Personal Viewpoint

Organ Procurement From Executed Prisoners in China

A. Sharif
1,2,
*, M. Fiatarone Singh
2,3
, T. Trey
4
and J. Lavee
2,5
1
Department of Nephrology and Transplantation, Queen
Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK
2
Advisory Board, Doctors Against Forced Organ
Harvesting, Washington, DC
3
Exercise, Health and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health
Sciences and Sydney Medical School, University of
Sydney, Sydney, Australia
4
Executive Director, Doctors Against Forced Organ
Harvesting, Washington, DC
5
Heart Transplantation Unit, Department of Cardiac
Surgery, Sheba Medical Center and the Sackler Faculty of
Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

Corresponding author: Adnan Sharif,

adnan.sharif@uhb.nhs.uk
Organ procurement from executed prisoners in China is
internationally condemned, yet this practice continues
unabated in 2014. This is despite repeated announce-
ments from Chinese authorities that constructive meas-
ures have been undertaken to conform to accepted
ethical standards. While there is unanimous agreement
on the unethical nature of using organs from executed
prisoners, due to its limitations on voluntary and
informed consent, there is insufcient coverage of forced
organprocurement fromprisoners of conscience without
consent. Strategies to inuence positive change in China
over the last fewdecades have failedtobringthis practice
to an end. While organ donation and transplantation
services in China have undergone considerable structural
changes in the last few years, fundamental attempts to
shift practicetoethicallysourcedorgans haveoundered.
In this article, we discuss the organ trade in China, reect
upon organ procurement from executed prisoners
(including both capital prisoners and prisoners of con-
science) and provide an overview of contradictory
Chinese efforts to halt forced organ procurement from
executed prisoners. Finally, we highlight current actions
being taken to address this issue and offer comprehen-
sive recommendations to bring this ethically indefensible
practice to an immediate end.
Abbreviations: CMA, Chinese Medical Association;
COTRS, China Organ Transplant Response System;
DAFOH, Doctors Against Forced Organ Harvesting;
NHFPC, National Health and Family Planning Commis-
sion; PRC, Peoples Republic of China; WMA, World
Medical Association
Received 11 April 2014, revised 17 June 2014 and
accepted for publication 18 June 2014
Introduction
The success of transplantation is dependent upon the gift of
life bestowed by willing organ donors and/or their families,
in the context of informed and voluntary consent. Scientic
advances have propelled organ transplantation to the
treatment of choice for the majority of end-stage organ
failure, but a shortage of willing organ donors remains the
major challenge limiting organ transplantation benets to
many sick and vulnerable patients.
Fueled by the growing disparity between supply and
demand for organs, scarcity has provoked attempts to
bridge this divide that violate acceptable ethical standards.
The most up-to-date Global Observatory on Donation and
Transplantation report estimates 114690 solid organ trans-
plants were globally performed in 2012 (1). The World
Health Organization conservatively estimates illegal organ
trades comprise approximately 10%of this global transplant
activity (2), speculated by the nongovernmental organization
Global Financial Integrity to generate income ranging
between US$600 million to US$1.2 billion annually (3).
Illegal transplant activity has been documented in countries
as diverse as India, Pakistan, Kosovo and the Philippines, but
by far the largest and most controversial is the exploitation
of incarcerated death row prisoners in China (4). Despite
longstanding international condemnation, and repeated
assurances fromChina concerningplanned cessation, organ
procurement from executed prisoners continues today in
China and attracts global transplant tourists (5).
In this article, we discuss the organ trade in China, review
the Chinese practice of organ procurement from executed
prisoners, elaborate on prisoners of conscience as an
unrecognized and underappreciated organ source, reect
upon on-going challenges in relation to engaging with China
and offer recommendations to bring this ethically indefen-
sible practice to an immediate end.
Organ Procurement From Executed
Prisoners
Illegal organ trafcking can occur in a number of ways, with
organ procurement from executed prisoners representing
one of the most controversial sources. Obtaining organs for
transplantation from executed prisoners has been unequiv-
ocally denounced by international declarations including the
Nuremberg Code (6), the Helsinki Declaration (7), the
American Journal of Transplantation 2014; XX: 17
Wiley Periodicals Inc.
C
Copyright 2014 The American Society of Transplantation
and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons
doi: 10.1111/ajt.12871
1
Belmont report (8), Amnesty International (9), the World
Health Organization (10), the World Medical Association
(WMA) (11) and more recently by the Declaration of
Istanbul (12). Organs and tissues should always be given
with free, voluntary and informed consent, without
coercion, and the choice to donate must not be inuenced
by the prospect of execution. Accepting organs from
executed prisoners has been debated in established
transplantation programs in the context of informed and
voluntary consent, but incarcerated inmates condemned to
death are not in the position to make an autonomous and
informed consent for organ donation (13,14).
Currently, there are 55 offenses in China reported to be
punishable by death, with 31 of them being nonviolent
offenses (15). Executions are performed within a short time
frame after death sentence and appeals against death
sentences are scarce (16). These circumstances harbor a
greater risk for abuse of the death sentence, including
nonconvicted prisoners of conscience. While capital
punishments for physical acts in some countries reect
inexcusably dened crimes (e.g. homosexuality), we
believe punishment on the basis of belief harbors
signicantly greater risk for abuse. Thus far, there has
been a consistent failure to highlight organs procured from
executed prisoners of conscience. Such prisoners are
dened as, any person who is physically restrained (by
imprisonment or otherwise) from expressing any opinion
which he honestly holds and which does not advocate or
condone personal violence (17). Imprisonment and/or
execution on the basis of belief leads to greater potential for
abuse, due to subjective condemnation from the executing
powers. Failure to acknowledge the plight of prisoners of
conscience in any discussion relating to forced organ
procurement from executed in prisoners in China has been
a signicant oversight.
Focus on Transplantation in China
China is widely acknowledged as performing the second
highest number of organ transplants in the world after the
United States. According to numbers presented by Chinese
ofcials at the 2010 Madrid Conference on Organ Donation
and Transplantation, approximately 10000 transplants are
performed annually in China (18). Delivery of transplantation
services has undergone signicant evolution in China over
the last few decades (see Figure 1), especially since 1984
when China enacted its Temporary Rules Concerning the
Utilization of Corpses or Organs from the Corpses of
Executed Criminals as national policy and stipulated that
organs of executed prisoners can be used for medical
purposes (19).
Chinese authorities have in the past consistently denied the
use of organs from executed prisoners for transplants. Not
until 2001, when a former doctor in the Police Tianjin
General Brigade Hospital (Dr. Wang Guoqi) testied before
the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human
Rights of the US House of Representatives, were these
issues brought to public attention for the rst time (20). In
his testimony, Dr. Guoqi discussed the procurement of
Figure 1: Flowchart outlining major milestones in the development of organ donation and transplantation services in China over
the last 50 years.
Sharif et al
2 American Journal of Transplantation 2014; XX: 17
organs from prisoners executed by gunshots to their
heads, sometimes even before their death, but also the
illegal organ trade which operates alongside abuses of the
Chinese judicial system. This practice serves the organ
donor system domestically, but also supports protable
trade in organs to international transplant tourists (21).
Subsequently in 2005, Dr. Huang Jiefu, then Vice Minister
of Health of the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) and a liver
transplant surgeon trained by the University of Sydney, not
only publicly admitted for the rst time that, apart from a
few trafc victims, deceased donor organs in China came
from executed prisoners, but that in fact more than 90% of
these organs came from executed prisoners (22). Chinese
authorities have repeatedly maintained that in the socio-
cultural context of Confucian beliefs, consent for organ
donation by prisoners awaiting execution may be consid-
ered a repentant act that is morally praiseworthy (23).
Recently, the Chinese Transplant Congress in Hangzhou
(November 12, 2013) reported that 1161 deceased organ
donors (who were not executed prisoners) supplied organs
for 3175 transplants in 2013 (24). Combined with living-
donor kidney transplants these constituted 49.4% of all
organ transplantation in China during 2013. Conversely, this
means that there is currently continued reliance upon
organs from executed prisoners in 50.6% of all organ
transplants performed according to ofcial Chinese
statistics (24).
However, investigation of Chinese transplant activity data
uncovers a number of discrepancies. First, the consent
process among death row prisoners awaiting execution
would have to be exceptionally successful in comparison
with the consent rate in the general Chinese population
with virtually negligible refusal rate. We believe that this is
highly improbable, as in the Chinese populace voluntary
organ donation is traditionally absent (between 2003 and
2009 there were only 130 freely donated organs in China
among the vast population of over 1.3 billion (25)). If applied
to the prisoner cohort, the average consent rate of the
Chinese populace would require millions of executions
each year to ensure a sufcient amount of donor organs for
the 10 000 transplants performed annually (18). Data
relating to numbers of executions performed in China
remains elusive but estimates range from 3000 to 5000
annually (26). While this represents more executions
than the rest of the world combined, recent trends suggest
declining numbers. Therefore if ofcial executed prison-
ers represent a dwindling pool of donors, where is the
remaining number of organs being sourced fromto achieve
the high volume of transplants performed annually?
Second, it also appears implausible that every prisoner
deemed healthy enough to donate viable organs is coinci-
dentally scheduled for execution onthe exact day a matching
recipient is available. This second paradox is of greatest
concern, as it raises the question as to whether the organ
procurement follows the execution or if the death sentence
follows the demand for organs procured from a pool of
prescreened prisoners. The source of this pool of donors
has been a matter of intense scrutiny over the past decade,
but recent allegations suggest specic minority groups in
China are being persecuted to facilitate transplantation. The
most comprehensive investigations into alleged forced
organ procurement from minority groups have focused on
Falun Gong practitioners, concluding that a large number of
Falun Gong prisoners of conscience have been put to death
on the basis of unveriable offenses (27,28). While Falun
Gong practitioners remain the largest persecuted group,
there is evidence of similar fates for other minority groups in
China such as Uighur Muslims, Tibetans and Christians (29).
The Laogai System (prison labor camps) offers a readily
accessible supply of organs to meet demand, with greater
potential for exploitation in military versus civilian hospitals
due to greater military control over the Laogai System.
Military hospitals in China are under the command of the
Peoples Liberation Army, which has a unique political
standing and autonomous status in China (30). The almost
total lack of transparency in this setting makes it difcult to
verify source of procured organs. Therefore, a clear
distinction must be made between military versus civilian
hospitals in China, as both have differing regulation and
nancial reimbursements (30), and there is no certainty that
re-organization of one system will lead to concurrent
changes in the other.
Exploitation of the Laogai Systemwould be consistent with
the third paradox of organ transplantation in China of widely
advertised organ waiting times of only a few weeks on
Chinese organ transplantation center websites. For exam-
ple, veriable cases of unusual, prescheduled heart trans-
plants for transplant tourists 2 weeks ahead of time have
been published (31). State Chinese authorities have so far
constantly denied this additional source of organs, without
providing veriable information about the ofcially pro-
claimed organ sources.
Contradictory Claims of Transplantation
Reform in China
Despite numerous statements over the past years
announcing plans to phase out reliance on organs procured
from executed prisoners (32,33), no such cessation has
occurred. Latest announcements from Chinese authorities
once again outline planned reforms of their edgling organ
donor system, with reciprocal phasing out of reliance
upon executed prisoner organs. The proposed system, to
be coordinated by local Organ Procurement Organizations
and planned for full implementation across China by
June 2014, will commit transplant programs to conform
to accepted ethical standards (24). Huang et al, in a
China-based medical journal, stated that much-anticipated
change in the practice of organ donation and transplantation
is now underway and afrmed by an important Hangzhou
Resolution promulgated at the 2013 China Transplant
Congress (34, p. 122).
Forced Organ Procurement in China
3 American Journal of Transplantation 2014; XX: 17
Supportive publications from outside China have also
expressed cautious optimism with regard to positive
engagement with Chinese transplant professionals and/or
organizations. A recent report in The Lancet highlighted the
small but credible indications from China that its health
ministry is sincere in their aspirations for change (35).
However, the hope for change seems premature as,
less than 6 months later, journalist reports state China
has regressed back from this announcement and now
proposes to further strengthen the regulation of organ
donations from executed prisoners and integrate it into the
existing public voluntary organ donation and allocation
system (36). This followed the Transplantation Society
publishing an open letter to Xi Jinping (General Secretary of
the Communist Party of China) repeating its call to
immediately halt organ procurement fromexecuted prison-
ers (37). Recent developments have destroyed any hope for
positive change, with an interview with Huang Jiefu
suggesting organs procured from executed prisoners will
continue to be justiably used by being classed as
voluntary donations as any other citizen (38). Huang
qualies his views in this interview with the following
statement (translated from Chinese): Executed prisoners
can voluntarily donate organs. Given the willingness of
death row prisoners to donate organs, once entered
into our unied allocation system they are counted as
voluntary citizens the so called death row organ donation
doesnt exist any longer (38). In this interview, Huang
also inadvertently conrms, to our knowledge the rst
occasion, that organs were (or still are) procured from
executed prisoners without their explicit consent by
emphasizing that, in the future death row organ donors
themselves and their families will also need to agree (to)
donate organs in the same way as citizens (38). Wang
Haibo, Director of the China Organ Transplant Response
System Research Center at the Ministry of Health, also
recently conrmed the lack of any schedule to wean off
dependence from executed prisoner organs in a journalist
interview (39).
These recent reports from China (36,38,39) are in direct
contradiction to the pronouncement of the Hangzhou
Resolution, where directors of transplant centers signed
a pledge to refrain from using organs from executed
prisoners at all (24,34). Thus, newly announced initiatives
from China (e.g. computerized organ allocation systems)
are not positive steps forward to allow a more organized
and equitable distribution system, but mechanisms to
further entrench, sanction and enable more efcient
allocation of unethically procured organs. As proposed,
the newsystemsimply becomes a vast, sophisticated form
of organ laundering, using prisoners organs to supply an
ever-increasing local and international demand.
Moreover, other recent reports fromChina indicate that the
Red Cross Society of China has been ofcially recruited as
the organization that, alongside the China Organ Transplant
Response System (COTRS), will be in charge of organ
donation and allocation (24). However, it has been reported
that the majority of voluntary donations in the rst 2 years
of the pilot organ donation system were obtained by the
Red Cross Society of China by paying families of a deceased
individual large sums of money (equivalent to up to twice
their annual income), to donate their loved ones
organs (40) thus indicating resorting to a different, but still
unacceptable and denounced, form of promoting organ
donation.
Proposed Recommendations for Stopping
Forced Organ Procurement
The international community needs rm and immediate
action from China to abolish the law from 1984 which
currently permits use of organs from executed prisoners,
and ban their use under any condition; to fully implement
such a ban without any delay in all hospitals, including
military hospitals, regardless of the burden it will impose on
the waiting lists for organ transplantation; to stop promoting
transplant tourism, and to facilitate international monitoring
to verify these changes. In order to achieve these goals,
several concerted and collaborative efforts, highlighted in
Table 1, should be employed.
A key component underlining these recommendations is
sustained pressure from international bodies. Lobbying
with the European Parliament has led to a joint motion for a
resolution, issued in December 2013, calling for an
immediate end to forced organ procurement (41). The
Italian Senate recently approved a resolution against forced
organ procurement in China (42). The currently proposed
House Resolution 281 in the USCongress calls for an end to
the practice of organ procurement from prisoners (espe-
cially prisoners of conscience) in the context of China and
prosecution for those found to engage in such practices on
US soil (43). The Congressional Subcommittee forwarded
the amended bill, rst introduced in July 2013, to the Full
Committee by unanimous consent in December 2013.
Finally the nongovernmental organization Doctors Against
Forced Organ Harvesting (DAFOH) personally handed
the United Nations Human Rights Commissioners ofce
in Geneva a petition signed by 1.5 million signatories
(gathered in over 50 countries and regions within 5 months)
in December 2013 that calls for an immediate end of forced
organ procurement from Falun Gong practitioners in
China (44). At the time of writing, no ofcial response
has been received back yet from the Commissioners
ofce.
Research utilizing data from forcibly harvested organs also
breaches the ethical code of conduct stipulated by the
Declaration of Helsinki and has very recently been denied
publication rights by several major scientic journals.
Transplantation science from China has therefore been
deprived of the opportunity to showcase its research on the
global academia stage (5,45).
Sharif et al
4 American Journal of Transplantation 2014; XX: 17
Some of the recently announced Chinese ve-point plan
for organ donation and transplantation (the Hangzhou
Resolution (24)), under the auspices of the National Health
and Family Planning Commission (NHFPC), should be
supported, such as encouraging the pilot program of organ
donation after cardiac death (46) or the living-donor number
expansion (47). However, to demonstrate robust action
from Chinese transplantation services that they are
conforming to acceptable ethical standards, immediate
cessation of unethical organ procurement is essential.
Abolishing the 1984 law, rather than simply adding
signatories to the Hangzhou Resolution, will immediately
end this practice without shifting responsibility to the
transplant centers. Recent events underline how the
Hangzhou Resolution is already under threat without
fundamental change to Chinese attitudes and legislation.
In addition, the current proposal to mix two pools of
organs in the computerized organ allocation system,
one from prisoners and another from voluntary organ
donations, represents a bureaucratic mechanism to ob-
scure unethical practice and further blur the lines between
forced procurement and voluntary donation in China. A
system that provides traceable documentation of organ
procurements from both civilian and military hospitals is
essential.
Conclusions
Forced organ procurement represents criminal activity that
is contradictory to ethical principles universally accepted in
the discipline of organ transplantation outside of China. In
Table 1: Recommendations to end forced organ procurement in China
Component Suggestive action and current progress Examples
1. Legislation Draft legislation to prohibit citizens receiving illegal
organs in any country
Australia, Israel, Spain
Prohibit reimbursement of transplant performed
anywhere around the globe under illegal
circumstances and involving organ trade
Israel
Denial of entry visas to individuals who have engaged in
illegal organ procurement in any country, in any
capacity
United States
Prosecute businesses and individuals engaging in
transplant tourism
Israel
2. Professional International and national professional medical societies
and journals should not accept abstracts, publications
or presentations from Chinese transplant centers
unless the authors clearly indicate that executed
prisoners were not the source of any of the organs or
data used for research
American Journal of Transplantation, Transplantation,
Transplant International
Continue critical debate and contact with the Chinese
leadership, in order to remind them of internationally
accepted ethical standards
Professional organizations, political bodies
Membership of international professional societies by
Chinese transplant professionals must be conditioned
by acceptance of ethics policies that specifically
express the unacceptability of executed prisoners as a
source of organs
Transplantation Society
3. Industry Pharmaceutical companies must ensure that no
executed prisoners are the source of organs used in
their studies that the principles of the Declaration of
Helsinki governing informed consent and research
participation are adhered to completely
Tourism businesses must ensure that Chinese
government regulations regarding transplant tourism
are adhered to rigorously
4. Training Training of Chinese transplant professionals by the
international community must be conditioned on
commitments that trainees will not engage, directly or
indirectly, in the use of organs from executed
prisoners
Australia
5. Monitoring On-site inspections of Chinese transplant centers by
internationally respected organ transplant
professionals is essential
Forced Organ Procurement in China
5 American Journal of Transplantation 2014; XX: 17
the context of organ procurement from executed prisoners
that occurs in China, it represents a disturbing example of
state-sanctioned illegal transplant activity. It is to be
fervently hoped that progressive, ethical, Chinese trans-
plant professionals and government ofcials will emerge.
By embracing acceptable ethical standards and recognizing
and correcting errors of the past, China will be able to take
its rightful place among the international transplantation
community as a respected member to be welcomed,
unequivocally, with open arms. Until then the international
medical community, which can never condone an ethically
indefensible gradual phasing out of criminal slaughter or
other crimes against humanity, should adopt a consistent
approach toward the abhorrent practice of forced organ
procurement and demand a complete and immediate
cessation. In the words of the late Reverend Martin Luther
King Jr., This is no time to take the tranquilizing drug of
gradualism.
Disclosure
The authors of this manuscript have conicts of interest to
disclose as described by the American Journal of Trans-
plantation. DAFOH is a charitable organization founded by
medical doctors and is independent from Falun Gong. AS,
MFS and JL are members of the Advisory Board and TT is
the Executive Director of DAFOH. There are no links,
associations or afliations between DAFOH and Falun
Gong.
References
1. Global Observatory on Donation & Transplantation, January 7,
2014. Available at: http://www.transplant-observatory.org/Pages/
Data-Reports.aspx. Accessed March 4, 2014.
2. Simazono Y. The State of the International Organ Trade: A
provisional picture based on integration of available information.
Bulletin of the World Health Organization 2007. Available at: http://
www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/85/12/06-039370/en/. Accessed
October 19, 2013.
3. Transnational Crime in the Developing World. Center for Interna-
tional Policy, Global Financial Integrity 2011. Available at: http://
www.gntegrity.org/. Accessed October 19, 2013.
4. Delmonico FL. The implications of Istanbul Declaration on organ
trafcking and transplant tourism. Curr Opin Organ Transplant
2009; 14: 116119.
5. Danovitch GM, Shapiro ME, Lavee J. The use of executed
prisoners as a source of organ transplants in China must stop. AmJ
Transplant 2011; 11: 426428.
6. The Nuremberg Code. Available at: http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guide-
lines/nuremberg.html. Accessed March 10, 2014.
7. Goodyear MD, Krleza-Jeric K, Lemmens T. The Declaration of
Helsinki. BMJ 2007; 335: 624625.
8. The Belmont Report. Available at: http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guide-
lines/belmont.html. Accessed March 10, 2014.
9. Amnesty International Report 2011: The state of the worlds
human rights. Available at: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/
info/POL10/001/2011/en. Accessed March 10, 2014.
10. WHO Guiding Principles on Human Cell, Tissue and Organ
Transplantation. Available at: http://www.who.int/transplantation/
Guiding_PrinciplesTransplantation_WHA63.22en.pdf?ua1. Accessed
March 10, 2014.
11. WMA statement on Organ and Tissue Donation. Available at:
http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/o3/. Accessed
March 10, 2014.
12. The Declaration of Istanbul. Available at: http://www.declaration-
ostanbul.org/. Accessed March 10, 2014.
13. Romano R, Piazza O. The use of organs fromexecuted prisoners in
China. Transl Med UniSa 2012; 3: 8182.
14. Caplan A. The use of prisoners as sources of organsAn ethically
dubious practice. Am J Bioethics 2011; 11: 15.
15. Why China Executes So Many People. Available at: http://www.
theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/05/why-china-executes-so-
many-people/275695/. Accessed May 19, 2014.
16. Amnesty International, Death Sentences and Executions 2013.
Available at: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ACT50/
001/2014/en/652ac5b3-3979-43e2-b1a1-6c4919e7a518/
act500012014en.pdf. Accessed May 19, 2014.
17. Benenson P. The forgotten prisoners. The Observer. 1961 May 28.
Available at: http://www.amnestyusa.org/about-us/amnesty-50-
years/peter-benenson-remembered/the-forgotten-prisoners-by-
peter-benenson. Accessed May 12, 2014.
18. Report of the Madrid Consultation Part 1: European and universal
challenges in organ donation and transplantation, searching for
global solutions. Transplantation 2011; 91 (Suppl 11S): S54.
19. Rothman D. The body shop. Sciences 2007; 35: 1721.
20. Organs for Sale: Chinas growing trade and ultimate violation of
prisoners rights. Hearing before the subcommittee on Interna-
tional Operations and Human Rights of the Committee on
International Relations, House of Representatives, United States
Congress. Available at: http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/
intlrel/hfa73452.000/hfa73452_0f.htm. Accessed November 11,
2013.
21. Hemphill JE. Chinas practice of procuring organs from executed
prisoners. Pac Rim Law Policy J Assoc 2007; 16: 431457.
22. Huang J. Ethical and legislative perspectives on liver transplanta-
tion in the Peoples Republic of China. Liver Transpl 2007; 13: 193
196.
23. Wang M, Wang X. Organ donation by capital prisoners in
China: Reections in Confucian ethics. J Med Philos 2010; 35:
197212.
24. The Hangzhou Resolution and Report of Meeting with Minister Bin
Li of the National Health and Family Planning Commission of the
Peoples Republic of China. The Declaration of Istanbul on Organ
Trafcking and Transplant Tourism. Available at: http://www.
declarationostanbul.org/index.php?
optioncom_content&viewarticle&id424:the-hangzhou-reso-
lution-and-report-of-meeting-with-minister-bin-li-of-the-national-
health-and-family-planning-commission-of-the-peoples-republic-
of-china&catid50:articles-relevant-to-the-declaration&-
Itemid67. Accessed November 15, 2013.
25. Yu X. Cultural taboos corruption. NewsChina. 2011 July 1, 1719.
26. World Coalition Against the Death Penalty. Available at: https://
www.worldcoalition.org/China. Accessed March 1, 2014.
27. China and Falun Gong. Congressional Research Service Report for
Congress, May 25, 2006. Available at: http://fpc.stae.gov/docu-
ments/organization/67829.pdf. Accessed March 10, 2014.
28. Matas D, Kilgour D. Bloody harvestThe killing of Falun Gong for
their organs. Woodstock, ON, Canada: Seraphim Editions, 2009.
Available at: http://organharvestinvestigation.net/index.html. Ac-
cessed March 10, 2014.
Sharif et al
6 American Journal of Transplantation 2014; XX: 17
29. Gutmann E. How many harvested? A survey-based
estimate of Falun Gong murdered from 2000 to 2008. In:
Matas D, Trey T, eds. State organs: Transplant abuse in
China. Woodstock, ON, Canada: Seraphim Editions, 2012, pp.
4967.
30. Investigative Report on the Role of Chinese Military & Armed
Police Hospitals in Live Organ Harvesting from Falun Gong
Practitioners, June 24, 2012. Available at: http://upholdjustice.
org/sites/upholdjustice.org/les/record/2012/06/218-en_218_report.
pdf. Accessed June 16, 2014.
31. Lavee J. The impact of the use of organs from executed prisoners
in China on the new Organ Transplantation Law in Israel. In:
Matas D, Trey T, eds. State organs: Transplant abuse in
China. Woodstock, ON, Canada: Seraphim Editions, 2012, pp.
108113.
32. Hillman H. Procurement organs from recently executed prisoners:
Practice must be stopped. BMJ 2001; 323: 1254.
33. Parry J. Amatter of life or death: China moves towards changing its
transplantation practices. BMJ 2007; 335: 961.
34. Huang JF, Zheng SS, Liu YF, et al. China organ donation and
transplantation update: The Hangzhou Resolution. Hepatobiliary
Pancreat Dis Int 2014; 13: 122124.
35. Alcorn T. China steps towards an ethical organ donor system.
Lancet 2013; 382: 755.
36. China Daily USA. Govt seeks fairness in organ donor system for
inmates. Available at: http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2014-
03/07/content_17331138.htm. Accessed March 25, 2014.
37. Delmonico F, Chapman J, Fung J, et al. Open letter to Xi Jinping,
President of the Peoples Republic of China: Chinas ght against
corruption in organ transplantation. Transplantation 2014; 97: 795
796.
38. Daily News China. Available at: http://dailynews.sina.com/gb/chn/
chnpolitics/phoenixtv/20140304/12205515629.html. Accessed May
10, 2014.
39. ARD Mediathek. Keine Organe mehr von Hingerrichteten?
Available at: http://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/china2158.html.
Accessed June 16, 2014.
40. Wu X, Fang Q. Financial compensation for deceased organ
donation in China. J Med Ethics 2013; 39: 378379.
41. European Parliament: Joint Motion for a Resolution. Available at:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?typeMOTION
&referenceP7-RC-2013-0562&languageEN. Accessed March
10, 2014.
42. Risoluzione Approvata Dalla Commissione SullAffare Assegnato N.
243 (Doc. XXIV-ter, n. 7). Senato della Repubblica. Available at: http://
www.senato.it/japp/bgt/showdoc/frame.jsp?tipodocSommComm
&leg17&id00750896&partdoc_dc-allegato_a:1&parseno&
stampasi&tocno. Accessed March 9, 2014.
43. H.Res.281Expressing concern over persistent and credible
reports of systematic, state-sanctioned organ procurement from
non-consenting prisoners of conscience in the Peoples republic of
China, including from large numbers of Falun Gong practitioners
imprisoned for their religious beliefs, and members of other
religions and ethnic minority groups. 113th Congress (20132014).
Available at: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hres281
#overview. Accessed March 10, 2014.
44. Doctors Against Forced Organ Harvesting. Available at: https://
www/dafoh.org/petition-to-the-united-nations). Accessed May 18,
2014.
45. Lavee J, West LA. A call for a policy change regarding publications
based on transplantation of organs from executed prisoners.
J Heart Lung Transplant 2012; 31: 555556.
46. Huang J, Millis JM, Mao Y, Millis MA, Sang X, Zhong S. A pilot
programme of organ donation after cardiac death in China. Lancet
2012; 379: 862865.
47. Lan G, Yang L, Peng L, et al. Long-term results of renal transplant
from living donors aged over 60 years. Exp Clin Transplant 2012;
10: 471474.
Forced Organ Procurement in China
7 American Journal of Transplantation 2014; XX: 17