Research Report: Comprehensive Exposure of the Truth Behind the Wuxi Authorities of the Chinese Communist Party Establishing a Specialized Institution to Hold “Legal Education Classes for Petitioners” (Actually “Black Jails”) to Secretly and Illegally Detain Petitioners

(Rights Defense Network Information Center report) On April 22, 2026, this website learned of a comprehensive exposure of the truth behind the Wuxi authorities of the Chinese Communist Party establishing a specialized institution to hold “Legal Education Classes for Petitioners” (actually “black jails”) to secretly and illegally detain petitioners.

The Wuxi authorities of the Chinese Communist Party treat the Constitution and the law with contempt, brazenly establishing a specialized institution, the “Wuxi Municipal Joint Conference Office,” to arbitrarily deprive lawful citizens who petition in accordance with the law of their personal freedom. At present, the illegal detention of citizens by Wuxi’s grassroots governments has already shown a trend toward institutionalization; their trampling on and violation of citizens’ human rights is horrifying!

This research report, based on hard factual evidence, fully records and thoroughly exposes the illegal conduct of the Wuxi authorities of the Chinese Communist Party, who, for the sake of so-called stability maintenance, have not hesitated to brutally trample on the Chinese Constitution and wantonly deprive Chinese citizens of their personal freedom.

“Legal Education Classes for Petitioners,” commonly known as “black jails,” are government-run “classes” for petitioners through which the government effectively deprives petitioners of their personal freedom, in substance illegally detaining petitioners in order to maintain stability.

Since the 1990s, this type of “class” has emerged in Wuxi. Large numbers of petitioners and rights defenders have been forced to attend “classes,” and all have been filled with fear and apprehension toward them. Whenever they speak of these “classes,” they are filled with terror and unease. They all say that these “classes” were tantamount to “hell” and were extremely cruel. Some say they suffered torture, abuse, intimidation and threats inside; others say they were beaten; still others say they were poisoned, among other things. The experiences of Huang Minju, Zhou Yahong and Ding Hongfen of Wuxi, among others, all confirm this fact.

First, let us understand the institution known as the “Joint Conference Office.” The “Wuxi Municipal Joint Conference Office” is a temporary institution under the Political and Legal Affairs Commission of the Chinese Communist Party’s Wuxi Municipal Committee; the “Binhu District Joint Conference Office” is a temporary institution under the Political and Legal Affairs Commission of the Chinese Communist Party’s Binhu District Committee; and the “Taihu Subdistrict Joint Conference Office” is a temporary institution under the subdistrict political and legal affairs commission (comprehensive governance office). None belongs to the administrative hierarchy. These three temporary institutions are generally collectively referred to as the “three-level joint conference offices.”

On June 19, 2013, the Wuxi “three-level joint conference offices” held a “Legal Education Class for Petitioners” at the Dongjiao Business Hotel in Anzhen, Xishan District, for five petitioners from Binhu District who had petitioned in Beijing: Ding Guoying, Ding Yongjin, Yang Jianyan, Zhou Jingjuan and Ding Hongxiang. Today, we obtained the “Legal Education Class Study Materials for Petitioners” produced by the Taihu Subdistrict Joint Conference Office when it held the “class” for these five petitioners. These “Legal Education Class Study Materials for Petitioners” confirm the truth that petitioners were forcibly and secretly detained illegally in the “classes.”

The contents of the “Legal Education Class Study Materials for Petitioners” of Ding Guoying, Ding Yongjin, Yang Jianyan, Zhou Jingjuan and Ding Hongxiang are identical, consisting of 14 items.

We will analyze only Ding Hongxiang’s “Legal Education Class Study Materials for Petitioners” to expose the facts of the “secrecy,” “illegal detention” and “students.”

The “Legal Education Class Study Materials for Petitioners” contain 14 items in total, as can be seen from the “Materials Catalogue”:

1. Plan for Providing Legal Education to Petitioners

2. List of Members of the Legal Education Working Group

3. Legal Education Class Study Plan for Petitioners

4. Schedule for the Legal Education Class for Petitioners

5. Application Form for the Legal Education Class for Petitioners

6. Notice of the Legal Education Class for Petitioners

7. Wuxi City Notice of the Legal Education Class for Petitioners (for the Individual)

8. Wuxi City Notice of the Legal Education Class for Petitioners (for Family Members)

9. Rules for the Legal Education Class for Petitioners

10. Statement of Understanding by Petitioners (the student did not write one, so it does not appear in the materials)

11. Legal Education Class Attendance and Study Record for Petitioners

12. Application Form for Ending the Legal Education Class for Petitioners

13. Notice of Completion of Legal Education for Petitioners

14. Duty Log for the Public Legal Education Program

Item 1: “Plan for Providing Legal Education to Petitioners”

Item 2: List of Members of the Legal Education Working Group

The following “Statement of Circumstances” was added separately and is not one of the 14 items. It proves that the class was led by the subdistrict political and legal affairs and comprehensive governance center.

Item 3: “Legal Education Class Study Plan for Petitioners”

Item 4: “Schedule for the Legal Education Class for Petitioners”; students had no rest during the class.

Item 5: “Application Form for the Legal Education Class for Petitioners”

Item 6: “Notice of the Legal Education Class for Petitioners,” issued by the district joint conference office to the subdistrict joint conference office.

Item 7: “Wuxi City Notice of the Legal Education Class for Petitioners (for the Individual),” which in fact was never given to the individuals.

Item 8: “Wuxi City Notice of the Legal Education Class for Petitioners (for Family Members),” which in fact was also never given to family members.

Item 9: “Rules for the Legal Education Class for Petitioners,” confirming that students were deprived of their personal freedom.

Item 11: “Legal Education Class Attendance and Study Record for Petitioners”

Item 12: “Application Form for Ending the Legal Education Class for Petitioners”

Item 13: “Notice of Completion of Legal Education for Petitioners”

Item 14: “Duty Log for the Public Legal Education Program”

Note: The recorded content from June 20 to August 7, 2013, has been omitted.

The study materials prepared by Taihu Subdistrict for Ding Hongxiang show that this “class” had the following characteristics:

1. Compulsory nature. The phrase “with the full cooperation of the local public security police station throughout the process” in Item 1, “Plan for Providing Legal Education to Petitioners,” and the word “must” in Item 7, “Wuxi City Notice of the Legal Education Class for Petitioners (for the Individual),” prove that students had to attend and receive instruction at the class.

At that time, Wuxi petitioners were “enrolled” in various ways. Some were abducted and taken to the class by unidentified persons while walking on the street; some were summoned from home by a police station and taken to the class; some were abducted and taken there by people brought by the subdistrict; some were abducted and brought back to attend after petitioning in Beijing, among other methods.

2. The class location was kept confidential, and detainees were held secretly.

Item 3, “Education Plan for the Legal Education Class for Petitioners,” states that the “study location” was “Site No. 1.” The use of “Site No. 1” to designate the class location proves that the location was confidential and not publicly disclosed. Students were forcibly made to wear black hoods both when entering and leaving the class, so that they would not know the location or route.

Locations used for the Chinese Communist Party’s Wuxi classes included hotels, party schools, factories, homestays, military retirement homes and farm guesthouses, including Xinlixin Hotel in Beitang District, the Xishan District Party School, Yaowan No. 1 Hotel, Xinfangyuan Hotel, Beikang Packaging Materials Factory and a military retirement home.

3. Deprivation of students’ personal freedom, constituting illegal detention.

Item 9, “Rules for the Legal Education Class for Petitioners,” makes this clear: students were “forcibly gathered” at a “secret location,” were not allowed to receive visitors, and could leave the educational program only after an application by the joint conference office had been approved. At that time, all students forced to attend the classes had all of their personal belongings, including mobile phones, taken away. They were not allowed to receive visitors or communicate with the outside world. Item 12, “Application Form for Ending the Legal Education Class for Petitioners,” and Item 13, “Notice of Completion of Legal Education for Petitioners,” are consistent with Item 9 and together prove that the classes forcibly and secretly detained petitioners illegally.

According to preliminary statistics, the Chinese Communist Party in Wuxi forcibly held “classes” for petitioners on 1,000 person-occasions; some petitioners were subjected to as many as 10 classes individually.

Because the “6.22” case broke out in Wuxi in 2013 and had a serious impact, the Chinese Communist Party’s Wuxi authorities were forced to cancel the practice of abducting and detaining petitioners under the guise of holding “Legal Education Classes for Petitioners.” It was replaced by the police and subdistricts directly hiring gang-related idlers to secretly and illegally detain petitioners on a small scale, carrying out stability maintenance, suppression and crackdown against petitioners and rights defenders.

On June 22, 2013, Wuxi petitioners Ding Hongfen, Shen Guodong, Shen Aibin and others gathered more than 20 petitioners and rescued Ding Guoying, Ding Yongjin, Yang Jianyan, Zhou Jingjuan and Ding Hongxiang, who had been illegally detained at the Dongjiao Business Hotel by the Taihu Subdistrict Joint Conference Office of Wuxi’s Binhu District under the pretext of holding a “class” because they had petitioned in Beijing during the sensitive period around June 4. During the rescue, the rescuers were obstructed when social idlers responsible for guarding the petitioners inside the rooms blocked the doors. Faced with this sudden incident, the rescuers immediately kicked the doors open. As a result, several hotel doors and locks were damaged.

On June 26, 2013, the Wuxi Municipal Public Security Bureau ordered its Binhu branch to arrest all the rescuers on charges of “the crime of gathering a crowd to disrupt social order,” creating the widely publicized Wuxi “6.22” case. Because the case files contained the “Legal Education Class Study Materials for Petitioners” prepared by the Taihu Subdistrict Joint Conference Office for the five students, proving that the five had been deprived of their personal freedom and that the joint conference office lacked a legal basis for holding “classes” for petitioners, the Binhu District Procuratorate later indicted the rescuers on charges of “intentional destruction of property,” citing the fact that they had kicked and damaged property when the rescue was obstructed. The Binhu District Court also sentenced Ding Hongfen, Shen Guodong, Shen Aibin and two others on charges of “intentional destruction of property.”