Threats to Hong Kong people’s freedoms and personal safety are mounting every day. Many people here and overseas are stunned and horrified by the speed with which the situation has been deteriorating since June last year, when large scale protests broke out to oppose Chief Executive Carrie Lam’s decision to enact the Extradition Bill.

Since then, there have been endless protests, marches and arrests, and escalating acts of police brutality. More than 10,000 people have been arrested and more than 2,000 charged and many have been jailed. However not a single police officer has been arrested. To cap it all off, the Chinese government imposed the sweeping national security law (nsl) on Hong Kong on June 30 this year, ushering in an era of terror and high anxiety. The rapid loss of civil liberties here must be a salutary lesson for people all over the world. To safeguard what we cherish, the answer is eternal vigilance.

For many decades, Hong Kong was an anomaly. The people had no right to elect the government, but the level of freedoms, personal safety and the rule of law we enjoyed was much higher than that of people in many countries which hold periodic elections. We enjoyed these basic human rights because of an independent judiciary and free press. The government respected the decisions of the judiciary and tolerated the independent news media.

These two bulwarks of our civil liberties are now under assault by the Carrie Lam administration and pro-Beijing politicians, who regard them as enemies of the establishment and protectors of violent demonstrators and so must be reined in.

On September 22, the Hong Kong police announced a decision to limit access to press briefings and restricted areas only to journalists from news organisations registered with the government. The police will not recognize press accreditation issued by local news media groups and journalist associations. As for foreign journalists, only those from internationally recognized media outlets will be accepted.

Under this new arrangement, which was imposed without consultation, the police will facilitate news coverage only when it can be done “without compromising operational efficiency.” For many months, government officials and pro-Beijing politicians have criticized the huge number of reporters who turned out to cover the demonstrations, labelling many of them as “fake reporters” whose motive was to obstruct the police and to aid and abet the protesters.

Under the new arrangement, freelance journalists, student reporters and people working for unregistered news media outlets would be banned from events run by the police. Furthermore, they could be prosecuted for taking part in illegal assembly or violating social distancing rules.

The arrangement has attracted fierce criticisms from journalist organisations, university lecturers and journalism students, social media groups and the Foreign Correspondents' Club (FCC), warning the restrictions would affect their operation and damage press freedom.

The FCC said the new guidelines would take away from the news media the power to decide who is a journalist and give it to the government, and said that would erode the news media’s independence. This provoked a scathing response from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Office (MFAO) in Hong Kong, which attacked the FCC for defending and white washing fake reporters who are actually rioters.

The MFAO said the FCC was essentially sheltering and condoning the black rioters who seek to stir up trouble. It accused the FCC of harbouring sinister intentions and hopes to see Hong Kong in chaos. It ordered the FCC to stop meddling in Hong Kong affairs.

Besides undermining press freedom, the pro-Beijing camp also stepped up its attacks on the judiciary. Legislative Council members of the Pro-Beijing party the DAB accused some magistrates of acting partially in some protest-related hearings. They accused magistrates who granted bail to some defendants of being guilty of collective obstruction of justice and suggested a committee should be formed to monitor the work of the judges. A sentencing committee should also be set up to set binding punishment standards for all criminal cases.

Pro-communist newspapers launched Cultural Revolution-style attacks on the judiciary and Chief Justice of the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) Geoffrey Ma, condemning them for being arrogant and out of touch with public opinion and for being sympathetic with the protesters.

Adding fuel to fire, Carrie Lam announced Hong Kong does not have “separation of powers” between the three branches of government, although this is a concept used by government officials, judges and politicians for many years.

To refute the pro-Beijing camp’s attacks and Carrie Lam’s announcement, Ma issued a 14-page statement on September 23 asserting the independence of the judiciary and stressed that court cases must be handled in accordance with the law and criticisms of the courts and judges without proper grounds would be detrimental to public confidence in the system.

Ma’s statement came a few days after the government revealed Australian Judge James Spigelman stepped down as Overseas Non-permanent Judge of the CFA. Spigelman told Australian media his resignation was related to the NSL. He submitted his resignation the day after Lam announced Hong Kong has no “separation of powers.”

Spigelman’s resignation has set alarm bells ringing. Many fear other Overseas Non-permanent Judges may also resign, signalling they no longer have confidence in the Hong Kong judiciary. During the handover of Hong Kong to Chinese rule in 1997, in order to bolster confidence in the city as an international financial and business centre, the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s mini constitution, stipulates judges may be recruited from other common law jurisdictions.

With the departure of Spigelman, there are still 13 Overseas Non-permanent Judges in the CFA. One Overseas Judge admitted mass resignations by all Overseas Non-permanent Judges had been contemplated but the idea was rejected because they have confidence in the Chief Justice and other judges. Ma will retire in January next year when he reaches 65.

In the coming months, the news media and the judiciary will be put under overwhelming pressure. Hong Kong people must realise the importance of a free press and an independent judiciary to their freedoms and personal safety and be prepared to fight tooth and nail to defend them. To people in the international community, continuing support for our struggle for freedoms, personal safety, rule of law and democracy is also exceedingly important.

(Emily Lau, Chairperson, International Affairs Committee of the Democratic Party)

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play