The “smears” by the US government on the extraterritorial effect of Hong Kong’s domestic security law were “untenable,” the city’s government has said, decrying what it called “biased and misleading remarks.”
The Hong Kong government on Thursday said it “strongly disapproved” of concerns expressed by the US on the enactment of a homegrown security law required under Article 23 of the Basic Law.
“It is simply unconvincing for the US Government to comment at this juncture on the HKSAR’s legislative proposals for safeguarding national security, especially those on offences relating to ‘state secrets’ and ‘external interference’,” an English statement from the Hong Kong government read.
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.
A spokesperson for the Hong Kong government said that providing “proportionate extraterritorial effect” for national security offences was fully in line with international law and common practice adopted in various countries and regions. If the legislation lacked extraterritoriality, it would amount to condoning activities threatening national security, the Hong Kong government said.
“The US even often abuses ‘long-arm jurisdiction’ and unilateral sanctions to target residents of other countries. The smears by the US Government on the extraterritorial effect of the Article 23 legislation are simply untenable,” the government said.
The US had conducted covert surveillance globally, the government spokesperson said, adding that a former national security advisor for the US had admitted publicly that he had assisted in the planning of coups in other countries.
According to the public consultation document released on January 30, the Hong Kong authorities said prescribing appropriate extraterritorial effect for offences endangering national security was “an essential component” of laws for safeguarding national security.
US concerns
In a press statement released on Wednesday, US Department of State spokesman Matthew Miller described the definitions of “state secrets” and “external interference” in the Article 23 consultation document as “broad and vague.” Such terms could be used to “eliminate dissent through the fear of arrest and detention,” the official said.
The remarks came the same day that the Hong Kong government closed its four-week public consultation period for the legislative proposal. The authorities on Thursday said they had received over 13,000 responses, almost 99 per cent of which showed some support for the law. During a three-month consultation period for the enactment of legislation under Article 23 held in 2002, more than 90,000 views were heard.
Miller also raised concerns that the free speech of US citizens and residents may be restricted by Hong Kong’s domestic security law if the legislation was applied extraterritorially.
“Article 23 risks compounding the 2020 National Security Law that has curtailed the rights and freedoms of people in Hong Kong,” he said, adding China’s international commitments and the One Country, Two Systems framework would be undermined by the potential extraterritorial reach.
DAB petition
On Friday, around 20 members of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, the city’s largest pro-Beijing party, filed a petition to the British Consulate to oppose concerns raised by UK foreign minister David Cameron on the Article 23 legislation.
The protest was led by lawmakers Holden Chow, Ben Chan Han-pan and Chan Hok-fung, with some demonstrators holding placards that read “the British Government should stop interfering in Hong Kong’s affairs” and “strongly condemn the British Government’s attack and smear.”
Cameron said in a statement released on Wednesday that the UK was worried that free speech would be inhibited with the toughening of penalties for speech-related crimes outlined in the security legislation. International organisations in Hong Kong may also be exposed to greater risks under the “vague references” to external forces in the proposed legislation.
“I strongly urge the Hong Kong SAR government to reconsider their proposals and engage in genuine and meaningful consultation with the people of Hong Kong,” his statement read.
The DAB accused Cameron of “smearing” Hong Kong’s fulfilment of its constitutional duty. The UK official also ignored the “extremely harsh” national security laws passed by the UK, the party said.
The DAB added the UK foreign minister’s comments “confirmed the existence of foreign interference in Hong Kong affairs.”
“It underscores the real and urgent risks to national security. Therefore, Hong Kong must complete the legislation of Article 23 of the Basic Law as soon as possible to address the ongoing external interference and eliminate national security risks and threats,” a Chinese statement from the DAB read.
‘Double standards’
Hong Kong’s Security Bureau rejected Cameron’s remarks on Thursday night, saying he “deliberately did not mention the extensive public consultation” and almost 30 consultation sessions the government had conducted on the Article 23 legislation.
Secretary for Security Chris Tang said the UK had “stringent law” to safeguard national security, and the foreign minister’s comments showed his “double standards.”
“The UK has no sovereignty, jurisdiction or right of supervision over Hong Kong. The UK should immediately stop interfering in Hong Kong affairs which are internal affairs of China,” Tang’s English statement read.
Beijing inserted national security legislation directly into Hong Kong’s mini-constitution in June 2020 following a year of pro-democracy protests and unrest. It criminalised subversion, secession, collusion with foreign forces and terrorist acts – broadly defined to include disruption to transport and other infrastructure. The move gave police sweeping new powers and led to hundreds of arrests amid new legal precedents, while dozens of civil society groups disappeared. The authorities say it restored stability and peace to the city, rejecting criticism from trade partners, the UN and NGOs.
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
