The US, together with 11 other countries, recently issued a joint statement at the UN Human Rights Council to express their concerns towards China’s “deteriorating human rights record," demanding China to release all its detained activists and lawyers.

Their accusations, however, clearly demonstrate a lack of respect for other country’s judicial sovereignty. The Chinese government has already hit back. “The criticism, under the excuse of human rights, not only severely infringes on domestic affairs and judicial sovereignty, but also breaches the spirit of the rule of law. China firmly opposes and definitely does not accept that,” said Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei at a press conference on March 11.

China is a country under rule of law and Chinese judicial authorities handle cases and protect any suspect’s legitimate rights and interests in accordance with the law, the Spokesperson added.

The cases mentioned in the statement are still under investigation. But Western countries, boasting themselves of “rule of law,” didn’t hesitate to incite the public to impose pressure on these cases. Such action exposed their lack of respect for other countries’ judicial systems, and therefore tarnished their own images.

It should be noted that China’s judicial departments withhold the right to crack down on illegal activities in accordance with the law. Any action diminishing China’s rule of law under the cloak of “human rights guardian” will not be accepted.

Even in Western countries with mature legal systems, activists and lawyers should work as defenders of, rather than challengers to, existing legal order. As the public’s understanding of rule of law is influenced by public figures, some collisions of social order in the name of “human rights” in recent years have brought a negative impact on Chinese people’s awareness of the law.

For instance, some people package importunate petitions as “rights protection” and describe court order disruptions as “fighting injustice.” These misleading behaviors gave rise to social confrontation and hindered legal progress in China. Meanwhile, such actions gave certain countries an excuse to interfere with China’s judicial sovereignty in the name of human rights.

As for the development of human rights, one-size-fit-all approach would never work, and each country’s concrete conditions should always be taken into account.

Rigidly applying Western experiences on China or labeling Western standards as “universal values” demonstrate the arrogance of Western-centrism. It is not the first time we have seen politicization of human rights issues in the international community. Some Western countries, with their own human rights problems, hold double standards toward other countries. By picking on other countries’ human rights records, these countries are trying to cover up their true intention of pursuing self-interests.