The Chinese embassy in London said on Thursday that the Sino-British Joint Declaration did not give Britain the right to intervene in Hong Kong’s affairs, after Cameron revealed UK officials had raised their concerns over the bill “privately” with city authorities.
“We firmly oppose the groundless attacks by British politicians on the legislation of Article 23 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law,” an embassy spokesman said, referring to the mini-constitution, which mandates that the city establish its own national security law.
The joint declaration signed on September 26, 1984, between the British and Chinese government set out the terms of Hong Kong’s return to Chinese sovereignty on July 1, 1997.
The embassy on Thursday said Hong Kong’s domestic legislation was “fully in line with international law and common practice in various countries and regions”, adding that the British government’s concerns were groundless and biased.
“On the contrary, the British national security law has a vague concept and broad authorisation for law enforcement agencies, making it extremely easy for it to be abused,” the spokesman said.
“The British authorities should self-reflect instead of pointing fingers at others.”
In a separate and longer statement, China’s foreign ministry office in Hong Kong expressed its opposition to the British minister’s “irresponsible remarks” and “malicious smear” regarding the security legislation proposal.
The condemnations follow the British foreign minister’s statement issued on Wednesday urging the Hong Kong government to reconsider the proposal for the law and engage in “genuine and meaningful consultation” with city residents.
Hong Kong’s Article 23 security law needs public interest defence: lawyers
Hong Kong’s Article 23 security law needs public interest defence: lawyers
Cameron said British officials had raised concerns about the Article 23 proposal “privately” with Hong Kong authorities and during the consultation process as he was concerned that the new law would have a “negative impact on the people of Hong Kong in the exercise of their rights and freedoms”.
“The toughening of penalties for speech crimes and the use of the broadly defined term ‘state secrets’ will inhibit freedom of speech, of expression and of the press,” he said.
“Vague references to ‘external forces’ and the new offence of ‘external interference’ threaten legitimate and lawful diplomatic and consular activity as protected in the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.”
Cameron added that while the consultation paper on the legislation made extensive references to several British national security laws, these were subjected to full scrutiny by the democratically elected House of Commons, thus ensuring democratic legitimacy.
‘Hong Kong’s new broadly worded national security offences could stifle press’
‘Hong Kong’s new broadly worded national security offences could stifle press’
“I strongly urge the Hong Kong SAR government to reconsider their proposals and engage in genuine and meaningful consultation with the people of Hong Kong,” he said.
The public consultation for the legislation ended on Wednesday. The full draft of the proposed law has yet to be completed.
It is unclear when the draft law will reach the Legislative Council, though lawmakers have already formed a special subcommittee poised to be converted into a bill committee for the new legislation.
