China breached international criminal law. Organs are harvested from political prisoners
Posted On 20 May 2019
China abuses in this and other fields have been published by our Observatory (for example frauduent trials scandal). On the other hand obtaining organs for transplantation from political prisoners has been fundamental to maintain donor organ levels in China for a substantial period of time. Now, an independent English tribunal has claimed to have new evidence of these facts in a public session held from 8 to 10 December 2018 (see HERE).
China breached international criminal law. Political prisoners forced organ harvesting
The British Medical Jornal says “Forced harvesting of organs from prisoners of conscience in China has been “substantial,” says an interim judgment of an independent “people’s tribunal” set up to determine whether the country’s transplantation practices breached international criminal law.
The former English judge Geoffrey Nice QC, the tribunal’s chair, said after a three day evidence gathering session, “We,
the tribunal members, are all certain, unanimously, beyond reasonable doubt, that in China forced organ harvesting from
prisoners of conscience has been practised for a substantial period of time, involving a very substantial number of victims
. . . by state organised or approved organisations or individuals.”
the tribunal members, are all certain, unanimously, beyond reasonable doubt, that in China forced organ harvesting from
prisoners of conscience has been practised for a substantial period of time, involving a very substantial number of victims
. . . by state organised or approved organisations or individuals.”
The tribunal found that the practices breached the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including articles 3 (right to life),
6 (recognition as a person before the law), 7 (equality beforethe law), 9 (not to be subject to arbitrary arrest), 10 (full equality to a fair and public hearing in determination of rights), 11 (presumption of innocence), and 5 (torture).
6 (recognition as a person before the law), 7 (equality beforethe law), 9 (not to be subject to arbitrary arrest), 10 (full equality to a fair and public hearing in determination of rights), 11 (presumption of innocence), and 5 (torture).
The Chinese government and the Transplantation Society, which has “official relations” with the World Health Organization and offers “global leadership in transplantation . . . and guidance on ethical practice,” had not submitted evidence.
Implications for WHO, doctors and institutions worldwide
The Independent Tribunal into Forced Organ Harvesting from prisoners of Conscience in China heard evidence in public in
London on 8-10 December. Seven strong panel questioned 30 witnesses, including refugees from China, doctors, and
investigators. Its full judgment, due early next year, could have major implications for doctors and institutions worldwide that collaborate with China on transplantation related activities.” (BMJ 11 December 2018).
London on 8-10 December. Seven strong panel questioned 30 witnesses, including refugees from China, doctors, and
investigators. Its full judgment, due early next year, could have major implications for doctors and institutions worldwide that collaborate with China on transplantation related activities.” (BMJ 11 December 2018).
.png)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario