South China Morning Post: Falun Gong Tells Court of Ill-Treatment During Detention

March 6, 2007

(Clearwisdom.net) Dozens of Falun Gong practitioners prevented from entering Hong Kong on the eve of a 2003 conference were held at the airport without explanation, food or water before being sent back home, a court heard yesterday.

The allegations came during a judicial review hearing before Mr Justice Michael Hartmann in the Court of First Instance into the events of February 21, 2003.

The review has been brought by four Taiwanese Falun Gong practitioners - Theresa Chu Woan-chyi, Liao Hsiao-lan, Lu Lih-ching and Chang Jenn-yeu. Kan Hung-cheung, a spokesman for the Hong Kong chapter of the Falun Gong, and the Hong Kong Association of Falun Dafa are also applicants.

They are seeking a declaration that the government acted unlawfully in preventing them and more than 70 others from entering the city and that unreasonable force was used to repatriate them.

The government has denied there was anything untoward in the classification of the practitioners as a security risk, and maintains that the level of force used to put them on planes was proportionate.

Paul Harris, SC, for the practitioners, read out several affidavits detailing their complaints against the way they were treated.

Ms. Lu claimed she and her husband, Mr. Chang, were taken aside after their passports were scanned.

They said they were placed in a room with several others and that 20 to 30 riot police guarded the exit. They were then told by an immigration officer that they would not be allowed to enter Hong Kong for "security reasons" even though he knew them to be good people.

Ms. Lu said that after three hours, six or seven police moved forward and wrapped both her and her husband in anti-riot blankets and marched them on to an Eva Air flight. She said she suffered a broken lip and numerous bruises.

The anti-riot blankets were called "humane wraps" said Daniel Fung Wah-kin, SC, for the government, and their purpose was "to protect the individual being wrapped from being injured or injuring others."

Mr Justice Hartmann said the effect of the device was to allow a prisoner to be carried "horizontally, almost like a piece of luggage."

Mr. Fung agreed but noted the wraps had been used on the couple only because they had repeatedly refused to co-operate. They had not been used on any other of the 75 or so people turned back.

The hearing continues today.