CMP reported earlier this week about a bold feature page at Sohu.com, one of China’s top internet news portals, that took a not-so-subtle jab at a heavyweight series of official Party editorials appearing recently in People’s Daily under the mysterious assumed name “Zheng Qingyuan” (郑青原). Topping the Sohu page, which was quickly “harmonized” but can be downloaded in PDF form here (Sohu Missing Page 11.2), was an unmistakable visual reference to the disquieted era of the Cultural Revolution, when ideological rancor tore the country apart.

Lately, a series of articles under the assumed name “Zheng Qingyuan” have sailed into the world, and have been re-posted by major internet portals. Masses of [Chinese] readers have speculated as to who this person is? So suddenly commanding banner positions at major sites, this must be [someone] of no ordinary background. Actually, “Zheng Qingyuan” is not any specific person, but rather is [the name given to] a writing task group. But its “background” is out of the ordinary indeed. In the history of New China [since 1949], these writing task groups have existed all along.

A couple of subsections on the feature page linked to the same Beijing Morning Post article, called “Who is People’s Daily’s ‘Zheng Qingyuan’?” The Sohu page originally containing the article was expunged along with the feature page itself, but is still available elsewhere.
We have a (more or less) full translation of the Beijing Morning Post piece below.
Further down the feature page, Sohu provided a convenient table revealing a number of important “writing task groups” and the specific political interests behind them. The assumed name “Tang Xiaowen” (唐晓文), for example, is used for editorials from the Central Party School. The assumed name Ding Xuelei (丁学雷) is used for the Shanghai Party Committee, representing the city’s top Party leaders. Readers can see the full (unfortunately brief) list by clicking on the link to the feature page PDF at the top of this post.

“Who is People’s Daily’s ‘Zheng Qingyuan’?” [original link, now “missing”]
Beijing Morning Post
November 2, 2010
Readers who read the People’s Daily and People’s Daily Online will know that commentaries at the newspaper and website have a pre-eminent place among central Party media. In the past, aside from essays from a number of well-known commentary writers, there have been other bylines, like “Ren Zhongping” (任仲平) and Zhong Zuwen (仲祖文) with unique backing. Ren Zhongping is byline referring to group commentaries by People’s Daily, and a series of influential commentaries on the occasion of the PRC’s 60th anniversary were written under the name “Ren Zhongping,” a writer who is expert at commenting on major affairs, but who is really a group of handsome guys and pretty girls at People’s Daily. These sorts of commentaries have not only tight logic, but are written with literary grace as well, and they are generally well received by readers.
Another name often seen at People’s Daily is “Zhong Zuwen,” who we understand is a name given to commentaries written in the name of the Organizational Department of the CCP Central Committee. So if there is expounding on principles that touch on issues of ideological building (思想建设) or organization building (组织建设) within the Party, these come under the name “Zhong Zuwen.” For example, the study and practice of the scientific view of development (科学发展观), creating excellence (创优争先), and important language about various important movements in the past, are all expounded under the name “Zhong Zuwen.” There is no specific writer behind the name, and the focus is on the importance of the essay, the depth of its thought, and on how its views serve to direct . . .
Plainly, among these two bylines, the political status of the latter is greater than that of the former. While the former (“Ren Zhongping”) is after all the voice of the editorial department at People’s Daily, commentaries from the latter must go through the approval of the Organizational Department.
Following the [recent] Fifth Plenary Conference of the 17th Central Committee, an article under the name “Zheng Qingyuan” (郑青原) appeared to the world at People’s Daily and People’s Daily Online. This is an entirely new name that has never before appeared, and People’s Daily and People’s Daily Online have run three consecutive pieces under this name, including “To Promote Reform With Greater Resolve and Courage,” “Strive for a Brighter Future” and “Moving in a Correct Direction to Reliably Advance Political Reform“. Each article was weightier than the last, particularly the third, an essay that dealt with the sensitive issue of political reform and which was posted to the very top of People’s Daily Online for 24 hours, something itself unprecedented. All of this points to the importance of these pieces under the name “Zheng Qingyuan,” and implies that this “Zheng Qingyuan” is no ordinary writer [or set of writers], something that has piqued the curiosity of readers.
The piece, “Moving in a Correct Direction to Reliably Advance Political Reform” was released after the official bulletin on the resolutions of the Fifth Plenary Conference of the 17th Central Committee, and in an atmosphere in which the high expectations of some people ahead of the conference that there would be [actions on] political system reforms were disappointed. The article was brief and concise, offering a full description and clarification of the major question of political system reforms in our country. The article stated clearly that “the question of what kind of political system [a nation] employs, and what path of political development it takes, is something determined by the will of that country’s masses, and by the specific national circumstances, history and culture of that nation. Looking back on 30 years of opening and reform in our country, [the article said], it was clear that political system reforms had never ceased, that [reforms] had been promoted steadily while keeping to a correct political direction, and that the results obtained had been impressive; [the essay] struck back against a number of overseas media that had criticized our country for “lagging seriously behind on political reforms,” and once again raised Deng Xiaoping’s three standards by which to measure political reform . . .
The raising and emphasizing of these major viewpoints is clearly not something a single individual alone would have the ability to accomplish. Moreover, the conspicuous placement of these articles in People’s Daily and People’s Daily Online suggests that these are articles meant to explain and publicize the spirit of the Fifth Plenary Conference of the 17th Central Committee, and that they set the direction on the issue of political system reforms in the near term. They serve as bugle calls to set the tone, and they are of no ordinary political significance. For the outside world, and for people’s understanding of political reform, they serve to clarify matters and get to the bottom of things (正本清源). Therefore, internet users [in China] have, according to the past tendencies of People’s Daily [in selecting special bylines of this sort], taken [the name] “Zheng Qingyuan” to mean “clarifying matters and getting to the bottom of things. It is understandable that they have drawn wide interest.
However, analyzing the content of the above-mentioned articles, it seems to me that this understanding [of the significance of the pen name] is a more superficial understanding. I think [the name] represents a much higher-level personality or concord, and we can only understand this series of articles from “Zheng Qingyuan” as the public opinion guidance (舆论导向) [emerging from] the level of the politburo. These are the views emerging from the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the CCP, a masterwork making clear the shared will and ideology undertaken by the whole Party, given an assumed name as befits media practice and other considerations and needs.

Professor Yu Jianrong is head of the Rural Development Institute of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Born in Hengyang, Hunan Province, in 1962, he studied politics and law at Hunan Normal University in the 1980s, and in 2001 received his post-doctorate in legal studies from Huazhong Normal University. Professor Yu’s writings include “Change in Political Structures at the Village Level in Transitional China,” “Rights Defense and the Modern Rural Population: An Investigation of Hengyang, Hunan” and “Class and the Contemporary Chinese Worker.”

When a recent forum in Beijing brought together deans from law schools around the world, the most stirring moment came as Zhou Yongkang (周永康), the most senior Communist Party leader in charge of legal affairs in China, delivered an address stressing his support for a strong legal system. Zhou said China must “comply with the universal principles of law” and “adopt and learn from all great human precedents in the area of rule of law.”
The idea of building a “rule of law culture” is now all the rage in China’s media, and a look at recent major news stories tells us exactly why. Rule of law is no longer just about protecting the rights of the weak in China, but concerns the safety and security of government elites as well.
The first news story to make ripples lately is the bribery case against Long Xiaole (龙小乐), a senior Party official at Wuhan University in China’s inland Hubei province. Not long after the trial began, Long Xiaole told the court his confession had been extracted through torture, involving three consecutive days and nights of interrogation during which he was subjected to beatings and extreme cold. Long’s prosecutors acknowledged dismissively that “the interrogation had been rather long.” But they countered that “there are no laws or regulations [in China] about the length of interrogations, and so there no illegalities were involved.”
Legal scholars, including Ding Dafan (丁大帆), quickly pointed out that China signed and ratified the United Nations Convention Against Torture more than twenty years ago. Article I of the convention states that “torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession . . . ” Insofar as the convention applies to criminal law in China, any infliction of physical or mental suffering by public officers is illegal and constitutes torture.
The second major news story was the trial of Yang Jiannong (杨建农), a top police official in Hunan province. Shortly before Yang’s arrest, his wife, Chen Ling (陈玲), had made an internet post exposing a hornet’s nest of “dark plots” within the Hunan Public Security Department. Right on the heels of these online revelations, the department announced on its official website that Yang Jiannong was under investigation by provincial discipline inspectors for alleged acts of bribery reaching into the millions.
Both husband and wife are now prisoners. We can only speculate as to what connection this has to Chen Ling’s online muckraking.
Lawyers on the Hunan case have pointed to all sorts of problems in how the cases against Yang Jiannong and his wife have been handled. To begin with, Yang’s telephone line was reportedly monitored secretly while he was serving in his post. According to China’s Criminal Procedural Law, the family of Yang Jiannong’s wife, who was subsequently arrested for “fraudulent registration of assets”, should have been notified within twenty-four hours — they were not. Nor was the paperwork for her arrest handled properly.
Chen Ling has still been unable to meet with her lawyers, Hunan authorities claiming the case deals with “national secrets.” This explanation is ludicrous considering that “fraudulent registration of assets” is a common criminal offense, having nothing at all to do with matters of national secrecy. Everything gives the appearance local authorities are acting as they please, in utter contempt for the law and procedure.
Long Xiaole and Yang Jiannong are elites within China’s political system. They are, to use a popular phrase, “men of men.” But regardless of their privilege and status, their fates are fragile and every step is fraught with danger. Knocked down a notch, they find no more protection for their most basic rights than the most ordinary of Chinese. The system deals with them as it deals with all those who fall through the cracks and find themselves in positions of weakness.
In China, where modern rule of law effectively does not exist, and where experts say more than 70 percent of total social wealth is now concentrated in state hands, the national grab for wealth by those within the system operates by the law of the jungle. There are no rules or boundaries. This means the prospects for those inside the system, like Long Xiaole and Yang Jiannong, are as unpredictable as for anyone else. No one enjoys security, and the nightmare facing Long and Yang is shared by all those in positions of power and privilege. The system offers no guarantees, and might at any moment pull them down into the maelstrom.
We often assume the purpose of rule of law is to protect the weak. But this couldn’t be further from the truth. Rule of law is about protecting the rights of everyone, regardless of how much wealth or power they have, and it should mean anyone can plan for the future with a sense of security.
If China’s ruling elite want this kind of security, the only way forward is developing a culture of rule of law in China. This is why Zhou Yongkang’s words were so timely and understandable. It is not enough for the weak to clamor for rule of law. The resources of our society are not in their hands, after all.
Only when both weak and strong reach a broad consensus on the urgency of this issue can we turn the resources of our country toward the development of rule of law. And only then will change truly come. Clearly, the time is already here.
A version of this article originally appeared in Chinese at Time Weekly. [View Time Weekly on the China Media Map].

I was beside myself with excitement, and my face was washed with tears.