Security laws adopted by the Chinese Parliament may have a profound effect on Hong Kong’s judicial, communications and commercial positions.
Half a million Hong Kong population in 2003 to protests against the government of the District proposed the security Bill pursuant to article 23 of the Basic Law. Article 23 of the special provisions of Hong Kong province are to be self-issued security laws to prohibit acts of reflection, secession, solicitation, rebellion or overthrow.
The intense response of the people forcing the Hong Kong district as a capitalized chief was to declare the bill in favor of “not enough to support”.
17 years since then, despite committing to the security law and the pressure from the Beijing, the Hong Kong administration still evade the re-booting of the process. However, Beijing seems to have run out of patience after more than 6 months of last year’s protests in the district. The National Congress of People’s Congress (NPC), the National Assembly of China, has just proposed Hong Kong Security Law during the annual session of the inaugural day 22/5.
The details of the Hong Kong Security Law Project were far more than the bill given by Mr. The United States of the year 2003. In addition to establishing the behavior of “reflection, secession, rebellion and overthrow” in the central government, the law also allowed the Chinese national security authorities to make offices in the district to “conduct relevant duties to protect national security in accordance with the law”.
The Hong Kong security bill is expected to be the NPC passed at the end of the month and is soon applied to the district. Critics have said that it will have a strong impact on the entire Hong Kong society, from a political perspective to international communication, education, and business.
Hong Kong was awarded to China by the British in 1997, with the right to compose and regulate its own law under the model “one country, two modes”. Thus, the city has independent judicial systems and other autonomous rights with mainland China. These rights are provided in the Basic Law, the documents are considered as “the sub-Constitution” of Hong Kong, and are secured by the 1984 General Chinese Declaration on the Special Management scheme.
The new security Law sets the challenge for all of this. The formation of a series of acts is declared “to reflect, dissociation, rebellion and overthrow” aimed at the central government, This law can help the authorities to have more control over the opposition in Hong Kong At the time they see fit.
The law also opened the way to the Chinese security forces operating more publicly and more broadly in Hong Kong. Speaking during the press conference 22/5, Democratic Congressman Helena Wong Cho or even the Hong Kong government also did not have the right to interfere with the operation of the security forces from the mainland China at the special district.
Meanwhile, Senator Claudia Mo’s assessment of Security law proves “Beijing will do everything to control Hong Kong at any cost”.
The court system in Hong Kong, which operates separately from mainland China, may have difficulties in enforcing new security laws. Although operating under its own mechanism, the Hong Kong court has no right to issue a judgment to reverse this law, as the NPC is the only authority to have “explained” to any constitutional matter.
The ambiguity, confused by the new laws created and the “legal wars” that are more likely to take place in the courthouse can damage the reputation of the Hong Kong judiciary, the important factor to help the district rise to the international financial and business Center.
Other than the conductivity bill causing last year’s unrest, the range of impacts of the security law is said to be much wider, including Impact on the media sector. Journalist groups in Hong Kong have long spoken about the increasingly severe censorship, in the context of the rising economic pressure from Beijing. Several media carriers and television stations in the district have belonged to the mainland Chinese owners.
International journalists do not yet know how future operations will be affected when new security laws take effect. At present, they are free to work in Hong Kong, not to bother with visa issues or other limitations such as colleagues in mainland China. However, the new control over Hong Kong can make many carriers leave the city.
Security laws can also lead to changes with the Hong Kong legislature, where the senators do not have their own Beijing occupies about 1/3 seats. In recent years, many senators are expelled from the agency, while some applicants are prohibited. With the new law, the Hong Kong government is said to have added rights to the elimination of opposition congressman, even prosecuting them for obstruction of the law, especially on the basis of national security.
The impact of the security bill is likely to go beyond Hong Kong. U.S. senators are expected to offer an assessment under the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democratic Act (HKDA), which is intended to consider whether the city is full of self-worth with mainland China to enjoy special trade status.
The special trade status with the United States makes Hong Kong unbearable to the tariffs that the U.S. applies to China, as well as an important condition for the benefit of other commercial incentives. If this particular trade position was cancelled, a series of corporations, the company could leave Hong Kong.
On 21/5, several U.S. Congressman said they would propose a bipartisan bill that punishes Chinese officials and entities to enforce security laws in Hong Kong, because this behaviour is considered “blatant infringement” that declared central – English.
As commentator James Griffiths of Cnn, China may be betting on the assumption that the Covid-19 has weakened the possibility, as well as the determination to force the pressure of the international community with them on Hong Kong issue. Britain is a typical example, as they have just left the European Union and increasingly depend on trade relations with China.
The Hong Kong protets each prevented the administration of security laws under article 23 of the Basic Law of 2003, or forced the government to withdraw the bill of conductivity last year. However, it is unclear what they can do to prevent new security laws from being issued by the Chinese Parliament.
Although some Hong Kong activists claim to continue to call for demonstrations against the new security law, the commentator Griffiths argue that their likelihood of success is very low. “Beijing’s dynamic action between Hong Kong still applies limited measures to prevent nCoV from spreading, which means that people will be afraid to join the protests as they last year,” Griffiths writes.
Pearl (According to Cnn)