HomeNewsBeritaBusinessLifestyleOpinionWorldSportsPropertyEducationCarzillaGalleryVideosAccelerator

Hong Kong security law not ‘harsh’, says lawyers’ group chief

-

Unlike in US, lack of death penalty is in line with international practice.

0
Shares
Total Views: 1
Free Malaysia Today
Critics have questioned national security law’s reversal of bail for arrestees. (AP pic)

HONG KONG:
The head of a top Hong Kong lawyers’ association believes the city’s national security law is “not particularly harsh” compared to other jurisdictions.

In an interview with Nikkei Asia, Chan Chak-ming, president of the Law Society of Hong Kong, said that the national security law (NSL), enacted in June 2020 by China’s National People’s Congress, was in line with international practice.

Under US federal law, those convicted of terrorism, espionage or treason can be sentenced to death. The maximum penalty for violations of Hong Kong’s security is life imprisonment.

“When you compare that, at least the NSL doesn’t impose death penalties,” Chan said. “When I refer that the NSL is more or less in line with international practice. I’m coming from that angle. It’s not particularly harsh.”

The death penalty for terrorism in the US, however, can only be invoked in certain cases resulting in death.

By contrast, Tong Ying-kit, the first person convicted under the NSL, was sentenced last July to nine years imprisonment for terrorism and secession for riding a motorcycle into a line of police while flying a flag carrying the protest slogan, “Liberate Hong Kong, Revolution of Our Times”.

In the only other verdict so far, a man was sentenced in November to five years and nine months in prison for inciting secession in relation to several incidents where he had chanted slogans alone in public.

Legal scholars and rights groups have criticised the NSL, which criminalises secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces, for being vague and broad as well as undermining freedoms guaranteed under the city’s constitution to free speech and expression.

Critics have particularly questioned the NSL’s reversal of the traditional right to bail for arrestees.

Under the law, a suspect has to prove their release would not endanger national security. Due to this high threshold, dozens of suspects have been in pretrial detention for more than a year, raising questions about the right to a speedy trial.

The Law Society – which represents lawyers who give advice and prepare contracts and other documents under the legal system the city inherited from Britain – elected Chan as its leader last August.

Chan, who has practiced for 24 years, specialises in advising wealthy clients on tax planning and personal trusts and campaigned on a promise to keep the association politically neutral.

“As professionals (like) in other professions, we need to stay away from politics when we do our daily jobs,” he told Nikkei. “I think it’s difficult, but we should try objectively.”

The Law Society last month set up a three-member committee to investigate complaints by national security police of possible misconduct by lawyers involved with a now-defunct legal defence fund for those arrested amid the city’s crackdown on those suspected of illegal acts during mass protests in 2019.

John Lee, who is due to take office as the city’s next chief executive on July 1, has said he will make a priority of plugging security “loopholes” and will push forward with a law to cover espionage, treason and other crimes.

Chan admitted that freedoms have been curtailed to a certain extent by the NSL, but said this was in the legitimate interest of protecting national security and that public uncertainty would ebb as further cases clarify the law’s bounds.

“Then, of course, it will affect confidence,” he said. “And that’s my duty – to clarify that misconception.”

Chan rejected any suggestion that the rule of law or judicial independence had been eroded by the NSL but acknowledged some have this perception.

Earlier this year, top British judges Lord Robert Reed and Lord Patrick Stewart Hodge withdrew from the city’s highest court, saying their presence appeared to endorse an administration that had departed from the values of political freedom and freedom of expression.

“The courts themselves were continuing to operate in accordance with rule of law values, although they were under pressure,” Reed told the British parliament in April.

Stay current - Follow FMT on WhatsApp, Google news and Telegram

Subscribe to our newsletter and get news delivered to your mailbox.