Legislation to safeguard national security conforms to international practice: Hong Kong legal profession

HONG KONG, Feb. 16 (Xinhua) -- The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) government on Jan. 30 commenced a month-long public consultation on the legislation of Article 23 of the Basic Law of the HKSAR, with the legal profession in Hong Kong saying that the legislation to safeguard national security conforms to international practice and is "necessary" and "should be done as soon as possible."

Gu Minkang, a professor of the Education University of Hong Kong, said that almost all countries in the world attach importance to national security legislation, as it is related to the survival of a country and must be protected by special laws. As a special administrative region of China, Hong Kong has the constitutional responsibility to safeguard national security.

Gu, also vice chairman of Hong Kong Basic Law Education Association, stressed that the legislation of Article 23 is the key to improving national security legislation, and it must be guided by the overall national security concept and fully fill the loopholes in national security.

He said that through the legislation of Article 23, Hong Kong can integrate local laws and regulations on national security, absorb new international regulations on national security crimes, and build a complete legal system for safeguarding national security. Only in this way can Hong Kong gain confidence and freedom, develop its economy and maintain long-term prosperity and stability.

Why is it necessary to legislate for Article 23 of the Hong Kong Basic Law when the national security law in Hong Kong already exists?

In this regard, Ian Chu, a barrister a governor of local think tank Path of Democracy, explained that although the national security law in Hong Kong has brought stability to the society, but in order to consolidate national security in an all-round way, it needs to be complementary to the legislation of Article 23 of the Hong Kong Basic Law.

Chu believed that with the legislation of Article 23, Hong Kong's work in safeguarding national security will be more effective. Since national security is the cornerstone of Hong Kong's development, the national security law in Hong Kong and Article 23 of the Hong Kong Basic Law need to work together to make Hong Kong's international status rock-solid. Hong Kong should seize the opportunity to do the legislation, so as to safeguard national security and allow Hong Kong people to live a stable life and Hong Kong can soar again.

Ronny Tong, an official member of the Executive Council of the HKSAR, also a senior counsel, said that there is no contradiction between national security and public interest, because there is no public interest in the world that endangers national security. If it is against national security, it is not in the public interest.

Tong said that Hong Kong is a pluralistic society, and the exchange of information is quite open and smooth. Therefore, as long as people do not do anything that violates or endangers national security, all information can flow freely.

Willy Fu, a law professor in Hong Kong, said that the enactment of Article 23 of the Hong Kong Basic Law adds some crimes according to the actual situation, which is a forward-looking and will provide important support for the maintenance of good governance and long-term peace and stability in Hong Kong.

Fu believed that the legislation of Article 23 and the national security law in Hong Kong are compatible and complementary, and can jointly build a strong wall of national security and plug legal loopholes. In particular, amending some existing laws, converting some common law crimes into statutory laws and providing extra-territorial effects, will give no foothold to the anti-China forces, which will do all good but not harm to Hong Kong.

Cheung Kwok-kwan, deputy secretary for justice of the HKSAR government, said that the legislation of Article 23 is not intended to lower the threshold of conviction. The prosecution must still prove beyond reasonable doubt that a defendant has committed a crime and has intent to commit a crime before the court can convict the defendant. The public need not to worry about inadvertently violating the law.