Dariga told Amnesty that to be allowed to go back to Kazakhstan she had to make a very detailed video stating that her time in the camp had been voluntary, that she was treated well in the camp, and that she had learned many valuable things during her time there, including why religion was bad. “I didn’t want to say these things,” she said. “I had to say them to see my children.”574 Family members of detainees were also threatened with detention if they spoke about the fact that their family members had been to a camp. According to Batima, who worked in a village administration office, family members of about-to-be-released detainees received a call from government officials warning them not to disclose that their relative had been to a camp and threatening them with jail time if journalists ever found out anything about the relative’s internment.575 Once detainees fulfilled the necessary conditions, they were permitted to return to their homes; however, they had to do so under strict conditions limiting their movements and associations.576
6.3 TREATMENT OF FORMER CAMP DETAINEES AFTER RELEASE FROM INTERNMENT CAMPS After being released from the internment camps to go home, former detainees faced further severe restrictions on their human rights, particularly their freedom of movement. These restrictions were in addition to the discriminatory policies directed at all members of ethnic minority groups in Xinjiang (see section 2.3). All former detainees Amnesty International interviewed said they were placed under both electronic and in-person surveillance and subjected to regular evaluations from government employees and cadres. Yerkinbek, who worked with several former detainees after they were released from camps, told Amnesty that government officials used to show up regularly at his workplace and question his ex-detainee colleagues.577 As discussed in Chapter 2, one of the most invasive aspects of life in Xinjiang for ex-detainees is the presence of government minders. Nearly all former detainees reported that government employees or cadres were required to stay with them in their houses for several nights per month after they were released from a camp.578 Several former detainees reported that while they were in the camp, their family members were required to have minders stay with them.579 Family members of detainees also faced additional restrictions on their rights during and after the release of their detained relative. These restrictions included being subjected to additional surveillance, having their houses searched, and having their movements further curtailed.580 Ibrahim told Amnesty he found out how his family’s freedoms had been curtailed while he was in the camp: “While I was in camp, I thought my family had freedom, but I learned that they were under house arrest. They had to ask permission to move… A cadre was consistently visiting their house… There was a camera in the street [in front of their house],” he said.581
574 Amnesty International interview. 575 Amnesty International interview. 576 Amnesty International interviews. 577 Amnesty International interview. 578 Amnesty International interviews. 579 Amnesty International interviews. 580 Amnesty International interviews. 581 Amnesty International interview.
118
“LIKE WE WERE ENEMIES IN A WAR” CHINA’S MASS INTERNMENT, TORTURE AND PERSECUTION OF MUSLIMS IN XINJIANG Amnesty International
