As more mainlanders receive permission to travel independently to Hong Kong, the chances they will return with uncensored publications increase. China Daily's XING BAO details the case of one man's struggle to win back a confiscated scholarly book
Lawyer Zhu Yuantao, appearing for the first time in court as a plaintiff, has finally managed to force the customs office at
Beijing Airport to return a book to him that it had confiscated more than a year ago.
On August 5 last year, Zhu was stopped by a woman customs officer at the airport after his bag was scanned. The officer found a book entitled, "How the Red Sun Rose -- The Entire Process of the Yan'an Rectification Movement" published by the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
The political campaign, which lasted from May 1941 to April 1945, was of great significance in the history of the Chinese Communist Party. As the first rectification in the Party's history, the campaign led to unprecedented solidarity within the Party.
Without asking any questions or even browsing through the book, the officer announced she was confiscating it as an overseas publication.
According to a customs regulation, publications and audio-visual products considered to be in violation of the Chinese Constitution or defaming Chinese leaders must be seized.
Publications with pornographic, violent or superstitious content or those considered bad for China politically, economically, culturally or ethically will also be confiscated.
"This is a serious academic work," said Zhu, who had only read one-third of the HK$175 book before it was seized.
At Zhu's request, the customs officer gave him a printed form marked "Needs Checking".
Opening a 'Closed' Book
On October 9 last year, Zhu drove to
Beijing Airport after receiving a call from the airport's customs office for a face-to-face talk. He had already asked several times that the book be returned to him.
"In addition to the time I spent, I had to pay the toll on the way to the airport, plus gasoline," he complained. Yet, he was driven to get the book back by "a stifling feeling in my chest".
A customs officer at the airport informed Zhu that there was little possibility of the book being returned, and the officer asked him to accept the administrative decision to confiscate it.
Zhu countered, proposing to settle the dispute by following customs regulations procedures, and he demanded an administrative writ.
He was then given an information sheet by the airport customs office, which alleged that Zhu had brought a forbidden book into the Chinese mainland and that his action amounted to smuggling.
Zhu was also told that the airport customs office had made this decision after conferring with the main
Beijing Customs Office.
Zhu immediately presented a written statement and said that before any final decision could be made, the customs office had to read the book first.
His statement explained that the book was an academic publication by Gao Hua, a professor with the History Department of
Nanjing University in East China's Jiangsu Province. In addition, he noted that Gao had been promoted to the rank of professor because of the book.
Zhu insisted that the publisher, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, was not among the publishers who may have or may have had a bias against China.
Furthermore, all the content in the book was from publicly available publications in China and did not refer to any overseas information or to confidential files. The book focused on the rectification movement in Yan'an and, while the details were not widely known, it was worthy of study.
As a Party member, Zhu said it was right and proper to study and learn about the Party's history. He proposed that in resolving the dispute, authoritative advice from scholars would be important.
The next day, Zhu presented more material to justify his position via post.
He reminded customs officials that smuggling was an intentional malfeasance, defined as the action of a person who, when passing through customs inspection, carries articles forbidden by the country or who hides, disguises, or does not report or makes a false report so as to avoid inspection.
Zhu queried that, as he had not hidden or disguised anything, nor made a false report, how could his action in bringing in the book be categorized as "smuggling"?
He also put forward a series of questions about how passengers could identify the character of a publication and the criteria used when customs officers inspected a publication.
And Zhu again demanded the return of the book. Airport customs, however, did not reply.
On December 17, the customs office called Zhu to inform him that their final decision was still to confiscate the book. They said that before the final decision had been made, the book had been sent to the Customs General Administration Office on October 21, which endorsed the seizure on November 19.
Court Debates
On January 1, Zhu filed a motion with Beijing's No 2 Intermediate People's Court against the airport customs office.
In court, the customs office insisted that the book was listed as a banned book in China and that Zhu had not applied to customs to bring it in, in violation of the relevant customs regulations.
Zhu insisted that the book was not a forbidden book. The customs office had not provided clear information about which overseas publications must be reported and, furthermore, there were no special facilities set aside at the airport where passengers could report any such publications.
On June 19, the court ruled in favour of the customs office and its handling of the book. Six days later, Zhu appealed to the
Beijing Higher People's Court.
Sources inside the airport customs office told Xinmin Weekly, a publication in Shanghai, that they had handled the issue very cautiously. A "special officer" had been asked to read the book, which had taken him 11 days, and then they had made their judgment and their report to the Customs General Administration.
Zhu, however, argued that such a closed procedure was not scientific and had violated regulations concerning citizens' rights under the Constitution.
Xu Jilin, a scholar, described the book as a serious academic work that had won high praise from well-known scholars after it was published in March 2000. The book could also be found in the libraries of Peking University and
Nanjing University where students could freely borrow and read it.
The Chinese University of
Hong Kong published a second printing of the book in June 2000.
Xu said the author, Gao Hua, had devoted some 20 years of his life to writing the book and argued that it was unreasonable to draw the conclusion that the book challenged Mao Zedong's philosophy on the opinion of a single customs officer who took 11 days to read it. Such a conclusion was against all academic evaluation of the book, he added.
The customs office told the court that a detailed list of forbidden publications did exist, but it was only available to some customs officers and the general public could not obtain a copy of the list or read it.
On September 8, the
Beijing Higher People's Court ruled that the customs office's decision to confiscate the book had been based on insufficient evidence and should be withdrawn.
After winning his case, Zhu acknowledged that one motivation in seeking the book's return was that he had not finished it. But more importantly, he said, he took his action because China was a country with the rule of law and administrative departments must abide by the law and associated regulations.
"The people's right to know the truth should not be an insignificant matter," he said. "However, people still do not know whether this book is forbidden or not."
