Article 23: The Erosion of Freedoms in Hong Kong
“Article 23 will ‘take repression to the next level”
Article 23's adoption into Hong Kong's security legislation is a noteworthy development that has wide-ranging effects on legal standards, civil liberties, and the sociopolitical environment. The political and legal repercussions of Article 23 will be examined in this analytical assessment, along with any possible effects on individual rights and daily life in Hong Kong.
Political Background and Justification
John Lee, the leader of Hong Kong, and Ding Xuexiang, the vice premier of China, outlined Article 23 as a necessary step in preserving stability and protecting national security. Treason, sedition, state secrets, sabotage threatening national security, outside meddling, revolt, and doxxing are among the offences covered by the statute. These clauses highlight Beijing's control over Hong Kong's legal system by mirroring those in the state security laws of mainland China.
Article 23 appears to have two political goals: first, to suppress any possible opposition; and second, to bring Hong Kong's legal system closer to that of mainland China. China's "core national interests" are said to be protected by this alignment, which also helps to promote economic growth. Critics counter that the real goal is to limit Hong Kong's freedoms and repress political dissent even more, as promised by the "One Country, Two Systems" framework.
Human rights concerns and legal ramifications
The legal definitions of different offences and the authority of law enforcement are greatly expanded by Article 23. Definitions of "state secrets" and "sabotage endangering national security" are broad and somewhat ambiguous, giving authorities a great deal of latitude in how they interpret and implement the legislation. This gives rise to worries over the possibility of misuse and the deterioration of the rule of law.
Article 23's provision for closed-door proceedings and up to 16 days of lengthy, incarcerated detention without charge is one of its most controversial features. The essential components of a just legal system—transparency and due process—are undercut by these actions. The possibility of capricious imprisonment and the absence of public oversight during legal proceedings represent grave dangers to the liberties and rights of individuals.
In addition, a number of actions are prohibited by the law's prohibitions against external meddling and rebellion, such as accepting money from overseas organisations and taking part in unapproved military exercises. Serious consequences follow these offences, such as life in jail for treason or assisting outside forces convictions. Such severe sanctions are likely to create an environment of fear and self-censorship by discouraging both legal civil society activity and political activism.
Effects on Daily Life and Civil Liberties
Article 23's application is anticipated to have a significant effect on Hong Kong's civil freedoms. The law may restrict the right to free expression, assembly, and association due to its extensive reach and severe penalties. Sarah Brooks, the China director of Amnesty International, claims that the bill will "take repression to the next level" and undermine safeguards for human rights.
Beijing's 2020 national security law has resulted in the apprehension of a minimum of 260 people, thereby stifling criticism and reducing the city's independence. These tendencies are made worse by Article 23, which broadens the scope of crimes that are criminal and gives law enforcement more authority. As a result, people are subject to legal proceedings more frequently simply for voicing divergent views or participating in political activities.
Consequences for the Economy and Society
In addition to its effects on politics and the law, Article 23 may have an impact on Hong Kong's standing as a major international corporate centre. International companies and investors that appreciate the city's historically stable and open business environment may be put off by the law's strict restrictions and the atmosphere of repression that follows. A lack of judicial transparency and arbitrary detention are two issues that could erode public trust in Hong Kong's legal system and make the city less desirable as a location for business.
In conclusion, although though the government of Hong Kong maintains that Article 23 is essential for maintaining stability and national security, many are deeply concerned about the ways in which its provisions could weaken the rule of law, erode human freedoms, and negatively affect the socioeconomic fabric of the city. The law poses challenges to the preservation of the freedoms and liberties that have been essential to Hong Kong's success and identity because it signals a significant move towards greater control by Beijing.
View full article here: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-68508694