Letter from the UK Falun Gong Association to the Chairman of the Bills Committee on National Security Regarding Article 23

Hon Ip Kwok-him, JP
Chairman
Bills Committee on National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill
Room 523G
West Wing
Central Government Offices
Hong Kong

Dear Mr Ip

I am writing to express our serious concerns over the proposed National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill put forward to the LegCo by the SAR government in February.

This bill has retained proposals widely opposed during the public consultation last year, including the proscription mechanism, which would seriously undermine the “one country, two systems” framework and civil liberties in Hong Kong.

The proscription mechanism, which is beyond the requirement of the Basic Law, makes it possible to ban HK groups, which are “subordinate” to “mainland organisations” proscribed in China on the grounds of national security. By linking the proscription mechanism to decisions of the mainland authority, which has a track record of serious abuses of legal systems, fundamental civil liberties and basic human rights, the proposed Bill would open the door for the mainland authority to export such abuses to Hong Kong.

In addition, by shrewdly manipulating and widening the definition of “mainland organisations” and “subordinates”, the SAR government has made many HK groups, including Falun Gong, democracy movement, and Roman Catholics, highly exposed to the proscription mechanism. First of all, according to the draft law, any group of two or more persons, no matter where it is, will be considered a “mainland organisation” if it was formed or established on the mainland or if its main place of business is in the mainland. Secondly, a Hong Kong group is considered “subordinate” to a “mainland organisation” if any of its policies is determined, directly or indirectly, by the “mainland organisation”. Falun Gong’s long-standing principles such as “no charge for teaching (the exercises)” adopted by practitioners around the world could easily be construed as policies from a “mainland organisation” and so regarded as satisfying the subordination condition.

A further threat to civil liberties and basic freedoms in Hong Kong lies in the court procedure for groups appealing against a ban. The draft bill shows that “the Court may order for all or any portion of the public to be excluded during any part of the hearing” and that the hearing can “take place without the appellant being given full particulars of the reasons for the proscription” as well as the Court holding “proceedings in the absence of any person, including the appellant and any legal representative appointed by him”. This amounts to a secret trial of the worst kind.

Any HK legislation must not contain a mechanism by which Beijing effectively decides which organisation in Hong Kong is to be banned. Such a mechanism would be a serious breach of the spirit of the “one-country; two systems” framework.

Our serious concern over the proposed proscription mechanism in the Bill is shared by many organisations in legal, political, religious, human rights, business and academic communities around the world, as well as governments and individuals.

The UK Foreign Office stated on 27/3/03 that the “principal” concern is over the proscription mechanism, which “blurs the dividing line between the separate legal systems of the SAR and the mainland”. The US State Department on 2/5/03 pointed out “serious reservations remain” about the proscription mechanism.

A European Parliament resolution unanimously adopted, on 8/4/03, states, “[The European Parliament] expresses its serious concern with regard to … particularly the proposals relating to the proscription of organisations outlawed in mainland China on national security grounds and the totally inadequate appeal mechanism,” and “any legislation introduced under Article 23 must not interfere with the exclusive jurisdiction of Hong Kong courts;” In addition, “[The European Parliament] states therefore its strong opposition to any move on the part of the Hong Kong authorities to ban the Falun Gong”

We urge the Hong Kong Legislative Council to protect the “one country, two systems” principle and uphold the civil liberties and basic freedoms in Hong Kong by dropping the “decided-by-China” approach to the proscription mechanism.

Yours sincerely
[name omitted]

Vice Chairman