|
PRESS RELEASE OF THE BAR COUNCIL ON
HKSARG'S THINKING ABOUT LEGISLATING AGAINST CULTS
-
The Bar Council is very concerned at the news that
the HKSAR Government is currently studying legislation
or measures in foreign countries regulating or prohibiting
"cults" or "sects" (hereinafter referred to as "cults")
and seriously considering introducing laws against "cults"
so that any organization labeled as such will, like
a triad society, be an unlawful body.
-
Any proposal to legislate against "cults" will invariably
threaten freedoms of conscience and religion guaranteed
to residents of the HKSAR by our constitution.
-
Article 32 of the Basic Law provides: -
"Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of conscience.
Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of religious
belief and freedom to preach and to conduct and participate
in religious activities in public."
-
Article 32 is reinforced by Article 39 of the Basic
Law, which provides: -
"The provisions of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights as applied to Hong Kong shall remain
in force and shall be implemented through the laws of
the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
The rights and freedoms enjoyed by Hong Kong residents
shall not be restricted unless as prescribed by law. Such
restrictions shall not contravene the provisions of the
preceding paragraph of this Article."
-
Article 15 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights applies
to HKSAR Article 18 of the ICCPR, which states:
"Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
-
Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought,
conscience and religion. This right shall include
freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of
his choice, and freedom, either individually or in
community with others and in public or private, to
manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance,
practice and teaching.
-
No one shall be subject to coercion which would
impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion
or belief of his choice.
-
Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs
may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed
by law and are necessary to protect public safety,
order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights
and freedoms of others. ..."
6. The expressions "religion" and "religious belief" are
to be broadly construed. They should not apply only to the
traditional religions.
7. It can be seen from the article that, whilst limitations
may be imposed on the right to manifest expressions of religion
and belief, no limitations whatsoever may be imposed on
the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
The reason for this is obvious. If Governments were allowed
to suppress or modify personal thoughts and beliefs, an
individual would lose that which makes him a human being.
That is his personal autonomy, meaning the right to choose
how best to develop his humanity according to a set of beliefs
or principles freely chosen by him.
8. Any restriction imposed on the right to manifest expressions
of religion and belief, in order to be compatible with the
Basic Law and ICCPR, must be rational, proportionate and
non-discriminatory in its application, that is to say, it
should satisfy the following conditions: -
(a) The restriction must be "prescribed by law".
This condition is not satisfied just by the Administration
promulgating the relevant statutes. The formulation
of such restriction must be sufficiently precise and
unequivocal so that people manifesting their thought
and religion will know what they cannot do;
(b) The restriction must be necessary for the protection
of public safety, order, health or morals or the fundamental
rights and freedoms of others. Any such restriction
must be directly related and proportionate to the specific
need it is addressing; and
(c) The restriction must not be imposed for discriminatory
purposes or applied in a discriminatory manner.
9. It is virtually impossible to objectively define a "cult".
The very word "cult" is pejorative. Labeling a group a "cult"
is to suggest at the outset that the beliefs, religious
or moral values, of its members are not merely atypical
but are unacceptable to society as a whole. The lack of
objective definition permits arbitrariness and abuse in
the implementation of any legislation against "cults".
10. No case of necessity has been made out for legislating
against "cults" in HKSAR. The personal safety of Hong Kong
people is not threatened by any "cult". No "cult" represents
a threat to public order. No "cult" represents a threat
to the moral values of the people of HKSAR. If "cult" members
do threaten personal safety, public order or morals, then
HKSAR has an impressive array of law, including statutes
and the common law, to deal with such matters. Notable examples
are sections 8 and 18 of the Societies Ordinance (Cap. 151)
dealing with triad and unlawful societies, section 33B of
the Offences Against the Person Ordinance (Cap. 212) dealing
with criminal liability for complicity in another’s suicide
and the common law offences of incitement and attempt to
commit any criminal offence.
11. Any legislation proposed for regulating or prohibiting
"cults" or certain activities of "cults" will have a grave
impact not only on the constitutionally guaranteed freedoms
of thought, conscience, belief and religion in Hong Kong
but also on freedoms of expression, assembly and association
similarly guaranteed.
12. The Bar Council urges the HKSAR Government to preserve
the rule of law by not legislating against an illusory threat
when the legal armory it commands is sufficient to handle
any "cult" and its activities. HKSAR’s autonomy under
"One Country, Two Systems" must not be perceived as weakened.
Plurality, tolerance, respect for the rule of law and freedoms
of expression, religion, thoughts, conscience, assembly
and association are hallmarks of a free and democratic society,
which HKSAR cannot afford to compromise given its aspiration
to become "Asia's World City".
Dated 25 May 2001
Hong Kong Bar Association
|