South China Morning Post: If [group] followers obey the law, leave them alone

UNDER BEIJING' concept of "one country, two systems", what sets the Hong Kong SAR apart from the mainland is the rule of law and the freedoms the people enjoy. This has led some misguided people to argue that Hong Kong does not need democracy, since the local inhabitants can enjoy freedoms that are underpinned by an independent legal and judicial system.

That presumption was severely tested in the right-of-abode saga in 1999, when the administration of Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa sought a reinterpretation of the Basic Law, the SAR' mini-constitution, from Beijing, thereby overturning the verdict of the Court of Final Appeal which ruled that children of Hong Kong people born in the mainland had the right to live in the SAR.

Compared with the right-of-abode cases, the trial of the Falun Gong followers is even more explosive. The former was a tussle between the SAR and mainland authorities but the latter has much wider international ramifications.

This is because although the Falun Gong is being branded an [slanderous term used by Jiang Zemin regime] on the mainland and has been outlawed, it is free to operate in the SAR. Furthermore, the Falun Gong has supporters in many countries, who have lobbied their respective governments to intervene.

Hence when the verdict on 16 Falun Gong members charged with causing an obstruction in a public place was handed down by Magistrate Symon Wong Yu-wing in Western Court last Thursday, officials from a number of consulates were present in the courtroom.

The defendants were arrested on March 14 while protesting outside the Beijing Liaison Office in Western district. They displayed a large banner calling on President Jiang Zemin to stop killing Falun Gong followers.

The defendants were all found guilty and fined $1,300 for obstruction. Of the 16 people, 11 were from Hong Kong, four from Switzerland and one from New Zealand. Falun Gong have lodged an appeal.

After the verdict was delivered, an official from one of the consulates asked me whether I thought it was a fair trial and whether I had confidence in the Judiciary. My short answer was, we will see. There is no doubt this was a politically charged trial and I do not think the 16 people should have been prosecuted. The pavement outside the liaison office is wide and with few passers-by, therefore a small group of peaceful but persistent protesters should not cause any inconvenience, let alone obstruction.

The Falun Gong followers were peaceful demonstrators. They do not appear to have caused obstruction to anyone, but were an eyesore to the central government. Taking them to court has tarnished Hong Kong' reputation and has signalled that the authorities are going after people with dissenting views, particularly those being targeted by Beijing.

It seems clear that the SAR government has been under pressure from Beijing to take action against the Falun Gong. However if "one country, two systems" is to remain intact, the Tung administration must have the courage to fend off such interference. So long as the Falun Gong followers are free to operate in the SAR, one can still argue that there is a distinction between Hong Kong and the mainland.

In the past few years, the Legislative Council has received a number of complaints from the Falun Gong. I was one of the members responsible for handling them. One complaint was about their followers being harassed and questioned by different government departments while protesting outside the Central Liaison Office. All of them were trying to move the Falun Gong away from the entrance of the office.

Another complaint centred on their inability to find a venue to hold a conference. Because of the political sensitivity of the Falun Gong, many hotels and commercial organisations have refused to rent them a venue. Thus they had to go to the government, which controls many community halls and auditoriums.

Unfortunately the government was unable to help. The reason given was that organisations relating to recreation and culture have a higher priority than Falun Gong.

During the meetings that legislators held with government departments to discuss the Falun Gong' complaints, I repeatedly told the officials present that they must not allow themselves to be used as tools to attack the administration' political enemies, otherwise it would be a sad day for Hong Kong.

I am not a follower of Falun Gong but have always been amazed by adherents' persistence. As far as I am concerned, so long as they do not break the law, they should be allowed to operate freely. It is deeply regrettable that they have been targeted by various government departments.

One thing about the Falun Gong which particularly upsets the SAR and central authorities is their foreign supporters. On numerous occasions, the SAR government has been accused of barring their followers from entering Hong Kong.

Senior mainland officials have said that when Hong Kong enacts legislation on Article 23 of the Basic Law regarding subversion, secession, sedition and treason, Falun Gong' links with overseas supporters will be affected.

I have told the Secretary for Security, Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee, that so long as the Falun Gong operates within the law, they should be left alone. The trial of their 16 followers showed that I may be too naive. In the final analysis, it is up to the Judiciary to defend the people' freedoms. I hope our courts will not be found wanting.

Emily Lau Wai-hing is a legislator and member of The Frontier