UN Experts Question China about the fate of Tibetan Buddhist Scholar Go Sherab Gyatso and Rinchen Tsultrim

Tibetan monks Go Sherab Gyatso and Rinchen Tsultrim.

 

Geneva: A group of UN experts have jointly questioned China about the cases of disappeared Tibetan Buddhist Scholar Go Sherab Gyatso and arbitrarily detained Rinchen Tsultrim, both Tibetan monks from Ngaba in Amdo, Eastern Tibet.

While expressing serious concern over the enforced disappearance of Go Sherab Gyatso and arbitrary detention of Rinchen Tsultrim, the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances; Working Group on Arbitrary Detention; Special Rapporteur on minority issues; and Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, have jointly called China to provide information about the whereabouts of Go Sherab Gyatso “urgently”, and asked legal grounds for the arrest, detention, and sentencing of Rinchen Tsultrim, in the communication transmitted to China.

The UN experts have further raised that “these detentions are not isolated events”, but reflect a systemic pattern of arbitrary and incommunicado detentions, closed trials, and unknown charges and verdicts against Tibetans by the Chinese authorities. The experts also expressed concern that individuals have been targeted based on religion and ethnicity by China.

A Tibetan Buddhist Scholar Go Sherab Gyatso was arrested at Chengdu in Sichuan Province on 26 October 2020, since then his well-being and whereabouts remain unknown. Go Sherab Gyatso has published several books on Tibetan philosophy and culture and the monastic education system. Go Sherab Gyatso had previously been detained by the Chinese authorities in 1998 and in 2008.

Rinchen Tsultrim, a monk from Nangshing monastery in Ngaba, was held in incommunicado detention since he was arbitrarily arrested by Chinese officials of Ngaba Public Security Bureau on 27 July 2019. It was only on 23 March 2021 information surfaced that he was sentenced to four and a half years in prison. The information about the charges against him, the trial date, and the court where the trial took place continued to remain unknown.

keyboard_arrow_up