분야
docI. China’s Censorship: Introduction
II. A contemporary human rights dilemma
III. Reaction to the Censorship of the Internet in China
i. Internal Factors
ii. External Factors
IV. China’s point of view
ⅰ. China’s Justification
V. Possible solutions
VI. Conclusion
As we mentioned earlier, China is not democratized as much as the other leading states in the international system. China’s internet censorship over its people by the central government can be seen as human rights dilemma in China, such as freedom of expression and privacy. China's internet regulations may be one of the most extensive and restrictive regulations in the world. At least twelve different government bureaus have some authority over the internet, in charge of the licensing and registration of all internet content providers. In 2001, Human Rights Watch estimated that the Chinese government had issued more than sixty sets of government internet regulations and many new regulations have been issued since then, all of them increasing government control.
Human rights in China are a matter of dispute between the Chinese government, other countries and NGOs. Organizations such as the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch have accused the Chinese government of restricting the freedoms of speech, movement, and religion of Chinese citizens. The problem is China’s point of view on the matter. The Chinese government believes that the way in which they manage the internet is a sovereign matter and foreign courts have no jurisdiction according to international law. The Chinese government argues for a broader definition of human rights, to include economic and social as well as political rights, and that they all should be in relation to the national culture and the level of development of the country. In this regard, China claims that human rights are being improved. China also repeated many times that its constitution specifies not only citizenship rights but also the "Four Cardinal Principles", in legal respect the "Four Cardinal Principles of Chinese socialism" are higher than citizenship rights, meaning there is legal base when China arrests people who want to overthrow these principles. Chinese people who obey these principles can enjoy their citizenship rights in principle.
Under international laws, governments are allowed to restrict the free flow of information to protect certain narrowly determined interests, such as national security or public morals. But any decision to limit or restrict access to information should comport with international standards for protecting the right to information. However, the way the Chinese government manages the internet in accordance with law is a sovereign matter and foreign courts have no jurisdiction according to international law.
In addition, there are many broader structural problems with China's legal system that prevent the emergence of more liberal internet regulations. One key stumbling block to improve internet regulation in China is the absence of any enforceable norms against which internet regulations can be measured. Although the Chinese constitution explicitly protects the right to free expression, the right to privacy, the right to engage in academic research and the constitution itself is not directly enforceable. Therefore regulations that clearly violate these rights escape any form of judicial scrutiny.
The overall institutional weakness and lack of independence of Chinese courts also plays a key role. Because most courts in China receive the majority of their funding from the local government, they are often unable or unwilling to deliver a verdict contrary to the local expectations, especially in politically sensitive cases. Courts are also subject to both government and Communist Party authority, and must please both masters. This lack of independence stifles any legal creativity on the part of judges that might otherwise limit the scope or effect of Internet regulations.
III. Reaction to the Censorship of the Internet in China
i. Internal Factors