Saturday, June 28, 2003

Taking advantage of preoccupation in Hong Kong with the SARS epidemic, the territory's pro-Beijing government has been pushing along a noxious national security bill that would leave the territory vulnerable to the sort of political repression common on the Communist mainland. It may be too late to block the law, which looks likely to pass on July 9. But it should be made clear to Beijing that nobody buys its justifications for this repressive measure.

The measure, known as Article 23, deals with treason, sedition, subversion and the theft of state secrets, and includes provisions that would enable the Hong Kong government to crack down on organizations deemed to be linked to any that are banned in China, such as Falun Gong. That would seriously erode the autonomy that the former British colony was promised when it came under China's rule six years ago under the formula of "one country, two systems."

Some governments, including the United States and Canada, have already protested, as have many human-rights organizations, prompting predictable squawks from Beijing against meddling in its internal affairs. That can hardly be said of opponents in Hong Kong, who turned out in the tens of thousands on the 14th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square uprising, and now plan an even larger protest against Article 23 for July 1, the anniversary of the turnover of Hong Kong. The resistance draws on an expanding coalition of human-rights groups, independent politicians, trade unions, journalists, academics and students. They have correctly identified the bill as a challenge to their autonomy and fundamental freedoms, and as an attempt to impose China's arbitrary legal system on Hong Kong through the back door. China argues that Article 23 is not much different from the laws of some democratic states. That may be so, but democratic societies have checks and balances that China and other Communist states do not; in the latter, national security laws have long been a primary tool for silencing critics and subverting freedoms. The fate of Falun Gong is but one example. Another is SARS: Under the new law, the dogged newspapers of Hong Kong might have been forced into the same disgraceful and dangerous silence as the mainland press. China's rulers have also portrayed Article 23 as a critical test of national sovereignty. It is really an assault on the freedoms they promised to respect in Hong Kong for 50 years. Even if the bill cannot be stopped, it should be widely exposed and condemned for the repressive measure it really is.

Posting date: 6/30/2003
Original article date: 6/29/2003
Category: News & Media Reports

 Yearly Archive  Printer Version