Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - China (Ratification: 2022)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 3 and 8 September 2025. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. Criminal Law. The Committee previously referred to several provisions of the national legislation under which penal sanctions involving compulsory labour may be imposed in circumstances falling within Article 1(a) of the Convention. The Committee notes in particular the following provisions of the Criminal Law, which are notably punishable by fixed-term imprisonment (involving an obligation to work according to section 69 of the Prison Law), detention or community correction (sentences which may involve compulsory labour pursuant to sections 43 and 39 of the Criminal Law):

• section 246 addressing defamation;
• section 290 addressing “gathering a crowd to disturb social order”;
• section 291 addressing “gathering a crowd to disrupt order in public places and traffic order”;
• section 293 addressing “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”;
• section 296 addressing unlawful assembly, procession or demonstration;
• section 299 addressing “insulting the national flag, emblem or anthem”;
• section 299-1 addressing “damaging the reputation and honour of heroes and martyrs”.

The Government indicates in its report that the Criminal Code sets out the principle of legality. In addition, the Criminal Procedure Code establishes procedural safeguards, such as the requirement for evidence and the presumption of innocence, to effectively prevent the misuse of criminal penalties. It stresses that no provisions involve criminalizing the “peaceful expression of opinion”. The crime of gathering a crowd to disrupt social order (section 290) requires that the circumstances be serious, to the extent that work, production, commercial activities, teaching, scientific research, or medical services cannot be carried out, and that serious losses are caused, before criminal liability is engaged. The crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble (section 293) refers to conduct that results in incidents and disrupts order in a way that seriously harms society, in the same way as the crimes of unlawful assembly, procession or demonstration (section 296) and insulting the national flag, emblem or anthem (section 299), which target overtly destructive and extreme acts. The Government also highlights that the crimes of insult and defamation (section 246), as well as the spread of rumours online and the provocation of large volumes of vulgar and malicious comments, seriously disrupt online order and gravely undermine the public’s sense of security. The Government refers to online violence, which may fall under section 246, as a global scourge. It asserts that prosecuting these crimes is an integral part of protecting freedom of expression.

The Committee recalls the 2024 observations of the ITUC concerning the convictions of labour activists and human rights defenders for the crime of subversion of state power. The ITUC referred to the sentencing of two activists, Mr Wang Jianbing and Ms Huang Xueqin, to imprisonment. In this regard, the Government indicates that Wang Jianbing and Huang Xueqin incited subversion of China’s State power and sought to overthrow the socialist system, which constituted a crime rather than a peaceful expression of opinion, and were therefore lawfully subject to the corresponding legal penalties. The Government adds that Wang Jianbing has served his sentence and been released. It points out that safeguarding national security is an important responsibility of the judicial authorities, and common practice in all countries governed by the rule of law. The Government also states that the Criminal Law imposes strict limitations on the constituent elements of offences endangering national security, such as subversion of state power and incitement to subversion of state power (section 105).

The Committee notes the information from the ITUC, in its observations, that Huang Xueqin is still serving her sentence, and that both Huang Xueqin and Wang Jianbing have lodged appeals but that they were dismissed without proper notification or documentation.

The Committee notes that, on 21 September 2025, the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner referred to a number of cases involving journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders who have been charged over and/or convicted for criminal acts in relation to what appears to be the exercise of their fundamental rights. It also expressed serious concerns with respect to the “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” offence, given its broad wording and the wide scope of its potential application to those exercising their rights, including freedom of expression and association. In a communication of 25 June 2025, the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers referred to the use of offences such as “subversion” and “inciting subversion” to criminalize the legitimate work of lawyers, frequently targeted with criminal charges in retaliation for their human rights work (AL CHN 10/2025). The Committee also notes the reports of reprisals, including imprisonment for “inciting subversion”, against those who cooperate with UN human rights mechanisms, as highlighted in the annual report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights of 9 September 2025 (A/HRC/60/62).

The Committee points out that even though some convictions are made in accordance with the national legislation, they may be contrary to the Convention insofar as they allow persons holding or expressing political or ideological views to be compelled to work. It recalls that the underlying rationale of Article 1(a) of the Convention is to protect persons who, in the exercise of the right to freedom of expression or other related civil liberties, express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, by establishing that they cannot be punished by sanctions involving an obligation to work.

The Committee notes with concern the use of various provisions of the national legislation to prosecute and convict journalists, lawyers and human rights defenders who express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, which have led or may lead to the imposition of penalties involving compulsory prison labour.

The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures, both in law and in practice, to ensure that persons who express political views or views opposed to the established system, including journalists, lawyers and human rights defenders, cannot be punished with sanctions involving compulsory labour, including compulsory prison labour. In this regard, it requests the Government to take the necessary measures to: (i) ensure that the section 105 of the Criminal Law punishing “subvert state power”, “incitement to subvert state power” and “overthrowing the socialist system” is amended or applied in such a manner that no penalty involving compulsory labour can be imposed on persons who peacefully express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system; and (ii) review the wording of sections 246, 290, 291, 293, 296, 299 and 299-1 of the Criminal Law, by clearly restricting the scope of these provisions to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour, so as to ensure that their application in practice does not lead to the violation of the Convention. 

Article 1(e). Forced or compulsory labour as a means of racial, social, national or religious discrimination. Ethnic and religious minorities in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (Xinjiang) and the Tibet Autonomous Region (Tibet). The Committee previously referred to the 2015 Counter-Terrorism Law, the Xinjiang Regulation on Deradicalisation (XRD), and section 120 of the Criminal Law, which contain offences related to terrorism and extremism, including crimes such as promoting terrorism and extremism, inciting terrorism, and using extremism to undermine law enforcement. It noted that these offences, punishable by sentences involving compulsory labour, are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to application in circumstances that could be covered by Article1(e) of the Convention.

The Government indicates that section 4(2) of the Counter-Terrorism Law, which defines manifestations of extremism, provides that “the State opposes all forms of extremism that, through the distortion of religious teaching or other means, incite hatred or discrimination, or advocate violence, and works to eliminate the ideological basis of terrorism”. The Committee also notes that the Government refers to the definition of terrorism contained in the Counter-Terrorism Law and section 3 of the XRD. The Government stresses that these provisions constitute the legal basis for identifying individuals influenced by extremism, thereby enabling the standardization and precision of deradicalization measures. It further emphasizes that the XRD, which is an integral part of the socialist legal system, aims to curb and eliminate the infiltration and harmful effects of extremism, prevent violent terrorist activities influenced by extremist ideology, achieve social stability and lasting peace, and ensure the effective protection of the fundamental rights of people of all ethnic groups. It refutes alleged practices of using forced labour to carry out racial, social, ethnic or religious discrimination.

With regard to vocational education and training centres in Xinjiang, which, according to the previous ITUC observations, have been used to arbitrarily detain Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities suspected of endangering social stability and national security, the Government replies that they are essentially institutions aimed at countering terrorism, which do not differ fundamentally from deradicalization centres or rehabilitation and disengagement programmes implemented in many other countries. It states that since October 2019, all individuals in these training centres have completed their training.

The Committee notes that, in its observations of 2025, the ITUC states that the Government has targeted Uyghurs and other Turkic and Muslim minorities through widespread forced labour practices in Xinjiang and Tibet. , The ITUC also refers to a system of coercive large-scale labour-transfer programmes in both Xinjiang and Tibet. The Committee refers in this regard to its present observation on Convention No. 29.

In addition, the ITUC points to the replacement of mass re-education camps through “Vocational Skills Education and Training Centres” with a system of long-term imprisonment of large numbers of Uyghurs in an expanded network of rural prisons in Xinjiang. Moreover, the ITUC submits that a large number of individuals were shifted from re-education camps into state-directed labour programmes. The ITUC reports a marked expansion of existing rural prison facilities in Xinjiang since 2019, coinciding with the long-term formal incarceration of Uyghurs, although the happenings within these facilities remain almost entirely inaccessible to outsiders. While representing only about 1 per cent of China’s total population, Uyghurs, other Turkic groups and non-Han communities in Xinjiang are now estimated to account for more than one third of the country’s prison population. Those imprisoned have generally been denied fair trials and sentenced for activities that do not constitute criminal offences under national law.

The Committee notes that, on 1 October 2025, United Nations Experts expressed serious concern over the increasing criminalization of Uyghur and other minority cultural expression in China. They stated that a number of individuals from Uyghur and other minority groups have reportedly been detained, convicted, and imprisoned under charges such as “extremism”, “separatism”, “terrorism”, or similar accusations, in connection with their cultural, linguistic, or religious expression. The Committee further notes that, in a communication dated 14 November 2024 (AL CHN 15/2024), several United Nations special procedure mandate holders pointed out the reported abduction, detention and sentencing of religious believers for religious activities, targeting Tibetans, Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims, as well as the increasing reports of Uyghur detainees being forced to work for up to 11 hours a day in Turpan Daheyan prison and other places of detention.

The Committee expresses its concern in respect of the above information, insofar as the imposition of compulsory labour appears to specifically target ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang and Tibet. The Committee recalls the requirement contained in Article 1(e) of the Convention not to make use of compulsory labour as a means of racial (including ethnic), social, national or religious discrimination. It further recalls that both (i) discriminatory distinctions made on these grounds for the exaction of labour, and (ii) punishment involving compulsory labour imposed particularly or more severely to certain groups, fall within the scope of the Convention.

The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures, both in law and in practice, to ensure that no form of compulsory labour, whether in the context of imprisonment, detention, or labour-transfer, is imposed in a discriminatory manner towards ethnic and religious minorities. In this regard, it also requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that provisions in the national legislation relating to acts of terrorism and extremism cannot be used to impose sentences involving compulsory labour on ethnic and religious minorities for peacefully expressing their cultural, linguistic or religious identity. With regard to the system of labour-transfer programmes in both Xinjiang and Tibet, the Committee refers to its detailed comments under Convention No. 29.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.