Holding Fast to the Faint Light of the Rule of Law, Defending the Dignity of the Defense: Public Statement by Lawyers of the China Human Rights Lawyers Group on the 11th Anniversary of the “709 Crackdown” and on the Professional Circumstances of Human Rights Lawyers

On July 9, 2015, the “709 crackdown” against Chinese human rights lawyers and citizen groups suddenly descended. This event became an extremely dark page in the history of the rule of law in China, and its far-reaching impact has still not dissipated.

Today marks the 11th anniversary of the “709 crackdown.” Over the past year, the professional environment and living circumstances faced by Chinese human rights lawyers and rights defenders have remained complicated, presenting a tug-of-war in which “routine surveillance and a systematic winter” continue, criminal judgments remain harsh, but individual cases of release also occur.

The realities of the past year show that systematic suppression of the human rights lawyer community has not stopped:

1. The extreme squeezing of everyday living conditions:
Lawyer Wang Quanzhang has for years faced multiple unidentified individuals keeping watch and following him outside his residence; his daily life, visits from friends and relatives, and even his basic freedom of movement have been subjected to unlawful deprivation around the clock and social isolation. Such extralegal measures in the name of maintaining stability seriously trample on citizens’ basic human rights.

2. The severe escalation of criminal measures:
The harsh reality of Lawyer Xie Yang’s sentencing once again demonstrates that, in sensitive areas involving the public interest, citizens’ speech, and rights-defense actions, public authorities still tend to use criminal punishment to convict legal professionals who dare to speak out, creating a tremendous chilling effect on the lawyer community as a whole.

However, amid the generally harsh judicial environment, we have also seen the exceptional case of Lawyer Yu Kai’s release. This change in an individual case reflects a certain marginal goodwill or flexible adjustment released by the relevant authorities when faced with legal demands and public attention at home and abroad. We are relieved that Lawyer Yu Kai has regained his freedom, but we also clearly recognize that the release of an individual does not mean fundamental improvement in the structural professional environment or the rule-of-law system.

Among the many egregious judicial cases of the past year, none has drawn more attention from the legal community than the judicial and administrative pressure and procedural deprivation collectively faced by the defense lawyer team in the “Beijing Zion Church case.” In representing Zion Church and other religious cases and arguing for citizens’ basic rights, defense lawyers have faced unprecedented obstacles:

Procedural rights have been effectively deprived:
While carrying out their legal defense duties, multiple lawyers representing the defendants have faced serious procedural violations, including difficulties in meeting with clients, difficulties in reviewing case files, and failures to issue notifications ex officio, rendering the right of defense granted by the Criminal Procedure Law merely formal.

All-around pressure from administrative power:
Judicial and administrative departments and relevant authorities have applied extreme pressure and forced lawyers to withdraw from the defense through frequent meetings, verbal warnings, and even threats involving the law firms’ “annual assessments.”

Implication and extralegal harassment remain:
Some lawyers deeply involved in the defense, as well as their family members, have faced varying degrees of surveillance and unlawful interference at the community level in their daily lives, placing tremendous psychological and personal pressure on lawyers as they carry out their professional duties.

The core purpose of this intensive crackdown on defense lawyers is to raise the individual cost of mounting a defense, causing sensitive cases involving religious belief and other issues to be hastily adjudicated in the absence of substantive defense. This practice tramples on the rights of citizens guaranteed by China’s Constitution and represents blatant contempt for the defense system established by the Lawyers Law and the Criminal Procedure Law.

However, no matter how long the night, the faint light does not go out. Even in such a harsh environment, we are heartened to see that Christian lawyers such as Yang Jing continue to uphold professionalism and have successfully secured the basic right of pastors detained in detention centers to read the Bible by finding alternative routes through lawful administrative remedies such as “administrative reconsideration,” breaking through the unlawful deprivation imposed by the judicial walls. This persistence and wisdom in seeking space for the rule of law amid the thorns is precisely the continuation of the “709” spirit today.

On the 11th anniversary of “709,” the China Human Rights Lawyers Group hereby issues the following solemn statement and appeals:

First, immediately stop the extralegal surveillance and unlawful monitoring of Lawyer Wang Quanzhang and others, restore their basic freedom of movement and right to private life as ordinary citizens, and correct the unlawful practice of maintaining stability by implicating their family members and children over the long term.

Second, effectively guarantee lawyers’ rights to meet with clients and review case files in cases involving religious belief and public interests. It must be ensured that all lawyers representing defendants in the Zion Church case and other cases can meet with their clients and review complete case files lawfully and without unlawful interference, and that lawyers’ independent professional defense opinions are respected.

Third, stop linking judicial and administrative assessments with “political stability maintenance.” Judicial and administrative organs should fulfill their statutory duties to protect lawyers’ rights and safeguard the dignity of lawyers’ lawful practice, rather than becoming tools for pressuring lawyers to withdraw from the defense.

Fourth, stop the criminal coercion of conscientious lawyers such as Lawyer Xie Yang, and continue in the constructive direction represented by Lawyer Yu Kai’s release. We call on judicial organs to reduce the use of criminal measures against legal and technical debates by practicing lawyers and move toward normalization as a society under the rule of law. The fog of the times may temporarily obstruct our procedures, but it can never deprive us of our inner conscience or our commitment to procedural justice. When citizens’ rights are violated, the China Human Rights Lawyers Group will, as always, use professionalism and resilience to defend the dignity of every law.

Lawyers of the China Human Rights Lawyers Group July 9, 2026