China's Rio Tinto Case. Everyone Move Along....
Okay, so the title is a bit of an exaggeration, but I do think the Rio Tinto case is being blown out of proportion, at least somewhat. From my perspective (which is based on ZERO inside information and absolutely no idea whether anyone is guilty of anything or not), this matter has always been a lot more about what the Chinese government is trying to say to its own populace than what it is trying to say to foreigners.
I was just interviewed on this case and this is essentially what I had to say:
It is my understanding that China just issued its charges against the Rio Tinto employees and they have been charged with bribery and with stealing commercial secrets. The government is not bringing spying/stealing of state secrets charges. The talk of bringing state secrets charges made foreign investors very nervous because it is not clear to anybody what constitutes a state secret, especially when so many businesses are government owned. My understanding is that if there had been a trial on stealing of state secrets chrages, it would have been conducted very differently than a routine criminal trial. Most importantly, stealing state secrets can subject one to the death penalty, stealing commercial secrets cannot.
Article 219 of China's Criminal Code is the code section on stealing commercial secrets. This statute applies to thefts of commercial secrets that bring "significant loss" to those from whom the secrets were taken. The sentence for this crime is to be not more than three years or not more than seven years in an "especially serious" case. The crime itself involves taking of a commercial secret by "theft, promises of gain, threat, or other improper means. Commercial secrets is defined as technical operational information that is unknown to the public and that can bring economic gain to its rightful owner and that the owner has kept secret.
My sense all along has been that China made these arrests strictly for domestic consumption. China/Beijing/The CCP are trying to show they are in control and they have done this to assert their control over iron ore pricing and to show the populace that when it comes to corruption, nobody is above the law, not even foreigners.
Today, the prosecutor(s) announced they have enough evidence to warrant going to trial. The court must now decide whether to take the case and, if it does, there will be a trial. My guess is this highly publicized matter would never have gone this far if there were not to be a trial and that a trial will ensue.
My law firm has worked with some fine criminal lawyers in China and I suspect that the Rio Tinto employees will be working with such lawyers as well. Our experience is that the top criminal lawyers do not speak English so if any of the Rio Tinto employees are not completely fluent in Mandarin, they probably should and will be retaining fluent Mandarin Australian lawyers as well. It would actually shock me to learn that they did not already have such a top-flight legal team already in place.
For more on this, check out the following articles in which CLB blogger Steve Dickinson was interviewed:
-- New York Times: "China's Detentions of Executives Rattle Investors."
-- Wall Street Journal: "China Rio Tinto Case Risks Sending a Chill."
-- The Guardian: "Perils of doing business in a secret state."
-- Christian Science Monitor: "
Rio Tinto: Will China's detention of employees scare off foreign firms?"
-- China Economic Review: "The Rio Tinto detentions are not only a concern for miners."
-- DealBook: "China Rattles Investors With Detention of Executives."
-- China Law & Practice: "Yes, there are risks in China - get used to it."
And last, and most certainly not least, this post Steve wrote for China Law Blog about a month ago: "China's Rio Tinto Arrests. Everyone Just Move Along...."
Update: China Bystander, in its post, "Chinese Industrial Espionage In America," notes that "more than 50 people have been prosecuted in the U.S. since 2006 for allegedly transporting restricted technology, stealing trade secrets or conducting business espionage for China, according to the U.S. Justice Department."

Comments (4)
Read through and enter the discussion by using the form at the endTwofish - August 12, 2009 5:58 AM
I don't think that the Rio Tinto prosecution was intended mainly for public relations purposes. There are a lot of other things that could be done for public relations.
As far as the penalty for state secrets. Article 113 allows for the use of the death penalty in cases of state secrets. but that provision has not been used recently. The PRC has over the last two years massively cut down on the use of the death penalty, so I don't think that it was ever seriously considered for this situation.
One thing that is interesting here is that everyone assumes that the Chinese authorities are acting politically, and no one has brought up the possibility that they did an investigation, figured out that based on the evidence that they had that they couldn't justify a state secrets charge, and then changed the charges to something that they did have evidence for. The problem with that explanation is that it means that China has a semi-rational and functional legal system, which of course can't possibly be the case.
Dan - August 12, 2009 8:04 AM
Twofish,
I certainly never said nor thought that this prosecution is being done "mainly for public relations purposes." I also have never assumed that this is being done strictly for political reasons. I see this as a criminal case that is being permitted (or encouraged) to go forward by the powers that be....
Daniel W. Kwong - August 12, 2009 2:20 PM
Dan:
I enjoy reading all articles you e-publish and
have been glad to see that you cover the
stories from all-sides, not pro and not con.
Keep on the good practice.
All the best,
Dr. Daniel W. Kwong
Hong Kong
tmg - August 13, 2009 2:47 AM
i understand there is an allegation of bribery aswell...is that a separate charge/offence or is that bound up together in the article 219 charge?