In order to view all images, please register and log in. This will also allow you to comment on our stories and have the option to receive our email alerts. Click here to register
25.10.2013

‘Release him’

A Chinese newspaper has called on public security police to release one of its reporters, arrested after Zoomlion complained

The Guangzhou, China -based Xin Kuai Bao newspaper, has called on public security officials to release one of its reporters who was arrested after publishing critical information about crane manufacturer Zoomlion. - It has run a front page story with the heading ‘RELEASE HIM’.

Reporter Chen Yongzhou, was arrested on Saturday, when security police from Changsha, the Hunan provincial capital where Zoomlion is based, crossed into Guahgzhou to arrest him.

He had been called to the local police station to clear up some points and was confronted by the officers from Changsha, who presented him with a list of the crimes and arrested him for damaging Zoomlion's commercial reputation.

The accusations concern a serious of articles that he has written accusing Zoomlion of engaging in fraudulent commercial practices, including faking its sales and exaggerating profits – see: Zoomlion denies allegations. A Zoomlion spokesman has confirmed that the company had filed a complaint with the security police. The newspaper said that if the manufacturer had an issue it should have filed a civil suit, rather than involved the security police.

Back in July, Goa Hui, Zoomlion’s secretary to the chairman of the board, said that the negative reports had depressed the company stock prices and accused Chen Yongzhou and New Express of being paid off by interest groups who stood to benefit from the drops in the company’s stock price.

Vertikal Comment

This arrest seems like a very ham-fisted attempt to silence criticism, and fly’s in the face of China’s efforts to modernise its commercial practices.

As far as Zoomlion is concerned any involvement with this sort of action will be counter productive as trying to silence journalists in this manner suggest guilt, while a civil action would have seemed far more appropriate. The best thing the company could do now is play an active role in trying to obtain the man’s release.

Comments