All charges against high-profile China Initiative defendant Gang Chen

[ad_1]

Please consider to support MIT Technology Review journalism subscribe to.

China Initiative

Chen was one of the most high-profile scientists indicted under the China Initiative, a Justice Department program launched under the Trump administration to counter economic espionage and national security threats from the People’s Republic of China.

Despite its stated purpose, a investigation by MIT Technology Review The initiative found that industrial spies increasingly focused on prosecuting academics for research integrity issues (cloaking ties or obtaining funding from Chinese organizations in grant or visa forms) rather than stealing trade secrets. Of the 77 cases identified by MIT Technology Review, only 19 (25%) claimed violations of the Economic Espionage Act, while 23 cases (30%) claimed grant or visa fraud by academics.

Our reports also revealed that the initiative disproportionately affected scientists of Chinese heritage, who accounted for 130 (88%) of the 148 people charged under the initiative.

Chen’s case is the eighth research integrity case dismissed prior to trial. Last month, Harvard professor Charles Lieber said: found guilty University of Tennessee-Knoxville professor Anming Hu’s first research integrity trial to appear before a jury resulted in a trial and then a complete acquittal.

Research Integrity Cases from MIT Technology Review’s China Initiative Database

A case of catalyst

Chen’s indictment has raised awareness and opposition to the initiative, both for his prominence in his field and for the seemingly routine activities he is being prosecuted for, including collaborating with a Chinese university at the behest of his own institution. A group of MIT faculty “We are all Gang Chen” Wrote At the time, they expressed both their support for their colleagues and their concern about how their own activities might come to the attention of the government.

“The end of the criminal trial is tremendous news for Professor Chen, and the defense team deserves praise for their work,” says Margaret Lewis, professor of law at Seton Hall University, writing about the China Initiative. But let’s not forget that he was questioned at the airport two years ago and charged a year ago. Even when charges are dropped, the human cost is very high.”

“I hope the Justice Department will soon move beyond the announcements regarding the review of individual cases to a broader statement ending the China Initiative.”

“Rebranding the China Initiative isn’t going to be enough,” says Patrick Toomey, a senior staff attorney at the National Security Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents two leading researchers who were falsely accused before the China Initiative was announced in 2018. “The Justice Department should fundamentally reform its policies that allow for racial profiling in the name of national security.”

not just academics and civil rights groups they are talking out. Over the past year, criticism of the initiative has grown from all sides. Congress has ninety members requested He said Attorney General Merrick Garland is investigating concerns about racial profiling, and former DOJ officials have also advocated a change of direction.

John Demers, former head of the Department of Justice division that oversees the initiative, said: reportedly He supported a proposal for amnesty programs that would allow researchers to disclose previously undisclosed ties without fear of prosecution. Meanwhile, in response to the MIT Technology Review report, former Massachusetts District Attorney Andrew Lelling, who filed charges against Chen, argued He said that the part of the program that targets academics should be closed. Six more research integrity cases are pending, and four will be tried this spring.

Some kind of announcement could come soon: DOJ spokesperson Wyn Hornbuckle told MIT Technology Review in an email last week that the Justice Department is “reviewing our approach to the threats posed by the PRC government” and expects to “complete the review and provide additional information.” next week.”

[ad_2]

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *