Freedom of speech in China

MARK COLVIN: The future of Australia's economy is now fairly heavily linked to China's continuing prosperity.

There's no question that the Chinese economy has been expanding at great speed and few believe it's about to stop dead in its tracks.

But some argue that a lack of transparency, a dependent judiciary, and an un-free press will all eventually start to put some brakes on the country's transformation.

So what can be talked about freely in China? What are their limits and how do people know not to cross them?

Professor Wang Hui of Tsinghua University in Beijing was the editor for ten years of the intellectual magazine Dushu, which pushed the boundaries more than most.

I asked him what people like him in China felt free to talk about.

WANG HUI: Generally speaking what I want to do for example my research work I can do myself at university. For example I was editor of Dushu magazine. We were able to launch a series of the intellectual discussions on the different topics concerning different aspects of the Chinese society - political, culture, economic and social. Of course, I know that there was certain kind of restrictions but still we had the space for that discussion.

MARK COLVIN: Was it because it was an intellectual magazine and therefore it wasn't necessarily going to inflame large numbers of people?

WANG HUI: Maybe. It's different from the mass media, especially the newspaper and the TV, that's different.

But on the other hand there was an interaction between the intellectual debates and the discussion and the public discussion. For example we had the discussion on agriculture crisis for example in 2000. Then that spread over to the mass media and eventually the result is policy changing happened.

And there were some other cases like this.

MARK COLVIN: Is it permitted really seriously to question the central role of the Communist Party?

WANG HUI: It's out of the question but a lot of the discussions on the issue of the political reform of course in a certain way for that.

MARK COLVIN: So you have to tiptoe around it a bit? If you step carefully you can talk about it?

WANG HUI: It's up to what kind of question you can raise about it in political reform.

MARK COLVIN: So what's ruled out?

WANG HUI: For example, now- recently there was still a lot of discussions on the democracy within the party system and also the how that made the government behaviour more transparent. That kind of discussion. And it’s still a lot of discussion on these kind of issues.

MARK COLVIN: If somebody were to discuss seriously making all of China a lot more like Hong Kong in the way it runs itself, would that be an allowable discussion?

WANG HUI: Not so many people believe that immediately that kind of the change happen.

MARK COLVIN: Yeah I'm not suggesting that's a majority view. I'm asking whether it's allowed to be discussed?

WANG HUI: Of course. There were some people trying to argue in that way. Basically, among the Chinese intellectuals there was a debate on what kind of political form that China should be. Some is arguing for formal democracy in a sense of western democracy, different models of course - America, European, maybe Australia.

And then some others tried to argue that maybe we need to find alternatives from our own historical conditions. But the basic direction is more open and democratic.

MARK COLVIN: Is it allowable to discuss, not independence for Tibet, but some form of more autonomous government for Tibet?

WANG HUI: Tibet issue is very complicated issue. I think that of course among the policy makers and among the intellectuals what kind of framework or the institution of framework can be used to resolve the problems that happen in Tibet is ongoing.

Actually next week there will be a conference in Beijing, an international conference I think – small- not small scale but intellectual discussion on these kind of issues.

MARK COLVIN: And it will be freely discussed?

WANG HUI: Um… it has not happened but I do believe that there will be a free discussion. I do believe that; among the intellectuals.

MARK COLVIN: Now you have suffered in the past for your own freedom of speech.

WANG HUI: Yes.

MARK COLVIN: You were sent for re-education after Tiananmen.

WANG HUI: Yes.

MARK COLVIN: Clearly you would say that things are much better than that now?

WANG HUI: It's difficult. Of course that after 1989 a very tough period - the whole country and many people suffered from that period. And it's difficult because I know that you rques- that people used to ask the question whether or not now the freer or more difficult and so on and so forth.

Sometimes my feeling is that it’s the public space - the expansion of the public space. It not only depends on the allowance from above, but also whether or not the intellectuals and other social forces have the strength, the capacity to open up some topics, questions for the public interest and discussion.

Through that practice you can expand the space. I served as the editor of Dushu for one decade. We were able... A lot of difficulties, of course, but we were able to touch upon those issues. So that's my experience.

MARK COLVIN: Professor Wang Hui of Tsinghua University in Beijing, former editor of Dushu magazine in China.