"Children abused in Guizhou": the rumour, and what the facts turned out to be

Background

On 26 June 2019 an internet user posted images alleging that young children in welfare institutions and kindergartens for left-behind children in Bijie, Kaili and elsewhere in Guizhou had been sexually abused by adults. The post claimed that there was a covert trade between staff at the orphanages and paedophiles, and included photographs with the faces pixelated and screenshots of what appeared to be conversations between kindergarten staff and paedophiles discussing the trade.

The matter set off wide discussion online and drew the attention of the local police. That evening the Qiandongnan cyber police patrol said that it took the matter very seriously and had formed a task force to investigate, and the Guizhou public security authorities said that they had promptly organised the local public security organs to verify the report and had sent a working group to guide the investigation on the ground.

Following joint inspection and investigation by the Guizhou public security, civil affairs and women's federation departments of kindergartens and welfare institutions in Bijie and elsewhere, none of what had been alleged online was found.

On the afternoon of 27 June the Guizhou public security authorities issued an official notice on Weibo: on 27 June, with the support of the public security authorities in Tianjin, they had questioned in accordance with law the person who posted the photographs and information about children being abused in Bijie and Kaili, a man named Zhao. Preliminary investigation established that the photographs circulated online had all been collected by him from the internet and had not been taken in Bijie or Kaili in Guizhou, and that the information was fabricated by him. Compulsory measures have been taken against Zhao in accordance with law. The work continues and the results will be published in good time.

The law

On 28 June Xinhua News Agency interviewed Zhao exclusively. He apologised, saying that he was deeply and profoundly ashamed, that he had made the story up and that it was not true. He had posted the pictures and said what he said purely to gain a sense of presence online and to satisfy a taste for the sensational. Zhao, 29, said he bitterly regretted the egregious effects of his false information and images.

The internet is not outside the law. How much social resources were wasted by this rumour because of one man's selfish desire? To verify it, many departments in Guizhou were mobilised to investigate widely, every kindergarten carried out its own checks and was inspected by others, and the Guizhou public security authorities worked from the provincial department down to the municipal bureaux, expending a great deal of manpower and resources.

The legal liability of a person who spreads rumours falls into three categories.

First, civil liability: where spreading a rumour infringes the reputation of an individual or the goodwill of a legal person, liability to compensate follows.

Second, administrative liability, that is a public security penalty: where the circumstances are relatively minor and do not yet constitute a crime, measures such as detention and a fine are imposed.

Third, criminal liability. Article 291A of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China provides that a person who fabricates false information about a dangerous situation, an epidemic, a disaster or a police incident and spreads it through an information network or other media, or who knowingly spreads such false information through an information network or other media, seriously disrupting social order, is sentenced to criminal detention, public surveillance or fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years; where serious consequences are caused, to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three and not more than seven years.

The case is still being handled and no result has been published. On the facts in the police notice, however, Zhao's conduct is already suspected of being a criminal offence and he may face up to three years' imprisonment, or up to seven years if serious consequences are found.

The internet is not outside the law

A rumour needs only one mouth to start but takes legs to run down. Zhao's momentary self-interest consumed an enormous quantity of public resources and preoccupied countless internet users, and fortunately none of it was true.

Information online is by its nature multi-sourced, hard to tell true from false and fast to spread. This rumour attracted such wide attention because the person who invented it used sensitive words such as sexual abuse, children, kindergarten and welfare institution, which readily arouse the sympathy of people in every walk of life and are subjects of public concern. Precisely for that reason, only 19 hours after the post spread, the departments concerned identified the public reaction and then quickly verified the facts, and the story was soon shown to be false. Had they not responded quickly and made the facts public, a rumour of this kind would have caused great public alarm and had many damaging effects on social stability.

This is not the first case of a rumour spread online. Such cases keep appearing, largely because the cost of inventing a rumour is so low that those who do it have no fear. Over time, lies steadily use up the public's goodwill, and people may come to meet many things with doubt and disbelief, so that matters that genuinely need help or the attention of the cyber police may not receive the attention they deserve.

It is to be hoped that the law will punish those who invent rumours severely. Only severe punishment will frighten those inclined to do it and, to some extent, prevent rumours from arising. Work to spread knowledge of the law should also be strengthened, so that more people understand that inventing rumours carries legal liability.

As Xinhua put it, the truth brought relief and indignation at the same time. The inventor of the rumour had sinister motives, used up people's goodwill and wasted society's resources, and the vulgarity of his wording and images seriously polluted the online environment and disturbed social order. Justice must not be absent, but neither must it be misled. The internet is not outside the law, and those who invent rumours will certainly be held to account.