her child” and “caring for her child.” Therefore, the most memorable part of this incident should not merely be the hero who climbed the security cage with his bare hands to save the child.
What we ought to remember even more is this: The true civilization of a society is measured not by whether it produces heroes, but by whether it can reduce the moments in which ordinary people are forced to risk their lives to survive. May every child have someone to look after them when needed; may every parent who works hard to live not have to shoulder all risks entirely alone. And this, perhaps, is the true meaning of why social security ought to exist.
