To get her passport and attend her daughter’s engagement party in Canada in October 2020, Chen Yun from Nanning city has to promise she will not comment on any Chinese-related issue.
Chen works for a state-owned enterprise based in the city which is the capital of Guangxi province. Three years ago, she was asked to turn in her passport to the human resources department of the company for what the state calls “unified management.” She complied as did all her colleagues.
Now, it took her almost two months to get her passport. The process is more cumbersome compared to 2018 when it only took her 10 days.
“The department gave me a form that [required] me to name my family members with their phone numbers and ID information, the places I plan to go, the reason of the travel, the hotels I will stay [in], the contact number in the country, as well as the dates when I will be back,” Chen recalled. The detailed form was not necessary in 2018.
The authorities cryptically say that they confiscate passports for “unified management” and “safekeeping.” Those who refuse to hand over their travel documents risk the cancellation of their passports.
When Chen finally got her passport back in August, her supervisor issued a stern warning after a morning meeting: “Remember to stay away from sensitive topics, such as coronavirus, Sino-Canada relations, Huawei, the Sino-US trade war, and the US-China decoupling. Ask your overseas relatives to behave; do not cause trouble for our country.”
An unattainable dream
Although she did not raise any objections, Chen thought the complicated process and the warning were unnecessary. “I am only an employee” she said. “My words carry little weight.”
Restricting the outbound travel of civil servants is not new in mainland China. The ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has curbed foreign travel for private purposes because of the confrontational relationship between China and the West for 40 years. Data from Xinhua News Agency shows only 210,000 passports were issued in the past 30 years from the founding of the People’s Republic of China until the reform and opening up. Going abroad was an unattainable dream for the Chinese before 1986. For civilians or public personnel, all applications for passports had to be approved by work units, sub-district offices, police stations, and even national ministries. Family status, overseas relations, and political ideology must stand scrutiny before getting approval.
To safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese citizens to enter and leave China, and to promote international exchange, the “Law on the Administration of Exit and Entry of Citizens of the People’s Republic of China” was promulgated in 1986. The law eased the restrictions on outbound travel for private purposes. But it was not until 1992 when China became more open to individuals studying abroad, visiting relatives, doing business, and traveling for leisure. Over 15 million Chinese went abroad in 2001; the number reached 560 million in 2018.
The tip of the iceberg
Many unscrupulous officials and their families fled the country with ill-gotten money after the right to leave the country for private reasons was granted and guaranteed. Authorities have not exposed how many corrupt officials have fled the country. But statistics from the June 2003 issue of China Comment (半月谈Ban Yue Tan), one of the Communist Party’s mouthpieces for the grassroots, has revealed the tip of the iceberg that at least 4,000 corrupt Chinese officials have fled the country with $5 billion.
China has simplified the procedures for ordinary citizens to travel abroad, but it has strengthened the management of officials and state personnel going abroad for private purposes. In the same year, 2003, the “Regulations on Strengthening the Administration of State Functionaries Going Abroad (Border) for Private Affairs” was introduced in the name of safeguarding party discipline.
However, the regulation over travel control of state personnel is not strictly implemented in many places except Tibet and Xinjiang. In 2008, when mass demonstrations and protests erupted in these regions, dissidents, activists, and civil servants were not allowed to leave the country even if they applied for passports.
To better control and monitor people’s movements, the state gradually applied strict regulation to all passport holders in Xinjiang after the 2008 protests. Except for unified management and “safekeeping,” authorities were unable to provide detailed explanations for the need to confiscate the passports of all residents in Xinjiang since 2016. But the warning is clear: Those who refuse to hand over their travel documents risk the cancellation of their passports and being punished by the authorities.
Tightening restrictions
An example is the case of Suli (not her real name), a 23-year-old graduate student in Urumqi, Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. Suli’s passport and student visa to Australia were canceled because her father, a diplomat, did not report to the authorities her real intention: she was planning to study abroad and refused to hand over the passport. Her father was reprimanded by the unit’s party committee. Suli and her father are terrified of the draconian control in Xinjiang, but they cannot leave without job transfer instructions even they are Han Chinese.
About 560 million Chinese went abroad in 2018. For many, though, travel restrictions make foreign trips an elusive dream.
Since 2016, outbound travel restrictions were expanded to the field of the academe. University lecturers at the level of deputy and above were required to surrender their passports and other travel documents in 2018. The authorities demanded that primary and secondary schools strengthen their control over teachers by collecting their passports and travel permits to and from Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan in the name of unified management.
A headmaster surnamed Zheng in a secondary school in the northern city of Shao Guan, Guangdong province confirmed they got a notice from authorities, ordering teachers to hand in passports for unified management in 2018. Since then, all teachers are required to seek approval before traveling outside mainland China.
Zheng is in charge of approving the applications. He complained about the time wasted on the tedious process. “There is no need to treat teachers like traitors who are thinking [of fleeing] anytime,” Zheng said. “Teachers go to [Hong Kong] or Macao to buy milk formula or to visit [relatives].” He would also need to take the passports back within a week after they come back.
Unified management for teachers’ passports has not yet been imposed nationwide. Three teachers from Guangzhou, Shenzhen, and Zhaoqing said they have their passports on hand, but they need to report and get permission if they plan to travel overseas.
An “Orwellian life”
Feng is an associate professor at a university. She chose not to disclose her full name in fear of retaliation from the CCP and the university. She lamented that restricting freedom of movement by confiscating passports will prejudice academic freedom and freedom of speech.
“Scholars and professors are more vocal and outspoken when visiting abroad, but adding restrictions on traveling now places more pressure on them,” Feng explained. They may not be allowed to return to China, or they may be banned from future overseas travel after their return.
Feng believed that such a move aims to intimidate teachers and the whole educational system. “One day, [disgusted] and resentful, people like professors Cai Xia and Xu Zhangrun will stand up against this Orwellian life,” Feng said.
Cai and Xu, both prestigious professors, criticized the CCP sharply and asked President Xi Jinping to step down. They were sacked. Cai lives in the United States now and cannot return to China for fear of retaliation. Xu, a constitutional law professor, received a visiting offer from Harvard University but was banned from leaving China. Xu was already under house arrest when he was detained on July 6, 2020, reports BBC News. He was freed after six days in police custody.
Recently, the CCP and Xi Jinping’s administration extended the travel restriction to medical staff in hospitals amid a raft of ever-widening controls on freedom of movement. Three doctors working for a public hospital in Hubei province confirmed that their passports were already handed over for “safekeeping” two years ago. One doctor from Shandong province was asked to turn in his passport this July. None of them received an explanation for the confiscation of their travel documents, except for a verbal order from the associate dean or the human resource department from the hospital. No one can specifically explain why the passports of the medical staff should be confiscated.
The Wuhan document
In late July, Wuhan, ground zero for the coronavirus pandemic, issued a regulation that travel documents—including passports and travel permits to Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan—of personnel from state agencies, state-owned enterprises, institutions, and military units must be confiscated by authorities. If the documents are lost or cannot be turned in for some reason, they must apply for invalidation; if not, the travel documents will be canceled.
The Wuhan document was widely circulated over the internet, but it was censored after people raised concerns and speculations. Most public hospitals in China are within the scope of state-owned institutions. Speculations on restricting medical staff in Wuhan by confiscating or canceling their travel documents are rife.
Rumors have it that the document aims to prevent medical personnel from leaking information on COVID-19, especially after Chinese virologist Yan Limeng fled to the United States and accused the Chinese government of knowing about person-to-person transmission of COVID-19 much earlier than reported. There is no way, however, to verify these speculations.
Two doctors from a community hospital in Wuhan said they had not been notified about the confiscation of passports. Three doctors from a public hospital in the same city refused to disclose whether their passports were confiscated. But they all expressed concerns about the nationwide implementation of the regulation and worry about their restricted freedom of movement.
Aside from the teaching staff and medical workers, the authorities have also been constantly intensifying control over the departure abroad of low-level civil servants across China. However, unlike people in the education and medical sector, these civil servants support the confiscation of passports.
“Tigers” and “flies”
“We are the biggest party in the world, and we also have some corrupt cadres,” said Zhang Guo, a civil servant from a maritime bureau. “It is necessary to hold their passports and stop them from abusing power and transferring money abroad.” He said that he and his wife’s passports are both with the authorities.
Four other low-level civil servants in three different provinces said the regulation over travel documents is essential to the nationwide anti-corruption campaign and maintaining integrity within the party. Such a campaign was launched by Xi Jinping right after he took office in 2012 and vowed to crack down both the “tigers” and the “flies”–corrupt people ranging from powerful party leaders to lowly bureaucrats. Some critics consider the move an attempt to root out his opponents and tighten his grip on power.
“In principle, we can travel abroad once a year as long as we show our cleanness and loyalty to the party and our country,” said Zhu, a secretary of the county committee in a Guang Xi province. “Strict regulation and monitoring are necessary to govern a country as big as China,” Zhu added. “No one likes being monitored, but living in China, you have to get used to it.”
Another civil servant working in county-level planning bureaus shared the same thought in favor of proper social control. But after expressing support, he stopped the phone interview and sent a voice message through Signal, an encrypted messaging app, explaining that he cannot speak freely due to the strict monitoring.
The civil servant continued the interview on condition of anonymity and expressed his worries. “Handing in one’s passport is a gesture of loyalty,” he said. “Loyalty is what matters most to CCP.”
Constant harassment
He shared the story of a friend, a district-level party leader, who fled with his wife and son to the United States years ago. Their families who stayed behind were scolded, threatened, and monitored. One of his nephews took the national civil service exam, but he never got the job despite having the highest mark. “One family fled, three generations were affected,” he concluded. Reports abound describing how the families and relatives of asylum seekers endure collective punishment and constant harassment.
Li Weihong, a retired civil servant at 73, voiced his disagreement with the restriction: “My generation is the victim of closing doors and cutting exchange with the world. We are also the beneficiary of open and reform policies, so we have the authority to say that restricting the freedom of movement of teachers, medical staff, and ordinary people is a reverse of history.”
He believes the rule of law and mutual supervision mechanism should be introduced to fight corruption instead of restricting people’s freedom of movement. As a veteran party member and civil servant, he is well aware of CCP’s obsession to control everything and to wield authoritarian power. He said, “You can control people’s movements, but you can’t control their thoughts.” ●
Sophia Huang Xueqin is an independent journalist and an activist from mainland China.
