This English version may have been machine-generated from the Chinese original and may not convey the original meaning accurately.
The National People’s Congress Standing Committee’s formal removal of Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli from their positions on the Central Military Commission of the People’s Republic of China, along with the termination of the National People’s Congress delegate qualifications of Zhong Shaojun and others, appears on the surface to be a military personnel adjustment. In substance, however, it exposes the fundamental predicament of China’s political power structure: important decisions are made within an opaque system of power, while the public can see only the results afterward, without knowing the facts, evidence, or procedures behind them.
According to reports, Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli were announced in January this year to be under investigation. Official statements accused them of “serious violations of discipline and law,” but to date have disclosed no specific conduct, evidence, amount of money involved, or outcome of any judicial proceedings. The PLA Daily said that they had undermined the “chairman of the Central Military Commission responsibility system,” but likewise did not explain precisely which laws they had violated. The termination of Zhong Shaojun’s NPC delegate qualification also revealed for the first time that this figure, regarded as a close associate of Xi Jinping in the military, had suffered a major reversal, yet there has still been no public explanation of whether he is under investigation or what he is suspected of doing. This pattern of “acting first and explaining later—or acting without explaining at all” cannot substitute for open, independent judicial proceedings in which evidence can be challenged.
The issue is not merely whether certain generals are corrupt or loyal, but whom the military and state institutions are ultimately accountable to. Under a one-party dictatorship, the powers of the Party, government, and military are highly concentrated, while the chairman of the Central Military Commission responsibility system lacks effective external checks and balances. The NPC Standing Committee, meanwhile, can hardly be regarded as an institution capable of independently reviewing decisions made by the highest authorities. As a result, a removal from office may be the product of a power struggle, or it may be a disciplinary purge, but the public has no independent media, open hearings, or independent judiciary with which to distinguish the truth. Someone called a trusted associate today may become a target of elimination tomorrow, demonstrating that personal loyalty cannot produce institutional stability.
Truly reliable military governance should not be built on a leader’s trust, factional balancing, and internal purges, but on the constitution, the law, and democratic authorization. The military must obey the state and the constitution, rather than a particular individual; major investigations should be subject to independent judicial review; the NPC should be able to genuinely supervise the government and the military; and the news media and citizens should have the right to question the facts.
This concerns not only the fate of generals, but also the dignity and security of every ordinary person. When those in power can strip someone of their position, qualifications, or even freedom without explanation, anyone could become the next person to be dealt with. Only constitutional democracy, the separation of powers, judicial independence, and genuine protection of freedom of speech and basic human rights can move the country from “whoever holds power decides who is guilty” toward “the law constrains all power.”
News background: The original report on which this commentary is based can be found at News - Voice of America.