How “irresponsible” of Australia’s government to publicly express concern about Stern Hu’s secret trial and ridiculously harsh punishment. Said Mr Rudd:
“The trial on the second charge was held in secret with no media and no Australian officials present for it.
“This has left, therefore, serious unanswered questions about this conviction. And holding this part of the trial in secret, China, I believe, has missed an opportunity to demonstrate to the world at large transparency that would be consistent with its emerging global role.”
Understandably, Chinese officials were outraged at having people keep going on about the fact that they regularly cloak their courts in secrecy – that defeats the whole point! Angrily snarled foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang, completely ignoring the specific criticism that had been made:
“We express serious concern about the Australian statements on the Rio Tinto case,” Mr Qin said. “The Rio case is a criminal case and the Chinese side has already given its verdict. Australia should respect this outcome and stop making irresponsible comments.”
I cite the precedent of So vs There.
Note the use of the words “the Chinese side” rather than “the independent court”.
Seriously, China – I know we can’t do anything about it but watch, but outside your magic external-world-excluding censorship zone, much of the rest of the planet is well aware of what secret trials mean. We’re well aware of what happens when the “law” is just a cover for the powerful punishing their opponents – where the difference between the person in jail and the person in the Politburo is not whether they’re corrupt or not, but whether they fell out of favour or not. You wanted to scare the hell out of foreign businessmen to ensure their compliance when in your country? Well, mission accomplished – although, unlike your people, they don’t actually have to be in your country. And if you want to demonstrate that you are happy to exert extreme power against anyone within your reach who pisses you off, then fear not, you did, message received – but you can’t simultaneously expect the rest of the world to help you whitewash it as “justice”.
Moved On 
The problem here of course Jeremy is that China just doesn’t give a stuff what the rest of the world thinks — they know they have the economic resources that everyone else needs.
Lay off China! We need the body parts. Regards ,Richard Ryan.
i wonder what non-corrupt, non-nepotic asian country Hu was based in…
my knowledge about the case is a bit sketchy.. but i read that the case was payback for not being allowed to buy a stake in Rio Tinto.
my understanding… China has been getting ripped off on the price of iron ore… their steel industry isn’t united, and steel mills bid against each other for supply of iron ore
the chinese tried to fix this by creating a united front, under a body called CISA. CISA had been hardline bargaining with the Rio Tinto for price cuts.
but Hu pinched the CISA reports on supply/bids etc and gave it to the smaller steel mills, completely wrecking the delicate negotiations.
the price of iron ore has gone up 400%, you can imagine the Chinese would be pissed!
regarding the “secret” trial, there was only one set of charges that were held in secret, the rest were public.
the western media, upset Rio Tinto’s “divide and conquer” ways have been exposed, have been milking the secret trial “outrage” for all its worth.
the fact that henry kissinger has had to be called in to patch up relationships… tells me Hu was almost certainly a DFAT/ASIS spook. kissinger is a very heavy hitter in the intelligence community. besides, how else could he have got such sensitive info without spy connections?
sorry for the long post
Interesting bias there Jeremy…the first part of the court case was open, and Hu was found guilty of corruption and bribery…the sentencing was closed…yet you still bleat on about China’s ‘human rights’ issues…are you supportive of Hu’s crimes? Did you bleat as loudly when Bond copped jail time, or Skase did a runner? Or are you just showing your bias towards capitalism? As a fellow lefty, i’ve nearly become so disgusted with some of your posts recently i’m close to not bothering to read them…
Hu pleaded guilty in a system where if he didn’t there would be closed trials and the possibility of execution. He copped the lesser of two evils. In a country where you are not guaranteed a fair trial, a guilty plea is suspect.
Are you seriously saying you can see no difference between the “rule of law” in China and here? It’s got nothing to do with “socialism” or “capitalism” – it’s authoritarianism in question here.
And of course Bond should’ve done jail time, as should Skase – their crimes were investigated openly and fairly and the evidence against them was available in court for anyone to see.
Which other posts have “disgusted” you?
the first part of the court case was open
The State secrets part of the trial was closed to Australian consular officials.