Sun Zhigang was a college graduate from Wuhan, the capital city of
Hubei province. On 24 February 2003 Sun received an offer from a Guangzhou
company, so he came to Guangzhou, the capital city of Guangdong province.
On 17 March 2003 , Sun went to an Internet cafe ́without carrying his ID card.
At 11 p.m., Sun was questioned by police on his way home and detained.
He called a friend to bring his ID card and other identification documents to
the police station. Before his friend arrived, Sun had already been sent to a
detention centre according to the administrative regulation on ‘custody and
repatriation’ that requires the return of all persons, without permanent resident
status or permit of sojourn, to their officially registered residence. This adminis-
trative regulation was initially enacted for combating vagrancy, and evolved into a
measure where municipal authorities could block working migrants from rural
areas. Though having no permit of sojourn in Guangzhou, Sun was certainly not
a vagrant as he had a legitimate residence, job and ID card. The public was
shocked by the report that Sun was severely beaten and died in the detention
centre. Chinese media later revealed the fact that many working migrants were
regularly beaten in those detention centres before being forced to return to their
rural homes. The authorities sentenced the murderers to death, but the public
was still concerned. Thus, many legal scholars requested the Standing Committee
of the NPC to review the constitutionality of this administrative regulation, which
had provided the authorities such illegitimate power as to deprive people of their
freedom of movement and many other personal liberties. The request put pres-
sure on the Standing Committee to act. Finally, the State Council decided to
resolve the problem. In June 2003 , a new regulation entitled Measures for
Administration of Aid Sent to Urban Vagabonds and Beggars without Assured
Living Sources was released, which abolished the original regulation Measure for
Confining and Sending back Urban Vagabonds and Beggars. In this way, the
Chinese authorities avoided the question whether the Standing Committee of
the NPC should exercise the power of constitutional review when an adminis-
trative regulation is reckoned inconsistent with the Constitution. Nevertheless, the
Sun Zhigang case demonstrates that the State Council is not unwilling to
compromise should public opinion be united and resolute. Bolstered by populist
demand, it is still possible that the Standing Committee of the NPC may truly
review administrative regulations in line with the Constitution. Pursuant to the
Procedure to Record and Review Administrative Regulation, Local People’s
Congress Regulation, Autonomous and Special Regulation of Ethnic Autono-
mous Region, and Regulation of Economic Special Zone, amended in 2005 ,
the Standing Committee shall assign one or several committee(s) to review an
administrative regulation and submit a report indicating whether the regulation is
in conformity with the Constitution and other parliamentary acts; if not, the
review committee(s) will return the regulation to the local legislature with a
request for amendment. If the local legislature refuses to amend, the reviewing