EndCCPWorld.com

709 Crackdown (2015)

From July 9, 2015, the CCP rounded up rights lawyers nationwide — 300+ taken or summoned. "Residential surveillance at a designated location" and televised confessions became hallmarks. Wang Quanzhang, held nearly 3 years, was the last sentenced. The largest assault on the legal profession since 1989.

Time

July 9, 2015 – 2017 (Wang Quanzhang's 2019 sentencing as coda)

Place

Nationwide; Beijing's Fengrui Law Firm as focus

Decision-makers

Ministry of Public Security (executor); Fu Zhenghua (then vice-minister; no public decision document); Xi Jinping (overall context)

Background: a decade of rights lawyers; Jiansanjiang

After the 2003 Sun Zhigang case, "rights lawyers" rose, defending petitioners, religious believers, dissidents. The 2014 Jiansanjiang incident — Tang Jitian, Jiang Tianyong and others detained and beaten for supporting Falun Gong practitioners in black jails — was seen as the prelude.

In 2015 the CCP decided rights lawyers were "hyping sensitive cases" with "foreign collusion" and moved to "kill the chicken to scare the monkeys."

Who decided

The Xi Jinping-era Central Committee — but the Politburo's 2015 decision-making was never made public — stated plainly. The verifiable chain: July 1, 2015: the National Security Law passed, 8 days before; July 9 (dawn): coordinated nationwide raids organized by the Ministry of Public Security — midnight hotel grabs, power cuts, boarding interceptions; July 11: Xinhua accused Zhou Shifeng of a "criminal syndicate." The irony: the 2014 4th Plenum had been all about "governing by law." How the top decided — no public record, unverified.

Who decided

The top leadership was the Xi Jinping-era Central Committee, but the Politburo's 2015 decision-making was never made public — stated plainly, not invented. The verifiable public chain:

• July 1, 2015: eight days before "709," the National Security Law was passed — tightening security around "core interests" (territorial integrity, CCP rule, continued development). Critics said it suppressed dissent.
• July 9, 2015 (dawn): coordinated nationwide raids organized by the Ministry of Public Security — dragged from hotel rooms at midnight, power cut at homes, stopped from boarding flights.
• July 11: Xinhua accused lawyer Zhou Shifeng of running a "criminal syndicate" at Beijing Fengrui Law Firm.
• The irony: the 4th Plenum (2014) had been devoted entirely to "governing by law"; scholars say 709 changed views of Xi's rule-of-law goal.
• How the top decided — no public record, unverified.

Detailed timeline

July 9, 2015: Fengrui's Wang Yu taken; that night lawyers seized or summoned nationwide.

July 11, 2015: Xinhua branded Fengrui a "major criminal gang."

July–August 2015: Detainees placed under "residential surveillance at a designated location" — secret detention, families uninformed. Zhou Shifeng, Wang Quanzhang, Li Heping vanished.

January 2016: CCTV aired "confessions."

August 2016: Tianjin trials — Zhou Shifeng 7 years, Zhai Yanmin suspended, Hu Shigen 7.5 years, Gou Hongguo 3 years suspended.

2017: Li Heping 3 years suspended; Xie Yang bailed; Wu Gan ("Butcher") 8 years.

January 28, 2019: Wang Quanzhang sentenced to 4 years 6 months for "subversion" — longest-held (nearly 3 years), last sentenced of 709.

2018: Licenses revoked. 2022: Xie Yang detained again. 2025: 709 documentary released abroad.

Key figures' sentences

Who executed

Chain: the MPS → police nationwide → Tianjin Public Security (RSDL — secret detention treated by UN experts as enforced disappearance) → Tianjin No. 2 Intermediate Court → state media ("confession" broadcasts) → the Justice Ministry/bar associations (license revocations). Televised "confessions" (likely coerced, per CHRD); torture allegations — Wang Quanzhang's electric shocks, Xie Yang's 500-day account (personal, source noted); family-chosen lawyers forcibly replaced; censorship directives banning all independent reporting; Fengrui Law Firm shut down.

Who executed

Execution chain: the Ministry of Public Security (coordination) → police nationwide (midnight raids) → Tianjin Public Security (RSDL — residential surveillance at a designated location) → Tianjin No. 2 Intermediate Court (trials) → state media (Xinhua/CCTV, broadcast "confessions") → the Justice Ministry/bar associations (license revocations).

• Coordinated raids: from dawn July 9, 2015 — cross-province teams, midnight hotel-room grabs, power cuts, boarding interceptions.
• Tianjin jurisdiction: detainees held in Tianjin detention centers, tried by Tianjin courts.
• RSDL: secret detention under an official name — treated by UN experts as enforced disappearance. Zhou Shifeng, Hu Shigen and Gou Hongguo were held in RSDL from July 10, 2015 until formal arrest on January 8, 2016; most were then charged with "subversion/inciting subversion."
• Televised confessions: recorded "confessions" by Zhou Shifeng, Wang Yu, Zhang Kai, Zhai Yanmin appeared on state TV — CHRD assessed them as likely coerced. Wang Yu recorded two after physical and psychological torture (including torture of her minor son).
• Torture allegations: Wang Quanzhang reportedly suffered electric-shock torture; Xie Yang described 500 days of forced repentance letters, 16-hour "sitting at attention," forced medication, coerced signatures. (Personal accounts — source nature noted.)
• Lawyers excluded: authorities forcibly terminated detainees' chosen lawyers and assigned state-controlled ones; Wang Quanzhang's family lawyer Yu Wensheng was later detained too.
• Censorship directives: July 2015 — all media must use "official authoritative media" as the standard for "troublesome lawyers"; January 2016 — no investigation/reporting/commentary on 709 without approval; January 2019 — no coverage of Wang Quanzhang's case.

Scale & methodology

Who opposed

Lawyers: the China Human Rights Lawyers Group's records; Chen Jiangang fled to the US (2019). The "709 wives": Li Wenzu's 100-km walk (April 2018, day 999 of her husband's disappearance); the 2017 head-shaving ("losing hair" = "losing rule of law"); Wang Quanzhang — the only one long denied visits — ruled arbitrarily detained by the UN (2018), ignored; 13 forced moves after his 2020 release; Merkel met Li Wenzu (2018). International bar: the IBA and 100+ organizations. UN, US, EU, Germany, Taiwan. Amnesty's 2025 report: 709 became the "model" extended to Hong Kong, Xinjiang, Tibet — Ding Jiaxi (12 years), Xu Zhiyong (14 years) in 2023.

Who opposed

1. The lawyers themselves:

• The China Human Rights Lawyers Group: on the 2nd anniversary — ~40 lawyers blocked from leaving China; detainees "disappeared" into RSDL; family-chosen lawyers forcibly replaced; the August 2016 Tianjin trials of Hu Shigen, Zhou Shifeng, Gou Hongguo and Zhai Yanmin were "walk-through" proceedings.
• Lawyer Chen Jiangang, who represented 709 detainees, became a target himself and fled to the US with his family in 2019.

2. The families — the "709 wives":

• Li Wenzu (Wang Quanzhang's wife): protested 30+ times at the Supreme Court petition office; on April 4, 2018 (the 999th day of her husband's disappearance) she walked 100 km from Beijing to the Tianjin court seeking him; on day 6 she was seized by Tianjin state security. In 2017 the wives shaved their heads — "losing hair" sounding like "losing rule of law."
• Wang Quanzhang was the only one of 300+ long denied lawyer and family visits; in August 2018 the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention ruled his detention arbitrary (Opinion 62/2018) — Beijing ignored it and prosecuted him anyway.
• After his April 5, 2020 release, the couple was forced to move 13 times in Beijing amid cut utilities and harassment.
• Merkel met Li Wenzu during her May 2018 China visit.

3. The international legal community: the International Bar Association's Human Rights Institute with 20+ rights groups wrote China's Justice Ministry condemning torture, imprisonment, surveillance and harassment; 100+ global civil-society organizations signed an open letter demanding releases.

4. The UN: the Working Group's arbitrary-detention ruling; the High Commissioner called the detentions "worrying"; a special rapporteur: "Lawyers need to be protected, not harassed."

5. Governments: US (State Department "deeply alarmed," July 12, 2015); EU (2020 5th-anniversary statement demanding immediate unconditional releases); Germany (Gabriel 2016, Merkel 2018); Taiwan; Amnesty, HRW throughout — Amnesty's 2025 10th-anniversary report said 709 became the "model" for crushing civil society, extended to Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Tibet, with Ding Jiaxi (12 years) and Xu Zhiyong (14 years) in 2023.

Impact

Destruction of rights lawyers. After 709, lawyers daring sensitive cases dwindled; the "die-hard" faction was wiped out; the profession fell silent.

Abuse of "designated-location surveillance." Written into law in 2012, it was mass-deployed in 709 as legalized black jails.

Televised confessions normalized. 709 pioneered CCTV "confessions," reused in Causeway Bay Books, Xiao Jianhua and other cases.

Archive supplement: detention, torture allegations and the families' fight

How "residential surveillance at a designated location" worked. Created by the 2012 revision of the Criminal Procedure Law, residential surveillance at a designated location — RSDL — allowed suspects in national-security cases to be held outside their homes, at a place the police chose and never disclosed, for up to six months. Families received a single notice stating the charge but not the place of detention. Meetings with a lawyer required the permission of the investigating police, and in the 709 cases that permission was never given. Wang Quanzhang, Li Heping, Xie Yang and Jiang Tianyong were all held in this form: no lawyer, no family visits, no letters, no confirmation even that they were alive. UN detention experts and special rapporteurs repeatedly warned that detention of exactly this kind — incommunicado, at an undisclosed location — carries the inherent risk of enforced disappearance, and it became the single most criticised element of the 709 cases in international legal commentary.

The whole family: Wang Yu, Bao Longjun and Bao Zhuoxuan. In the early hours of July 9, 2015, Wang Yu sent out a message saying the power to her home had been cut and someone was forcing her door. She was never heard from again that night. Her sixteen-year-old son, Bao Zhuoxuan, was due to fly from Beijing Capital Airport that day to begin school in Australia. He was intercepted at the airport, his passport was confiscated, and he was sent to live with relatives in Inner Mongolia under watch. Her husband, Bao Longjun, who had gone to the airport to see the boy off, was detained at the same time. A family of three was thus drawn into the case at once — a fact that gave 709 a collective-punishment colouring from its first day. After Wang Yu was released on bail in August 2016, she appeared in an interview with an overseas newspaper renouncing a human-rights award that a foreign bar association had given her, and protesting foreign "interference." She then fell almost completely silent. Bao Longjun, after his own release, said publicly that his wife's televised and printed statements had not been voluntary. That is the family's account; the authorities have never responded to it.

Xie Yang's torture account — and its courtroom reversal. In January 2017, Xie Yang's defence lawyer, Chen Jiangang, published a long record of his meetings with Xie in detention, built from Xie's own descriptions. In that record, Xie said interrogators had deprived him of sleep for days on end, forced him to sit motionless for long hours on a low iron "hanging chair," beaten him, blown cigarette smoke in his face, threatened his wife and children, and told him plainly — in the phrase that was quoted around the world — "we are going to torture you to death; remember, torturing you to death will be recorded as suicide." The Changsha detention authorities denied that any torture had taken place. Four months later, at his trial in May 2017, Xie Yang stated in open court that he had not been tortured, thanked his interrogators, pleaded guilty to inciting subversion, and was released on bail. The court record contains only the second version. Most outside observers read the reversal as the price of the bail arrangement; the transcript of the detention meetings was never investigated by any Chinese authority. Chen Jiangang himself was then investigated by the judicial authorities, lost his ability to practise, and in 2019 left China with his family for the United States. Xie Yang was detained again in January 2022, prosecuted for inciting subversion after he supported a teacher who had questioned official accounts of the Nanjing Massacre, and his case has dragged on without a publicly reported verdict.

Li Chunfu's breakdown and Jiang Tianyong. The crackdown reached beyond the named lawyers to their relatives who practised law themselves. Li Heping's younger brother, Li Chunfu, was taken in August 2015 and released without warning in January 2017. He came home, in his sister-in-law Wang Qiaoling's account, a broken man: terrified of visitors, convinced he was being watched, unable to recognise the life he had left eighteen months earlier. Photographs and video of his condition, released by the family, became some of the most widely seen images of the entire crackdown. Li Heping himself was released under a suspended sentence in May 2017; his family and lawyers stated that in detention he had been given electric shocks, forced to take unidentified medication that blurred his vision, and held for long periods in stress positions. These are allegations by family and counsel; no official investigation was ever announced. Jiang Tianyong, who had travelled to Changsha in November 2016 to support Xie Yang's family, disappeared after leaving their home; a year later the Changsha court sentenced him to two years for inciting subversion. After serving the sentence he remained under close surveillance, unable to practise, to travel freely or to leave the country.

The 709 wives: from searching to resisting. The crackdown produced its own opposition — the detainees' wives. Wang Qiaoling, Li Wenzu, Liu Ermin and Yuan Shanshan began by comparing notes on police stations and detention centres, trying simply to learn where their husbands were. They became a disciplined campaign group: filing complaints month after month at the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate, wearing matching clothes printed with their husbands' names, and publishing a daily online count — "Wang Quanzhang has been disappeared for day 1,000" and beyond. On April 4, 2018, Li Wenzu set out on foot from Beijing for Tianjin, where Wang Quanzhang was believed held, intending to walk the roughly 100 kilometres and demand a meeting. International camera crews walked with her. Police intercepted the march in Wuqing district, Tianjin, and held her for a week. In December 2018, four of the wives shaved their heads in front of cameras, chanting a pun that became the movement's slogan: "We can be hairless — you cannot be lawless." Their campaign is the main reason 709 did not end with its verdicts: for years afterwards, it remained a living public story inside China, told by the families themselves.

Release did not mean freedom. From 2017, bar associations and rights groups in Hong Kong, Taipei, London and elsewhere began marking every July 9 as China Human Rights Lawyers Day, with statements, awards and vigils that continue today. The last of the imprisoned lawyers, Wang Quanzhang, completed his sentence on April 5, 2020 — and was promptly taken not home but to Jinan, where he was held for two further weeks under pandemic quarantine rules while his wife published daily appeals; he reached his Beijing home only on April 27. Release, for the 709 group, meant a different register of pressure rather than its end: licences gone, incomes destroyed, children followed at school in some families' accounts, and constant surveillance. In 2023 the Wang family was forced by landlords to move home repeatedly within a few months — evictions Li Wenzu documented flat by flat on social media. Wu Gan completed his eight years in May 2023 and Zhou Shifeng was released in September 2022; both have remained almost entirely silent in public. The template tested in 709 — months of incommunicado detention under RSDL, a coerced statement for state media, trial or suspended sentence, disbarment, then surveillance and housing pressure after release — became the standard operating procedure against China's rights lawyers, and it is that template, more than any single verdict, that constitutes the crackdown's lasting legacy.

One trigger: the Qing'an shooting and the Fengrui firm. The crackdown had a visible fuse. In May 2015, at Qing'an railway station in Heilongjiang, a police officer shot dead a farmer named Xu Chunhe during a confrontation at a security checkpoint. The authorities promptly declared the shooting lawful, but the released surveillance footage raised obvious questions — about why a travelling father of three, stopped over a ticket dispute, ended up dead in a station concourse. Lawyers from Beijing's Fengrui firm took on the family's case; several of them were themselves detained and beaten in Qing'an when they pressed for the full video. Hundreds of lawyers across China then signed an open letter demanding the unedited footage and an independent investigation. It was the rights bar's last great act of collective solidarity before 709, and when the raids came two months later the official indictment of Fengrui named exactly this casework — "hyping sensitive incidents," "assembling crowds to pressure the courts" — as the core of the firm's supposed crimes. Many scholars and practising lawyers regard the Qing'an solidarity campaign, proof that Chinese lawyers could now mobilise nationwide within days over a single case, as one of the direct causes of the decision to strike when the authorities did. That is scholarly interpretation rather than an official admission, and it is labelled as such; but the sequence of events is a matter of public record.

The Tianjin trials, and the second wave against the defenders. The judicial core of the crackdown was disposed of in four days. From August 2 to 5, 2016, the Tianjin No. 2 Intermediate People's Court tried the Fengrui series back to back — Zhai Yanmin on the second, Hu Shigen on the third, Zhou Shifeng on the fourth, Gou Hongguo on the fifth. Each defendant confessed, expressed repentance and declined to appeal. The families had not been notified and could not attend; wives who travelled to Tianjin were held outside the courthouse by police. The public record of the trials consists of Xinhua dispatches and edited CCTV footage; the lawyers who appeared for the defence were officially appointed, while counsel retained by the families was never permitted to act. The full written judgments long remained unpublished, and Fengrui's licence was revoked, the firm dissolved in law and in fact, its remaining staff scattered. Then the pressure widened to a second ring: the lawyers who had defended, represented or merely spoken publicly for the 709 detainees. In 2018, Yu Wensheng, Xie Yanyi, Cheng Hai and others lost their licences in sequence through disciplinary and annual-review procedures. Yu was detained the day after his licence was cancelled and was later sentenced to four years for inciting subversion. Annual licence inspection, police summonses for "tea," and exit bans became standing instruments suspended over the entire profession — which is why lawyers inside China describe 709 not as a case that ended but as a governing condition that began.

Videos