In 2003, the Hong Kong government tried to enact a national security law under Article 23 of the Basic Law. That proposal was abandoned following mass protests.
Sixteen years later, peaceful protests over an extradition law in Hong Kong turned violent. There is no telling when this chaos will end.
Meanwhile, violent protests remain exceptionally well-coordinated and funded with an alleged international element. The anti-government protests have morphed into a broader anti-China movement.
At this juncture, it is unrealistic for the Hong Kong government to enact the national security law on its own, but every nation needs such a law for the protection of its people and its sovereignty. The US, UK and other European countries are no exception.
The central government has stepped in by promulgating legislation applicable to Hong Kong that would criminalise any act of secession, subversion of state power, organising and committing terrorism, and collusion with foreign and external forces to endanger national security .
There are worries that the term “national security” is so vague that it lends itself to wide interpretations to silence activists and clamp down on dissidents. This argument has some force, since a law should be defined with sufficient precision to enable citizens to know how to behave in accordance with the law.
Others express concerns that, while Hong Kong would handle most security cases, the mainland would retain jurisdiction over exceptional cases relating to national security. It is noteworthy that a mainland national security agency would be installed in Hong Kong under the direct supervision and guidance of mainland security agencies. People wonder if this agency would have the power of arrest within Hong Kong.
On the bright side, Hong Kong has an independent judiciary and a vocal press to guard its core values, be it the rule of law, freedom of speech or freedom of assembly. What is more, basic legal principles – that no one is above the law, one is presumed innocent until proved guilty, punishment should be proportionate to the degree of culpability, and that criminal law should have no retrospective effect – are shared by the common law system in Hong Kong and the civil law system on the mainland.
In the final analysis, the ultimate test is how much the people of Hong Kong trust China and how much China can rely on Hong Kong people to maintain the security and integrity of the nation.
Charles K.C. Chan, barrister, Central