Scholars from United States and UK Meet in Hong Kong for Anti-Article 23 Forum (Photos)

(Clearwisdom.net) About ten scholars from the United States and the United Kingdom of British came to Hong Kong to attend the two-day forum "Freedom and National Security - Has the Right Balance Been Struck?" organized by the Hong Kong Lawyers Association, Hong Kong University, and Hong Kong Civic University. The attendees oppose Article 23, and some of them believe the proscription mechanism should be deleted.

The forum's panel	Mr. Nicholas Howson, representing New York City Attorneys' Association and United States Attorneys' Association	Dr. Christopher Forsyth, Director of International Law Center, Cambridge University, believes the proscription mechanism should be deleted
Mr. Alan Leong emphasized several times that Hong Kong doesn't need Article 23	Mr. Martin Lee questions government officials on why the "National Security Bill Draft" still has the term "Her Majesty" in it six years after the transition	Mr. Chen Jinsheng discusses legal definitions at the forum

The Legislation Committee discussed the "National Security Bill" today. Representative of the Democratic Party Martin Lee, Shen Yang, Jingshen Tu, Aiyi Wu, Huiqing Liu and others boycotted the meeting to protest the legislation and attended the "Freedom and National Security - Has the Right Balance Been Struck?" forum.

Former Hong Kong Bar Association Chairman Alen Leong said that many regulations in the draft legislation were beyond the scope of Article 23, and he didn't support the legislation. Xianming Tang, representing the security department in the forum, replied that the government saw the need of regulations, so they were inserted into the legislation. Another scholar contended that any given law has its own scope and cannot be extended arbitrarily.

Representative of the Justice Department Mr. James O'Neil also made a number of blunders. When it was time for questions from the audience, Martin Lee asked the two government officials why the draft sometimes uses "the People's Republic of China" and sometimes uses "My Majesty". It was not just a matter of consistency but also an insult to China.

James O'Neil replied that the Hong Kong Bar Association once said it would "rather do one thing less than do one thing more." Changing all the terms was a big project that didn't conform to this principle. Current Chairman of the Hong Kong Bar Association Mr. Jinsheng Chen immediately pointed out that he was twisting the words. He said that in writing legislation the terms must be consistent, and has nothing to do with doing more or doing less.

 Yearly Archive   Printer Version