The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government today (February 29) strongly disapproved of and rejected the biased and misleading remarks made by the United States (US) Government about the Basic Law Article 23 legislation (Article 23 legislation).

     A spokesman for the HKSAR Government said, “The US was found conducting long-term covert surveillance around the world and even against the governments of multiple countries. A former US national security advisor even publicly admitted that he helped plan coups in foreign countries. It is simply unconvincing for the US Government to comment at this juncture on the HKSAR’s legislative proposals for safeguarding national security, especially those on offences relating to ‘state secrets’ and ‘external interference’.”

     “The practice of providing for proportionate extraterritorial effect for offences endangering national security fully aligns with the principles of international law, international practice and common practice adopted in various countries and regions. The national security laws of the US and many other countries have extraterritorial effect. A lack of extraterritorial effect in the relevant laws in safeguarding national security is tantamount to condoning activities endangering national security carried out by ill-intentioned people overseas. Therefore, extraterritorial effect is an essential component of national security laws. The US even often abuses ‘long-arm jurisdiction’ and unilateral sanctions to target residents of other countries. The smears by the US Government on the extraterritorial effect of the Article 23 legislation are simply untenable.

     “Moreover, the HKSAR Government has pointed out publicly time and again that the proposed offences relating to ‘state secrets’ and ‘external interference’ have multiple conditions. It is necessary to meet all the relevant conditions concurrently before the offence concerned is committed, and hence it is impossible for anyone to violate the law unwittingly. In formulating the relevant offences and drafting the bill, we will target acts endangering national security with precision and ensure that the elements and penalties of the relevant offences are defined with clarity.

     “Furthermore, the HKSAR law enforcement agencies have been taking law enforcement actions (including arrest and detention) based on evidence and strictly in accordance with the law in respect of the acts of the persons or organisations concerned, and have nothing to do with the background or political stance of the person or organisation.

     “To safeguard national sovereignty, security and development interests is the top priority of the principle of ‘one country, two systems’. To legislate on Article 23 is precisely for safeguarding national sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity; and ensuring the full and faithful implementation of the principle of ‘one country, two systems’ under which the people of Hong Kong administer Hong Kong with a high degree of autonomy. It will also better safeguard the fundamental rights and freedoms of the residents of the HKSAR and other people in the city. The US should immediately stop making irresponsible remarks on the Article 23 legislation and interfering in Hong Kong affairs which are internal affairs of China,” the spokesman stressed.

     The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government today (February 20) firmly opposed and strongly condemned a joint statement made by “Hong Kong Watch” and other organisations on the Basic Law Article 23 legislation.

     A spokesman for the HKSAR Government said, “The joint statement smacks of deliberate smears and is no further from the truth. The HKSAR Government must refute and set the record straight.”

     “Regarding the measures concerning enforcement powers, procedural matters and arrangements on the serving of sentences of convicted persons as mentioned in the consultation document on the Basic Law Article 23 legislation, similar provisions are also present in legislation such as the National Security Act 2023 and the Terrorist Offenders (Restriction of Early Release) Act 2020 of the United Kingdom. It is fully justified for the HKSAR to put forward measures that could be considered, having regard to the relevant laws of foreign countries, as well as the shortcomings as revealed from experiences gained from handling cases concerning offence endangering national security. Those organisations completely disregarded relevant laws of the countries in which they are situated and made skewed remarks that the HKSAR Government’s legislative proposals on the Basic Law Article 23 undermined human rights, exposing their sheer hypocrisy and double standards,” the spokesman pointed out.
 
     “Remarks on the offences relating to ‘seditious intention’ in the joint statement, which alleged that offences relating to ‘seditious intention’ would criminalise peaceful criticisms against the government, are clearly wrong and amounted to scaremongering. It intentionally ignored paragraph 4.8 of the consultation document, which proposed circumstances that do not constitute ‘seditious intention’. Making reasonable and genuine criticisms of government polices based on objective facts, pointing out issues or offering views for improvement will not violate offences relating to sedition intention.”

     The joint statement also appeals to foreign chambers of commerce and international companies based in Hong Kong to re-evaluate risks, and even requests them to impose so-called “sanctions” on officials handling the Basic Law Article 23 legislation. It totally disrespects the constitutional duty of the HKSAR and blatantly tramples on the legislative process of the HKSAR. Such practice interferes through intimidation in the affairs of Hong Kong that are purely China’s internal affairs. It not only violates the international law and basic norms that govern international relations, but also allegedly constitutes the offence of “collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security” under Article 29 of the National Security Law.

     “What the joint statement advocates squarely reflects the ongoing national security threats which anti-China and destabilising forces pose. The HKSAR Government will complete the legislative exercise as early as possible to plug the relevant national security loopholes, and in the process, it will listen to the constructive suggestions from various sectors and give full and prudent consideration to the Basic Law, and the relevant provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as applied to Hong Kong,” the spokesman stressed.

     The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government is very concerned about the media report of the leakage of nuclear contaminated water in Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station and has immediately sought verification and further information from the Consulate-General of Japan in Hong Kong (CGoJ).

     In response to the Japanese Government’s earlier decision to discharge nuclear-contaminated water at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Station into the sea, the Director of Food and Environmental Hygiene issued a Food Safety Order which prohibits all aquatic products, sea salt and seaweeds originating from the 10 metropolis/prefectures, namely Tokyo, Fukushima, Ibaraki, Miyagi, Chiba, Gunma, Tochigi, Niigata, Nagano and Saitama, from being imported into and supplied in Hong Kong. Besides, all vegetables, fruits, milk, milk beverages and dried milk originating from Fukushima are banned from importing into Hong Kong while such foods originating from the four prefectures nearby Fukushima, i.e. Ibaraki, Tochigi, Chiba and Gunma, are allowed to be imported on the condition that they are accompanied with a radiation certificate and an exporter certificate issued by the Japanese authority. Chilled or frozen game, meat and poultry, and poultry eggs originating from the above five prefectures are allowed to be imported on the condition that they are accompanied with a radiation certificate issued by the Japanese authority which shows the radiation levels do not exceed the Codex guideline levels of the Codex Alimentarius Commission.

     The Government will continue to closely follow up the incident with the CGoJ with the view to safeguarding food safety and public health in Hong Kong.