Reporting forced labour at Gian prison after release: Shaw Gol claims that he was still required to continue his work

After six months of imprisonment, Jiangxi labour defender Xiao Gao, also known as Xiao Qingshan, was again targeted at the Gian prison where he had served his sentence. (a) Humanistic Watch (OP) disclosed on 2 October that Shaw Gao-Sau had claimed that he had been placed in prison for long periods of time and fatigue and had sustained injuries to his right hand ' s index finger during the operation of the carjacking in November 2025; After his release in March this year, he reported and submitted information to the Jiangxi Judicial Department, the Public Prosecution Service, the Prison Administration and the courts, but has not yet received the results of the proceedings which he approved.

These specific allegations of work in prison, injury management and other sentences of imprisonment are currently mainly from statements made by Shaw Gao-Sho himself through Human Life Watch, and no public response to the report has been received from the Giang Prison or the Jiangxi Prison Administration. At the same time, the Giang prison, where it is served, can be corroborated by previous records of the organization and by public reports of prison activities. The separation of the two is key to understanding this report: while the reporting of sentences and actions is publicly documented, allegations of responsibility such as “forced labour” “rejection of treatment after work injury” still require further verification of surveillance, working hours, medical treatment and production records.

One time a machine job injury became the core detail of the report

According to Humans Watch, citing Shaw Gao, he was required to work long hours while serving his sentence in the Giang prison between 2023 and

1. Shaw Gol stated that on 9 November 2025, he was injured by the machine with his right index finger and sustained injuries exceeding one centimetre due to fatigue; He reported to two prison police officers that he had not been given prompt medical treatment and had had to stop the bleeding himself with a cloth and then continued his work.

This allegation could be further verified because it contained a clear date, equipment, injuries and the names of the staff members. If the workshop concerned, such as Xiao Gao, claims that there is a monitoring presence, the prison production platoon, surveillance video, injury registration and medical records may be direct materials to test their claims.

Shaw Gothor also alleged that he was not the only one at the labour site in Giang prison who suffered an injury at work, and that some of his prison inmates were beaten, verbally abused and robbed by other prisoners. This claim is also currently lacking independent and public evidence and cannot be based solely on the information reported to establish the facts of the conduct of the individual responsible.

From the end of the sentence to the multisectoral reporting

Shaw Gao was released on 18 March 2026 after serving his sentence. (a) The Human Rights Defence Network (HRN) previously recorded his promotion as a person born in 1967 and his long-term participation in labour legal aid and advocacy; Arrested in 2021, then sentenced to four years and six months' imprisonment for “false prosecution” and “silent assault”, and transferred to the Gian prison in 2023.

Human Rights Watch (POS) reported that after his release, Shaw Gao-Sung reported on the problem of prison labour to the Jiangxi Provincial Judicial Department, the Public Prosecution Service and the Prison Administration. On 3 April, the Aohara District Court received its materials; On 8 May, he sent a further letter of complaint to the Jiangxi Provincial High People ' s Court, which also referred to the fact that he considered that the commutation of some sentences was illegal.

By 1 October, Shaw Gao-Shang continued to raise his voice at home. Human Rights Watch stated that he was currently under movement restrictions and was therefore unable to travel freely to defend his rights. The public reports available do not provide sufficient documentation to confirm whether they are currently in legal terms, as well as the specific decision-making bodies and legal instruments.

The official display of “work site” is in contrast to the report

Around midday this year, the prison held a prison opening day and a family-friendly teaching event. (a) The daily reports of the Rule of Law newspaper, published by the New Wave, stated that families entered the prison area to visit the places of study, life and work of the prison population; The Director of the prison in Giang said that he was advancing the construction of the Sunshine Prison and emphasized the need for regulatory management and educational rehabilitation.

Such public activities are presented on the initiative of the prison administration, while the reports of the high-level prison authorities are directed at the power relations between the working hours, fatigue, injury disposal and the serving of sentences in the daily production chain. The two narratives do not prove or deny each other. What is truly capable of answering the dispute is not the promotion of a caliber or the identity of the whistleblower, but the specific production record and the regulatory evidence.

The Chinese prison system allows for the organization of labour for persons serving sentences in accordance with the law, but labour arrangements are subject to legal and regulatory norms. If there is a time-consuming work, and the necessary medical treatment is refused after a visible injury, the question is no longer just “labour” per se but whether the prison performs its duties of safe labour, medical care and supervision.

Why the report needs a verifiable official response

The promotion was not the first time that he had been released from prison to defend his rights in public. (b) The 2024 prison notice of the Network for the Defence of Human Rights (CNDH) that he had been recorded serving his sentence in the prison of El-Gian, as well as family and friends contact and difficulties in visiting; The release notice of April this year confirmed that his sentence ended on 18 March. In June, other human rights organizations also reported that Shaw Gao-Sung had been beaten and injured while continuing to report local politicians, but that the responsibility for the incident was also based on his own statements and those of his supporters.

What is really needed, therefore, for this report in October is an open evidence and a procedural response. (a) The Shou Gao-Sao gave the date of the injury, the equipment, the location of the prison and the destination of the report; Prisons and the judicial authorities that receive complaints have records of scheduling, monitoring, medical treatment, commutation of sentence and processing of complaints. These allegations are subject to a test or rebuttal procedure, provided that the authorities concerned investigate them in accordance with the law and form a written response that can be verified by the parties.

For prisons, the closed environment means that the convicted persons are almost unable to preserve their own evidence and are not free to leave dangerous workplaces as are the workers. This is why monitoring, medical care and production of archives are not only internal management materials, but also key evidence of accountability in the event of disputes and the protection of the fundamental rights of persons serving sentences. The validity of the complaints by Shaw Gao should ultimately be answered by these records and by the investigations conducted in accordance with the law, rather than by placing the reports in prolonged suspension between multiple departments.