A top official of Guangzhou municipality urged the city's police officers to
"have the courage to fire" at armed robbers who are threatening the life of a
citizen or police officer.
Zhang Guifang made the appeal when commenting on police shooting a criminal
suspect who had robbed a woman by pressing a knife against her neck and later
resisted arrest by thrusting the knife towards the police officer.
The official's words sparked hot debate in the nation's media. Internet
surveys found that 80 per cent of Chinese citizens approve of the shooting. Some
legal experts and newspaper columnists, however, criticized Zhang, saying that
his words could incite police officers to abuse the use of weapons and could
lead to the killing of innocent people. They also said that the widespread
sentiment of supporting police shootings represents a "dangerous inclination in
the public of using violence against violence" and asserted that such a
sentiment would "jeopardize China's process of democratization."
You've got to hand it to these scholars and writers for their ardent defence
of human rights and democracy. Yet on second thoughts I doubt if their
allegations are really that reasonable.
First, their accusation was based on misinterpretation of Zhang's words.
Zhang's argument was made against the backdrop that some public places in
Guangzhou are infested by the kanshou dang (gang of hand-choppers) who cut off
the hands of their victims, usually a woman, to snatch their handbags. And his
appeal was based on the fact that many police officers dare not open fire, even
when the lives of victims or their own are threatened. Zhang asked the police to
"dare to take the responsibility to fight crimes with legal weapons."
Second, support from the majority of the public for police use of firearms in
the above-mentioned situation stems from a natural sense of justice rather than
a "dangerous inclination for violence."
Presently, violent crimes are becoming rampant in many places across the
country. The Guangzhou Railway Station, for example, is notorious for savage
robbery by armed thugs, who would not hesitate to fatally harm the victim even
for something worth as little as US$1. Citizens are increasingly worried about
security in public places and yearn for forceful protection from the police.
The police, however, have become increasingly wary of taking tough action
against criminals even when the crime is conspicuous. There have been more and
more cases in recent years in which police officers were accused of violating
the human rights of suspects. Some police officers choose to shy away from
getting involved in "difficult to be clarified troubles." That is exactly why
Zhang called for police officers to "dare to take the responsibility."
Blame certainly should not be placed on people's growing awareness of human
rights. The problem lies with the ambiguity of the law concerning police use of
weapons. The Regulations on the Use of Weapons by Police stipulates that
"policeman should refrain from using weapons unless the refraining may lead to a
more serious consequence." The wording is too general and too vague. A police
officer would hardly have time, in an emergency, to determine if the situation
is as serious as stated in the law. The law should be more specific in defining
the conditions .
In many cases, the question is not about police abusing power, but rather
about their shirking responsibility to protect themselves from being accused of
abusing power. We seem to have gone to the other extreme in emphasizing the
human rights of criminal suspects. Criminals seem to have become more and more
audacious in preying on citizens while the police have become less and less
courageous in fighting violent crimes.
For the sake of protecting common citizens, let's stop preaching about the
human rights of criminals for a while.
Email: liushinan@chinadaily.com.cn
(China Daily 04/12/2006 page4)
