Family says jailed journalist Dong Yuyu was ordered back to work after lung surgery
Updated: 52 minutes ago
NEW YORK | 3 November 2026
The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said in New York on 3 November that Dong Yuyu, a former Guangming Daily editor imprisoned in China, had been ordered back to garment work on 12 October after lung surgery in August. His family told CPJ he was working about 40 hours a week and that his health had since deteriorated. The organisation called on the Chinese authorities to stop requiring him to work and to release him immediately on humanitarian grounds. It said China’s foreign ministry had not immediately replied to its emailed request for comment. [1]
The statement was published at 9.17am US Eastern Standard Time, or 2.17pm in London, on 3 November. The disclosure concerns the date of the return to work, the hours and Dong’s condition, as well as CPJ’s appeal. CPJ described the tumour removed at a prison hospital in Beijing as cancerous. No pathology report, discharge instructions, return-to-work order or attendance register was available for this report; neither Dong nor his treating physician was interviewed. The weekly hours are the family’s estimate, not a daily attendance record. [1][2]
The family’s English-language account of 7 May distinguishes the discovery of a mass from a diagnosis. It said Dong was admitted to hospital on 27 April with heart discomfort and that a CT scan on 29 April showed a lesion measuring about 3.3cm by 2.2cm in the lower lobe of his left lung. The family feared it was malignant, but said doctors told them during a visit that subsequent contrast-enhanced scans had not produced a conclusive diagnosis. The April finding should not be reported retrospectively as a cancer diagnosis made at the time. [2][3][4]
The early accounts differ by a day on admission: Reporters Without Borders (RSF), citing the family, gave 28 April; PEN International gave 27 April. Both identified a prison-affiliated hospital in Tianjin. The Associated Press also spoke to Dong’s son for its 8 May report on the family’s appeal for medical release. These sources establish when the family sought help. They are not independent medical assessments, and their accounts of tests in the spring cannot establish how far Dong recovered after surgery in August. [2][3][4][5]
Where Dong is held also affects how easily his family can see him. In April, CPJ reported his March transfer from Beijing No. 2 Prison to Chaobai Prison in Tianjin. Relatives said a drive of roughly 40 minutes from their Beijing home had become a journey of more than two hours each way. On 12 May, Harvard’s Nieman Foundation for Journalism expressed hope that its former fellow would receive the treatment he needed. It attributed its medical information to the family: the foundation can attest to Dong’s fellowship but was not his healthcare provider. [6][7]
Prison work was already a concern before the operation. Dong’s son told AP in May of long hours sewing and insufficient rest. In their statement that month, relatives relayed Dong’s account that his heart discomfort eased when he rested in hospital. He associated the symptoms with working hours and inadequate rest; that was his interpretation of his experience. The November alert gives no specific postoperative symptoms, test results or doctor’s assessment of his fitness for work. It does not establish a medical cause for the reported deterioration. [2][5][8]
Dong spent his career writing from inside a state newspaper. In a signed account published by the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan, his son recalled that Dong earned a master’s degree in law from Peking University in 1987 and spent the next 35 years at Guangming Daily. At home, he remembered his father cooking and doing chores, then returning to his keyboard. Many columns appeared without his name; subjects included accountability after disasters and the rights of rural and urban residents. Dong was a Nieman Fellow at Harvard in 2006–07. His family attributes his prosecution to his writing and outside contacts; that is its assessment, distinct from the offence of conviction. [8][9]
Dong was detained on 21 February 2022 while having lunch with a Japanese diplomat at a Beijing restaurant. The diplomat was also briefly held and then released. Dong’s family initially kept quiet in the hope of a resolution and went public in 2023. The trial was held behind closed doors in July that year. On the second anniversary of his detention, the US National Press Club noted that there was no public transcript and that the family had been unable to attend. The arrest, trial and subsequent sentence can be documented; outsiders have far less access to the evidence put before the court. [9][10][11]
A Beijing court sentenced Dong to seven years for espionage on 29 November 2024. On 13 November 2025 the Beijing High People’s Court rejected his appeal, leaving the sentence in place. His son confirmed the outcome to Reuters; defence lawyer Mo Shaoping told the agency that he considered the evidence insufficient to sustain the charge. Dong’s son separately told AP that his father’s contact with Japanese diplomats had been part of his professional life. The lawyer and family dispute the conviction, which remains in force. [10][12][13]
The two governments addressed different questions after the verdict. Asked about Dong on the day of sentencing, Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said judicial authorities handled cases strictly according to law. Her answer did not specify what information Dong was alleged to have passed, or to whom. Japan’s then foreign minister, Takeshi Iwaya, said the diplomatic activities of Japan’s overseas missions were legitimate duties. That was a statement about Japanese officials’ work rather than an independent review of the court evidence. Both statements predate Dong’s operation and neither addresses his return to work. [14][15][12]
The reported date of Dong’s return to work, 12 October, preceded the entry into force of China’s revised Prison Law. Adopted on 30 April, the revision took effect on 1 November. Article 102 requires prisons setting tasks to take account of a prisoner’s ability to work, health and other personal circumstances, as well as the needs of rehabilitation. Article 103 separately refers to national provisions on working hours. The suitability of a task for an individual is a different question from how hours are scheduled. The family’s weekly estimate cannot determine Dong’s fitness, and a provision that took effect in November cannot by itself establish that an October decision was unlawful. [16][17][18]
The UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, known as the Nelson Mandela Rules, offer a further benchmark. Rule 96 makes work for sentenced prisoners subject to a determination of physical and mental fitness by a doctor or another qualified healthcare professional. Rule 27 places clinical decisions with the responsible healthcare professionals. In Dong’s case, a dated assessment could establish who examined him, what duties were considered suitable and whether he was reassessed after his condition reportedly changed. CPJ’s public account does not answer those questions; nor does it prove that no assessment took place. [19][1]
Continuity of care matters for someone transferred from Beijing to Tianjin and reportedly taken to Beijing for surgery. Rule 24 of the Mandela Rules calls for continuity of treatment; Rule 26 requires accurate, up-to-date and confidential individual medical files, to be passed to the receiving healthcare service on transfer. A prisoner may designate a third party to access the file. Confidentiality need not preclude verification: an authorised clinician could check the diagnosis, any restrictions on work and arrangements for follow-up without publishing the entire medical record. No such assessment was available to this report. That does not mean records failed to follow Dong. [19][2][6]
The requests made on Dong’s behalf are distinct. In May, PEN International sought medical release and permission for him to travel abroad for treatment and family reunion. CPJ now asks for an end to prison work and immediate humanitarian release. Under Article 265 of China’s Criminal Procedure Law, a prisoner serving a fixed term who is seriously ill and needs treatment outside prison may be permitted to serve the sentence temporarily outside, subject to certification by a designated hospital and approval. This does not overturn a conviction or automatically authorise foreign travel. No public decision granting or refusing Dong medical release was found by publication. [4][20][1]
As of the evening of 3 November, this report had found no specific public response from the prison, treating hospital or Chinese government on the hours or postoperative condition reported by the family. Earlier records establish that relatives had raised the lung finding, press organisations had sought treatment and Beijing had defended the judicial process. The new development is the family’s disclosure through CPJ and the organisation’s renewed appeal. Independent records of Dong’s present condition and how it informed his work assignment remain unavailable. [1][2][7][14]
Sources
Comments