WRITTEN EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY FALUN DAFA ASSOCIATION UK

(TRUK0122)

1. Recommendation for the UK government

For the past 25 years, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been relentless in their domestic persecution of Falun Gong. They have shown no sign of easing the killing, detention and torture of Falun Gong practitioners for their faith.[10]  As a result, overseas Falun Gong practitioners continue to be outspoken about this human rights atrocity.

The CCP, instead of ending the killing and persecution, have stated that their current policy is now to “fully eliminate Falun Gong worldwide”.[3] Our experiences bear this out.

In the past year, there have been over 60 bomb threats, threats of violence, death and rape of female Falun Gong practitioners that have been received by Falun Gong affiliated groups globally. They are just one part of a much larger, very aggressive transnational repression effort that we are currently experiencing. [5]

The recent bomb and shooting threats on British soil are an escalation that is both dangerous and unacceptable in a civilised society. As the Communist Party becomes more aggressive and openly authoritarian its actions in the UK undermines our own laws, values, and principles.

We encourage the UK government to be clear-sighted and strong against the actions of the CCP, in order to protect British nationals. 

As the China Tribunal said, “Governments and any who interact in any substantial way with the PRC … should now recognise that they are ... interacting with a criminal state.”

2. Addressing questions by the Joint Committee on Human Rights

A. Definition and understanding

1.Should the Government adopt a formal definition of transnational repression? What should be the key elements of a definition?

Yes, the Government should adopt a formal definition of transnational repression.  Key elements of this definition should include: a state policy that is widespread, organised, and implemented over a reasonable period of time.

2.How does transnational repression impact (a) those targeted and (b) their wider communities?

Those targeted live constantly in fear.  Their wider communities are always on the defensive and constantly have to explain what is actually going on in China. Countering state propaganda is a huge task for our community. Working with Shen Yun venues, it is frightening when we receive a bomb threat. The CCP has shown that they do not respect human life. So this escalation of violent threat is a genuine concern. Their stated tactic includes “no traceable ties” back to them, so how far will they take these bomb threats in British theatres?

3.Which states are currently understood to be the biggest perpetrators of transnational repression in the UK? What are the main methods employed by such actors in the UK?

China. The methods employed are varied, coordinated and sophisticated as this report, we hope, displays.

B. Government response

4.What steps has the Government taken to address transnational repression in the UK? What departments have been involved in these steps? How effective is coordination between departments?

We have approached ministers over the years, to no effect.  Local police have been very supportive with the recent bomb and shooting threats. We have contacted Ofcom, also to no effect.  We have seen no evidence of effective coordination between departments.

5.Several allied countries have taken action in relation to transnational repression in recent years. What could the UK Government learn from other countries’ legislative and policy responses to transnational repression?

In the US, the FBI is the organisation that is able to uncover crimes of transnational repression, for example the arrest and conviction of 2 CCP proxies trying to “topple” Shen Yun [11], and the “Illegal Agent” of the PRC [12]. The FBI have a larger, national picture, as opposed to local police.

6.To what extent has entry into force of the National Security Act 2023, in particular the new offence of foreign interference and the Foreign Influence Registration scheme, helped to strengthen the UK’s ability to tackle transnational repression?

The Act has been in force for slightly more than two months, and we are aware of no prosecutions having thus far been brought.  The effectiveness of this legislation will depend entirely on how well-organised HMG is in looking for evidence of transnational repression, as defined above.

We have reported 3 bomb threats since the legislation came into effect and we are not aware that the police sought any evidence of a transnational repression element to the crime. So we do not believe that the police are looking for transnational repression.

7.How effective is other UK domestic legislation in preventing instances of transnational repression? What gaps have been identified and how may they be addressed?

8.What international legal obligations does the UK have in relation to transnational repression? Are there further steps, including legislative, that the UK should take to give effect to those obligations?

C. Law enforcement and support for victims

9.What issues have been encountered by law enforcement and the Intelligence Community in countering transnational repression within the UK?

10.How effective are the police at recognising and dealing with instances of transnational repression? Is a consistent approach offered by different police forces across the UK?

We have been advised to report Shen Yun venue bomb threats to MI5 as well as local police forces precisely because of a perceived lack of coordination between local forces.  If transnational repression is not identified, it cannot be countered.

11.How effective is the support and security assistance offered to (a) individuals and (b) communities that are the targets of transnational repression? What guidance is provided to victims and how is it tailored depending on the state perpetrating the attack?

The police response to threats of violence has generally been excellent.  However, it does not appear to be the responsibility of local police forces to identify large-scale transnational repression, so the individual acts are responded to individually.  No single body appears to be responsible for tying multiple independent reports together to identify systematic transnational repression, so there can be no meaningful response to it.

(Feb 2025)