Justice minister Paul Lam says new security legislation will not ‘mainlandise’ Hong Kong
Hong Kong Free Press
The Secretary for Justice Paul Lam has refuted concerns that the legislation of Hong Kong’s homegrown national security law, as laid out under Article 23 of its mini-constitution, will “mainlandise” the city.
“I disagree with [this concern] 100 per cent,” Lam said in Cantonese when he and security chief Chris Tang attended a press conference with 10 selected media outlets on Wednesday, not including HKFP.
“[Hong Kong] worked on the legislation independently, applying the rules of common law. Common law is a characteristic of Hong Kong, a totally different system from that of mainland China,” Lam said.
The government introduced a 110-page consultation paper for the legislation of a new security law last Tuesday, marking the beginning of a consultation period that runs until February 28 and spans the Lunar New Year holiday.
The proposed, homegrown security legislation will cover five types of offences: treason, insurrection, theft of state secrets and espionage, sabotage, and external interference.
According to chapter nine of the consultation document, the government seeks to introduce at least eight measures to be imposed on suspects, including extending pre-trial detention, requiring suspects to reside at a specified residence, and barring a detained suspect from consulting specific lawyers.
Victor Dawes, chair of Bar Association, told the press after attending a consultation seminar on Article 23 on Tuesday the Basic Law stipulates that a defendant has the right to seek legal advice and can choose their own lawyers, RTHK reported.
“Under Article 35 of the Basic Law, there is the right to confidential legal advice, and there is also a right to choose [a] lawyer that you so wish. So, it is really important to balance the two… particular rights and interests,” Dawes said.
During Wednesday’s small-group interview, when asked why authorities were considering restricting a detainee from meeting specific lawyers, Lam said some might use their lawyers to exchange information with an accomplice, local media reported.
He added that implementation of the new national security law will be safeguarded by Hong Kong’s jurisdiction. “The courts enjoy the right to independent adjudication. We should have confidence in them.”
Article 23 of the Basic Law stipulates that the government shall enact laws on its own to prohibit acts of treason, secession, sedition and subversion against Beijing. Its legislation failed in 2003 following mass protests and it remained taboo until after the onset of the separate, Beijing-imposed security law in 2020. Pro-democracy advocates fear it could have a negative effect on civil liberties but the authorities say there is a constitutional duty to ratify it.
Broadening the definition of sedition
The new legislation also seeks to broaden the definition of “seditious intention.”
According to the consultation paper, seditious intention should cover nine areas including the intention to bring a Chinese citizen, a Hong Kong permanent resident or a person in Hong Kong “into hatred or contempt against, or to induce his disaffection against, the following system or institution,” and the the intention to “induce hatred or enmity” amongst residents of Hong Kong or amongst residents of different regions of China.
The sedition law, one of Hong Kong’s legacies from the British colonial government, was unused for over half a century until its revival in the aftermath of the 2019 extradition bill protests and unrest. The law outlaws incitement to violence, to disaffection and to other offences against the administration
Johannes Chan, Adjunct Professor of the Faculty of Law of University of Hong Kong, said in Ming Pao last Friday that many countries had have gradually narrowed or abolished the offence of incitement. Hong Kong, on the other hand, had “fully embraced” the sedition offence used by the British colonial government in the 1960s to suppress leftist individuals, even expanding its definition, Chan said.
Chan added that in many common law jurisdictions, the concept of “incitement with seditious intent” mainly involved incitement to violence and disruption of public order. However, the professor said, the current situation in Hong Kong went beyond that, raising questions about whether it complied with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
In response to Chan’s remarks, Lam told the press on Wednesday that previous convictions for sedition had targeted extreme speeches such as advocacy of Hong Kong independence.
Since the reactivation of the sedition law, Hongkongers have been sent to jail over “uttering seditious words” and applauding from the public gallery at court during a hearing involving a pro-democracy activist.
Lam reportedly also said that criticising Hong Kong on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu would not be considered a violation of the new security legislation.
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
