The recent massive leak of data from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca shows that greater China constitutes the single largest market for the secretive offshore companies that have been the firm’s stock-in-trade. Thus the PRC and Hong Kong offices account for 29 per cent of Mossack Fonseca’s business.

How do the Panama Papers fit with Xi Jinping’s high-profile campaign against corruption in the ruling Communist Party since his accession to the leadership in 2012?

If you thought Beijing was grateful for the treasure-trove of information on senior cadres’ dodgy financial dealings, including relatives of Xi Jinping and two other members of the Standing Committee of the Politburo, you would be wrong. Instead, coverage of the revelations in China has been censored and suppressed.

The data-dump exposes a basic contradiction in this current as well as other Chinese anti-corruption campaigns. To be effective, these efforts have to enlist the aid of civil society activists and investigative journalists, both at home and abroad. A consistent lesson in efforts to combat corruption – in other times and places whistle-blowers, journalists and activists have been crucial in first breaking scandals and revealing basic facts about those abusing government office, as well as generating and maintaining political pressure for thorough-going reforms.

Yet the Chinese Communist Party leadership has been consistently suspicious of these kinds of actors. This mistrust has extended to blocking previous media coverage of Chinese leaders’ huge wealth, and that of their families, as well as repressing those at home who have agitated for what are standard anti-corruption policies elsewhere, (for example) requiring senior officials to declare their assets.

A final element of note from the Panama papers is to once again underline how little faith rich Chinese seem to have in their own government to safeguard their wealth and respect their property and human rights. The pronounced tendency of this stratum to relocate themselves, their families and their assets abroad seems to constitute a serious vote of no confidence in China’s future under the current regime.

Article by Griffith University Centre for Governance and Public Policy Deputy Director, Professor Jason Sharman.