2014-07-25
A policeman walks past the Haidian District People's Court in Beijing, April 8, 2014.
AFP
Twenty-five years after the ruling Chinese Communist Party passed a law allowing people to sue the government, the hopes of that era of a judicial check on government power have largely been dashed, legal experts and activists said.
China's Administrative Procedure Law was passed during an era of relative political openness, the late 1980s, and commanded wide support among intellectuals who believed it could help hold an increasingly corrupt government to account.
But in today's China, anyone seeking to file a lawsuit, the majority of which involve eviction or land disputes, will find the country's courts highly unwilling to accept the case, campaigners said.
"Only a small minority ever get to sue the government," said Zhejiang-based rights lawyer Yuan Gulai, adding that recent government attempts to boost the rate of acceptance of lawsuits amount to little more than "propaganda."
"They think that this is progress, because you are allowed to sue, and they think you could get a result," Yuan said. "But they won't; that's not likely."
"The government and the [ruling Chinese Communist] Party are the same thing, so if you sue the government it's like suing the father on the son's territory," he said.
The idea of a regular person of limited means and little education taking an official or party cadre to court caught the popular imagination in television shows and movies like Zhang Yimou's "The Story of Qiu Ju."
In the movie, the heavily pregnant wife of a farmer from rural China sues a local official for beating her husband, taking the case all the way to the Supreme People's Court in Beijing, where she wins.
Flood of complaints
But China's army of real-life petitioners say they are increasingly stonewalled by the courts, and instead flood the government's "letters and visits" petitioning system with more than 20,000 new complaints a day.
Yuan said that while some regions of China were more likely to accept lawsuits in the past, even courts in those jurisdictions are now refusing to take new cases.