national security law – Techdirt (original) (raw)

Hong Kong’s Zero-Opposition Legislature Aims To Up Oppression With New ‘National Security’ Law

from the heckler's-veto,-but-with-life-imprisonment dept

A gentleman’s agreement with the UK following years of colonialism has given rise to another form of oppression. China took over Hong Kong in 1997, promising to stay out of the day-to-day business of governing Hong Kong for 50 years. Not even halfway through this promised period of relative autonomy, the Chinese government began imposing its will.

Hong Kong residents were understandably unhappy with this development. Protests followed. Every wave of protest was followed swiftly by even more impositions by the Chinese government. In the last couple of years, it’s become apparent the Chinese government is no longer willing to tolerate any form of dissent in Hong Kong, despite its earlier agreement to take a hands-off position on governing Hong Kong until the middle of this century.

Now, it’s just China, but even richer. The Democratic government has been gutted. Nearly every position of power has been staffed by someone fully supported by (and fully supportive of) the Chinese government. It’s an actual police state now, thanks to the appointment of former Secretary of Security John Lee to the position of Chief Executive. Lee was best known for heading up the crackdown on pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong. Taking his place as second-in-command is Hong Kong’s police commissioner, who was similarly involved in the crackdowns.

Since then, pretty much the entire legislature has been purged of pro-democracy lawmakers. The democratic election system has been replaced with a voting system that only allows “patriots” to vote.

And to better serve the ongoing issue of ridding the country of dissent, a series of steadily escalating “national security” laws have been enacted for the sole purpose of handing out life sentences to critics, protesters, dissidents, and opposition political leaders.

But China’s government is never satisfied. Why settle for outrageously harsh sentences when those sentences can always be harsher? As Derren Chan reports for Jurist, another national security law is making its way through the legislature, where it is expected to face little debate or opposition.

The Hong Kong government released the new national security bill on Friday and sent it to the Legislative Council (LegCo) for deliberation.

The bill consists of nine parts, including criminalizing several national security offenses not covered in the 2020 National Security Law but listed in Article 23 of the Hong Kong Basic Law. The bill criminalizes new offenses, including treason, insurrection and incitement of Chinese armed force members to mutiny that could result in life imprisonment upon conviction. The bill also allows the court to impose harsher bail conditions on suspects.

I realize “sent it for deliberation” is just a turn of phrase commonly used when discussing pending legislation, but in this case, it’s meaningless. There’s no deliberation awaiting this bill, other than possibly how it could be expanded to punish more dissent and deter future opposition from citizens. This was the state of affairs in the Hong Kong legislature at the end of 2021:

The Hong Kong government has purged the last remaining opposition voice from the city’s legislature amid a deepening crackdown on dissent.

“We have come to the determination that Cheng Chung-tai hasn’t fulfilled the legal requirement of upholding the Basic Law and bearing allegiance to the Hong Kong SAR,” Chief Secretary John Lee said on Thursday, referring to the constitution of the Chinese special administrative region.

A committee led by Lee has been reviewing applicants for the Election Committee, which itself will screen legislative candidates as well as choose 40 of its members for the city’s expanded 90-seat legislature.

What’s even sadder about this additional, equally transparent power grab is that the pro-China legislators and city leaders in Hong Kong still feel they’re obliged to defend the bill as though it’s legitimate or would somehow face serious opposition if they didn’t say things about “common law” or “protecting” Hong Kong. And yet, they’re out there saying things that don’t matter to defend a bill that will become law because China wants it to become law and there’s no one left in Hong Kong with the power to oppose it.

The Secretary for Justice Paul Lam highlighted that the bill is a piece of local legislation written in common law traditions, which requires reasonable and practical clarity. Lam contended rights and freedoms are not absolute under international treaties, and necessary restrictions are justifiable because of national security.

I assume the yes-man work being done here is just for show, allowing Chinese leaders to easily see who’s advocating for must-pass will-pass legislation. I’m guessing Lam’s angling for whatever the Chinese equivalent of a dacha on the lake is.

And, once again, Hong Kong residents unhappy about being oppressed are cited as the justification for additional oppression.

Security chief Chris Tang told lawmakers there was a “genuine and urgent need” for the new law.

“Hong Kong had faced serious threats to national security, especially the color revolution and black-clad violence in 2019, which was an unbearably painful experience,” he said, referring to the democracy protests.

If there’s anything that might prompt some deliberation over this bill, it won’t be the residents of Hong Kong or their complete lack of legislative representation. It will be the rest of the world. And I don’t mean the part of the world willing to engage in their own demonstrations in support of democracy in Hong Kong.

No, it will be the money that does the most talking. Foreign investors and companies may choose to spend elsewhere, rather than continue to show their proxy support for China’s oppression of Hong Kong.

As with its predecessor, the proposed new security law states that offenses committed outside Hong Kong fall under its jurisdiction.

And in a section closely watched by Hong Kong’s foreign business community, the draft provides a multipronged definition of “state secrets” that covers not only technology but “major policy decisions” and the city’s “economic and social development.”

It also criminalizes the unlawful acquisition, possession and disclosure of state secrets, though it offers a “public interest” defense under specific conditions.

Authorities said the public submissions received during the consultative process revealed support from a majority.

But concerns have been raised by NGO workers, foreign businesses and diplomats, with critics saying the existing security law has already eviscerated Hong Kong’s political opposition and civil society.

Foreign businesses may have the most power here. But it’s foolhardy to expect a unified front demanding a rollback of China’s stranglehold on Hong Kong. China is synonymous with commerce and has been for decades. And so it’s inevitable the Chinese government’s pattern and practice of disappearing dissent will continue to cleanse Hong Kong of its pro-democracy “problem.”

Filed Under: china, free speech, hong kong, national security law

Hong Kong Government Arrests Four Members Of Pro-Democracy Hong Kong Alliance, Shuts Down Its Online Presence

from the collect-them-all! dept

The Chinese government’s national security law — adopted/acquiesced to by Hong Kong politicians apparently handpicked to serve the country that agreed not to interfere in Hong Kong’s government business until 2047 — is still paying off for the region’s impatient overseers.

The handover of Hong Kong to China has provoked an never-ending stream of pro-democracy protests. China doesn’t care for democracy, nor does it care for any other form of autonomy. To combat its opponents, the Chinese government — with an assist by a China-controlled Hong Kong government — has declared advocating for democracy to be an act of terrorism. Dissent has been equated with undermining national security, and will be punished accordingly.

The latest news in this ongoing attack on Hong Kong’s autonomy — one that is being committed in broad daylight in front of a world full of witnesses — is the arrest of even more pro-democracy activists and the shuttering of their website.

Earlier this month, the Hong Kong police state came for activists who ensured the Chinese government was never allowed to forget 1989’s Tiananmen Square Massacre — an act that made it clear what the government thought about people who demanded some say in their representation. In response to its annual Tiananmen-related rally and other demands for democracy, four activists were arrested.

Activist and barrister Chow Hang Tung of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements in China was arrested along with three others, the group said.

“I want to tell Hong Kongers that we need to continue to resist, don’t surrender to the unreasonable power quickly and easily,” Chow told media on Tuesday when she went to police headquarters to tell officers she would not provide information they had requested.

Police sent a letter to the alliance in August requesting information about its membership, finances and activities by Sept. 7, according to a copy the group sent to reporters.

The letter accused the alliance of being “an agent of foreign forces”. Failure to provide the information by the deadline could result in a HK$100,000 fine and six months in jail, the letter said.

The follow-up arrived a little later, with the Hong Kong police exercising new powers under the national security law that allow officers to literally police the internet.

NEW: Hong Kong Alliance said police has invoked power to remove messages on its website and social media under NSL, and will comply starting from 10pm tonight. New FB to come, it added. https://t.co/SxwHeHis3o

— Alvin Lum (@alvinllum) September 16, 2021

If you can’t see the tweet, it reads:

NEW: Hong Kong Alliance said police has invoked power to remove messages on its website and social media under NSL, and will comply starting from 10pm tonight. New FB to come, it added.

And the Hong Kong Alliance website is now offline as well, with a notice stating only that “the authors have deleted this site.” This suggests some more demands made by Hong Kong law enforcement, as even the involuntary deletion of a site will trigger the same WordPress notice.

It’s all far from subtle. The Chinese government is big enough and threatening-to-world-peace enough that things like this will go unchallenged until it has brought Hong Kong under its ideological as well as its physical control.

Filed Under: censorship, china, democracy, free speech, hong kong, hong kong alliance, national security, national security law

Hong Kong Kowtows To China Again, Turns Virtual Police State Into An Actual Police State

from the cutting-edge-advances-in-bootlicking dept

The Chinese government agreed to stay out of Hong Kong’s (government) business until 2047 when it took possession of the region in 1997. It has refused to hold up its end of the bargain.

Its steady encroachment into Hong Kong’s affairs has been met with increasingly intense pro-democracy protests. Realizing this wasn’t going to make its eventual takeover any easier, the Chinese government increased its pressure on the local government. When that wasn’t working fast enough, it started replacing legislators with handpicked pro-China representatives.

When all of that still wasn’t enough to get the Hong Kong populace to bend the knee, it implemented a new national security law and imposed it on the region. Being anti-China meant being a threat to national security. Pro-democracy protesters were threatened with life sentences. Pro-democracy press outlets were hassled and their leaders arrested.

Apparently, giving Hong Kong the appearance of a police state just isn’t enough. If Hong Kong is going to become China 2.0 far ahead of schedule, it needs to become an actual police state.

Hong Kong’s leader Carrie Lam announced a reshuffle of her cabinet on Friday, placing two ex-cops in key cabinet positions, including the police commissioner who presided over the widespread use of violence against mostly peaceful demonstrators during the 2019 protest movement.

The ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) approved the appointment of former secretary for security, John Lee, to replace Matthew Cheung as Lam’s second-in-command, while former police commissioner Chris Tang was made secretary for security, the government said in a statement on its official website.

What’s left of the Hong Kong government isn’t willing to fight back against China’s omnipresent imposition of its will. Handing the security of the nation over to police officials who encouraged the use of violence against protesters makes it clear the Chinese government is done fucking around. I mean, it never really was. But it’s done making incremental changes.

The remnants of Hong Kong’s government are on the side that has the power. Insect overlords are just what the region needs.

Asked if Hong Kong had become a police state, as evidenced by the new appointments, pro-Beijing lawmaker Alice Mak dismissed journalists’ concerns.

“If it’s a police state, why not? I don’t think there’s any problem with a police state,” Mak said. “When we say a police state, I will view the other side, that is the emphasis on security.”

The only thing experiencing any insecurity is the Chinese government, which likely viewed the region as a pushover when it took control in 1997. It probably expected pockets of resistance, but whatever plans it had in place prior to its agreement-violating putsch apparently didn’t scale well enough to keep Hong Kong’s population silent and compliant.

With cops heading the national security team, there’s nothing holding the police back. The national security law greatly expanded law enforcement’s powers. Jackbootstrapping the government’s national security oversight ensures officers will never have to fear reprisal for their actions, pushback for overstepping whatever boundaries remain, or any judicial roadblocks slowing them down as they inflict China’s worst aspects on their fellow countrymen.

Filed Under: carrie lam, china, democracy, hong kong, national security law