Implementation of Article 23 of the Basic Law - National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill

 

IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 23 OF THE BASIC LAW - NATIONAL SECURITY
(LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS) BILL

The Bar Association will take time to come up with a considered response
to the Bill which will have to be studied by its Constitutional Affairs
and Human Rights Sub-Committee and by the Bar Council.

On a preliminary reading of the Bill the areas that seem to warrant close
attention are:

Clause 6: The new offence of handling a seditious publication
with intent to cause others to commit an offence of treason, subversion
or secession is contained in the proposed new section 9C of the Crimes
Ordinance. There would appear to be no need for the new offence given
the elements of the offence of sedition provided for in the proposed new
section 9A deals with incitement generally.

Clause 10: The proposed new section 16A Official Secrets Ordinance
creates a wholly new category of protected information, namely information
related to Hong Kong affairs within the responsibility of the Central
Authorities. There needs to be a close examination of what categories
of information will in future be protected which are at present not protected.

Clause 11: The proposed new section 18(5A) makes it a criminal
offence to publish protected information that comes into a person's possession
through, directly or indirectly, criminal means. The new offence does
not appear to recognize that, notwithstanding the fact that it has been
obtained by illegal means, it may be in the public interest to publish
information. There appears to be no exception made for information obtained
by such illegal means which is in fact in the public domain.



Clause 15: The proposed new section 8A allows for additional powers
of proscription of organizations in Hong Kong in the interests of national
security. It allows decision-making in the Mainland to be the basis for
proscription in the HKSAR. The procedural mechanism for proscription and
appeals from orders of proscription, which may involve the exclusion the
person affected from the hearing, may give rise to questions of compatibility
with Article 35 of the Basic Law which guarantees persons right of access
to a court.

The Bar Association hopes that the passage of this important Bill will
not be rushed. In particular, it hopes that the First and Second Readings
of the Bill will be deferred until the public has had time to consider
the Bill and make its views known to the Administration so that amendments
could still be made to the Bill before the legislative process gets under
way.



Date: 13th February 2003

Hong Kong Bar Association

Click here for Chinese
version