JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS debate

Alleged Organ Harvesting in China: Presentation.

Chairman

The next item on the agenda is a discussion with Mr. David Kilgour and members of the Falun Gong group on alleged organ harvesting of Falun Gong practitioners. Prior to commencing the discussion, I advise witnesses that while members of the committee enjoy absolute privilege in respect of utterances made in committee, witnesses do not enjoy absolute privilege. Accordingly, caution should be exercised particularly with regard to references of a personal nature.

I invite Senator O'Toole to introduce the delegation.

Senator O’Toole

I appreciate the committee giving time to this important and extraordinary presentation. Many members of the committee have taken an interest in the matter. Senator Norris and I have been dealing with it for many years. I was sickened by the level of brutality, of which the committee will hear.

Mr. David Kilgour is a Canadian parliamentarian whose work is done on an independent basis. He is not a member of the Falun Gong. Ms Dongxue Dai is the Irish representative of the Falun Gong who will give her personal experience. It is not a religious group but simply a movement. It does not seeks political or religious gain.

Senator Norris

May I suggest, Chairman, that Mr. Kilgour speaks first as several members will have to leave for the Order of Business in the Seanad. No disrespect is intended to Ms Dongxue Dai.

Chairman

Is that agreed? Agreed. I welcome Mr. David Kilgour who served as Secretary of State for the Asia-Pacific region in the Canadian Government. He will discuss his report, Report into Allegations of Organ Harvesting of Falun Gong Practitioners in China. This report has been circulated to members. I welcome Ms Dongxue Dai is the Irish representative of the Falun Gong. Ms Dai is accompanied by Mr. Feng Lui and Dr. Zhang.

On Tuesday evening, I met briefly with the Chinese ambassador to Ireland who asked me to circulate a letter on the issue to members.

Mr. David Kilgour

It is a pleasure to be in Ireland. I have always had the utmost respect for Ireland and its people. If I may confess, a young woman from Ireland and I were engaged but unfortunately I never got to visit the Emerald Isle until now.

It is four months since the report was published. It has been translated into 13 languages and is posted on our website along with several hundreds news articles on it. I am fascinated by the letter from the Chinese ambassador because the Chinese Government has only been able to find two errors in the report. Two cities were placed in the wrong provinces. I have not seen the ambassador's letter and I suspect I will not be shown it. I have visited approximately 25 capital cities and the line changes, but I suspect the line used in the letter to members of the committee is similar to the one used on Canadian MPs. It is basically to the effect, "Do you think that the Government of China would kill 6,000 Falun Gong practitioners?"

My answer to that, if that is what the members heard, is we have not suggested a particular figure. The persecution of Falun Gong has been ongoing since the summer of 1999 and up to now there have been 41,500 unexplained organ transplants. By that I mean they are unexplained in terms of executed prisoners, brain dead persons or donated organs. I am sure the committee knows that the culture in China is such that people do not donate their organs. This is also true in Japan, almost to the same extent. We have not accused the Government of China of killing 6,000 Falun Gong practitioners. However, the committee will hear in a few moments that we have good reason for believing that at least 3,000 have been killed. The conclusion of our report is that the Government of China and its agencies, hospitals and detention centres mostly, have since the organ harvesting began in 2000-01, put to death a large but unknown number of Falun Gong prisoners of conscience. Their vital organs, including hearts, kidneys, livers and so on have been taken from them and sold for high prices.

When I was in Asia, about two weeks ago, I met a man from a country I will not name. He described what happened to him. He needed a new kidney. In the summer of 2004 he went to Shanghai No. 1 People's Hospital, and checked in. He had many antibodies so that when the first kidney that was brought to him did not work; a couple of days later a second one was brought, and then finally two more. At that point he returned to his country and came back a couple of months later, when the whole process started again. A doctor brought him four more kidneys. The eighth kidney worked and he is now doing fine. However, four human beings died in order that he might get a new kidney.

One may argue that a person can have one kidney removed and still live, but our experience is that this is not the way it works for Falun Gong in China. They take both kidneys and every other organ and tragically sometimes they remove a person's skin, and then the body is burned. The Government of China has been taking the organs from executed prisoners for 20 or 25 years. Last year it admitted it. Now I see in the news reports they are admitting that foreigners who can pay for them are getting priority for the organs of executed prisoners — and in fact most of the organs are coming from executed prisoners. This was an admission a few days ago at the Guangzhou summit.

The man I mentioned who got the new kidney in Shanghai, received it from an executed prisoner. It is possible that some or all of these eight people who died were prisoners condemned to death for having been convicted of some of the 68 offences in China that carry the death penalty. My strong feeling, which I cannot prove, is that at least some of the eight prisoners who died were members of Falun Gong. The important point I am trying to make is that members of the Falun Gong community almost never get brought before a court. They are administratively assigned to detention centres and work camps, where they produce various goods, even Christmas decorations, almost entirely for export. In any event, one normally thinks of executed prisoners as people who have been accused of a terrible offence. The committee's stance on capital punishment is its own business, but Falun Gong practitioners, as victims, are rarely convicted of any offence. They simply have the misfortune to have the right tissue factors, blood samples and so on. When the computer match indicates that somebody like the gentleman I mentioned has arrived and needs a kidney, and the blood tissue matches, the prisoner dies. He or she is killed by a doctor or nurse virtually simultaneously with losing his or her organs. People do not understand that. There is a fundamental misconception about this point.

The reason I am here is to appeal to the committee to do something. In the case of Australia, Mr. Edward McMillan Scott and I were there for about a month and a half about two months ago. The media were very kind to us. ABC Television had us speaking on the issue four nights in a row and many Australians became aware of the fact that this terrible thing is happening to a community in China. Last week I received an e-mail from a senior doctor in Australia, saying in effect that the number of Australians going to China for transplants had collapsed, as he put it, in the last two months. All of us can do something. The Irish, Canadians and others must be made aware of the fact that if they go the transplant tourism route, the chances are they are getting an organ from a Falun Gong practitioner who has done nothing except to believe in ideals such as truth and compassion. I will stop there. I believe members of the committee will be far more struck by what they will hear now. I am getting a note to the effect that I should talk about the report. Should I assume the members have read it, or has nobody read it?

Chairman

Some of us have read it, in so far as the committee is concerned.

Senator Norris

How long will the meeting last, because I am hoping to return after the Order of Business? Do we have to be out of this room by any particular time?

Chairman

The Senator should make it back in time, as long as the Order of Business does not last too long. Are there any key points Mr. Kilgour should like to emphasise?

Mr. Kilgour

The key point I often refer to is the appendix. It is probably the only report in which people refer to the appendices. I refer the committee to the first page of appendix 14, on victim interviews. It is for the Mijiang city detention centre and Ann is the person calling. As a former prosecutor I want the committee to know I really went over this carefully and made sure there was an independent interpreter, telephone records, etc. I talked to the people making the telephone calls to ensure that these events happened and were not being invented — and we took out excerpts. This call was made on 8 June 2006.

Caller: "Do you have Falun Gong organ suppliers?"

Mr. Li: "We used to have, yes."

Caller: "And what about now?"

Mr. Li: "Yes."

Caller: "Can we come to select, or do you provide them directly to us?"

Mr. Li: "We provide them to you."

Caller: "What about the price?"

Mr. Li: "We discuss after you come."

Then there are these chilling words at the bottom:

Caller: "Now, for male Falun Gong prisoners, how many of them do you have?"

Mr. Li: "Seven, eight, we have at least five or six now."

Caller: "Are they from the countryside or from the city?"

Mr. Li: "Countryside."

Many Falun Gong members do not give their names when they are rounded up and put in these camps and detention centres because they do not want to harm their families. The trouble is that they are given four-digit numbers, which make them all the more vulnerable to organ harvesting.

The only other part of the report to which I refer is appendix 13, which contains an interview with a surgeon's former wife. In the interview I asked how many cornea operations did her ex-husband perform and she answered that he said about 2,000. I asked whether it was the corneas of 2,000 people or 2,000 corneas and she answered that it was the corneas of about 2,000 people between late 2001 to October 2003. Harry Wu does not think it feasible to do that many operations in that period of time. Mr. Matas and I checked with a doctor and we found it takes about 20 minutes to take the corneas out of a human body. If we do the arithmetic, her husband could have done these operations in 83 days. I spent a lot of time with her and I am convinced that she was doing her best to tell the truth. Since Chinese Government spokespeople like to quote Harry Wu, I met with him for several hours and did my best to get his views. Mr. Wu did not even meet this woman who calls herself Annie, yet he has decided that she is a liar.

I am sorry I took so long, but I would like to hand over to someone whose story will touch everyone far more than mine.

Ms Dongxue Dai

I would like to thank the Chairman and the joint committee for providing me the opportunity to speak. I would like to tell Members about the experiences of my two sisters and I as Falun Gong practitioners in China and about the sufferings of my family under the dictatorship of the Communist Party in China.

Since July 1999, when the regime started its crackdown on Falun Gong, there are reports of Falun Gong practitioners being tortured everyday. There are almost 3,000 verified cases of Falun Gong practitioners tortured to death, while millions have been illegally sent to forced labour camps, prisons and mental hospitals where they are subjected to immense torture, including sexual abuse. When I first heard the news of organ harvesting on live Falun Gong practitioners in March, I was not very surprised. From the information we have gathered about persecution and from the killing history of the Chinese Communist Party, I believe in the existence of this genocide.

I began to practise Falun Gong in 1996, not long before I came to Ireland. Soon after practising Falun Gong, I found myself benefiting from it greatly. I became energetic, clear-headed, my terrible headache was gone and my low blood pressure improved. Noting these great changes, my three older sisters and my younger brother all started practising and they all benefited from Falun Gong. However, the Chinese authorities' crackdown on Falun Gong since July 1999 brought disaster to myself and my family.

My two sisters and my brother, together with other practitioners, went to appeal for Falun Gong, but they were detained and beaten up by police. In December 2000, my sister Qiuxia was sentenced to a three-year term of imprisonment in Jinan female labour camp. Eight months later, another sister, Xialing, was arrested in a different city and sent to the same labour camp as Qiuxia. We did not tell our mother about the imprisonment of Qiuxia and Xialing as we knew she would worry about them. However, because she did not hear from her two daughters for months, my mother became very anxious and she knew subconsciously that her daughters were in danger. She had experienced too much misfortune after my father was expelled from the hospital in which he worked.

My father once was a doctor at a hospital in my home city of Gaomi, in Shandong Province, but when he told the truth of the big famine he was expelled from the hospital. In the big famine between 1960 and 1962, at least 30 million Chinese people starved to death because of the Communist Party's political movement, known as the Great Leap Forward. In this movement, everyone was forced to produce steel and iron and nobody had time to harvest the crops until they were rotting in the field. Many vulnerable people died, most of them women, children and elderly people. My father had to escape to a remote small village and made a living as a street vendor for the rest of his life, as no hospital would dare to accept him as a doctor due to his background. He had to feed the whole family from his little income, including six children and my mother.

Seeing those numerous slanderous stories against Falun Gong on TV, radio and in the newspapers, my mother knew that another political movement had arrived. Our neighbours and friends knew that many people in our family practised Falun Gong so they were afraid to talk to us. My mother passed away from worry in October 2001, two months after my sister Xialing was sent to a forced labour camp. The Chinese embassy in Dublin did not allow me to go home for the funeral. My two sisters could not bear the physical tortures in the forced labour camp and the mental pressure of missing their young daughters. They were released after being brainwashed in the camp. After coming back, they told me about their experiences there. They had to work for at least ten hours every day and they usually had to work overtime. They made different products for export, such as duvets and toys. Of course, they did not get paid for all this work. For the rest of the day, they had to study materials that slandered Falun Gong and had to report what they thought after study. My two sisters were not in the same team and they were not allowed to meet or talk to each other. Following their release from the labour camp, they found their memories had suffered and they could hardly remember things that had happened before. They lost much weight and it took a long time to recover.

I came to Ireland in 1996 as a student. When my Chinese passport expired in February 2001, the Chinese Embassy in Dublin told me that it would not be renewed unless I renounced Falun Gong. For the following two years, I did not have any valid travelling document until I obtained my Irish citizenship in 2003. When I spoke to my sisters recently by phone, one of them told me that the police talked to her and they asked her to tell me that as long as I did not talk about Falun Gong or conduct any Falun Gong activities, I could go back to China and they would ensure my safety. I will never accept these terms as long as I am alive. That means I still cannot go back to China to meet my family members and I have been separated from them for almost seven years.

I would like to express my gratitude to the Irish people, the Parliament and the Government for helping two Falun Gong practitioners, Mr. Zhao Ming and Mr. Liu Feng, to return to Ireland after being persecuted in labour camps. However, many more Falun Gong practitioners are still illegally detained and subjected to severe torture in China, and many are in danger of being killed for their organs.

My personal experience and the experiences of my family members may not prove the organ harvest allegations. They are just the story of one family among millions of families in China. They are stories for the people who heard them, but for the people who experienced them, they are pains in both bodies and hearts.

I express my gratitude to Mr. David Kilgour and Mr. David Matas for their excellent work on the investigation and publication of the report. I also thank the committee, Senator Norris, Deputy Catherine Murphy, Senator O'Toole and many other Deputies and Senators for helping us.

Deputy Allen

I have found very few people in 23 countries who had seriously read the report but who did not agree this is happening. The medical practitioners I met in various countries have been the most encouraging because virtually all of them told me they think we are correct that it is happening. Mr. Matas and I now have another ten categories of proof and evidence which we have located in our travels around the world and which we will include in a revised report. The revised report will contain more evidence that this is happening.

On the point about the US consul visiting the Sujiatin hospital, if I recall correctly, that was approximately two to three weeks after the whistle was blown on 9 March by the wife of the surgeon to whom I referred, perhaps while Deputy Allen was not present. Does anyone present or any reasonable person think that, in the three week period, the authorities in the Sujiatin hospital could not have cleaned up the operating rooms and made sure no body parts were lying around? We referred to that incident in the report but we dealt with many other indications of proof prior to and since 9 March.

I remind Deputy Allen that if one types the words "Government of China denies" into Google, one will currently get 4 million entries. The Government of China specialises in denials. It denied the SARS epidemic and denied that anybody died at Tiananmen Square in 1989. Now, of course, it has admitted organ harvesting has been taking place. In fact, it has admitted in the past two days that it is happening on a large scale. There is a suggestion that the Chinese Government regulated it as of 1 July but it is often the case — I do not know how much Deputy Allen knows about China — that there is a long gap between enacting regulations and enforcing them. This is the problem. Our indications are this has happened as recently as a few weeks ago and I am sure it is still happening.

Chairman

We will continue with the contributions.

Deputy Allen

Is Mr. Kilgour happy that this matter is being addressed in a meaningful way under the European Union-China human rights dialogue?

Mr. Kilgour

I do not think so.

Deputy Allen

Has it been addressed in any way?

Mr. Kilgour

No, not that I am aware of. Canada is about to suspend its annual human rights dialogue with China because it has become, as a former diplomat pointed out in his study, a charade. I have spoken with European Union diplomats throughout the continent in this regard.

I give utmost credit to Europe with regard to one aspect, namely, it raised the issue at the EU-China summit in Helsinki in September. The Foreign Minister of Finland explicitly raised the issue with the Foreign Minister of China, stating that Europeans are concerned about this issue and would like the Government of China to investigate it and stop it.

I am not here to have a debate with Deputy Allen. I am trying to persuade him to, if he reads the report carefully and is persuaded by it, put it on his website or ask his constituents to read it. Perhaps they can write letters or send e-mails on the issue.

We are very close to getting the Government of China to stop this terrible practice. The reason we can do this is that the Olympic Games will take place in 2008. The Government of China is extremely worried about the games and worried that people will arrive in Beijing with banners reading: "Stop persecuting the Falun Gong community". That is the lever we have to force the Chinese Government to stop this practice. All of us, in Ireland, Canada and elsewhere, provided we have hearts, heads and backbones, can do something about this issue.

Chairman

The most recent round of the human rights dialogue took place in Beijing on 19 October last. Senior officials from both sides discussed a wide range of human rights issues. Special attention was given to questions related to combating racism, freedom of expression and reform of the criminal justice system in China. The EU took note of the commitment of China to ratify the international covenant on civil and political rights as soon as possible and, in that context, to reform its criminal justice system. The EU further expressed concern at the high number of human rights defenders, lawyers and journalists in prison, and urged China not to harass or punish individuals exercising the right to freedom of expression in a peaceful manner.

——is a matter for myself to decide.

Deputy M. Higgins

I appreciate the opportunity to comment on this report. We are all under pressure now that Dáil business has commenced for the day but this is an important issue. It should be treated as such.

This committee has discussed the issue of human rights on several occasions. I was part of the delegation that visited China and Tibet some years ago and raised difficult questions regarding human rights with the authorities in Beijing and Lhasa. If we are to make progress on any of these issues, we must first ask ourselves how useful this committee can be both in regard to the general issue of human rights and the specific issue of the report we are discussing today. The committee can certainly ask for this issue to be revisited in the context of the human rights dialogue. We should also send the report to the Sub-Committee on Human Rights, which we might ask to consider making a recommendation that the report be the subject of an independent appraisal by means of the system of human rights dialogue of the EU as well as in bilateral talks between Ireland and China.

In regard to the general issue of human rights, what is unsatisfactory in our exchange with the Chinese ambassador and his predecessors is the suggestion that human rights issues are matters simply of national concern. This constitutes the use of sovereignty as a screen against discussions of general human rights issues. We must make a strong statement that we do not accept this principle. It is vital that we are free to discuss these matters. Neither this committee nor the Sub-Committee on Human Rights could accept such a limitation on the vindication of human rights. We must be unequivocal, for example, in our condemnation of the death penalty and the 68 crimes to which it applies.

The issues of concern here are probably best managed by grouping them. First is the general human rights situation in regard to China and the character of the dialogue that is taking place. There is then a second group of issues relating to the position of Falun Gong, particularly the evidence we heard about the experience since 1999. The definition of Falun Gong as a cult, for instance, is capable of closer investigation in the context of what is accepted internationally as the defining characteristics of a cult. In my discussions with representatives of the Chinese Embassy and others over the years, including those I spoke to when I visited China, I detected a certain ambiguity in regard to Confucianism, for example. From the perspective of an outsider, Falun Gong does not seem to have the characteristics generally associated with a cult.

This leads on to a consideration of the set of practices since 1999. I listened with great care to what Ms Dai told us and I accept it. It is important to be frank in our consideration of what is best to do. All of these issues — general human rights, the death penalty, the definition of Falun Gong and the various responses post-1999, which include torture, enforced labour and death — occupy different levels in a consideration of the human rights situation in China. As I said, the Chinese Government must not be allowed to use the veil of sovereignty to evade responding to concerns on all these levels.

The Matas-Kilgour report is a particular issue. The report is frank in its assertion that it departs from the usual practice in criminal reports of the presentation of a deductive case. Its case is made inductively and across a set of categories. These categories, which may be supplemented by additional points in the future, are ones where the evidence is to some extent secondary. As more and more of this type of information is accrued, it leads one almost inexorably to a conclusion that is arrived at inductively. We should be frank in acknowledging that this is a lesser category of proof than that which is employed in some of the human rights reports issued internationally. I am not dismissing it for this reason; in assessing a report on any area of human rights, one must look at the capacity that existed to gather evidence and draw conclusions by a particular methodology.

The function of this committee is to see how far we can get to a resolution of human rights abuses. One would expect the representative of any country with whom we have relations to seek to make such a defence as it deems feasible. At the same time, the definition of friendly relations with a country means one should be able to speak frankly. I speak frankly in making the case that the Chinese Government is guilty of an abuse of sovereignty in its discussions of human rights issues and its lack of engagement with international attempts to universalise human rights principles. One might say that the rhetorical statement about acceptance of the ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is in itself an acceptance of the case for the universalisation of human rights. If that is the case, sovereignty is no longer an acceptable screen.

People should study the report in detail. On my first reading of it I was struck by the gap between the more than 41,500 procedures and the suggested source. One cannot simply dispose of the discrepancy between 41,500 transplants and the couple of thousand or couple of hundred donors. By any standard, it is reasonable to ask how the gap can be explained. One cannot then dismiss it by falling into propaganda on one side or the other.

I am anxious to be of as much assistance as possible in this regard. Since 1999, I have received correspondence from different practitioners of Falun Gong. I am acquainted with its philosophical background, the public demonstration of the practice and so forth. I am interested in helping it. However, its practitioners should also dispose of a context that is frequently used to dismiss their claims and some of these reports, namely, that it is simply anti-China. China has a history of empire and the future of China is a matter of conjecture. While I have my own views in this regard they are for another occasion.

It is useful to draw a distinction between the different levels of the presentations heard by members. I refer to the general human rights situation, which would include specific issues the joint committee has often taken up, such as questions concerning Tibet and the definition in 1999 of Falun Gong as a cult, which can be dealt with in another way, as well as issues regarding the universalising of human rights. Thereafter, one comes to the particular issues raised in the report. What can one do about the Matas-Kilgour report? For a start, it should be forwarded to the joint committee's Sub-Committee on Human Rights. This should not be done simply to leave it there, but to ask it to prepare an appropriate message to the bilateral talks that are taking place between Ireland and China. I refer to the human rights dialogue and a specific proposal could be made to have the matter investigated independently. It is important to raise the matter with China.

It is also important for China to allow an independent observation without notice. It is certainly true that this resembles inspections for weapons of mass destruction in that there is no point in arriving weeks after a whistle has been blown. I accept Mr. Kilgour's point in this regard. However, I assure him that those members who have been interested in human rights in China for some time are well aware of the issues in a general sense. Moreover, such members are well disposed to hearing representatives and practitioners of Falun Gong and in seeking to advance the particulars.

Ultimately, one needs courage to take up such issues with countries. I am aware of the Canadian change and it is correct. If the Canadian dialogue with China is to be reduced to mere rhetoric, the correct approach for a country with a strong background in international human rights is to look for a different model. While all these matters should be borne in mind when considering the joint committee's response, I am anxious to be of as much assistance as possible.

Deputy C. Murphy

While I am not a member of this joint committee, I have an interest in this issue. I was introduced to it outside the gates of Leinster House, when newspapers were distributed that contained some fairly graphic and horrific photographs and articles. I decided it was important to satisfy myself, both as a citizen and as a parliamentarian, as to whether there was a basis for those newspaper reports. I received a copy of this report during the summer and found it to be useful. It gave me even greater cause for concern as I found the newspaper articles were backed up by the testimonies in the report. At the least, one should adopt the precautionary principle, namely, if there is a basis to this, one must ensure that one does something about it.

I accept that in the recent past, the Chinese have taken an extremely defensive approach as far as probing and outside interest is concerned. That said, I reiterate the point made by Deputy Michael D. Higgins that one would not wish to be seen to be, or to give the impression that one is anti-Chinese. China has a long and rich culture and I do not understand why it allows that culture to be let down by not being open to investigating such issues, as it does not reflect well on the country. Clearly, given its economic expansion and so on, China hopes to have a more ongoing dialogue with the West. Consequently, human rights issues must be tackled and as a country, China must be open about it.

As for the response, not being a member of this joint committee I will take guidance from the suggestions made as to what can be done by the Oireachtas. For instance, I would have no difficulty in placing a link on my website to highlight this issue as an example of one person doing something. I take the witnesses' point regarding events such as the Olympic Games. However, international trade requires a balance in terms of adherence to human rights and if one quarter of what I have seen in this report stands up, a significant basis exists for probing further, satisfying ourselves and trying to seek redress. I apologise for being obliged to leave the meeting for part of the presentation, which was due to the time at which the meeting was scheduled. As I have engaged in an ongoing dialogue in this regard, I am reasonably well-acquainted with some of the issues raised.

Senator Norris

I welcome Mr. Kilgour. He is a distinguished man and his report is balanced. It is an affront to us all that, apparently, human beings are now regarded as an assemblage of body parts for commercial harvesting. This is a staggering thought. Although most people had hoped we had got away from such matters after Nuremburg, we have not. Respect for the body of a deceased person is an ancient and essential part of our humanity, as is respect for the feelings of the bereaved family of the deceased. If one is not prepared to stand up for this, one is not prepared to stand up for anything at all.

I was in the background helping Ms Dongxue Dai, whose work I know, to arrange this meeting. I am glad it was facilitated because the Government will not move without a public campaign to shame it. It has never shown the slightest commitment to human rights internationally. I am not simply referring to this Government as this is a fact of realpolitik. If one is looking for ethical considerations, one must have leverage, which is best acquired by organising and motivating public opinion.

The Government is now highly critical of Saddam Hussein. However, I remember a time when I was a lone voice in voting against the beef deals with the Iraqi army. I remember being told from the Government benches that while my proposal might well have been the ethical and moral course, the question was whether Ireland could afford it. That was 15 years ago. I have just come from the Order of Business in the Seanad, in which the question of ethical investments by the National Pensions Reserve Fund was raised by one of my colleagues. I also have had meetings with the Minister of State last week on this issue. Government Members again have told us that if we had our way and there was ethical investment, there would be no pensions for anyone. This is the kind of attitude with which members are dealing and they might as well face up to it.

We have a major job in terms of moving the Government and the media, rather than public opinion which can be moved. I hope this will be reported and reported in a responsible way. One of the major newspapers, the Irish Independent, carried a disgraceful article last week. It was an attack on the Dalai Lama in which he was described as a saffron dwarf and contained extreme vulgarity and obscenity of language.

The Government is, of course, interested in China because it sees it as the major economic machine in the Orient. This is what it is after. It is a case of follow the money. If one wishes to get away from this totally mercenary approach, public opinion must be moved. It can be moved because what is happening in this instance is so scandalous. It is not simply what we heard here today and have read about. It also involves issues like the fact that the Chinese Government has been selling corpses for exhibition as art. These are people who did not give permission. I do not know whether they were prisoners. There is no explanation of it yet these exhibitions of human corpses are made available. Despite this very few questions are raised.

In respect of the presentation, Ms Dongxue Dai knows very well — I have advised her in the past — that this issue must be separated from the specific Falun Gong idea. Falun Gong has been persecuted, which is a matter of great regret and is something that must be followed up. However, if we are going to have a real impact on this area, it must be the broad general human rights issue. Nobody should be subjected to these things. It does not matter a damn to me whether they are part of Falun Gong or not. They are human beings and we must look at this. The fact that many of them probably are part of Falun Gong is another issue that must also be dealt with.

The persecution of Falun Gong is a separate issue. If it is seen as, if I may use the word, a "sectarian", partisan or sectional issue or just one aspect of Chinese life, we will not succeed as quickly as we should. We must therefore concentrate on the broad human rights issue. We start from the position that in Europe, capital punishment has been outlawed. We no longer regard it as an appropriate way to treat prisoners, except, of course, the twin potatoes in Poland who are trying to drag Europe backwards as hard as they can.

In respect of the report, I note the reservations of my esteemed colleague, Deputy Michael D. Higgins. It is prudent for us to take these into account. However, the overwhelming circumstantial evidence is there. There is no question or doubt about that and I would be convinced by it. There is a clear prima facie case. Where does this enormous gap come from? Less than 2,000 prisoners are murdered and their organs harvested but what about the other 38,000 or 8,000? I think the yearly figure is 10,000. There is a significant discrepancy, amounting to perhaps five times the number that can be accounted for.

If Ms Dai wishes.

Ms Dongxue

Mr. Feng Lui was in a labour camp for a year and had his blood tested. If the Chinese authorities do not care about the health or welfare of members of the Falun Gong, why did they conduct blood tests on many people? Mr. Feng Lui is lucky to be here because he had high blood pressure. My sisters, who were brainwashed and followed the Chinese Government's line, were okay. On the surface, the Chinese Government states that people should at least be listened to, but it wants to eliminate anyone with ideas other than communism.

I have heard that Ireland respects our history and culture. It is true that we have 5,000 years of history and a rich culture, including Confucism, Taoism and, later, Buddhism. Until the Communist Party came to power in 1949, the Chinese liked peace, kindness, honesty and harmony, good universal principles practised everywhere in the world. In our school and college textbooks, we learned that we must fight, conquer and use violence to rule the country. By its nature, the Communist Party is violent and evil. If it had not got rid of the old cultures and philosophies of China, communist theories would not have taken hold in people's minds.

After the party established the Government, it shot dead the landlords, people who not only owned more land than others, but also owned more of the culture. I will tell a funny story. My mother was to be matched with a man who worked in the Government as the head of a large region, but he had another wife and two children. This was the fashion of the time, namely, Communist Party and military officials would find new wives with better educations in the cities. However, my grandmother refused because she was afraid that if the Communist Party disappeared, the man in question would be shot dead for shooting landlords village by village.

The Government got rid of business owners in the cities and, during the cultural revolution, the intellectuals, many of whom were outspoken and influenced society. In 1957, Chairman Mao initiated a movement and asked people to give opinions to the party. Those who were loyal to the party stated that they were honest and explained what they thought about it, but those with different opinions or people who criticised the party were labelled as rightists. They were expelled and sent to labour camps and prisons, after which the cultural revolution took place. It got rid of Confucism, Taoism and good values. By 1976, when the trial of the Gang of Four and the revolution had concluded, there was a vacuum in the minds of the Chinese. We had nothing but communism.

The Government wants to get rid of Falun Gong practitioners because we are continuing our traditions of the good principles of truthfulness, compassion and tolerance. The Government wants to brainwash us, it does not give us passports and it sends us to labour camps if we persist. They want to kill our spirit. Like my sisters, when someone's spirit is killed by brainwashing, he or she will be fine, but when the spirit cannot be killed, the person is killed.

We have had some debate about the lack of absolute proof. It is difficult to obtain such proof. The report is based on the substantial balance of evidence. I thank Ms Dongxue Dai for an informative and emotional contribution. The members understand the personal experience recounted. Our meetings are public and embassies are informed of upcoming meetings. The Chinese ambassador states the following in his letter:

In respect of human organ transplant, China has consistently abided by the relevant guiding principles of the WHO endorsed in 1991, prohibiting the sale of human organs and stipulating that donors' written consent must be obtained beforehand and donors are entitled to refuse donation at last minute. China has issued a regulation on human organ transplants, explicitly banning the sale of organs and introducing a set of medical standards for organ transplants in an effort to guarantee medical safety and the health of patients. The regulation requires medical institution, which is qualified for practicing human organ transplant to register at provincial level health department. Unregistered medical institutions are forbidden to practice human organ transplant. If the government finds any registered institution violating the regulation, it will cancel the registration and punish the people responsible.

The body of opinion from human rights defenders was that this was happening. Members may be aware that The Washington Times of 17 November refers to an admission of certain organ transplants:

"Most of the organs from cadavers are from executed prisoners," Vice Health Minister Huang Jiefu said at a summit for transplant doctors in Guangzhou this week, state newspapers reported. [...]Under new rules, foreigners would only be allowed to come to China for transplants under regulations yet to be announced but that would conform to international standards, the summit was told. Priority would be given to an estimated 1 million Chinese on waiting lists.

Senator Norris

Does the Chairman not feel that the article from which he has quoted makes complete nonsense of the Chinese ambassador's letter? Would it not be better to invite the ambassador to answer these questions?

Chairman

The Chinese ambassador refers to the current situation in legislation.

Deputy M. Higgins

Temporary legislation.

Chairman

Temporary legislation to this effect exists. The dialogue with the EU, concerning trade and other matters, is taking place. We believe there is a need for an independent investigation and we will refer the matter to the sub-committee on human rights, which can give more time to the matter. We will follow up on this with the Department of Foreign Affairs in respect of its direct relations with China and the matter of the EU dialogue.

Mr. Kilgour

I meet the Department of Foreign Affairs this afternoon. I did not see the letter before the Chairman read it out. May I make a comment on it?

Chairman

It arrived last night.

Mr. Kilgour

Chairman

I do not want to become confrontational. We have invited Mr. Kilgour to put the case. We do not have time to go into details. On the basis of Mr. Kilgour's body of evidence he has come to the conclusion that organ harvesting is taking place. Others are concerned about this, as is this committee. We wish to keep out of the political side of things. We want to prepare our case, pursue it and use the means we have including the Department of Foreign Affairs and the sub-committee. The points made by Ms Dongxue Dai and Mr. Feng Lui were moving.

JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS debate - Thursday, 23 Nov 2006

Alleged Organ Harvesting in China: Presentation.

Mr. David Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Ms Dongxue Dai

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Feng

Mr. Feng

Ms Dongxue

Ms Dongxue

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Feng

Mr. Feng

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

Mr. Kilgour

JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS debate -
Thursday, 23 Nov 2006