IPVM Testifies at Uyghur TribunalBy IPVM Team, Published Sep 14, 2021, 10:08am EDT
IPVM provided expert testimony to the Uyghur Tribunal in London on September 12, outlining how PRC China authorities use various surveillance tools to oppress and control the ethnic minority group in China. The video clip below shows the introduction:
Conor Healy, IPVM's government director, provided an expert report and testimony to the panel, discussing the role of video surveillance in oppressing the PRC's Uyghur population. Healy also testified about how new technology such as "emotion detection" cameras and devices like smart Tiger Chairs are developed and used by the PRC to persecute Uyghurs and other minorities.
The Uygur Tribunal questioned IPVM for ~50 minutes after IPVM's 10-minute presentation ended, as this clip shows:
The entire 1-hour IPVM testimony and questioning by the Tribunal may be watched below:
The Uyghur Tribunal is an independent, UK-based body chaired by a British attorney Geoffrey Nice, who served as the lead prosecutor in the 2002-2006 war crimes trial of Slobodon Milosevic. The goal of the panel is to "reach an impartial and considered judgment on whether international crimes are proved to have been committed by the PRC".
The tribunal also includes prominent international human rights attorneys such as Hamid Sabi. As counsel to the Iran Tribunal, Sabi investigated mass killings of political prisoners by the Islamic Republic of Iran in the 1980s.
The tribunal has featured eyewitness testimony from ethnic Uyghurs and Kazakhs previously detained in 'reeducation camps' in Xinjiang, former PRC policeman Wang Leizhan, and former British diplomat and China expert Charles Parton.
China experts, such as Professor James Millward, Professor John Packer, Dr. Darren Byler, Dr. Rian Thum, Dr. David Tobin, Dr. Adrianok Zenz, and Jessica Batke, provided testimony. Like IPVM, this testimony centered on an ongoing pattern of human rights abuses against minority groups in Xinjiang.
As the Tribunal explains itself, it aims to reach a judgment on whether the PRC has committed international crimes as the PRC objects to the International Court of Justice's jurisdiction:
If it were realistically possible to bring the PRC to any formal international court – in particular to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) – there would be no need for the establishment of a people’s tribunal.
There is no such possibility not least because China/the PRC, although a signatory to and ratifier of the Genocide Convention, has entered a reservation against ICJ jurisdiction. There is no known route to any other court that can deal with the issues before the tribunal.
The Uyghur Tribunal, which has no powers of sanction or enforcement, will confine itself to reviewing evidence in order to reach an impartial and considered judgment on whether international crimes are proved to have been committed by the PRC.
It will be for States, international institutions, commercial companies, art, medical and educational establishments and individuals to determine how to apply the Tribunal’s Judgment, whatever it may be, in their dealings with the PRC. This could include, but is not limited to, trade and other sanctions including against individuals, proscribing the sale of technologies, surveillance and medical equipment and the declaration of ineligibility for visas
The panel is currently holding its second set of hearings, following proceedings in June, and is expected to issue its judgment in December 2021.
IPVM shall continue to report on the progress and judgment of the Uyghur Tribunal.
Back to Top