Revenge of the whistle-blowers

When Zhao Minghua, a then deputy chief of the Shanghai Higher People's Court, was suspended from his position due to a sex scandal and corruption, he had no idea that the man who set him up was an old acquaintance.

The whistle-blower, surnamed Chen, a hotel manager, had lost a lawsuit in 2012. Zhao had been the one who made the ruling, which forced Chen to sell his apartment in order to pay a 7.2 million yuan ($1.18 million) construction fee to a project contractor. The contractor was allegedly a relative of Zhao, who had previously built a hotel for Chen.

The fee was much higher than the contract stipulated and Chen said the trial had been unfair.

After several petition efforts failed, he decided to take revenge. First he shadowed Zhao in an effort to collect evidence of corruption, then after he obtained a video of the deputy chief which seemingly shows him hiring prostitutes, he published it online and ended Zhao's career.

It's not the first time an insider has played an important role in China's anti-corruption campaigns; often they have been crucial. However, the case highlighted how personal vendettas can play a role in exposing corrupt officials, and can create a different kind of whistle-blower.

"Normal people wouldn't have the patience shown by Chen, to obtain evidence of corruption by officials. About 95 percent of the evidence comes from insiders, most of whom are rivals of the corrupt officials," Zhu Ruifeng, an experienced muckraker, told the Global Times Sunday.

"The existence of this phenomenon shows that the regulations regarding corruption still need to improve. A mature system for fighting corruption would reduce the number of cases revealed in this way," Yun Jie, director of the administration research department at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times Monday.

Dubious motives, real results

"In the West, political rivals collect unfavorable evidence on others to beat them in election contests. It is a good way for society to exclude unqualified leaders. In China, whistle-blowers are doing the same thing and making a huge contribution to Chinese anti-corruption," Xu Xianglin, a professor at Peking University, told the Global Times Monday. But he also added that anti-graft efforts cannot be based on private interests, and all the evidence should be gained using legal methods.

However, Yun pointed out that the information was what was important, not necessarily the motives of those who obtained it. "The purpose is not important. What matters most is whether the evidence is powerful enough to bring down a corrupt official. If it is, then it is good for Chinese anti-corruption," Yun said, pointing out that if the information was obtained illegally, it's inadmissible anyway.

However, many question the actual effect in the long run, saying that those cases are isolated and a more comprehensive system is needed.

"Whistle-blowers are helpful in such cases, but the Chinese anti-corruption campaign can't rely on them as these aren't coordinated cases. It would be much more reliable to improve regulations and strengthen the supervision of media against the government," Yun said.