In 2011, two separate lawsuits were filed in US court against Cisco Systems regarding the company's activities in China. Both sets of plaintiffs allege that Cisco helped the Chinese Government build computer systems used to track and prosecute political dissidents. This tracking led to many of the plaintiffs being arrested, arbitrarily detained, tortured, and killed.

案例简介：思科系统公司诉讼案（中国）

In mid-2011 two separate lawsuits were filed in US federal court against Cisco Systems and its top executives regarding the company's activities in China. Human Rights Foundation filed a lawsuit on 19 May 2011 in California on behalf of 11 members of the Chinese Falun Gong movement against Cisco and certain of its executives, including CEO John Chambers. The second lawsuit was filed on 6 June 2011 in Maryland on behalf of three jailed Chinese writers. Both sets of plaintiffs allege that Cisco helped the Chinese Government build computer systems used to track and prosecute dissidents.

The lawsuits allege Cisco designed and maintains a censorship network known as the Golden Shield Project, with the understanding that Golden Shield would be used by the Chinese authorities to monitor and access private internet communications, identify anonymous blog authors and to block online publications critical of the Chinese Communist Party. The Falun Gong plaintiffs allege that, by using Cisco's network, the Chinese authorities tracked the online activities of the Falun Gong movement. They allege that some of the Falun Gong members were arrested, arbitrarily detained, tortured and killed, while others disappeared.

The second lawsuit alleges that the defendants' role in creating the Golden Shield enabled the Chinese Government to identify and jail each of the plaintiffs. The writers had each published articles on the internet supporting democracy and human rights and critical of the Chinese Communist Party. Each writer alleges that he was subsequently detained and tortured by the Chinese authorities. They brought the lawsuit under the Alien Tort Statute.

Cisco denies all accusations, claiming it sells the same equipment in China that it sells in other countries around the world.

In February 2014, the judge in the lawsuit filed on behalf of the three jailed Chinese writers dismissed the case ruling that the court lacked jurisdiction. He also found Cisco was not at fault for abuses carried out using the censorship network.

In September 2014, a US federal court dismissed the lawsuit against Cisco over allegations of abetting torture of Falun Gong practitioners in China ruling that the allegations did not have sufficient US ties for a US court to hear the claims under the Alien Tort Claims Act.

In January 2016, NGOs filed an amicus brief that urges a US court of appeals to reinstate the Falun Gong practitioners lawsuit against Cisco. In April 2017, the plaintiffs in this case asked the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to revive the allegations.

In July 2023, the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reversed the 2014 decision to dismiss the case concerning the Falun Gong practitioners and ruled that the case can move forward to trial. The Court rejected Cisco's argument that domestic corporations cannot be sued under the Alien Tort Statute, a law allowing non-US citizens to bring tort claims that violate international law in US courts. To bring similar cases in the future, plaintiffs must demonstrate that a domestic company engaged in substantial conduct in the US with the knowledge it was enabling human rights violations abroad.

In September 2024, the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reaffirmed its 2023 decision that US tech companies, like Cisco, can face aiding and abetting liability in the US for providing surveillance tools used to commit human rights abuses. Cisco attempted to challenge the 2023 decision through an en banc review, but the court rejected this, allowing the case to move forward.

On 31 January 2025, Cisco Systems filed a petition asking the US Supreme Court to review the Ninth Circuit’s 2023 decision, arguing that the ruling improperly expanded corporate liability under the Alien Tort Statute and Torture Victim Protection Act.

• USA: Cisco petitions Supreme Court to review ruling on surveillance case, William S. Dodge, George Washington University Law School, 4 Feb 2025
• Human Rights Claims Against Cisco Can Move Forward (Again), Electronic Frontier Foundation, 18 Sep 2024
• Ninth Circuit Allows Human Rights Claims Against Cisco to Proceed, Transnational Litigation Blog, 19 Jul 2023
• "Lawsuit Accuses Cisco of Complicity in Oppression Abroad", Jennifer Wadsworth, San Jose Inside (USA), 24 May 2017
• "Cisco Won't Face Claim it Abetted Torture in China", Elizabeth Warmerdam, Courthouse News Service (USA), 11 Sep 2014
• "Cisco Slapped With New Suit", Richard Finney, Parameswaran Ponnudurai, Radio Free Asia, 7 Jun 2011
• "Cisco rejects Falun Gong 'China online spying' lawsuit", BBC, 24 May 2011
• "Falun Gong members sue Cisco for helping China build its national firewall, called the Golden Shield", Associated Press, 23 May 2011

• Cisco's petition for Certiorari , Jan 2025
• [PDF] Doe et al. v. CISCO Systems, et al. - Order granting motion to dismiss, US District Court of Northern District of California. 5 Sep 2014
• [PDF] Du Daobin, Zhou Yuanzhi, Liu Xianbin, and Does 1-10 v. CISCO Systems, Inc., Thomas Lam, Owen Chan, Rick Justice, John T. Chambers - Complaint, 6 Jun 2011
• Doe et al. v. CISCO Systems, John Chambers, Thomas Lam, Owen Chan, and DOES 1-100 - Class Action Complaint, 19 May 2011