EndCCPWorld.com

November 27, 2022: Cao Zhixin, Li Siqi, Li Yuanjing and Zhai Dengrui — four women in their 20s — joined a vigil at Beijing's Liangma River mourning the victims of the Ürümqi fire. The vigil evolved into protest.

November 29: all four were summoned for questioning, then released.

December 18: Li Siqi and Li Yuanjing were criminally detained; December 22: Zhai Dengrui; December 23: Cao Zhixin.

January 19, 2023: all four were formally arrested for "picking quarrels and provoking trouble," held at Chaoyang Detention Center, facing 5 to 10 years.

Cao Zhixin recorded a video saying friends were forced to sign blank detention notices — the charges filled in later.

February 17, 2023: the European Union publicly called for their release.

April 19, 2023: after nearly four months in detention, Cao Zhixin and Zhai Dengrui were released on bail; Li Siqi and Li Yuanjing were also released on bail during April 2023. No public indictment or sentence against the four has been recorded since. (See Section 6 below; outcome added from Reuters, CHRD and other sources.)

Notably, all four are postgraduates of elite universities with no prior activism background — they had simply gone to mourn fire victims.

On 24 November 2022, a fire in a high-rise residential building in Urumqi, Xinjiang, officially killed ten people. Nearly three years of 'zero-COVID' lockdown layering was widely blamed for delaying escape and rescue. After the mourning protest on Shanghai's Urumqi Middle Road on 26 November, Beijing residents gathered spontaneously on the evening of 27 November along the Liangma River — laying flowers, lighting candles, holding up blank sheets of paper — to mourn the dead and protest the lockdowns. There were no organizers and no banners; the crowd stood by the river for several hours, shouted slogans, sang, and dispersed on its own that night. That was the Beijing scene of the White Paper Movement that then swept the country.

Cao Zhixin, Li Siqi, Li Yuanjing and Zhai Dengrui were in that crowd on the Liangma River. They were close friends of the same age, all living in the hutongs of Beijing's old Gulou district, whose days were books, writing, films, small screenings and discussions. In their friends' words, they cared about society but had no record of activism whatsoever — 'half-activists,' literary young people interested in everything. What they brought that night was flowers, poems and a few sheets of blank paper. None of the four imagined that evening would rewrite the following years of their lives, still less that their names would travel the world in the capacity of 'detainees.'

To understand this case, one proportion must be seen clearly first: what they did was mourn ten fire victims in a public place; and the state machine's answer to them was summons, searches of their electronic devices, criminal detention, formal arrest, and the threat of up to ten years in prison. That proportion is, in itself, the whole case.

Cao Zhixin, born in 1996 in Hengyang, Hunan, held a master's degree in history from Renmin University of China (class of 2021) and worked as a book editor at Peking University Press — what friends called her 'dream job.' Of the four, she was the first to sense the danger, and the one who left the fullest public voice (see Section 3). Li Siqi, a freelance writer and independent journalist who called herself an 'un-free contributor,' had graduated from Goldsmiths, University of London, and had only recently returned from Britain; her contacts included many foreign journalists — an ordinary professional fact that state security later treated as incriminating: according to accounts relayed by rights groups, police held it against her that she 'brought many foreign journalists into a chat group.' Li Yuanjing, 27, a graduate of Nankai University who had studied at the University of New South Wales in Australia, was a professional accountant; December, when she was taken, was her birthday month, and she had messaged friends inviting them to her birthday gathering — a wish that came to nothing. Zhai Dengrui, 27, a teacher who loved literature and theatre, was in the middle of preparing her application for a master's in theatre at the University of Oslo in Norway — application season and cell season collided head-on in her life.

The four women's common features deserve itemized record: all in their twenties; all postgraduates of prestigious universities; all with respectable professional work or clear plans for further study; none with any criminal record or history of activism; all described by friends as literary young people who loved life and cared about public issues. They were not professional dissidents, nor members of any movement organization — they were a typical cross-section of post-1989 urban Chinese youth: reading, watching films and talking in the surviving crevices of public space, occasionally discussing current affairs, and nothing more. On 27 November 2022 they took to the street to express themselves publicly for the first time. The first time made them targets of a purge. That choice of 'first offense, heavy punishment' is not accidental: a purge never aims at the 'ringleaders'; it aims to teach every ordinary person that even a first time, even mere mourning, can be paid for with a prison cell.

On 29 November, two days after the protest, Beijing police summoned a batch of Liangma River participants including the four women, questioned them for about twenty-four hours, confiscated and examined their phones and other electronic devices, then released them. The matter did not end there — it was only gathering force. From mid-December, police began a second round of arrests. As her friends disappeared one by one, Cao Zhixin foresaw that she too would be taken, and pre-recorded a video appeal, entrusting it to friends with instructions to publish it if she became unreachable. On 16 January 2023 her friends released the video overseas, and it spread around the world. In it she calmly recounts the summons and the arrests, and discloses one key detail: several of her friends had been forced by police to sign blank criminal detention notices — forms on which neither the suspected offense nor the place of detention had been filled in; the charges were written in afterwards.

What she said in that video became the most widely circulated first-person testimony of the case. She said that they cared about society and that what they had done was a normal expression as citizens (in substance); and she asked why merely mourning their compatriots in a normal way should cost them being 'disappeared,' and whose quota, exactly, they were supposed to fill. The video's spread broke the silence of this secret roundup: by then at least dozens of White Paper participants had been quietly taken away across the country, unknown to anyone; after the video, 'the arrested White Paper protesters' became a standing topic for international media and parliaments. When she recorded it, Cao did not know how far her words would travel. Only on 20 January 2023, at her first meeting with a lawyer, did she learn from counsel that her video had already gone around the world.

The blank-notice detail must be underlined on its own, because it exceeds ordinary procedural defect: the criminal detention notice is the first legal instrument by which state power deprives a citizen of liberty, and the offense and place of detention are its most essential required contents. Making detainees sign a blank form means public power takes the person first and thinks up the charge later, back at the office. That is not negligence; it is an exhibit of procedure used as a rubber stamp. The content later filled into the charge column — first 'gathering a crowd to disrupt order in a public place,' then changed at formal arrest to 'picking quarrels and provoking trouble' — proves the point exactly: the charge really was decided afterwards.

The second round of arrests was carried out by the Chaoyang Branch of the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau, on dates precise to the day: on 18 December 2022, Li Siqi and Li Yuanjing were criminally detained (Li Yuanjing was briefly released after testing positive for COVID, then formally arrested anyway); on 22 December, Zhai Dengrui was criminally detained; on 23 December, Cao Zhixin was taken away in her home province of Hunan (CHRD records that Beijing police seized her in Hunan). All four were held at the Beijing Chaoyang District Detention Center. Many more Liangma River participants were taken in the same sweep — the reporter Yang Liu, the director Qin Ziyi and others — some of whom were released on bail on the night of 19 January 2023. According to informed sources speaking to media, at least twenty people were announced as formally arrested on that single night; the four women were the only group whose full names became public and who received named international support.

On 19 January 2023, two days before the Lunar New Year, the four were formally arrested with the approval of the Chaoyang District People's Procuratorate of Beijing, the charge changed from 'gathering a crowd to disrupt order in a public place' at detention to 'picking quarrels and provoking trouble.' The maximum sentences for the two offenses are five years and (in serious cases) ten years respectively — the authorities said on one hand that the women had merely attended a mourning gathering, while reserving, on the legal documents, room for a decade in prison. The lawyers' remedies were obstructed throughout: Cao's lawyer's bail application of 9 January was rejected; on 17 January counsel submitted a written opinion against approving arrest, arguing she had only joined a spontaneous mourning activity and committed no crime at all — it was not accepted. Only on 20 January, the twenty-ninth day of her criminal detention, did Cao first see her lawyer. Zhai Dengrui's lawyer visits were delayed again and again by formalities and 'accidents,' and no meeting happened before the New Year; her family had hoped to obtain, at that visit, the password for her University of Oslo application and submit it for her before the deadline — instead they watched the application lapse.

This chain is set out in full because it demonstrates the standard operating procedure of Chinese political cases: a polite release after the first summons, creating the illusion that 'it's over'; individual criminal detentions three weeks later, staggered to prevent momentum; charges that start lighter and can be swapped heavier at any time; lawyer access held back until after formal arrest, letting the 'golden rescue window' slip away unknown; and the arrest approval timed to the eve of the Lunar New Year, so families receive the worst news as every other household reunites. No step breaches the surface of their own written rules, and every step maximizes isolation and fear.

Once the four names became public, international response developed along three lines. The first was governments and institutions: on 17 February 2023, the European Union spoke out, stating that the four had been detained in disregard of due process requirements and calling on the Chinese government to release them immediately. Human Rights Watch, CHRD, CIVICUS and other organizations issued continuing statements and case updates, treating the four as emblematic cases of the White Paper purge. The second line was their universities: Goldsmiths, University of London, where Li Siqi had studied, issued a statement of support on 28 January 2023; students and alumni of the University of New South Wales in Australia, where Li Yuanjing had studied, launched a petition (over 2,500 signatures) urging the university to speak publicly as other institutions had and to raise the case with the Chinese embassy; and members of the University of Chicago's Center for East Asian Studies had already issued a statement of concern for Qin Ziyi, detained in the same sweep — every university these young women had attended abroad testified for them. The third line was civil society: on the eve of International Women's Day 2023, feminist and human-rights activists in many places launched a March 8 joint open letter, naming and supporting the four and all arrested White Paper participants, demanding release, withdrawal of charges, and an end to the persecution of feminist activists; the letter placed the case in a longer thread — in 2015 the 'Feminist Five' were detained for planning anti-sexual-harassment advocacy, and eight years later another group of young women was detained over a mourning gathering, with the method and script almost unchanged.

Cao Zhixin personally received two honors: on 19 February 2023 she was given an outstanding individual award at the tenth 'Oscar Freedom Human Rights Awards' in Los Angeles, and later that year the Youth Chinese Human Rights Award. In April 2023 she joined the Independent Chinese PEN Center. When word of these reached her, she was still in the detention center or had only just been bailed — honors and a prison cell stamped on the same person is a rare absurdity of this era. It must also be recorded without exaggeration: no government took actual diplomatic or sanctions measures over this case, and the EU statement had no sequel. But in the experience of comparable cases, named international attention is the floor of a detainee's safety — a person whose name the whole world knows is always one layer safer than a person no one knows.

On 19 April 2023, after nearly four months in detention, Cao Zhixin and Zhai Dengrui were released on bail — Reuters confirmed the development through two of their friends; the Chinese and English Wikipedia entries for Cao Zhixin likewise record her release on bail on 19 April 2023. Li Siqi and Li Yuanjing were also released on bail during April 2023 (subsequent case summaries by multiple rights organizations use the formulation 'all four released on bail'; the exact release dates of these two have no independent reporting of the same standing as Cao's and Zhai's, and this page marks those dates as unverified). This site's earlier version of this page stopped at 'the four face five to ten years,' without recording this outcome; this expansion corrects that: they were not sentenced, and as of October 2026 there is no record of any public indictment, trial or sentence against them.

But 'released on bail' must not be read as 'released innocent.' Under China's Criminal Procedure Law, bail pending trial is a compulsory measure of up to twelve months, during which the person must appear when summoned, may not leave their city of residence, and may not contact specified persons — and the case is not legally closed; the procuratorate may in theory still indict. After the bail term expires, whether a case is withdrawn, not prosecuted, or simply left hanging is something the authorities have never publicly stated for these four. For the women themselves, from the moment they walked out of the detention center in April 2023, life entered a long gray state: jobs gone (a press editor's post is not held for a bailed person), studies broken (Zhai's missed Oslo application will not come again), passports and exit presumably restricted — and the heaviest chain is silence: they can never again tell anyone about the Liangma River or those four months in the detention center, because telling itself could invite new trouble. For the four women's lives after April 2023, this page records only publicly verifiable facts: Cao joined the Independent Chinese PEN Center (April 2023, public); of the other three, there has been no further public reporting. In domestic public coverage, even their names no longer appear.

That is the most refined part of this machinery of purge: it does not need a sentence. Four months of criminal detention, formal arrest, the threat of up to ten years, then release on bail with no explanation — the punishment is completed inside the process itself. From now on, whenever they and their peers think of taking to the street or holding up any sheet of paper, they will first remember those 120 days from December 2022 to April 2023. Silence is not the outcome of the case; silence is the purpose of the case.

As a group-portrait page, this page must state the portrait's boundaries. The post-White-Paper arrests were by no means limited to the Beijing four: on CHRD's nationwide tracking list, others detained in Beijing in the same sweep included the reporter Yang Liu (bailed on 19 January 2023), Qin Ziyi (taken from Shenzhen, later bailed) and Lin Yun; and in Guangzhou, Shanghai, Chengdu, Wuhan and elsewhere, rights organizations recorded participants detained and in some cases sentenced — among them cases with clear terms, such as the Uyghur student Kamile Wayit, convicted over reposting protest videos. A considerable number of others were briefly detained and released, summoned and warned, or disciplined by work units and schools, never entering any list. This site writes only names already widely and publicly reported by international media and rights organizations; for those still in China and never publicly reported, it writes neither names nor details — in this case, protecting the living outranks the completeness of the archive.

There is one more boundary: no beautification and no invention. The four are not a designed 'heroines ensemble'; they are ordinary people pushed by chance — by a fire, a mourning gathering, and a state machine — to the front of history. Some of them were steadfast (recording the video, answering with unrepentant silence); some simply wept in the detention center — in Initium Media's in-depth report, Cao Zhixin could not hold back tears at her lawyer's visit on hearing greetings from her boyfriend and family. These details matter precisely because they are human beings, not symbols. This site records them not because they are flawless, but because the way the state machine treated four ordinary people marks the true water level of ordinary people's rights in this era: mourning can be a crime, a blank sheet can be a crime, having foreign journalists in a chat group can be a crime — and when the charge is 'filled in afterwards,' that water level speaks for itself.

As of this site's check in October 2026, the four women's latest verifiable status compresses into three sentences. First: all have been out on bail for over three years, with no record of public indictment, trial or sentencing. Second: the final disposition of their case after the bail term (withdrawal, non-prosecution, or otherwise) has never been made public by the authorities, and whether the legal uncertainty has ever been lifted cannot be verified. Third: after 2023, apart from a few public records such as Cao Zhixin joining the Independent Chinese PEN Center, the four appear in no public reporting at all — and this site respects that silence, neither probing nor speculating about their present work and lives.

Read those three sentences against the arrest scene of 19 January 2023, and the case's full shape emerges: a case that mobilized the Chaoyang police branch, the Chaoyang procuratorate, a detention center and a cross-provincial seizure (Cao was taken in Hunan) ends, publicly, as if nothing had ever happened. That is the design goal of secret purge: a process painful enough, an ending vague enough, that the persons concerned can never confirm they are safe, and bystanders can never confirm where the boundary lies. What an archive can do is nail the process and the dates to paper: on 27 November 2022, they stood for a few hours by the Liangma River; the price paid afterwards was 120 days in cells, lost jobs, a lapsed application, and a lifetime's caution, henceforth, of looking around before telling the story. This page keeps that account for them.

In the case of the four White Paper women there was no violence, no organization, no foreign direction — only a mourning gathering and four blank detention notices. When a state machine needs detainees to sign forms whose charge column is empty, needs 'foreign journalists in a chat group' written up as evidence of crime, and needs to approve the arrest, on the eve of the Lunar New Year, of four young people who had taken to the street for the first time, what it exposes is not strength but a complete lack of confidence in its own legitimacy. That the case ended without sentences was not leniency but design: four months in cells and a file that can be reopened at any time, teaching a generation to remember these women before opening their mouths.