Beijing Takes Complete Control Over Hong Kong
By MARTIN LEE
The honeymoon is over. Beijing's patience is running out. Hong Kong's
recently re-appointed chief executive, Tung Chee Hwa, is about to
install
the necessary legal mechanisms to enable Beijing to suppress the free
press
and dissident groups in Hong Kong.
After many months of careful planning, a consultation paper entitled
"Proposals to Implement Article 23 of the Basic Law" (Hong Kong's
mini-constitution) was released this week by the chief executive.
Article 23 is the most controversial provision in the Basic Law, which
was
promulgated by the National People's Congress in Beijing on April 4,
1990.
This was exactly 10 months after the Tiananmen massacre on June 4,
1989, a
bloody crackdown of what was a peaceful student movement for democracy
and
clean government in mainland China, which drew support from almost the
entire population of Hong Kong.
The timing of the passage of the Basic Law was unfortunate, because it
came
at a time when the Beijing leaders were not even sure of their own
ability
to remain in power. So control was the key word, including over Hong
Kong
affairs. Article 23 therefore requires the Hong Kong Special
Administrative
Region to enact laws to prohibit treason, secession, sedition,
subversion
against the Central People's Government, theft of state secrets and to
prohibit local political groups from having any ties with foreign
political
bodies.
This article has the clear potential to enable Beijing to exercise
absolute
control over the mass media as well as all dissident groups in Hong
Kong.
And fear of being prosecuted is likely to cause the local mass media to
practice even more self-restraint.
More than five years have now elapsed since the handover on July 1,
1997,
and Hong Kong has been extremely stable politically without any such
laws.
But Beijing still wants more control. Two months ago, Qian Qichen, the
Chinese vice-premier responsible for Hong Kong affairs, said publicly
that
Article 23 should be implemented now.
Indeed, all the indications are that the Hong Kong government has been
in
close touch and has reached agreement with Beijing over both the
contents
and timetable for the proposed legislation. This is to ensure that what
is
enacted in Hong Kong will not be inconsistent with the laws in mainland
China even though, under the "one country, two systems" policy and the
Basic
Law, Hong Kong should be left to legislate those provisions "on its
own."
Nor is Beijing supposed to have any power of veto over laws enacted by
the
Legislative Council, Hong Kong's legislature.
So the consultation period of three months is but part of a
public-relations
exercise to win the public's support, in order to shut up any concern
that
may be expressed both in Hong Kong and abroad. But the public will not
be
told the entire truth. Instead, the proposals are all couched in broad
principles and without specifics.
Who can ever object to a law of treason which imposes a penalty of life
imprisonment (for there is no capital punishment in Hong Kong) on
anyone who
joins forces with a foreign power to levy war against the People's
Republic
of China and overturn its government?
But in the same breath, there is a proposal to give additional powers
to the
police. These will allow the police, on the decision of a
superintendent, to
break into and search a person's home or office without a sea
rch
warrant for
most of the Article 23 offences, if he reasonably believes that the
investigation of such an offense would be seriously prejudiced without
immediate entry.
The devil is in the details. But for the Hong Kong government to win
public
support, the devil must not be exposed during this consultation period.
And
the public cannot be expected to read the entire document anyway,
particularly in a gloomy economic climate in Hong Kong when people are
more
worried over the possible loss of their jobs and pay cuts.
But a careful reading between the lines reveals a number of time bombs.
The
following are just two examples:
The most hated people in mainland China must be the Falun Gong
followers who
have long been branded as an evil cult, imprisoned and expelled from
China.
The Falun Gong followers in Hong Kong are currently tolerated by the
Hong
Kong government, although some local as well as foreign Falun Gong
practitioners have been recently arrested and prosecuted in the courts.
And
Mr. Tung, protected by privilege during a recent session in the
Legislative
Council, called the Falun Gong an evil cult.
Under the present proposals, so long as Beijing decides and states that
the
Falun Gong "endangers national security" in mainland China, and that
the
Hong Kong Falun Gong is a branch of the mainland group, the Hong Kong
government would have to take action against Falun Gong followers in
Hong
Kong. In other words, the initiative lies with Beijing.
As for the press, take the hypothetical example of a newspaper that
publishes an article stating that a prime commercial site in the
Central
district of Hong Kong presently occupied by the People's Liberation
Army
would soon be released to the Hong Kong government so that it could be
redeveloped into a large office and commercial complex. If such
information
had come from an unauthorized source, then both the newspaper and the
reporter who wrote the article would be committing a criminal offense
under
the new law, which seeks to protect "information relating to relation
between the Central Authorities of the PRC and the HKSAR," and be
liable to
a prison term of up to five years.
These are shocking scenarios for anyone in any country or territory
where
there is supposed to be the rule of law. Many people outside Hong Kong
will
no doubt wonder why Mr. Tung and his government will do this in Hong
Kong.
The answer is simple: Beijing wants it done.
Mr. Tung would not have been given a second term of office on July 1,
but
for the open support given to him by the top three Beijing leaders. And
with
the recent establishment of a so-called accountability system, which
makes
all senior officials accountable to Mr. Tung, who is in turn only
accountable to Beijing, the Hong Kong government will do everything as
directed by their masters in Beijing.
As for the undemocratically constituted legislature, only 20
legislators out
of a total of 60 members will vote against government proposals, and
the
majority of 40 will support them no matter how bad they are. Further,
there
is effectively no possibility of there ever being a fully
democratically
elected legislature in Hong Kong unless Beijing gives the nod, which
will
only happen if the Beijing leaders are confident that the pro-Beijing
political parties will win elections on a one-person, one-vote basis.
The only thing remaining is an independent judiciary -- but what can
the
most independent judge do to protect human rights if the law in fact
gives
those powers to the government? With the passage of these laws under
Article
23 of the Basic Law, Beijing's control over Hong Kong will be complete.
legislator and a former member of the Basic Law Drafting Committee
No comments:
Post a Comment