Print

Mail

wiki links

Article 23 poses dangers, legislators warn

Vocal in their opposition to the Hong Kong government's proposed anti-subversion legislation, two Hong Kong legislative councilors expressed their concerns over the outlook for the territory's press freedom and human rights if Article 23 of its Basic Law is enacted.

"The [Hong Kong] government's proposal of the legislation has many in the Hong Kong publishing industry feeling nervous and sweating about it because [the law would] grant the authorities the power to intervene and control the press under the pretext of protecting national security, said Emily Lau (劉慧卿), a veteran journalist turned lawmaker.

Law, made the comments yesterday at a conference held in Taipei by the Taiwan Advocates, a think-tank founded by former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝).

Lau, along with fellow Hong Kong legislative councilor James To (涂謹申), a former lawyer, was invited to speak at one of the sessions in the conference on the impact of Article 23 on Hong Kong's press freedom, human rights and judicial system.

The law would prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the People's Republic of China or theft of state secrets. It would also ban political organizations and groups in Hong Kong from having contact with similar groups abroad.

Critics say it would also grant the authorities the power to silence political opponents and muzzle the press under the pretext of protecting national security.

Pointing to the ambiguity of definitions in the proposed law, Lau said the law would give the Hong Kong government the power to brand illegal any press reports that it judges to be a threat to China's national security or theft of state confidential information.

"That is to say, individuals or groups that call out slogans or make moves of any sort that China's authorities see as sensitive and pose a challenge to the Chinese Communist Party would risk the possibility of spending time in jail under the new law," To said.

To said that even talking about Taiwan's independence or the need for the US to assist Taiwan in the event of an attack from China could be considered subversive.

"In other words, those who make casual remarks in expressing support for Taiwan could easily find themselves in trouble with the law before they know it," he said.

To slammed the proposed anti-subversion legislation as detrimental to the freedom of the people in Hong Kong.

"Those who wish to hold demonstrations in Hong Kong would be branded for disturbing social stability," To said.

Beijing says that passage of Article 23 of the Basic Law is required under the agreement that saw Hong Kong return to Chinese rule under the "one country, two systems" formula.

Deeming that the proposed law threatens their freedoms and fundamental rights, an estimated 500,000 people took to the streets of Hong Kong on July 1 -- the anniversary of the handover -- to protest against the controversial law.

The mass turn-out prompted Hong Kong's administration to eventually yield and agree to scale back the bill and defer passage of the legislation, which was originally scheduled for a vote last month.

Both Lau and To are democracy activists instrumental in the fight against the proposed law. Lau has been known as a persistent critic of the Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (董建華).

At yesterday's conference, session Chair Byron Weng (翁松燃), a professor at National Chi Nan University, cited a story reported in the Ta Kung Pao, a mouthpiece for Beijing. The report branded Lau and To's participation in the conference as "acts of defiance."

While expressing gratitude for Taiwan's support so far in their fight against their government's proposed anti-subversion legislation, both Lau and To stressed that the implications for Taiwan cannot be brushed aside and deserve close attention.

"We hope that Taiwan can continue to support us, as well as pay attention to the further development of the proposed law," Lau said.
This story has been viewed 2550 times.