By Tu Haiming

Ever since Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu proposed in his second Policy Address delivered in October to complete the legislation according to Article 23 of the Basic Law by the end of 2024, skeptical voices have arisen in Hong Kong, arguing that the National Security Law for Hong Kong (NSL) is sufficient to deter criminal acts endangering national security, and that there is no need for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government to push ahead with the Article 23 legislation — rather, it should focus on promoting economic development and improving people’s livelihoods.

Such reasoning seems to make sense. But by going deeper, one can realize that such reasoning is superficial or has been come up with for certain purposes. In fact, Article 23 legislation and the implementation of the NSL do not conflict with each other; rather, they complement each other in ensuring long-term stability in Hong Kong.

Article 23 provides that the HKSAR should “enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the Central People’s Government, or theft of State secrets, to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in the Region, and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies”. Meanwhile, the NSL criminalizes four types of acts: secession, subversion, terrorism, and collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security. There are only two overlapping offenses — “secession” and “subversion” — between the NSL and the future Article 23 legislation. In other words, five of the seven offenses described in Article 23 have yet to be criminalized, leaving significant loopholes in national security protection.

Take the requirement of “to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies”, for example. During the “black-clad” riots in 2019-20, some political organizations in Hong Kong openly established close ties with foreign political organizations, and the leaders of some political parties openly sought foreign interference in Hong Kong’s affairs and called for US sanctions on Hong Kong and the Chinese mainland. Those rebellious acts wouldn’t have happened had the Article 23 legislation been completed.

By exploiting the loophole, political agitators in Hong Kong forged close ties with foreign political organizations, cooperated with external forces, and launched a Hong Kong-version “color revolution”, the “black-clad” insurrection in 2019.

It is never too late to mend. The NSL targets the more serious national security offenses and has proved to be effective. But Article 23 legislation is still necessary to build a wider national security net covering all other offenses.

Article 3 of the NSL stipulates that the central government has an overarching responsibility for national security affairs relating to the HKSAR, and that the HKSAR has a constitutional duty to safeguard national security.

Had the HKSAR performed its constitutional duty and effectively safeguarded national security, the central government wouldn’t have had to step in and promulgate the NSL for Hong Kong. The NSL enactment explains what “overarching responsibility” means.

“Constitutional duty” and “overarching responsibility” are not in conflict.

Some people have absurdly misinterpreted the relationship between the HKSAR and the central authorities as one of “federalism”. The fact is, China is a unitary state and has never been a federal state. The relationship between the Hong Kong and Macao SARs and the central government is that of superiors and subordinates. With a correct concept of this relationship, one would easily understand the HKSAR’s “constitutional duty” and the central government’s “overarching responsibility”.

The central government has fulfilled its “overarching responsibility” by promulgating the NSL for Hong Kong. But this does not spare Hong Kong from “constitutional duty”.

The NSL has effectively plugged the “bigger loopholes” in national security protection; the completion of Article 23 legislation will fix most if not all of those “small loopholes”.

Xia Baolong, director of the Hong Kong and Macao Work Office of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, in his speech delivered at an event celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies, called on all quarters of Hong Kong society to make concerted efforts to fix the loopholes in national security protection as soon as possible so that the city can focus on economic development and livelihood improvement. It is easy to understand why he has repeatedly made such an appeal to Hong Kong residents: Only when Hong Kong is free from any subversive threat can socioeconomic development be guaranteed and sustainable.

The incumbent HKSAR government has proactively implemented numerous measures to tackle social problems and promote socioeconomic development since taking office, putting to work its results-oriented governance philosophy. The central government no doubt has high hopes for the HKSAR administration to set another milestone in optimizing governance in the special administrative region — the completion of Article 23 legislation this year.

The author is vice-chairman of the Committee on Liaison with Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan and Overseas Chinese of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference and chairman of the Hong Kong New Era Development Thinktank.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of Bauhinia Magazine.

Source: China Daily