HK Chief Executive Tung Chee Hwa, Secretary for Security Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee & all other officers,

Regarding the implementation of Article 23, the whole world is watching closely to see how the "pearl of the east" defends its freedom and laws established over the past century. Recently, the European Parliament, the U.S. State Department, the British General Consulate, the Foreign Ministry of Canada, the Austrian Branch of the International Human Rights Association expressed to the government of Hong Kong their concerns over, and their position against, the implementation of an anti-subversion law by means of resolution or announcement. During the 21st century, when there is no restricting human rights or freedom in many nations, on the issue of Article 23, which is against freedom and human rights, which suppresses dissenting voices, and which has serious defects in its legislative procedure, we hereby show our utmost concern to the HKSAR.

With regard to the current laws in Hong Kong, there are already quite a few articles in the "Criminal Act Regulations" and "Emergency Treaty" dealing with the seven crimes dealt with by Article 23. Many in Hong Kong's political arena believe that there's no need for an anti-subversion law. However, the Hong Kong government insists on enacting a new law, with ambiguous legislation for loosely defined crimes. The enhanced investigation power, the extended power of the law outside the country, and the groundless application of the law violate the freedom of the press, speech, belief, and assembly. It goes against not only the legislative spirit in Article 39 of the Basic Law -- restrictions to the rights and freedom that Hong Kong residents are entitled to should not contravene the relevant regulations in International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and International Labor Treaty -- but also the spirit of protecting human rights and freedom embodied in the Hong Kong Human Rights Bill. How can a piece of legislation that goes beyond the protection of basic human rights and freedom, and a law that ignores current laws and regulations be accepted by the international community?

The original regulation in Article 23, which is similar to a "counter-revolution law," was not agreed to by the people of Hong Kong. Its establishment has its own background. That is, the Chinese regime, fearing a repeat of the student demonstrations for democracy in 1989, intended to strengthen control over Hong Kong through such a regulation. And now, the Hong Kong government's insistence on the implementation of Article 23 is nothing but another example of yielding to political pressure from the Chinese authorities at the expense of the people of Hong Kong's freedom. By means of legislation, the Chinese ruling Party not only broke its promise in Article 5 of the Basic Law that "one country, two systems" shall "remain unchanged for 50 years", but also extended its backward autocratic rule to Hong Kong and therefore directly violated the people of Hong Kong's basic human rights and freedom. What's more, it is displaying its powerful hold on the nation and its people by suppressing Falun Gong and other peaceful organizations through the enactment of Article 23.

In fact, since the government of Hong Kong expressed its cooperation with Beijing's policy in suppressing Falun Gong this year, when police used violence to stop Falun Gong practitioners' lawful activities in the "street obstruction" incident in March, as well as when Taiwanese and overseas Falun Gong practitioners with valid visas were not allowed to enter Hong Kong to participate Falun Gong's legal activities in June, the government of Hong Kong's arbitrary judgment over the freedom of belief, speech, assembly etc. has drawn attention from the international community. At the end of September, the government of Hong Kong extended its power, in the name of national security, in the legislative proposal to implement Article 23 of the Basic Law -- under the section dealing with Foreign Political Organizations -- that could be used against an organization that "is affiliated with a Mainland organization, which has been proscribed in the Mainland by the Central Authorities in accordance with national law, on the ground that it endangers national security." The Hong Kong Bar Association pointed out in Item 182 of the Hong Kong Bar Association's Response to the Consultation Document on the Proposals to Implement Article 23 of the Basic Law on December 9 that the proposal is entirely outside the realm of Article 23, which doesn't give power to HKSAR to prohibit a local organization that is affiliated with a Mainland organization. The Hong Kong Bar Association further indicated in Item 184 that, "Should one day the Mainland Authorities proscribe an organization like the Falun Gong on national security grounds, and go further to notify the HKSAR that a HKSAR Falun Gong body being a cell of and affiliated with such a Mainland organization has posed a threat to national security, it will be stretching one's imagination to expect the Secretary for Security to say that the HKSAR body should not be so proscribed in the HKSAR." While the international community acknowledges the peaceful nature of Falun Gong's "Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance" and provides lawful protection for Falun Gong's public activities, the Hong Kong government turns its back to this fact under political pressure rather than legal elements, and intensifies the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in the name of implementing Article 23. This action would not be accepted and understood by the international community.

Since the return of Hong Kong to China, its prosperity has faltered, and the decline of its human rights and freedom has aroused worldwide attention. We think the government of Hong Kong should not yield to politics at the expense of the people of Hong Kong's freedom and rights; instead, it should insist on democracy and a fair legal system in order to carry out the policy of "one country, two systems." In particular, the government of Hong Kong should not, under the pressure of a certain Chinese leader's political and personal interests, sacrifice the people of Hong Kong's and Hong Kong Falun Gong practitioners' freedom of the press, speech, belief, thought and assembly. Otherwise, the image of a bright, open Hong Kong will disappear forever, and the international community will lose their confidence in Hong Kong's legal system.

We hope the government of Hong Kong will guarantee that any of the Chinese government's behavior against human rights and freedom will not be duplicated in Hong Kong, and that the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in Mainland China will not be repeated in Hong Kong.

We expect the government of Hong Kong to for good reason reject the extension of dictatorship. We expect the government of Hong Kong to listen to the voices of Hong Kong's people, who oppose the implementation of Article 23, and we expect that they will listen to the human rights organizations' appeals from all over the world. We expect the Hong Kong government to insist on safeguarding the Basic Law -- the spirit of "one country, two systems" and the spirit of human rights and justice.

HKSAR, don't make the wrong choice on this issue of great historical importance. Let your choice be a blessing for Hong Kong and the world.

Falun Dafa Associations of Asia

December 21, 2002