(Clearwisdom.net)
-
Free Asia
World Journal
Free Asia Broadcast Station: Human Rights Organizations Call for Extension to Article 23 Consultation
Free Asia broadcast station December 24, 2002 report from Hong Kong: the consultation period for Article 23 of the Basic Law of Hong Kong ended on Tuesday, December 24, 2002. Timothy Tong, Acting Permanent Secretary of the Security Bureau said 90,000 comments from more than 800 organizations were received [...].
On Tuesday, many organizations appealed in front of the Hong Kong SAR government headquarters. Human rights representatives from more than 40 organizations delivered an appeal letter signed by 170,000 Hong Kong citizens in opposition to Article 23. The representatives said Article 23 deprives people of their human rights and seriously threatens civil rights, including freedom of belief, freedom of press and freedom of speech.
From its headquarters in New York City, Human Rights in China (HRIC) recently published a news article calling for an extension to the consultation period for Article 23. HRIC suggested that the Hong Kong government publish an official White Bill so the public can comment on the specific language used in the draft.
World Journal: [San Francisco] Bay area T.V. Audience Opposes Article 23
World Journal December 25, 2002 report: a TV audience in the Bay area responded to Article 23 with mostly opposing comments.
Audience members who phoned in said enactment of Article 23 is inappropriate at this time for Hong Kong, which is in a poor economic situation right now, and it will cause a great drop in investment confidence. The Chinese audience in San Jose pointed out that Article 23 contains obscure definitions, and would lead to the same abuses that take place in Mainland China against groups such as Falun Gong. Some other Chinese audience members thought Article 23 "is unreasonable" and "unfit for democracy." However, the Hong Kong government is restricted by the Basic Law and cannot refuse to enact a law. A San Jose resident who had just returned from Hong Kong said the government should publish the detailed content of Article 23 in order to avoid serious problems. According to him, it is very ridiculous to regard Hong Kong as a base for subversion.
Another San Jose resident said there is no need for enactment of Article 23. Hong Kong enjoyed a prosperous economy during the colonization period and was called the Pearl of the East. It was free although not very democratic; after the enactment of Article 23, freedom will be inevitably affected.
Another resident thought the argument surrounding Article 23 shows this law has more negative aspects than positive ones, and there will be an even greater argument after its enactment that will lead to social instability. A San Francisco resident pointed out that [freedom of speech] is guaranteed in the U.S. because there are public forums and representatives in the Congress, so the people's voice can be heard. The Hong Kong government is in a haste to enact Article 23 because they are receiving pressure from the Beijing government.
A public opinion survey showed 46.7% of Hong Kong citizens oppose the enactment of Article 23 while 20.4% express support and 64% think the enactment will not be successful.
