The Washington Post editorial board writes: ‘At China’s behest, the city says people can now be charged retroactively for crimes that didn’t exist when they allegedly committed them’…
Hong Kong’s national security law has already crushed the territory’s once-vibrant civic and political life. But now the city’s hard-line authorities are making the law even more repressive for anyone caught in its net.
Under updates which took effect this week, the city’s chief executive can classify any case as a national security crime under the 2020 law, even when the alleged offense was committed before that law took effect.
For good reasons, people cannot generally be told they violated a law that didn’t exist when they broke it. Yet Hong Kong’s leaders, beholden to China, don’t care.
The chief executive — picked by Beijing, with no popular mandate — now gets to classify any criminal act as a national security offense. The authorities classified this as housekeeping. Or as Chief Executive John Lee put it, the changes were designed “purely to make the law even clearer.”
But the authorities used a procedure to impose these changes without public comment and the usual legislative review.
Being charged with a national security offense carries enormous consequences for defendants. They can be jailed immediately and held for longer pre-trial detention periods. They are denied the ordinary presumption of innocence and denied bail. And they can be denied their choice of lawyer, as happened to newspaper publisher Jimmy Lai.
Their case is also heard before a judge chosen by — guess who? — the chief executive himself.
The HK government issues a predictably robust response…
The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) today (June 13) strongly condemns the wanton slander and groundless allegations made by The Washington Post in its article entitled “Hong Kong’s nightmare gets darker”, criticising the Safeguarding National Security (Procedural Matters) Regulation (Procedural Matters Regulation). The article clearly exposes The Washington Post’s irrational anti-China stance and double standards, falling well short of what is expected of professional journalism.
…The Washington Post, shamelessly display[s] its hypocrisy and double standards by pointing fingers at the HKSAR as we continuously improve our legal system to fulfill a constitutional duty to safeguard national security.”
…”Any reasonable and objective person who has studied the three provisions of the Procedural Matters Regulation with care, and observed the relevant discussions at the Legislative Council (LegCo) meetings would have no difficulty in finding that the Procedural Matters Regulation has no retrospective effect at all. It does not create any new offence or alter the penalties of any offence. It certainly does not turn any lawful conduct into an offence. It is not applicable to legal proceedings that are concluded. Yet, The Washington Post falsely and maliciously claimed that ‘people can now be charged retroactively for crimes that didn’t exist when they allegedly committed them’. Its ignorance of facts and betrayal of the basic tenets of responsible journalism are shocking, irresponsible, and totally unacceptable behaviour for any media organisation.
…Regarding The Washington Post’s baseless claim that Hong Kong is now “a less secure place to visit or do business”, the spokesperson said, “It is most appalling that The Washington Post has to resort to dirty tricks and tell bold-faced lies to smear the HKSAR.
Ever since the NPC ‘interpretation’ procedure started to be used to give Basic Law clauses meanings that were never in the original wording, I have ceased as a layman to see much point in reading the fine print in legislation. So I honestly have no idea whether this (Procedural Matters) Regulation (Procedural Matters Regulation) is retroactive or not. The government seems pretty adamant that it isn’t – though, given the uniformly outraged tone of the press statement, it’s hard to calibrate how adamant anything is.
“So I honestly have no idea whether this (Procedural Matters) Regulation (Procedural Matters Regulation) is retroactive or not. The government seems pretty adamant that it isn’t – though, given the uniformly outraged tone of the press statement, it’s hard to calibrate how adamant anything is.”
It’s retroactive for cases that happened before 2020 that the Party-State feels have a national security character (even if that character is just jaywalking on June 4th). So terrorism cases, 2019 rioting cases, etc that would normally be handled by a jury with a very real chance of acquittal as we have seen many times with conventional court cases, can be turned into NSL cases at a stroke of the CE’s pen with no jury trial, special handpicked NSL judges who have statist record, no bail, no presumption of innocence, and a 95% conviction rate.
Ultimately it just reconstitutes the normative state and “normalizes” such exceptional interventions in a legal procedure to give it a veneer of legitimacy.
I do understand why HKSAR govt thinks there’s a double standards though. Federal courts in the USA have ~95% conviction rate as did courts in Nazi Germany. It’s only US State level courts where conviction rates are around 70% and that’s where the defendant has a fighting chance and where the full weight of the State isn’t pressed on the defendant’s chest. The US isn’t some human rights haven, despite how obnoxious it is about it.
Having said that, in the US, President Trump also can’t wave a magic wand and certify any crime as a national security crime. Though I agree that Federal courts will tend to give the executive the benefit of the doubt when it comes to so called national security crimes and accusations very much like our own NSL courts do. It’s just that mere spoken words in the US will not result in getting charged with a national security crime.
Trump also cannot unilaterally create “Patriots only” elections like we enjoy in Hong Kong because elections are a reserved power of US state sovereignty under the US dual sovereignty model. But Trump wants Patriots only elections more than ever for November
As I was saying…
They’ll do whatever the fuck they want.
Wonton Slander: A popular new cha chaan ting offering?
‘Wanton’ is back!
” It does not create any new offence or alter the penalties of any offence.”
On the contrary ANYTHING can now be declared an offence once CE signs off on it.
Years of detainment without bail and hearing in front of the selected judges certainly alter the penalities.
And, as the nature of crimes against NS has never been outlined, blowing your nose could be an offence if CE decrees this was done with ulterior motives.
I wonder whether I understand the G0vernment’s point of view, and can fairly explain it.
The acts in question – for example, lighting a candle at a certain place and time – these acts always were a danger to national security, even though this was not formally declared or certified. By issuing a certificate, the Chief Executive removes some doubt and makes things clearer. The law is improved.
I hope the Government’s good intentions will be appreciated.
Wonton Slander is a good band name maybe for a rap group
Good comment by Mark Bradley.
However, I would note that most Federal charges result in plea deals and that only 2-3% actually go to a full trial. At that point, the Federal success rate is closer to 80%. Of course, many plea deals are reached simply because most would risk bankruptcy as the Federal Government resources are basically unlimited.
@justsayin: Definitely punk. Are there any punk bands around any more?
Interestingly the UK courts do appear to have jurisdiction over national security matters
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gy927jx88o