Freedom and the rule of law are the core values of Hong Kong. As far as the rule of law is concerned, it is all about the organic combination of goal justice and procedural justice. From the perspective of goal justice, with Hong Kong being the Special Administrative Region of China, its people have no qualms about safeguarding national security. Nevertheless, in terms of procedural justice, Hong Kong people are understandably doubtful about the legitimacy of having the National People’s Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) unilaterally impose the national security law on Hong Kong. In fact, such an arbitrary action is not in line with Article 23 of the Basic Law, which clearly outlines that Hong Kong should “enact laws on its own”. And Hong Kong is definitely not in a “state of war” or “state of emergency” as mentioned in Article 18. Even by the mainland standard, the way the law is imposed does not comply with the Legislation Law of the People’s Republic of China.

As generations of leaders of the central government have pointed out, most Hong Kong people “love the country and Hong Kong”. In theory, Hong Kongers support the criminalization of secession, subversion, terrorist activities and foreign interference. However, what worries people is the criteria for conviction. They are of the view that mainland Chinese dissidents such as Liu Xiaobo, Tan Zuoren and the “709” civil rights lawyers were convicted because of their speech, not for “subverting the state power”, which was the charge slapped on them. Hong Kongers find that unacceptable, and they worry about the diminishing of the freedom of speech and freedom of press in the city. What Hong Kong people expect is that the process of the national security legislation should uphold Xi Jinping’s idea of “adhering to the ‘one-country’ principle, respecting the differences of the two systems, and ensuring the coexistence of the above two”. Moreover, the NPCSC’s unilateral action is also an obvious violation of Article 5 of the Basic Law, which states clearly that “the socialist system and policies shall not be practiced in the Hong Kong SAR”.

Added to Hong Kong people’s concerns are a series of judicial concerns: how can the Hong Kong version of the national security law work in accordance with the principles of the common law? In case mainland officials of the national security commission arrest someone and send him back to the mainland for prosecution, how can it comply with the Basic Law regulation that Hong Kong enjoys independent judiciary power and the final adjudication power - even if the number of such cases would be “extremely small”? Will there be a retrospective period? How can it embody the presumption of innocent in the common law? How can the suspects’ human rights be properly protected in the process? Will special courts be established? Any limitation on the nationalities and qualifications of the judges? What are the appeal and final appeal mechanisms? Will juries be formed? The list of queries goes on and on. In addition, the lack of consultation in Hong Kong during the legislation process has exacerbated people’s concerns and resentment.

On the other hand, the NPCSC’s legislation of the Hong Kong version of national security law has provoked widespread outcry from the international community. The “Five Eyes Alliance” formed by the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, as well as the European Union and Japan, being stakeholders of the Asian financial hub, stand against Beijing’s action. From Hong Kong people to the world in general, it is believed that the practice of the “one country, two systems”, “Hong Kong people governing Hong Kong” and “high degree of autonomy” are more than just the internal affairs of China. It is a commitment made in the Sino-British Joint Declaration, which has been signed by Chinese and UK leaders and registered in the Secretariat of the United Nations. And according to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the Joint Declaration is an international commitment that has to be respected. Not only does it stipulate the handover of Hong Kong’s sovereignty back to China, but it also contains the Chinese government’s 12 basic principles on Hong Kong. These are the inalienable part of the international treaty and represent the Chinese government’s solemn international commitment. China should never alter anything in the agreement unilaterally, and surely not under the pretext of managing its “internal affairs”.

If the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) allows its leftist force to misjudge the situation and violates the Joint Declaration, the Basic Law and procedural justice despite international opposition, so that the Five Eyes Alliance, the European Union and Japan decide that Hong Kong no longer enjoys freedoms or has the rule of law, the international financial center will be reduced to just another mainland Chinese city. It will prove to be an irrevocable loss to Beijing. History will tell how disruptive the consequences will be.

(Lew Mon Hung is Chairman of Smart Strategy Limited)

Click here for Chinese version.

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

Apple Daily mobile app latest version DOWNLOAD NOW