On Sunday, public security officers from Chengdu detained investigative journalist Liu Hu, as well as his colleague Wu Yingjiao, who was in Hebei at the time. The two are reportedly accused of false accusations and illegal business operations in connection with their recent work together. An article posted to WeChat by the journalism collective Aquarius Era, now censored but archived by CDT Chinese, gave details of the circumstances leading up to their detention:

On January 29, Wu Yingjiao and Liu Hu published a joint-bylined article on the WeChat public account Law and Sentiment, titled "Is the Sichuan County Party Secretary who once hounded a professor to his death now driving investors to bankruptcy?" A Shanxi businessman surnamed Wang said he had invested in a postpartum care center in Chengdu’s Pujiang county in 2020 under what was then a government "investment promotion" program. After the county government changed hands, the new administration unilaterally declared their signed investment agreement invalid, called a halt to work on the nearly completed project on grounds of "illegal construction," and froze the property. He believed that local officials intended to seize the project, turn the facility into a government kindergarten, and fraudulently claim a large amount in government subsidies. Mr. Wang accused the current Pujiang County Party Secretary Pu Fayou of orchestrating the scheme, saying he "tightly controls construction projects from a distance, while his family members pull strings behind the scenes to fix contract bids." Wang also provided chat logs that showed demands for shares and bribes from Peng Xingli, former Political Commissar for the Pujiang County Public Security Bureau.

The article has now been deleted. Aquarius Era notes that before he lost contact, Liu Hu published a text message he had received from an official at the Chengdu Municipal Commission for Disciplinary Inspection. It said that they had taken note of the report on issues in Pujiang County, and requested that Liu promptly contact city-level disciplinary authorities to help them verify the situation. At the same time, it reminded him that petitions and complaints against civil servants should proceed in a lawful manner through lawful channels. Liu Hu replied that they should contact Mr. Wang, that his published article was not a formal complaint or petition, and that he would not cooperate.

Mr. Wang had previously told interviewers that he had filed as many as 12 formal complaints with the relevant authorities, "but they negligently brushed it off, saying that there was no evidence of corruption that amounted to a legal or disciplinary violation." Aquarius Era attempted to reach Mr. Wang by phone, but the call was "temporarily unable to connect."

[…] Lawyer Zhou Ze, who has defended Liu Hu in the past, has intervened in the current case, and is preparing to meet with Liu. On learning that Liu was in legal danger once more, he issued a statement on Liu’s behalf: "He travels all over the map writing articles for those who can’t speak out for themselves, voicing grievances and exposing injustice. I believe Liu Hu’s work is invaluable, and of immense benefit to the public." He said he had earnestly discussed the risks facing Liu Hu with lawyer friends in the past, but continued to support him in the current circumstances. He had correctly anticipated that the public security organs might pursue charges of illegal business operations, but believes that citizens’ right to hold state organs and employees accountable is a matter of freedom of expression, and should not be criminalized. [Chinese]

NGO Chinese Human Rights Defenders reported on the subsequent progress of Zhou and others: "On February 3, lawyers for Liu and Wu traveled to Chengdu City Detention Center seeking to meet with their clients. Despite waiting the entire day, detention center staff denied the lawyers access to their clients, citing the lawyers’ lack of prior reservations and an overwhelming number of meeting requests, according to updates CHRD received. On February 4, Liu’s lawyer was given access to his client."

Liu previously spent a year in detention after reporting on official corruption in 2013; that case was eventually dropped. In a WeChat post on Monday, "Chongqing Telephone Guy" praised Liu’s work and character, and lamented his latest detention. The post was censored, but is archived at CDT Chinese.

When my phone screen went dark this morning, my heart skipped a beat. The news had come in that contact had been lost with my old friend Liu Hu on the afternoon of February 1, and with Wu Yingjiao as well. When I asked around, the rumors pointed to the Chengdu Public Security Bureau, apparently in relation to that recent article about Sichuan’s Pujiang county. Outside the window is Chongqing’s usual, stifling winter haze, and my thoughts drift back to the years when I first got to know him.

It was pure good luck that I met Liu Hu. The bright lights of big outlets like New Express were already far behind him, and he’d moved on to the battlefield of self-media, but he still had an investigative reporter’s unique sharpness and tenacity. Everyone in the field knew he was as hard as a rock. Every article of his set off shockwaves, from early reports calling out senior officials by name, to later ones calling for justice in the Zhang Jiahui and Zeng Jianbin cases. He was like a tireless hunter stalking hidden truths through the dark forest of information.

A lot of people ask me how he’s always able to catch these "big fish." I think it’s because of his almost punishing professional standards. From what I know of him, his writing often includes only 70% of the facts he has in hand. He won’t write anything down rashly: he needs a complete chain of evidence and reliable sources. This rigor is a survival instinct forged by more public opinion storms than you can count. It’s his core as a journalist. He doesn’t just write articles, he lays the facts like bricks and lets the wall stand on its own.

Nowadays everyone has a microphone, but there are fewer and fewer real investigative voices. Many of our colleagues have chosen to go quiet or pivot, crushed by the pressure to attract traffic and the weight of reality, but Liu Hu keeps stubbornly working the field that others have abandoned. He knows in his bones that with any deep investigation, there could be someone with vested interests who wants to shut him up, or a whole crowd of them. He’s exposed no small number of corrupt officials, and made countless enemies in the process. Every time, he comes through because of his unshakable professional integrity and absolute commitment to the truth. I used to joke that he was invulnerable, but the truth is that justice and the law ultimately took the side of truth.

Spring Festival is on its way, and at a time when families should be reuniting, we hear this news instead. I feel like there’s a stone in my heart. Where is that friend of mine now, always weary from the road, with his hoarse but firm voice on the phone? Is he OK?

I choose to believe so. I believe in Liu Hu. I believe that every character he’s written will stand up to scrutiny. I believe that his commitment to justice will win out. He didn’t cause the storm; he’s just the one brave enough to light a lamp in the eye of it. The gales may hide it for a while, but as long as the wick burns, the light will always shine.

Liu Hu, old friend, I’m waiting for you to come home. We’re all waiting for you to come back safely and tell us another true story. [Chinese]

At The New York Times, Andrew Higgins and Joy Dong noted: "Even a news outlet affiliated with the government of a Chinese province, Shandong, raised questions about the detentions, urging the authorities to handle the case fairly. In a commentary published on Tuesday, the outlet wrote that ‘silence is not conducive to solving problems.’" The post has since been deleted from WeChat, "suspected of violating relevant laws, regulations and policies under users complaints and platform reviews."

As "Telephone Guy" writes above and Liu Hu has told foreign media in the past, investigative journalism in China is under mounting pressure from both political and commercial angles. This tightening was discussed again this week in a piece from China Media Project’s sister site Tian Jian, in which Yu Tian explained that the situation is "no longer simply about direct legal and political restrictions, but about the contraction of the entire public space in China":

In recent years, the pressure facing Chinese journalists has intensified considerably. When reporters in multiple regions cover stories such as mass incidents or the debt problems facing local governments, they are now routinely required to remove or revise reports, or to hand over their interview materials. Local propaganda offices continue to strengthen their review of news coverage, prompting frontline reporters to resort to self-censorship simply to survive professionally. Internet regulatory agencies have also increased real-time monitoring of news platforms and self-media accounts — independently operated accounts on social media platforms like WeChat that remain subject to strict licensing and content regulations. Reports involving social issues are often required to undergo a process of “pre-publication review” (先审後发).

[…] Xiao Hong, another reporter working at The Beijing News, told Tian Jian that many news organizations no longer encourage investigative reporting. “In July 2024, after investigative reporter Han Futao and two other reporters jointly investigated and published a story about [industrial] oil tankers transporting [edible] oils, the higher-ups were really unhappy,” she said. [See more background on the scandal from CDT.] “Now all similar reports must go through several layers of approval. We all know which topics can’t be touched — and even if we do touch them, they can’t be published. Now when we receive complaints [from citizens about public interest issues], even with evidence, we don’t write about them.” [Source]