The notice pictured above seems to be authentic, though I would welcome evidence that it is not. It reads: [switch to English]
2018年8月8日晚8时40分，我局接到举报：石佛寺 榆树庄村有人私自出租房屋给维吾尔族群众。接报后镇平县公安局直属分局迅速赶赴现炀进行调查。经查，确有在榆树庄烤馕的维吾尔族群众：外力·米吉提，吉尼沙汗．哈力克和图尔荪·则依提三人未经公安机关同意，私下租住在房东赵某家中．且赵某没有向公安分局报告, 其行为已违反《中华人民共和国反恐怖主义法》，依据《中华人民共和国反恐怖主义法》第九十一条规定：以拒不配合有关部门开展 反恐怖主义安全防范、情报信息、调查、应急处置工作，擅自出租房屋且不报告的行为，决定：
- 对赵某行政拘留十五日，并处罚款1900元的处 罚（现该赵已羁押在镇平县拘留所）。
- Article 91 of the Counter-terrorism Law, evoked as the basis for the landlord Zhao’s punishment, reads:
- Administrative punishments like those discussed here are given and implemented directly by the Public Security police forces rather than the courts.
- Detention is permitted by the cited provision only where ‘serious consequences’ are caused, but landlord Zhao has been given the maximum period of detention– 15 days in jail, despite the case seemingly involving minimal- if any – consequences.
- There is no allegation of extremism or terrorism in the notice, just being or renting to Uighurs.
- The failure to cooperate with intelligence gathering here seems to be a failure to proactively report and seek approval for Uighur tenants.
- The title of the Notice refers only to the punishment of the landlord, ignoring the tenants, an indication of who it is meant to alert and intimidate.
- Notice also that the landlord remains anonymous, while the tenants are named.
- There is no clear legal basis cited for the ‘education’ awaiting the three Uighurs being returned to Xinjiang but ‘education’ has been used as a euphemism in the titles of several newly constructed prison complexes.
- The population of Yushuzhuang Village in Henan Province, where the report and rental occurred was 1,800 in 2006, according to Baidupedia.