This English version may have been machine-generated from the Chinese original and may not convey the original meaning accurately.

According to Radio Free Asia, Kharimiti Cheger, the former imam of a mosque in Toli County, Tacheng Prefecture, Xinjiang, is still serving his sentence. He has lost sensation below the waist and can move only with the help of a wheelchair. The most striking aspect of this case is not merely that a man born in 1958 is now disabled in prison, but that three fundamental questions surrounding him—what crime he committed, what his medical condition is, and who should be held responsible—still have not received clear official answers.

What law did he actually break?

The report did not disclose Kharimiti’s specific charges. His family said he was arrested in the autumn of 2017 and secretly tried in 2018. He was initially sentenced to 18 years, but the sentence was later reduced to 10 years. Relatives were not allowed to attend the trial, and there has been no public explanation of the basis for the judgment, the evidence, or why the sentence was reduced from 18 years to 10.

The official narrative has not directly filled this gap either. The report only noted that in 2017, facilities officially referred to as “vocational skills education and training centers” were established in many parts of Xinjiang. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, meanwhile, stated that between 2017 and 2019, Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minority groups were subjected to mass arbitrary detention. Such terminology may describe the facilities, but it does not explain which specific law Kharimiti allegedly violated.

What exactly happened to his health?

The most specific account so far came from his son, Aiyifu Huli Kharimiti: his father has lost sensation below the waist and can only sit in a wheelchair. But has the authorities confirmed his condition? When did it begin to deteriorate? Did he receive treatment? Is there a connection between his disability and his imprisonment? None of these questions has been answered.

Radio Free Asia explicitly stated that its reporters had not obtained medical records and could not independently verify his condition, the cause of his disability, or the treatment he received. Calls to the office of the director of the Tacheng Prefecture Justice Bureau also went unanswered. Thus, “severe disability” remains a fact reported by the family in their appeal for help, but it is unsupported by corresponding medical explanations, a response from the authorities, or treatment records. A person’s body is disappearing, while public information remains trapped in silence.

Who should explain these ten years?

Kharimiti had served as head imam of the Toli County mosque since 1990 and had been elected a county people’s congress representative since 1991. He had also been granted special permission to recruit students, teach religious knowledge, and train imams. His family stressed that these activities had previously been formally approved by the relevant authorities. Why he was later arrested, how the charges were established, and why his sentence changed have not been explained by the authorities in the report.

The family also said that after Kharimiti’s arrest, his eldest son, Rehemaihuli Kharimiti, was repeatedly interrogated, detained, and threatened, and was forced to hand over a list of people with religious beliefs in Toli County. The son died in 2018 at the age of just 34. The family linked his death to the interrogations and threats, but his cause of death has not been confirmed by a death certificate, medical records, or an investigative conclusion. The allegations cannot be written as established facts, but the lack of an investigation cannot be allowed to erase the questions either.

Why can the family only seek help overseas?

Aiyifu Huli is in the United States. He previously sought help publicly for his father in Kazakhstan and has continued submitting testimony and videos to overseas human rights organizations. Kharimiti’s wife remains in China, and her passport has been confiscated. His son said that his mother is afraid to speak with him by phone, worried that she could be detained as a result.

This is precisely the linguistic predicament of this case: the authorities have not publicly disclosed the charges, responded to his medical condition, explained the change in his sentence, or accounted for what happened to his family. What remains are only a “secret trial,” unanswered telephone calls, and an old man confined to a wheelchair. For a person whose freedom has been taken away by the state, the most basic form of dignity is first to let the public know why he was imprisoned, what happened to his body, and who must answer for it.

News background: The original report on which this commentary is based can be found at Radio Free Asia Mandarin。