As Human Rights Watch has documented, in mainland China, subversion and state secrets laws with similar language are regularly used to convict and imprison journalists, labor activists, internet entrepreneurs and academics.
"Civil liberties and civil society are precisely what distinguish Hong Kong from China," said Brad Adams, executive director of the Asia division at Human Rights Watch. "After five years of peaceful exercise of those liberties, it is incredibly short-sighted for the Hong Kong government to propose laws that put Hong Kong's freedoms in jeopardy."
In September 2002, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) government released a 62-page Consultation Document outlining the proposed anti-subversion legislation, and invited public comment.
Human Rights Watch's open letter outlined a number of concerns about the proposed changes to Hong Kong laws. These concerns include that:
- Hong Kong should conduct the widest possible public consultation on a specific text before introducing it to the Legislative Council. The public outcry the proposals have engendered are a clear indication that the consultation period should be extended;
- The proposed new laws under Article 23 give the Secretary for Security wide authority to ban local and foreign political organizations. Under the proposals, a declaration by the Chinese government that an organization endangers China's national security could be sufficient grounds for a ban--which greatly increases the possibility of the Chinese government's intervention in Hong Kong. This provision introduces Chinese law and Chinese political control into Hong Kong through the back door, and is a clear violation of both the letter and spirit of the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law;
- New offenses relating directly to freedom of expression, including sedition, treason, and the "theft of state secrets" will erode press freedom. A free and unfettered media-both the thriving local press and the large contingent of foreign journalists in Hong Kong-have been and will continue to be essential to Hong Kong's long-term success; and
- The proposed law's definition of "seditious publications," under which those who publish information inciting others to "commit treason, secession or subversion" or "endangering the stability of China and Hong Kong" can be jailed for seven years, is certain to have a chilling effect on the free flow of information.
"It must be up to journalists to report any news in the public interest," said Adams. "Press freedom is essential to protecting all other rights."
Human Rights Watch pointed out that the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration guarantees explicitly that all of Hong Kong's freedoms--including press freedom, religious freedom, and freedom of association--will continue.
Hong Kong is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Laws should not be enacted that would compromise its international commitments, Human Rights Watch said.
Human Rights Watch's letter to C.H. Tung explains that the best long-term guarantor of civil liberties is a government accountable to and responsive to the Hong Kong people, together with an independent judiciary. The provisions of Article 23 are inherently vague, creating the prospect of politically-motivated and selective prosecutions
"China promised Hong Kong 50 years of its own system of civil liberties," said Adams. "This could end prematurely, with grave consequences to Hong Kong people and serious harm to China's reputation in the world, if these proposals are adopted."
