The government of the Hong Kong SAR issued a consultation paper outlining their proposals for Article 23 legislation on 24 September 2002. There was then a three month public consultation period which ended on 24 December 2002.
Despite many calls by different groups and sectors of society including China Labour Bulletin, the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions, the Hong Kong Bar Association, and Amnesty International, the government did not respond to the demand for a White Bill.
Instead the public consultation was based on the consultation paper which only set out vague proposals and ill defined offences. The proposals were extremely wide ranging and unclear which meant that the public was unable to comment on the exact wording of the proposed legislation. Many submissions criticized the lack of clarity and the huge scope of the new offences proposed in the paper as well as the apparent rush to pass through legislation which was not urgently required.
Many of the proposals went far beyond what was actually need by the text of Article 23 of the basic law and perhaps even more worrying - seemed to introduce mainland concepts of subversion and limits of freedom of association into Hong Kong. This runs counter to the principles of One Country-Two Systems.
On 24 December 2002, the public consultation period ended.
The government issued a compendium of Submissions as well as a leaflet explaining their position and an analysis of the submissions from the public. There followed an outcry by many groups in Hong Kong and international organizations.
Submissions from some organizations including China Labour Bulletin,the Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions and Amnesty International were not even included in the Compendium, while others which clearly stated their opposition to the government proposals were actually classified as undecided!
Many complaints were sent to the government about the irregularities in the classification and worries that many opinions were not actually counted or analyzed.
Blue Bill issued
Despite ongoing objections and the mobilization of thousands of Hong Kong people on 14 February the government published a Blue Bill containing the proposed legislation. The Blue Bill means that there is only a limited amount of revisions can be made. The government stated that they want the legislation to be in place as soon as possible.
Although the government has made some welcome changes like the removal of proposed charges of misprision of treason and the removal of the offence of possession of seditious publications there are still many areas which potentially threaten the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong citizens.
For example, the proposed legislation still wants to ban any local organization in the interests of national security if that organization is subordinate to and takes policies from any organization in mainland China which has been banned by the Peoples Republic of China on the grounds of national security grounds. Given the widespread use subversion charges against dissidents and labour activists in China, this is real threat to the ability of groups in Hong Kong to support the struggles of activists in China who are peacefully seeking their basic rights to freedom of association and expression.
China Labour Bulletin issued a joint statement with other organizations in opposition to the proposed legislation on Article 23 in Hong Kong on 21 February. ( see the Joint Statement)
We believe the proposals could have very serious and damaging limitations on our freedom to continue to research, monitor and support workers struggles in China.
We are continuing our campaign against the imposition of the proposed legislation and continue to need your support in our campaign.
We have no deadlines for our struggle. Send your statements to ceo@ceo.gov.hk
February 2003