OPINION | Black Sites and Broken Laws: The CCP's Secret Architecture of Enforced Disappearance

by Ashu Mann

Residential Surveillance at a Designated Location (RSDL), the detention mechanism used to hold roughly 300 lawyers and activists swept up in China's 709 Crackdown, is once again under international scrutiny as the operation marks its 11th anniversary on Thursday, July 9.

What RSDL Actually Permits

Codified under Article 73 of China's Criminal Procedure Law, RSDL allows police to detain individuals accused of endangering state security, terrorism, or major bribery at a location chosen by the state instead of a registered detention facility for up to six months.

While authorities are legally required to notify family members within 24 hours, China Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) and other monitoring organizations have documented numerous cases since 2015 in which notifications were delayed for weeks, failed to disclose the detainee's location, or were never provided at all.

Testimony From Inside the System

Xie Yang, a lawyer detained during the 709 Crackdown, described his experience under RSDL during meetings with his defense lawyers, Chen Jiangang and Liu Zhengqing, in January 2017. According to transcripts later published and translated into English by China Change, Xie said he endured prolonged interrogations without adequate rest, was forced to sit on stacked plastic stools for more than 20 hours at a time, and faced repeated threats during questioning. Human rights organizations later submitted evidence to United Nations investigators that corroborated broader allegations of torture.

Li Chunfu, another lawyer detained under RSDL following the crackdown, was released on bail in January 2017. His family reported that he displayed severe psychological deterioration, including symptoms later diagnosed as schizophrenia. These accounts were documented by China Change and independently corroborated by his relatives and organizations including Human Rights Watch.

In 2017 and 2018, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention issued opinions on several 709-related cases, including those of Xie Yang, Wang Quanzhang, Jiang Tianyong, and lawyer Li Yuhan. The Working Group concluded that the detentions were arbitrary and highlighted the denial of access to legal counsel chosen by the detainees themselves, a protection recognized under both Chinese law and international agreements signed by China.

A Mechanism With No Outside Oversight

Unlike detention in officially registered facilities, the locations used for RSDL are not publicly disclosed. Lawyers retained by families have repeatedly reported being denied access to suspected detention sites without confirmation that their clients were even being held there.

According to the Committee to Support Chinese Lawyers, the absence of any public registry fundamentally distinguishes RSDL from ordinary pretrial detention because no institution outside the police can independently verify where a detainee is being held or what condition they are in.

Wang Quanzhang, who remained under RSDL followed by pretrial detention for more than three years before being sentenced in January 2019, was unable to see either his wife or son throughout his detention, according to family statements. His case remains one of the longest documented uses of RSDL connected to the 709 Crackdown.

Why the Lawyers Were Targeted

Those detained under RSDL after July 2015 were not accused of conventional criminal offenses. Case files compiled by CHRD and other organizations indicate that many had represented clients involved in disputes over land seizures, forced demolitions, religious freedom, or allegations of torture while in custody. These cases frequently placed them in direct conflict with local and provincial authorities.

Where Scrutiny Stands Today

China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has consistently maintained that RSDL is implemented in accordance with domestic law and is used only in a limited number of serious cases.

Nevertheless, United Nations human rights experts, including mandate holders focused on torture, arbitrary detention, and the independence of judges and lawyers, have continued raising concerns over individual 709-related cases with Beijing. The issue was revisited most recently around the crackdown's 10th anniversary in 2025.

International scrutiny remains active for reasons extending beyond the anniversary itself. Xie Yang, whose 2017 allegations of torture helped expose the RSDL system to global attention, was detained again in January 2022 in a separate case. Following closed-door hearings in mid-2025, he was sentenced in March this year to five years in prison. His case underscores that the consequences of RSDL and the 709 Crackdown remain ongoing rather than historical.

CHRD's latest case tracking also indicates that several other individuals connected to the 709 Crackdown continue to be barred from practicing law, with no confirmed timeline for the restoration of their legal licenses.

---

About the Author

Ashu Mann is an Associate Fellow at the Centre for Land Warfare Studies. He was awarded the Vice Chief of the Army Staff Commendation card on Army Day 2025. He is pursuing a PhD from Amity University, Noida, in Defence and Strategic Studies. His research focuses include the India-China territorial dispute, great power rivalry, and Chinese foreign policy.

Disclaimer: This article represents the author’s independent analysis and perspective based on publicly available information. It does not constitute official guidance, intelligence assessment, or policy recommendation, and does not reflect the positions of Access Hub or any affiliated entities.