Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
Just$1.99
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(select.open)}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](select.open),dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); }
Coronavirus information
Coronavirus information
The Zero Canada Project provides resources to help you make the most of staying home.
Visit the hub

Wuhan mayor Zhou Xianwang, left, exchanges documents with Bai Zhongbin, right, deputy commander-in-chief of China's People's Liberation Army Joint Logistic Support Force, during a handover ceremony at the Huoshenshan temporary field hospital on Feb. 2, 2020.

The Associated Press

Frank Ching is a Hong Kong-based journalist.

One week after it decided not to declare the coronavirus epidemic in China a public health emergency of international concern, the World Health Organization’s emergency committee reversed course on Jan. 30. The impetus: The disease had spread to 18 countries, with human-to-human transmission occurring in three of them.

But the committee also praised China for its “commitment to transparency” – even though government control of information continued to be a burning issue within China. Of the 83 cases in the 18 countries, only seven had “no history of travel in China.” WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who had just returned from Beijing, praised China for setting “a new standard” for outbreak response with its massive lockdowns.

Story continues below advertisement

Yet oddly, despite the role that travel in China evidently played in the spreading of the virus, the committee said that it “does not recommend any travel or trade restriction based on current information available.”

Despite the WHO’s stance, a number of countries – the United States, Singapore, Australia, Indonesia and Vietnam – moved to restrict travel to and from China anyway. The Philippines, where the first coronavirus death outside China occurred, banned travellers from Hong Kong and Macau as well as the mainland.

And even as the WHO praised Chinese actions, criticism within China itself has grown over how information on the health crisis had been handled at both the local and national levels – and from unusual, high-profile sources.

Significantly, one of the critics was the Supreme People’s Court. On Jan. 28, an article on the court’s official WeChat account commented on the detention by Wuhan police in early January of eight people for “spreading rumours” online. It turned out that all eight were doctors, and they were discussing the mysterious pneumonia-like disease quietly spreading in the city.

One doctor, an ophthalmologist named Li Wenliang, told members of a medical-school alumni WeChat group on Dec. 30 that there were seven cases of SARS in Wuhan’s central hospital, where he worked. He was then summoned by the police and reprimanded for spreading rumors that had “severely disturbed the social order.”

The court, however, rebuked that decision. While Dr. Li was wrong about the diagnosis of SARS, said the article, the patients did have a disease that was similar, and he had not manufactured fake news for any ulterior purpose. If people had listened to him and worn masks and avoided the wildlife market, China might be in a better position now to deal with the virus, it said.

Meanwhile, the Wuhan government has been severely criticized for withholding information or for providing misinformation. Its mayor, Zhou Xianwang, readily told China’s national broadcaster CCTV that “everyone was dissatisfied with the way we disclosed information.”

Story continues below advertisement

But Mr. Zhou also defended his government by explaining that China has a law on the handling of contagious diseases, and that “information may be disclosed only as permitted according to that law.”

“As a local government,” the mayor said in an interview no doubt watched with keen interest by senior officials in Beijing, “we may disclose information only after we are given permission to do so. That is something that many people do not understand.”

Indeed, article 38 of the Communist Party’s “Regulations on requesting instruction and reporting on major matters” says that "when an infectious disease breaks out and prevails, the health administration department under the State Council shall be responsible for announcing to the public information on the epidemic situation of the infectious disease, and may authorize the health administration departments under the people’s governments of provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the Central Government to announce to the public information on the epidemic situation of the infectious disease in their own administrative areas.”

In effect, Mr. Zhou claimed that it was not the city but the central government that had left its citizens in the dark about the health threat in their midst. So far, the Chinese government has not responded to the mayor’s allegation.

In 2003, officials in both Guangdong and Beijing lied about the gravity of the situation around SARS. Now, the Chinese government needs to explain – to its own people and to the world – just how the system is supposed to work in a health crisis and why, once again, it did not work the way it should have.

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.

In the interests of public health and safety, our coronavirus news articles are free for anyone to access. However, The Globe depends on subscription revenue to support our journalism. If you are able, please subscribe to globeandmail.com. If you are already a subscriber, thank you for your support.

Your subscription helps The Globe and Mail provide readers with critical news at a critical time. Thank you for your continued support. We also hope you will share important coronavirus news articles with your friends and family. In the interest of public health and safety, all our coronavirus news articles are free for anyone to access.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies