Administrative reconsideration setback in pension rights case involving Hangzhou human rights defender Chen Shuqing

On May 1, 2026, this outlet learned that Zhejiang Hangzhou human rights defender Chen Shuqing turned 60 years and 3 months old on December 25, 2025, and had actually paid into the social insurance pooling system for 24 years and 4 months, exceeding the minimum contribution period of 15 years. When handling retirement procedures in December 2025, staff members of the Hangzhou Gongshu District Human Resources and Social Security Bureau, citing Chen Shuqing’s four-year prison sentence in 2007 for the crime of inciting subversion of state power and his 10-year-and-six-month prison sentence in 2016 for the crime of subversion of state power, deducted the combined duration of the two prison terms from his social insurance contribution period, leaving only slightly more than nine years of contributions—less than the minimum contribution period—and refused to process Chen Shuqing’s retirement procedures.

During negotiations, Chen Shuqing submitted a government information disclosure application. On December 25, 2025, Chen Zupeng, a staff member of the Hangzhou Gongshu District Human Resources and Social Security Bureau, issued at his office the “Notice of Matters Handled by the Hangzhou Gongshu District Social Insurance Management Service Center,” the “Notice,” and the “Reply on Issues Concerning Basic Pension Insurance for Persons Sentenced to Fixed-Term Imprisonment (This Document Is Disclosed Upon Application)” (Zhejiang Human Resources and Social Security Letter [2010] No. 358).

Chen Shuqing believes that the laws and policies on which the aforementioned documents are based are clearly inapplicable or insufficient in legal effect. On January 27, 2026, he applied for administrative reconsideration of the matter, and the Gongshu District People’s Government accepted the application on February 3, 2026. During the reconsideration period, the review period was extended because Chen Shuqing requested an ancillary review of the regulatory documents, resulting in the lawful suspension and resumption of the proceedings. On May 1, 2026, Chen Shuqing received the “Administrative Reconsideration Decision of the Hangzhou Gongshu District People’s Government,” issued by the Hangzhou Gongshu District People’s Government on April 30, 2026, Hangong Zhengfu Reconsideration [2026] No. 67. The “Administrative Reconsideration Decision” upheld the “Notice” issued by the respondent, the Hangzhou Gongshu District Human Resources and Social Security Bureau, on December 25, 2025, refusing to process Chen Shuqing’s retirement procedures, indicating that Chen Shuqing’s efforts to defend his pension rights had suffered a setback at the administrative reconsideration stage.

Given that neither Chen Shuqing himself, nor the enterprises where he worked, nor his family members had ever been informed, when paying or making up social security contributions in the past, that contributions could not be paid during a period of imprisonment; given that the Gongshu District government of Hangzhou, in its final “Administrative Reconsideration Decision,” just like the respondent Hangzhou Gongshu District Human Resources and Social Security Bureau in its specific administrative action in this case, disregarded the human resources and social security authorities’ responsibility for administrative dishonesty in handling Chen Shuqing’s retirement matter (the principle of protecting reliance interests in government actions); disregarded the fact that the Labor Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Social Insurance Law of the People’s Republic of China, and every other regulatory document possessing the legal status and force encompassed by the Legislation Law of the People’s Republic of China contain no mandatory provision expressly excluding social security participants serving prison terms; disregarded the fact that the effective court judgment concerning the applicant in this case only expressly deprived him of his personal and political rights, and did not deprive him of his social and economic rights, including the right to social insurance; disregarded the applicant’s participation in labor during his imprisonment and the requirements concerning equal pay for equal work and universal, exception-free social security in international conventions that the Chinese government has joined or approved and that have the force of national law; and given that the human resources and social security authorities apply a double standard to themselves and others when interpreting and applying the law (the same applies to the “scope”: they exceed the restrictions expressly stipulated by law and seriously violate the legal requirement of equal pay for equal work by extensively using labor dispatch, thereby enforcing the law while violating it; yet they evade responsibility for the social insurance Chen Shuqing has already paid by claiming that “persons serving sentences in prison are not within the scope of participants in basic old-age insurance for employees.” Is this a case of “the magistrate being allowed to set fire while the common people are forbidden even to light a lamp?”), Chen Shuqing is dissatisfied and plans to file an administrative lawsuit as soon as possible, hoping that judicial oversight and the separation and balancing of powers can play their proper roles in this case.