Hong Kong’ security chief Chris Tang has rejected a lawmaker’s suggestion for Article 23 – the city’s proposed national security legislation – to replace the Beijing-imposed national security law, saying that “vigilance” was still needed in peacetime.
Speaking at a Legislative Council security panel meeting on Monday, lawmaker Paul Tse said national security legislation should keep up with the times, and suggested replacing the national security law with Article 23.
“More and more people now think that Hong Kong is too focused on national security… which has put pressure on commerce and international transactions, and has even provoked unwelcome sanctions and criticism,” he said in Cantonese.
Hong Kong is expected to complete the legislation of Article 23 next year, Chief Executive John Lee announced in his Policy Address last month.
Article 23 would prohibit seven types of offences: treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the central government, theft of state secrets, foreign bodies’ conducting political activities in the city, and local bodies establishing ties with foreign bodies.
“This might just be an idiot’s daydream, but after Hong Kong legislates Article 23, then we won’t need the national security law,” Tse continued.
Attempts to legislate Article 23 in 2003 saw massive street protests, with over 500,000 people estimated to have marched on July 1, the anniversary of Hong Kong’s Handover to China, that year. In the days after, Regina Ip – then the city’s security chief – resigned from her post. Successive governments shelved the Article 23 issue, until Lee’s administration.
It is expected to pass in Hong Kong’s legislature today, made up of just one self-proclaimed non-pro-establishment lawmaker following an overhaul in 2021 ensuring only “patriots” can run in elections.
‘Vigilance in peacetime’
Tse told AFP in August that criminalising “soft resistance” – a vaguely defined term that has been used more often among government officials and pro-establishment figures – with further national security legislation could create legal “grey areas” and pose censorship threats.
In response to Tse, Tang said at the Monday Legislative Council meeting that Hong Kong could not, and should not, replace a “national level” law. He added that Article 23 and the existing national security law should function in tandem with one another.
“It’s not our intention to speak about national security or scare citizens, but we must remain vigilant in peacetime,” Tang said in Cantonese, calling protests that erupted in June 2019 over a since-axed extradition bill a “lesson in blood.”
The 2019 protests escalated into sometimes violent displays of dissent against police behaviour, amid calls for democracy and anger over Beijing’s encroachment. Demonstrators demanded an independent probe into police conduct, amnesty for those arrested and a halt to the characterisation of protests as “riots.”
Only under a “stable environment” would Hong Kong be able to attract investors and tourists, Tang added.
Executive Council convener Regina Ip told Ming Pao that the national security law’s standing was equivalent to that of the Basic Law, meaning it could not be easily replaced. She added that Article 23 would not have to address secession and subversion, which were already criminalised under the national security law.
Ronny Tong, also an Executive Council member and a senior counsel, said he believed that the national security law supersedes local laws, and thus takes precedence over Article 23, Ming Pao reported. Hong Kong’s own legislation will only handle crimes not covered by the national security law and supplement where necessary, Tong added.
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, led to hundreds of convictions amid new legal precedents, whilst 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, despite an overall rise in crime.
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
