Transparent Transition: Chinese Internet Undermines Corruption

Sunshine Laws. That is what open information laws are called in many western countries because they provide the opportunity to better see what is being done behind closed doors.

Where such laws do not exist, the internet, with its 'information just wants to be free' ethos makes transparent much of what used to be secret. It is no secret that this is why officials fear the net and why one of the first steps taken during times of controversy or upheaval is to attempt to censor or entirely it shut down.

Xiao Han comments in Caixin on how the exposure of one case of official corruption in China is emblamatic of the changes this may produce. His commentary is notable for its sophisticated but pragmatic understanding of the forces at play. JL:

"How the public's online interest in a Shenyang official’s reaction to media reports over his wife’s business effectively served as a check on corruption. In contemporary China, while information is not as open and quickly disseminated as the people would hope, and free press and freedom of expression are far from optimal, the development of electronic technology and Internet technology have made it difficult for the bureaucracy to easily control the flow of information.
The Yang Xiaoxong incident highlights the conflict between the information society and the bureaucratic political system. Even if the Liao Shen Evening News had not reported on the incident of his family's bakery selling moldy rice dumplings, other media might have. Yang's own drunken row with Liao Shen Evening News was exposed by Internet users, reproduced in various Internet forums and microblogging sites, which led to follow-up reports from Xinhua and an official investigation.

The arrival of the information society no doubt threatens the monopoly on information by which the bureaucratic system survives, making officials unable to infringe upon the freedom of ordinary citizens with impunity. But as to the punishment of official violations of discipline, under the existing bureaucratic system, much is still left to randomness and chance.

In many cases, how and to what extent those involved are punished rests entirely on an overall calculation of the balance between personal interests and bureaucratic interests.

Compared to a large number of cases, the consequences of Yang's actions were not particularly serious, and that he is even being punished by discipline inspection authorities may only be because of his low official rank – he had no senior figures to shield him. Perhaps he had made enemies in official circles and competitors took the opportunity to deal him a blow. Or maybe he simply broke the unwritten rules of officialdom. Perhaps if he had privately confronted someone in charge at the newspaper instead of making a public ruckus, the results would have been different.

Whatever the reasons that contributed to the current state of the case, at least one thing is clear. The Shenyang Prefecture Commission for Discipline Inspection is not the best body to try the case. The Shenyang Party Committee system for punishing breaches of discipline is only used for party members and does not possess a common binding applicable to ordinary citizens. Thus, it is equivalent to an extra-legal privilege. From a democratic point of view, it overrides judicial power and is contrary to the spirit of rule of law.

This sort of internal, institutional method, in a situation where the bureaucracy is unable to monopolize the dissemination of information and official infringements of public interest are made public, officialdom has no alternative but to either sacrifice an individual to pacify public outrage, or, sometimes, manipulate legal procedures under the cover of darkness to exempt those involved from criminal liability.

This punishment approach only uses rule-of-law processes to shroud bureaucratic punishment in a veneer of legality.

In a society truly ruled by law, officials abusing their power would not be tolerated under a democratic constitution. Second, even if this sort of enterprising behavior occurred in a rule-of-law society, it would be conducted in secret, not on a grand scale, and such outrages would not be committed for improper benefits. Third, once exposed, this sort of thing should be handed over directly to the judiciary, not an institution used to override judicial authority to penalize misdeeds.

The Yang Xiaosong incident not only highlights the conflicts between the information society and the official bureaucracy, but also shows that under the current system, it is extremely difficult for the rule of law to grow, if not impossible to survive at all. However, the democratic transformations of many countries show that freedom and openness of information are some of the most important drivers behind the move from bureaucratic politics to citizen politics, if not the most important. As a result, freedom of information is the most important sustaining force in the rule of law gradually taking root.