Australian academic Yang Hengjun has been given a suspended death sentence by a Chinese court, after five years in detention on espionage charges.
Yang was arrested in 2019 at Guangzhou airport, accused of spying for an undisclosed foreign country. The 57-year-old pro-democracy blogger is an Australian citizen who was born in China. He was tried in a one-day, closed-door hearing in Beijing in May 2021, with a verdict not publicly disclosed.
Yang’s family was shocked and devastated by the court’s decision, with a spokesperson describing it as being at the “extreme end of worst expectations”.
Penny Wong, Australia’s foreign minister, said on Monday the government was “appalled by this decision”, and said it had called in the Chinese ambassador, Xiao Qian, to lodge Canberra’s objection “in the strongest terms”.
Wong said the Australian government had advocated for Yang “at every opportunity and at the highest levels”.
“Australia will not relent in our advocacy for justice for Dr Yang’s interests and wellbeing,” Wong said. “All Australians want to see Dr Yang reunited with his family.”
The sentence revealed on Monday is formally described as a death sentence with a two-year reprieve. It is a relatively common ruling that allows death sentences to be commuted to 25 years, or life in prison after two years of good behaviour. China is believed to be the world’s biggest user of the death penalty, but there is no publicly available data. China’s court system is notoriously opaque, with conviction rates above 99.9% and very few cases overturned for wrongful convictions.
Associate Prof Chongyi Feng, Yang’s PhD superviser in Australia and advocate for his case, said Yang’s sentence would be converted to life in prison. He said his former student’s sentence was an “outrageous political persecution”.
“Dr Yang did not commit any crime of espionage. He is [being] punished by the Chinese government for his criticism of human rights abuses in China and his advocacy for universal values such as human rights, democracy, and the rule of law.”
Wong told media there were still avenues of appeal, however Feng said Yang was already struggling with poor health. “Five years of arbitrary detention and torture have taken a heavy toll on his health. He is now critically ill.”
Feng urged Australia to press for Yang’s return to Australia immediately, potentially on medical parole, so he could access treatment.
Yang’s detention in China has been a key point of friction between the Chinese and Australian governments. Last year another Australian, journalist Cheng Lei, was released after three years in jail also on national security charges. Her release was widely believed to be the result of Australian lobbying amid attempts by both governments to repair ties and reset the bilateral relationship, but efforts to secure Yang’s release were proving more complicated, according to sources familiar with the cases.
Despite Wong’s condemnation of the verdict, the foreign minister played down its potential broader impact on the Australia-China relationship, by noting the decision was made “within China’s legal system”.
“I have said stabilisation means we cooperate where we can, disagree where we must, and we engage in the national interest.
“Clearly this is an occasion in which we disagree. However, Australia will continue to advocate for the interests of Dr Yang.”
In November, Yang’s sons wrote to the Anthony Albanese, ahead of the Australian prime minister’s visit to China, pleading with him to negotiate their father’s release.
“We request that you do all in your power to save our father’s life and return him immediately to family and freedom in Australia,” they wrote. “We know our father has done nothing wrong.
“They subjected him to more than 300 interrogations, over 18 months, including six months of intense torture … they deprived him of sleep, strapped his wrists and ankles and pinned him to a chair for days at a time, until he couldn’t walk.
“But still there has been no confession … He is in jail because he represents truth, democracy, respectful exchange of rational ideas.”
