Posted By Colum Lynch Share

Navi Pillay, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, pressed China to release this year's Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, expressing hope that China will "come to recognize" the positive contribution the pro-democracy activist can make on Chinese society.

In a rare, wide-ranging press conference in Geneva, Pillay presented the U.N.'s strongest public criticism of China's imprisonment of Liu, who is serving an 11-year jail sentence for drafting the pro-democracy Charter 08 manifesto. Pillay also scolded China for placing Liu's wife, Liu Xia, under house arrest "that in my view is in contravention of Chinese national law."

The remarks by the South African rights advocate bore a stark contrast to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's highly circumspect comments on Liu's selection as the 2010 Nobel laureate. To date, Ban has never publicly called for his release, spoken out against the house arrest of his wife, or even officially congratulated him on the prize. Ban did not raise the matter in private talks with Chinese leader Hu Jintao, reserving discussion of the politically delicate matter for talks with lower-level Chinese officials.

Chinese offficials have responded to the Nobel Committee's decision to honor Liu, whom they consider a criminal, by lobbying foreign governments not to attend this week's award ceremony. "China's foreign ministry has boasted that the peace prize has been discredited because a large number of countries agree with China and will boycott the ceremony," wrote Keith Richburg of the Washington Post. "So far, China has listed 18 other countries not attending, including fellow communist regimes Cuba and Vietnam; Arab monarchies and authoritarian regimes including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Morocco, and Tunisia; and China's allies Venezuela, Pakistan, Sudan, and neighboring Russia and Kazakhstan. Iran, Colombia and Ukraine also said their ambassadors will not attend."

Beijing has also mounted a crackdown on Chinese activists and critics inside China. Pillay said that she was "dismayed" by the recent restrictions China has placed on a "widening circle" of activists and critics of the government. "In recent weeks at least twenty activists have been arrested or detained and more than 120 other cases of house arrest, travel restrictions, forced relocations and other acts of intimidation," she said.  Pillay defended her decision not to attend the Nobel award ceremony, saying that she never received a formal invitation to the event from the Nobel Peace Prize organization.

Pillay came under fire from Yang Jianli, a U.S.-based Chinese dissident and friend of Liu Xiaobo, who said that the rights leader had rejected an invitation to attend the meeting. At the time, Pillay's spokesman defended her decision not to go on the grounds that she had a previous obligation to host a Human Rights Day event in Geneva on the same day.

Pillay also weighed in on the mounting WikiLeaks controversy, decrying the efforts of politicians and other government officials to "pressure" banks, Internet providers, and credit card companies to cut off Wikileaks, saying such measures ran afoul of free-speech protections. "I am concerned about reports of pressure exerted on private companies including banks, credit card companies and Internet service providers to close down credit lines for donations to Wikileaks, as well as to stop hosting the website," she said.

"Taken as a whole [such measures] could be interpreted as an attempt to censor the publication of information thus potentially violating WikiLeaks right to freedom of expression. If WikiLeaks has committed any recognizable illegal act then this should be handled through the legal system and not through pressure and intimidation."

The remarks follow a high-level campaign, first initiated by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, to pressure companies, universities, and other institutions to prevent Wikileaks from disseminating confidential cables. A group of anonymous computer "hacktivists" have retaliated by mounting cyber attacks on the websites of institutions that they believe have been hostile to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

"This is truly what media would call a cyber war; it's just astonishing," Pillay said. "The WikiLeaks case raises complex human rights questions about balancing freedom of information, the right of people to know, and the need to protect national security or public order. This balancing act is a difficult one... So who is best to judge or strike at the balance, but courts of law?"

Pillay said the WikiLeaks documents have provided troubling new evidence that the Obama administration "knew about the widespread use of torture by Iraqi forces and yet proceeded with the transfer of thousands" of Iraqi detainees from U.S. custody to Iraqi custody between 2009 and 2010. "This could potentially constitute a serious breach of human rights law." She said she supported the efforts of U.N. human rights researchers who are seeking clarification from the U.S. and Iraqi authorities on the use of torture.  She urged all to investigate the reports "and bring to justice those responsible for human rights abuses."

Follow me on Twitter @columlynch.

 

RAY GIBBS

12:36 PM ET

December 10, 2010

To the UN right's chief

cyber attacks, hacks, stealing and down-loading State, corporate, , institutional or individual secretes (proper) or private matters (proper) is wrong.

such cyber, info sneaks or wars can be dangerous to life, lives, liberty, liberties; degrade our freedoms, our uses our 'Net

yes, we are living (perhaps forever) a newer, ever-evolving era. as promising and as strong as whatever we might freely and fairly imagine via our free and unbounded imaginations.

which is the dignity every individual, individuals, their coming together--our States, other.

no, we can not now no in the future, "police" or "secure" our rapidly (exponentially) digital innovations. nor can we "police" every world resident.

so, in a word our world is Altered. which can be for the better for all. but the continuous actions Anonymous and Wikileaks is wrong, not helpful.

 

INTEGRAL_AL

2:44 PM ET

December 10, 2010

I love guarding detainees

Hey so i guess freedom of speech is more important than our ability to keep sources and the like in here in Afghanistan protected and get information that could save our lives quickly.

I think she should spend a year guarding detainees in Iraq before she suggests that. It's not a pleasant experience. When we were giving one we shot in the buttocks after he tried emplacing an IED medical treatment he kept defecating all over the bathroom because he couldn't use a western style toilet. Cleaning that up was not fun.

 

ACAC

2:57 PM ET

December 10, 2010

'hacking'? hardly

I wish people had a clearer idea of what these 'hacktivists' are doing; it's the equivalent of a cyber sit-in. They're not commandeering other computers or botnets, they're volunteering their own computer connections to swamp a website with requests. How is that different from a sit-in?

 

HURRICANEWARNING

4:38 PM ET

December 10, 2010

you know this whole BRIC

you know this whole BRIC alliance, and all these countries named who are boycotting the peace prize....who cares. Literally, not ONE of those countries listed has its act together or deserves recognition for something noble on the world stage...literally, not one. well, maybe Colombia and or Vietnam, i was a bit surprised by them. Seriously though, what reality do these leaders live in? So they boycott, so what, who cares, everybody educated in the world finds them to be reprehensible regimes anyway. thats like Hitler boycotting the prize for "most responsible European" WHO CARES? These countries are pathetic. and yes, im talking mainly about you China...bullying other smaller Asian countries into boycotting as well...for shame.

 

BOBBY FLETCHER

2:49 AM ET

December 13, 2010

Difference between Assange and Liu

There is one huge distinction between Assange and Liu – Liu Xiaobo was on US government’s payroll to conduct domestic politics in China, while Assange blew the whistle on America’s imperialistic foreign policy without underwritting by foreign powers that may wish to weaken US influence.

- Evendence of US government’s patro- nage and sponsorship of Liu Xiaobo can be found in the NED’s (cover for the CIA) own China grant publication to groups Liu founded.

- Assange’s arrest has US fingerprint. The bogus sex charge to discredit the messenger, is based on puritian/protestant tradition of sex shame not prominent in Europe. And the same ploy was used against another peace activist, UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter, in order to silence his opposition to the Iraq war.

In essense, if there’re lessons the Chinese will learn from us, it is this: Nobel Peace Prize is awarded to demonize nations we don’t like, and while dissident in US are always criminals, criminals in China are always dissidents.

 

Longtime Washington Post correspondent Colum Lynch reports on all things United Nations for Turtle Bay.

Read More