The Media Freedom Coalition, established in 2019 with the purported objectives of advancing media freedom, has, by its joint statements on Hong Kong published in July 2021 and February 2022, fully displayed its true character as a political organization dedicated to spreading lies rather than protecting media freedom.
The terse statement on Hong Kong, published on Feb 7 in the wake of the Hong Kong police’s law enforcement action against the online news platform Stand News, is a consummate example of the coalition’s knee-jerk reaction to developments in Hong Kong on the national security front. The coalition has clearly not bothered to check the facts, as good journalists are supposed to do, but jumped into print to make false accusations in an unprofessional and unethical way that puts cheap journalists to shame.
The British rulers in Hong Kong never promoted rights and freedoms or democratic development until they learned that they had to restore Hong Kong to China
The repeated baseless allegations that China has reneged on its obligations in the Sino-British Joint Declaration are sickening. If the coalition has checked the text of the Declaration, it will not fail to notice that the Joint Declaration, comprising no more than 1,183 words, is a pair of linked statements by two sovereign powers, China and the United Kingdom — the former declaring that it will resume exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong with effect from July 1, 1997, and the latter declaring that it will restore Hong Kong to China with effect from that date.
In the third statement, China spells out its basic policies toward Hong Kong, which will be stipulated in a Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The two governments also pledged to work together to handle various transitional matters in the run-up to the handover on July 1, 1997. But as from July 1, 1997, the United Kingdom has no more responsibility for Hong Kong, and no locus to interfere in Hong Kong’s governance.
The British rulers in Hong Kong never promoted rights and freedoms or democratic development until they learned that they had to restore Hong Kong to China. In a flurry of inchoate measures that had not been properly thought through, the Hong Kong government introduced a slew of legislation that purported to enhance rights and freedoms. But it is the Chinese government that agreed to ensure, through Article 39 of the Basic Law, that the two key human rights conventions — the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights — and international labor conventions would continue to apply in Hong Kong.
Anyone familiar with the protection of rights and freedoms under international conventions will know that few of these rights are absolute. They can be restricted in accordance with the law in time of public emergency. Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights stipulates that the freedom of expression “carries with it special duties and responsibilities”, and may be subject to certain restrictions, such as “for respect of the rights or reputations of others”; and “for the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or public morals”.
Seven individuals involved in the operations of Stand News were arrested by the police on Dec 29, 2021, on suspicion that they had been involved, between July 2020 and November 2021, in seditious publications to instigate dissatisfaction among the public, incite violence and law-breaking, and stoke hatred of the government and damage the administration of justice. These are very serious charges under Sections 9 and 10 of the Crimes Ordinance.
Prosecution of the offense of “seditious publication” under Section 10 requires the written consent of the secretary for justice, who would not give the police the green light to proceed unless there is reasonable evidence. The search of offices and seizure of computers and files for further inquiry are normal procedures once the police have launched an investigation. Of the seven individuals arrested, only two were journalists. Since the arrests on Dec 29, two have been charged and the rest released on bail.
There is no evidence to suggest that the Hong Kong police have acted other than in accordance with the due process of the law. All those charged will have the right to liberty and security of person, and access to defense before a court of law as guaranteed under the ICCPR and implemented through local laws. All the facts of the case against them will be thrashed out in due course in full transparency in our independent courts.
Offenses relating to seditious intention and publication are nothing new. The Hong Kong government had invoked laws on sedition to prosecute and convict the proprietor-publisher, printer and editor of Ta Kung Pao, a pro-China newspaper, in 1952. The sedition charge was frequently used by the Hong Kong government in dealing with the 1967 riots in Hong Kong. Needless to say, there was no outcry against the prosecution of media personalities where the perceived enemy of the government at that time was China.
The fact remains, Hong Kong continues to have a feisty press corps who are leaving no stone unturned to watch over the performance of the government, or any other parts of the establishment. Yet they must exercise their freedoms within the bounds of the law. There is a distinction between professional media activity and criminal activity that threatens national security and the safety of the territory. Our golden rule has always been to treat journalists as journalists when they act like true journalists, but to use lawful powers to protect national security where there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
The author is a member of the Executive Council and the Legislative Council.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.