CHINA LAW PAPER SERIES
GOVERNMENT
LAW CENTER
GOVERNMENT
LAW CENTER
30 Years of Linking Policy & Law
THE CHINESE SYSTEM OF
CORRECTIONS: SEARCHING
FOR ANSWERS
Chad Cook
The Chinese System of Corrections:
Searching for Answers
Chad Cook 1
I. Introduction
One doesn’t have to look very far to
gain inside knowledge about the American
Correctional System. On any number of
television channels one may find a show
trying to educate the public on what life is like
inside real American prisons. Investigative
reporters immersing themselves in a world
most of us never want to see, so that we may
experience it in the safety of our homes. Some
of these shows’ purposes are to educate and
steer those teetering on the edge of criminality
away from a life behind bars. Other shows
dramatize and even glamorize life in our
system of corrections. Certain sects within
our American culture view time in the
correctional system as time spent earning
one’s stripes, if you will. No matter how
skewed our view of the American correctional
system may be, we have the ability to see
behind the walls of prisons in the U.S. When
our loved ones are put behind bars we know
what facilities they are in, we know their
sentences and we know what crimes they are
being incarcerated for. As a young male going
to a foreign country that is known to be
lackadaisical regarding human rights
protections, I asked myself what would
happen if by some chance I got into trouble
while I was in China. Would I be tortured?
Would I just disappear without a trace? In
twenty years would someone see my body
plasticized touring the world in “The Body
Exhibit?” The purpose of this paper is to
explore the Chinese system of corrections and
to analyze how a government with seemingly
unlimited control over its people punishes
those who have broken its rules. This author
will also attempt to compare parts of the
Chinese corrections system to those of the
United States and discuss the differences,
strengths and weaknesses of each.
II. Forms of Punishment
Chapter three of The Criminal Law of
The People’s Republic of China sets forth
punishments for crimes. 2 It divides
punishments into principal and
supplementary punishments. 3 The types of
principal punishments are public surveillance,
criminal detention, fixed-term imprisonment,
life imprisonment and the death penalty. 4
Criminal detention and public surveillance
are punishments designated for minor
offenses. 5 Fixed-term imprisonment, life
imprisonment, and the death penalty are self
explanatory and are reserved for more serious
crimes. Public surveillance has been
analogized to parole or probation, as the
wrongdoer lives in society under government
supervision. 6 As mentioned, criminal
detention is also used for minor offenses.
When utilizing criminal detention the
offender serves his sentence in a detention
house rather than a prison or labor camp. 7
While living in the detention house the subject
is paid for any work performed there and is
even allowed to go home for up to two days a
month. 8
All of the principal punishments may also
be accompanied by supplemental
punishments. Article 34 lists the types of
supplementary punishments as fines,
deprivation of political rights, and
confiscation of property. 9 Deportation is an
additional punishment that may be applied to
foreigners either in addition to or
independently of other punishments. 10 While
public surveillance, criminal detention and the
supplementary punishments may seem minor,
one must look closer into their application.
Are these punishments what the Chinese say
they are? There have been reports of people
going missing after being detained by police
or after being put on house arrest. 11 Forms of
house arrest and public surveillance seem to
vary in form and intensity. The Chinese
government even denies the existence of
some of these measures. 12 Take for example
the case of Chen Guangcheng. Mr. Chen is
on extended home confinement because of
his unwillingness to bend in his defense of
human rights in China. 13 Mr. Chen’s home
confinement is 24 hours a day. 14 Security
agents and government hired citizens repel
visitors, sometimes beating them in the
process. 15 Mr. Chen has no phone service or
internet connection. 16 He has been cut off
from the outside world. Not only is he being
punished but his wife and daughter are
suffering right along with him. 17 The criminal
and prison laws of China don’t mention these
punishments. The Chinese government
doesn’t even acknowledge these practices. Is
this anti-Chinese propaganda? Or is the
Chinese government hiding some of its
practices from the outside world? It’s hard to
find reliable information. The Chinese
government does an exceptional job keeping
certain information out of the world’s view.
One controversial practice that the
Chinese government has not denied is the
existence of prison labor. In all forms of
Chinese punishment, labor is a recurring
theme. Reform through labor and
reeducation camps are said to be comparable
to minimum security prisons in the United
States. 18 These facilities look and function just
as the name suggests - as a camp. The inmates
live in dormitory style facilities and selfmanage much of their everyday life. 19 Often
these labor camps function within a military
model with inmates taking leadership
positions. 20 The role of labor in the Chinese
correctional system is a major source of
criticism from human rights organizations.
Article 46 of the Criminal Law states that
anyone sentenced for a crime “who is able to
work shall do so to accept education and
reform through labor.” 21 Is the labor they are
taking part in their education? Is their labor
the means by which they will be reformed?
More questions are raised, but information is
not easy to come by. Much of the
information about Chinese corrections comes
from opposite sides of the spectrum. First
there is government propaganda preaching
reform and education through labor. There
are criminal and prison laws which supposedly
show the way things are should work in
China. There are not supposed to be
precedents or discretion on official’s behalf.
They are to follow the codes and those alone.
Not only does this limit available information
but the absence of this information shows
that the Chinese government can and most
likely does whatever it feels is in the country’s
best interest. Much of the contrary
information we get about the Chinese prisons
and labor systems come from former
prisoners themselves. They tell tales of
twelve-hour or more work days with minimal
food rations and supplies. 22 They speak of
torture and beatings at the hands of prison
guards and other inmates solicited by the
guards. 23
Putting human rights issues aside it is easy
to see the benefits of reform through labor.
Working can provide structure and meaning
for lives that may otherwise be going to waste
behind bars. Inmates can develop vocational
skills that can turn their life around once
released from prison. They can gather the
tools to be productive members of society.
However, forced labor will most likely always
remain a sensitive topic for most Americans.
III. Physical Settings
In my short time in China I did not see
one prison, or at least I didn’t realize what it
was if I had. In the United States prisons are
usually located in areas outside of cities.
Communities will sometimes evolve around a
prison or jail, as they can be major sources of
employment for small communities. In the
United States it is generally agreed that
institutions should be located within a
reasonable distance of the civilian population.
The American Correctional Association has
set standards which require for new
construction that “the institution is located
within 50 miles of a civilian population center
of at least 10,000 people, or minimally within
2011 Chinese Law Paper Series (c) Government Law Center of Albany Law School 2011
one hour’s drive of a hospital, fire protection
and public transportation.” 24 I imagine that
the purpose behind this is a mixture of safety
concerns for the prisoners and the staff of the
institution as well as making the prison more
easily accessible to the prisoner’s families for
visits.
In China, prisons tend to be in more
distant and remote locations. 25 According to
one author, “only about 40% of Chinese
prisons are located within 10 kilometers of a
county town or bigger city.” 26 There are many
different theories on why the Chinese have
chosen to put their prisons in rural locations.
Some say that they use the mountainous
terrain and rural landscape as a means of
controlling the prisoners. 27 Additionally,
locating prisons in such areas is beneficial, as
prison labor can be used to reclaim the
uncultivated land and develop those areas. 28
Yet others look to “the Taoist beliefs in the
mind-changing value of nature and pristine
environment” as to why prisons were placed
in remote areas. 29 Whatever benefits are to be
had of having prisons and labor camps in
remote areas, the Chinese have acknowledged
the benefits of having their institutions closer
to the city and many of the jurisdictions in
China are moving their prisons closer. 30
If the Chinese are in fact moving their
prisons closer to the city they may be doing
this for a variety of reasons. It’s possible they
want a higher quality of guards that the more
educated urban areas can provide. 31 They also
claim that they can provide higher quality
correctional programs using medical,
educational and vocational personnel and
resources that are more available in the city. 32
This rationale is not very convincing. It seems
a little farfetched that the Chinese
governmental bodies are concerned with
providing better programs for their prisoners.
It seems that they would be more concerned
with providing these types of programs for
the correctional officers and their families. 33
Whatever the motivation, it seems as though
the Chinese government is making a transition
towards placing their prisons closer to cities.
In addition to location, prison size is
another way in which Chinese prisons differ
from those in the United States. This should
come as no surprise when you consider the
vast population differences between the two
countries, and also the comparative
philosophies on the rights of its citizens.
Generally, Western countries tend to believe
in smaller population prisons. In the U.S.,
current standards recommend that institutions
have a design capacity of no more than 500
prisoners, to provide the facilities with a
manageable scale of inmates. 34 However, it is
generally acknowledged that the United States
has a prison overpopulation problem.
Prisoners are often kept in gymnasiums
instead of cells and double bunking in single
bunk cells is commonplace. While the United
States may seem to be at the forefront of
prison design and planning, the execution and
implementation of correctional standards is
still flawed.
IV. Goals
Under Article 3 of “The Prison Law of
the Peoples Republic of China,” (hereinafter
Prison Law) “A prison shall, with regard to
prisoners, implement the principle of
combining punishment with reform and
combining education with labor, in order to
transform them into law-abiding citizens.” 35
This author, in over 7 years of studying law
and the criminal justice system, has heard the
words punishment, reform, and education
countless times. Labor and education seem to
be the most permeating principles in the
Chinese system of corrections. 36 In the United
States we try to put a label on the principles
and goals of our correctional system as well.
The most common labels we use are
retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and
rehabilitation. At various points in our history
we have placed emphasis on each of these
models of corrections. Sometimes it’s the
labels we don’t place that are more telling.
Often rehabilitative models are met with
much resistance. Get-tough advocates want
retribution and punishment while others want
rehabilitation and to get at the source of an
2011 Chinese Law Paper Series (c) Government Law Center of Albany Law School 2011
inmate’s problems, whether it be education or
drug problems. Our goals can sometimes be a
major source of criticism for the corrections
system. When we read the Chinese Prison
Law it seems as though they aim to take on all
of the challenges associated with prisoners.
They are going to punish, vocationally train,
and reform their prisoners through labor and
education to transform them into law abiding
citizens. 37 This author has learned many
lessons by the way of hard work. However, it
appears that the true goals of the Prison Law
are not those which are expressly stated in the
statute. Control of the country’s people and
cheap or free labor seem to be closer to the
top of the priority list. It is a topic of much
debate on whether or not prison labor in
China is a profitable endeavor. Some say that
it is “A myth created and fueled by Chinese
critics about prison labor is that it is gigantic,
systematic, profitable, integral to the national
economy, and indispensable to the state
revenues.” 38 They say that most prisons do
not even make enough money to cover their
operational costs. 39 Are Chinese prisons really
not making enough money to cover
operational costs? Are they actually huge
operations raking in money? That is a
debated topic and one which will likely remain
so unless reliable figures are disclosed in the
future..
V. Internal Critiques
Do the Chinese people buy into their
system of corrections? Do they dare speak out
against the government? Chinese scholars say
that most Chinese do believe that education,
thought reform, and productive labor are the
means that should be used to transform
criminals into productive members of
society. 40 However, just because the Chinese
people believe in the ideologies behind their
system of corrections, that does not mean
they have no criticisms of the system. The
Chinese people are said to have concerns
about “whether prison guards are
conscientious, courageous, and competent
enough to put sound ideals and policies into
seamless practice.” 41 They are also doubtful as
to correction authorities status as part of the
communist party. As party officials speak of
the wonders and successes of education,
labor, and thought reform in prisons, official
statistics often criticize party messages. The
people question whether or not good news is
an effort to cover things up when things are
going wrong.
VI. Conclusion
This author’s research has left a lot of
questions unanswered. There was no open
look into the lives of Chinese prisoners.
There were no concrete figures and no official
reports of prison conditions. However, there
are definitely a lot of differences between
theAmerican and Chinese correctional
systems, and it is not easy to judge these
differences objectively. Both the United
States and China could benefit from a better
understanding of one another’s correctional
systems. Open, honest, information sharing
would be step in the right direction for China,
while openness to foreign ideas and practices
will make the United States a stronger world
leader.
1
Chad Cook is a 2011 graduate of Albany Law School. This paper was completed for the Introduction to Chinese
Law course in 2011.
2
Criminal Law of the P.R.C., art. 32-37 (Adopted by the Nat’l People's Cong. on July 1, 1979, amended by the
Nat’l People's Cong. on Mar. 14, 1997).
3
Criminal Law of the P.R.C., art. 32 (Adopted by the Nat’l People's Cong. on July 1, 1979, amended by the Nat’l
People's Cong. on Mar. 14, 1997).
4
Criminal Law of the P.R.C., art. 33 (Adopted by the Nat’l People's Cong. on July 1, 1979, and amended by the
Nat’l People's Cong. on Mar. 14, 1997).
5
Daniel C.K. Chow, The Legal System of The People’s Republic Of China: In A Nutshell 328 (West 2nd ed. 2009).
2011 Chinese Law Paper Series (c) Government Law Center of Albany Law School 2011
6
Daniel C.K. Chow, The Legal System of The People’s Republic Of China: In A Nutshell 328 (West 2nd ed. 2009).
Daniel C.K. Chow, The Legal System of The People’s Republic Of China: In A Nutshell 328 (West 2nd ed. 2009).
8
Daniel C.K. Chow, The Legal System of The People’s Republic Of China: In A Nutshell 328 (West 2nd ed. 2009).
9
Criminal Law of the P.R.C., art. 34 (Adopted by the Nat’l People’s Cong. on July 1, 1979, and amended by the
Nat’l People’s Cong. on Mar. 14, 1997).
10
Criminal Law of the P.R.C., art. 35 (Adopted by the Nat’l People's Cong. on July 1, 1979, and amended by the
Nat’l People's Cong. on Mar. 14, 1997).
11
Andrew Jacobs, Chinese Government Responds to Call for Protests, N.Y. Times, Feb. 21, 2011, at A8.
7
Andrew Jacobs, Chinese Government Responds to Call for Protests, N.Y. Times, Feb. 21, 2011, at A8.
Andrew Jacobs, China’ s Intimidation of Dissidents Said to Persist After Prison, N.Y. Times, February 19, 2011,
at A1.
12
13
Andrew Jacobs, China’ s Intimidation of Dissidents Said to Persist After Prison, N.Y. Times, February 19, 2011,
at A1.
15
Andrew Jacobs, China’ s Intimidation of Dissidents Said to Persist After Prison, N.Y. Times, February 19, 2011,
at A1.
16
Andrew Jacobs, China’ s Intimidation of Dissidents Said to Persist After Prison, N.Y. Times, February 19, 2011,
at A1.
17
Andrew Jacobs, China’ s Intimidation of Dissidents Said to Persist After Prison, N.Y. Times, February 19, 2011, at
A1.
18
Victor N. Shaw, Corrections and Punishment in China: Information and Analysis, Journal of Contemporary
Criminal Justice 26(1), 53, 58 (2010).
19
Id.
20
Id.
21
Criminal Law of the P.R.C., art. 46 (Adopted by the Nat’l People’s Cong. on July 1, 1979, and amended by the
Nat’l People’s Cong. on Mar. 14, 1997).
22
Shaw at 67.
23
ID.
24
American Correctional Association, Standards for Adult Correctional Institutions, 3rd ed. (Laurel, MD 1990) p.42.
25
Wu Zonxian, Western Prisons and Chinese Prisons: F ocusing on Differences, 11 Eur. J. Crime, Crim. L.
& Crim Just. 93, 98 (2003).
26
Wu Zonxian, Western Prisons and Chinese Prisons: F ocusing on Differences, 11 Eur. J. Crime, Crim. L.
& Crim Just. 93, 98 (2003).
27
Wu Zonxian, Western Prisons and Chinese Prisons: F ocusing on Differences, 11 Eur. J. Crime, Crim. L. & Crim
Just. 93, 98 (2003).
28
Wu Zonxian, Western Prisons and Chinese Prisons: F ocusing on Differences, 11 Eur. J. Crime, Crim. L.
& Crim Just. 93, 98 (2003).
14
29
Shaw at 56.
30
Id.
31
Id.
32
Id.
33
Id.
34
American Correctional Association, Design Guide for Secure Adult Correctional Facilities 34 (College Park,
Maryland 1983).
35
Prison Law of the P.R.C., art. 3 (adopted by the Standing Comm. of the Nat’l People’s Cong. Dec. 29, 1994).
36
Shaw at 58.
37
Prison Law of the P.R.C., art. 3 (adopted by the Standing Comm. of the Nat’l People’s Cong. Dec. 29, 1994).
38
Shaw at 63.
39
Id.
40
Shaw at 65.
41
Shaw at 66.
2011 Chinese Law Paper Series (c) Government Law Center of Albany Law School 2011