Leader

Monday June 30, 2003

Hong Kong has faded from Britian's horizon since it returned to China - in spite of all the pledges that we would "never forget". The only story to attract attention recently has been the dismal one of Sars. Tomorrow, on the sixth anniversary of the July 1 1997 handover, tens of thousands of Hong Kongers will demonstrate on an issue requiring Britain's closest attention - the anti-subversion law that is about to be driven through the mostly unelected legislative council.

No one denies that, under article 23 of China's "Basic Law", Hong Kong will have to legislate against subversion, sedition and other such acts against the state. Yet although the Basic Law says that Hong Kong should do so "on its own", senior Hong Kong officials admit that both its timing and content have been agreed in advance with Beijing.

The most worrying clause requires the government to proscribe any group found to be linked to an already proscribed mainland organisation. The obvious example is the Falun Gong, already banned on the mainland where it is claimed, ludicrously, to be a threat to national security.

There are few illusions that Hong Kong's secretary for security, if asked to proscribe the Falun Gong's local chapter, would dissent from that demand. Another provision banning the disclosure of "state secrets" causes particular concern for Hong Kong's media, which has become more vulnerable to pressure since the handover. The government has rejected calls for a public interest defence to be allowed.

Chief executive Tung Chee-hwa is already deeply unpopular as a result of the Sars crisis, which he initially played down so as not to point the finger at China's own cover-up. More than 70 % in a University of Hong Kong poll believe that Mr Tung has listened more to Beijing than to his own people in rushing ahead with the new legislation. He has also back-pedalled on initiating the "political review" which many hope will lead to fully democratic elections before the end of the decade.

The new anti-subversion bill, if passed as it stands, will do nothing to encourage international confidence in Hong Kong's future. It also violates the principle behind the 1984 Sino-British agreement that Hong Kong's rule of law should remain unchanged. Britain, which has much better relations with China now than before, should say so clearly.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/leaders/story/0,3604,987556,00.html

Posting date: 7/1/2003
Original article date: 6/30/2003
Category: News & Media Reports

 Yearly Archive  Printer Version