20200525-香港大律師公會就「港版國安法」中英文聲明全文
香港大律師公會就「港版國安法」中英文聲明全文
19:51 25/5/2020
Statement of Hong Kong Bar Association on proposal of National People's Congress to enact National Security Law in Hong Kong
The National People's Congress (NPC) is currently deliberating a draft decision (“Draft Decision”) aimed at authorizing the Standing Committee of the NPC ("NPCSC”) to formulate laws (“HK National Security Law”) to penalise acts of secession, subverting state power, organising and carrying out terrorist activities and other behaviours that seriously endanger national security, as well as activities interfering with the HKSAR's internal affairs by foreign or external forces. It is intended that the National Security Law as formulated will be added to Annex III of the Basic Law as part of the national laws which apply in Hong Kong, and take effect in the HKSAR by way of promulgation by the Chief Executive?
The contents of the proposed HK National Security Law are yet to be publicised. The HKBA however observes that the Draft Decision discloses a number of worrying and problematic features pertaining to the proposed HK National Security Law.
Firstly, under Article 18(3) of the Basic Law the laws added to Annex III of the Basic Law by the NPCSC “shall be confined to those relating to defence and foreign affairs as well as other matters outside the limits of the autonomy of the [HKSAR] as specified by this Law”. Under Article 23 of the Basic Law the HKSAR shall 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 [HKSAR]," and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the [HKSAR] from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies". The HK National Security Law as proposed in the Draft Decision would appear to contain matters covered by Article 23 of the Basic Law and it is within the autonomy of the HKSAR to enact the relevant laws. In that regard, under Article 66 of the Basic Law, the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) of the HKSAR “shall be the legislature of the [HKSAR]”; under Article 73(1) of the Basic Law, the LegCo of the HKSAR “shall enact, amend or repeal laws in accordance with the provisions of this Law and legal procedures”. It would therefore appear that the NPCSC has no power to add the HK National Security Law under Annex III of the Basic Law via the mechanism provided under Article 18 of the Basic Law.
Secondly, there is no assurance that the HK National Security Law as proposed will, being a national law, comply or be required to comply with provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which is entrenched in the Basic Law. The United Nations Security Council, of which the People's Republic of China is a permanent member, has repeatedly emphasised that all measures adopted in aid of national security, including counter-terrorism, must be fully compliant with international human rights law3. When the HKSAR Government sought to introduce the National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill 2003 to LegCo to implement Article 23 of the Basic Law in 2003, there were genuine and widespread concerns that the proposed legislation would infringe upon the HKSAR residents' civil and political rights, including freedom of speech and freedom of the press. In 2003, an extensive consultation exercise on Article 23 legislation was undertaken, and the relevant bill 1 Article 6(2) of Draft Decision 2 Article 6(3) of Draft Decision *See e.g. UN Security Council Resolution 1624 (2005), 14 September 2005, and Resolution 2178 (2014), on 24 September 2014, both adopted unanimously was withdrawn after vehement public opposition. In the current exercise, the HK National Security Law is intended to be enacted by promulgation by the HKSAR Government rather than legislation by the LegCo. There is no assurance that public consultation will take place at all on this vastly important legislation prior to promulgation. This is unprecedented. The public must be allowed the opportunity to properly consider and debate about proposed laws which affect their personal rights and obligations.
Thirdly, Article 4 of the Draft Decision stipulates that “when needed, relevant national security organs of the Central People's Government will set up agencies in the HKSAR to fulfil relevant duties to safeguard national security in accordance with the [HK National Security Law]”. It is entirely unclear how the proposed agencies set up in the HKSAR will operate under the laws of the HKSAR, whether they will be bound by the laws of the HKSAR, whether they have power of enforcement, and whether such powers as exercised will be limited by the laws currently in force in the HKSAR. It is also entirely unclear how this arrangement would comply with Article 22(1) of the Basic Law, which provides that “No department of the Central People's Government ... may interfere in the affairs which the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region administers on its own in accordance with this Law”.
Fourthly, Article 3 of the Draft Decision provides that “the HKSAR's administrative, legislative and judicial organs must, in accordance with relevant laws and regulations, effectively prevent, stop and punish acts endangering national security”. The reference to “judicial organs” gives rise to perceptions that the Judiciary of the HKSAR is being or will be instructed to act in a particular way. Independence of the Judiciary is the cornerstone of the success of the HKSAR and should not be undermined in any way.
News of the imminent enactment of proposed HK National Security Law by the NPCSC and promulgation of the same by the HKSAR Government in the HKSAR has caused deep unease in the local and international community. We note that the Chief Executive stated on 22 May 2020 that the Government will fully cooperate with the NPCSC in the enactment of the HK National Security Law, and further stated that the new legislation would not affect the legitimate rights and freedoms presently enjoyed by the people of HKSAR and that the independence of the Judiciary would remain unchanged. In light of those assertions which were made without further explanations, the HKBA calls upon the HKSAR Government to address the fundamental constitutional and legal concerns raised above as a matter of urgency. HKBA may make further observations when details of the HK National Security Law are disclosed.
HONG KONG BAR ASSOCIATION
Dated: 25 May 2020
香港大律師公會就全國人民代表大會（）「全國人大」)審議《全國人民代表大會關於建立健全香港特別行政區維護國家安全的法律制度和執行機制的决定（草案）》（「草案」）之聲明
全國人大正審議草案，旨在授權全國人民代表大會常務委員會（「人大常委」）制定建立健全香港特別行政區維護國家安全的法律制度和執行機制相關法律（《香港國安法》）以防範、制止和懲治任何分裂國家、顛覆國家政權、組織實施恐怖活動等嚴重危害國家安全的行為以及外國和境外勢力干預香港特別行政區事務的活動。草案並建議人大常委將《香港國安法》列入《基本法》附件三，由香港特別行政區政府（《特區政府》）在本地公佈實施。
雖然《香港國安法》的內容有待公佈，但大律師公會認為草案擬授權人大常委制定《香港國安法》有幾點令人憂慮。
首先，《基本法》第18（）3)條規定，任何列入《基本法》附件三的法律，僅「限於有關國防、外交和其他按本法規定不屬於香港特別行政區自治範圍的法律」。根據《基本法》第23條，香港特別行政區「應自行立法禁止任何叛國、分裂國家、煽動叛亂、顛覆中央人民政府及竊取國家機密的行為，禁止外國的政治性組織或團體在香港特別行政區進行政治活動，禁止香港特別行政區的政治性組織或團體與外國的政治性組織或團體建立聯繫」。草案中所建議的《香港國安法》看來涉及《基本法》第23條涵蓋的範圍，理應由香港特別行政區在自治範圍內自行立法。根據《基本法》第66條，「香港特別行政區立法會是香港特別行政區的立法機關」，除《基本法》第73（1）條訂明香港特別行政區立法會「根據本法規定並依照法定程序制定、修改和廢除法律」。因此，人大常委看來並沒有權力以《基本法》第18條的機制將《香港國安法》納入《基本法》附件三。
其次，草案沒有保證作為一條建議經由人大常委制定的《香港國國安法》將會或需要符合《公民權利和政治權利國際公約》的條文。而該公約內談及的權利及自由受《基本法》所保障。中華人民共和國為聯合國安全理事會（「安理會」）的其中位永久會員。安理會重複強調所有關於國家安全的措施，包括反恐措施，均需要符合「國際人權法的要求。在特區政府於2003年嘗試就《基本法》第23條立法而提出《2003年國家安全（立法條文）條例草案》（「23條草案」）時，當時社會上已有真誠及廣泛的擔憂該23條草案會否侵害香港居民的公民權利和政治權利，包括言論自由及新聞自由。於2003年，特區政府有就23條草案作出一個廣泛諮詢及於激烈的公眾反對下做回23條草案。是次全國人大正審議草案建議《香港國安法》以特區政府公佈而非經立法會立法實施。草案並沒有保證於《香港國安法》公佈前會就這項重要的法例作出公眾諮詢。這是史無前例的。公眾理應有機會考慮及辯論一條影響他們權利及義務的法例。安理會決議1624（2005）、2005年9月14日及安理會決議2178（2014）、2014年9月24日，兩個決議均獲得一致通過。
第三，草案第4條提出「中央人民政府維護國家安全的有關機關根據需要在香港特別行政區設立機構，依法履行維護國家安全相關職責」。這提議對於該機構是否會以香港法律行事、是否受香港法律所規管、是否有執法權力及該機構的執法權力是否受香港現行法律所限制等問題均非常含糊不清。再者，這提議是否符合《基本法》第22（1）條的規定，即「中央人民政府所屬各部門、各省、自治區、直轄市均不得干預香港特別行政區根據本法自行管理的事務」，亦是非常含糊不清。
第四，草案第3條提出「香港特別行政區行政機關、立法機關、司法機關應當依據有關法律規定有效防範、制止和懲治危害國家安全的行為」。「司法機關」在此被提及會令人產生一個司法機關現正或將會被指示如何判決的觀感。司法獨立為香港特別行政區的基石，不應以任何方式被削弱或動搖。
人大常委短期內為香港特別行政區制定《香港國安法》的消息已引起本地及國際社會的極度不安。大律師公會留意到特首於2020年5月22日聲稱特區政府將全力協助人大常委制定《香港國安法》，並聲稱《香港國安法》不會影響香港居民所享有的合法權利和自由及司法機關會保持獨立。基於上述未有詳加解釋的說法，大律師公會呼籲特區政府緊急處理以上所述的最根本合憲及合法的關注。在更多《香港國安法》的細節公佈時，大律師公會或會再發出聲明。
香港大律師公會
2020年5月25日
19:51 25/5/2020
Statement of Hong Kong Bar Association on proposal of National People's Congress to enact National Security Law in Hong Kong
The National People's Congress (NPC) is currently deliberating a draft decision (“Draft Decision”) aimed at authorizing the Standing Committee of the NPC ("NPCSC”) to formulate laws (“HK National Security Law”) to penalise acts of secession, subverting state power, organising and carrying out terrorist activities and other behaviours that seriously endanger national security, as well as activities interfering with the HKSAR's internal affairs by foreign or external forces. It is intended that the National Security Law as formulated will be added to Annex III of the Basic Law as part of the national laws which apply in Hong Kong, and take effect in the HKSAR by way of promulgation by the Chief Executive?
The contents of the proposed HK National Security Law are yet to be publicised. The HKBA however observes that the Draft Decision discloses a number of worrying and problematic features pertaining to the proposed HK National Security Law.
Firstly, under Article 18(3) of the Basic Law the laws added to Annex III of the Basic Law by the NPCSC “shall be confined to those relating to defence and foreign affairs as well as other matters outside the limits of the autonomy of the [HKSAR] as specified by this Law”. Under Article 23 of the Basic Law the HKSAR shall 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 [HKSAR]," and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the [HKSAR] from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies". The HK National Security Law as proposed in the Draft Decision would appear to contain matters covered by Article 23 of the Basic Law and it is within the autonomy of the HKSAR to enact the relevant laws. In that regard, under Article 66 of the Basic Law, the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) of the HKSAR “shall be the legislature of the [HKSAR]”; under Article 73(1) of the Basic Law, the LegCo of the HKSAR “shall enact, amend or repeal laws in accordance with the provisions of this Law and legal procedures”. It would therefore appear that the NPCSC has no power to add the HK National Security Law under Annex III of the Basic Law via the mechanism provided under Article 18 of the Basic Law.
Secondly, there is no assurance that the HK National Security Law as proposed will, being a national law, comply or be required to comply with provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which is entrenched in the Basic Law. The United Nations Security Council, of which the People's Republic of China is a permanent member, has repeatedly emphasised that all measures adopted in aid of national security, including counter-terrorism, must be fully compliant with international human rights law3. When the HKSAR Government sought to introduce the National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill 2003 to LegCo to implement Article 23 of the Basic Law in 2003, there were genuine and widespread concerns that the proposed legislation would infringe upon the HKSAR residents' civil and political rights, including freedom of speech and freedom of the press. In 2003, an extensive consultation exercise on Article 23 legislation was undertaken, and the relevant bill 1 Article 6(2) of Draft Decision 2 Article 6(3) of Draft Decision *See e.g. UN Security Council Resolution 1624 (2005), 14 September 2005, and Resolution 2178 (2014), on 24 September 2014, both adopted unanimously was withdrawn after vehement public opposition. In the current exercise, the HK National Security Law is intended to be enacted by promulgation by the HKSAR Government rather than legislation by the LegCo. There is no assurance that public consultation will take place at all on this vastly important legislation prior to promulgation. This is unprecedented. The public must be allowed the opportunity to properly consider and debate about proposed laws which affect their personal rights and obligations.
Thirdly, Article 4 of the Draft Decision stipulates that “when needed, relevant national security organs of the Central People's Government will set up agencies in the HKSAR to fulfil relevant duties to safeguard national security in accordance with the [HK National Security Law]”. It is entirely unclear how the proposed agencies set up in the HKSAR will operate under the laws of the HKSAR, whether they will be bound by the laws of the HKSAR, whether they have power of enforcement, and whether such powers as exercised will be limited by the laws currently in force in the HKSAR. It is also entirely unclear how this arrangement would comply with Article 22(1) of the Basic Law, which provides that “No department of the Central People's Government ... may interfere in the affairs which the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region administers on its own in accordance with this Law”.
Fourthly, Article 3 of the Draft Decision provides that “the HKSAR's administrative, legislative and judicial organs must, in accordance with relevant laws and regulations, effectively prevent, stop and punish acts endangering national security”. The reference to “judicial organs” gives rise to perceptions that the Judiciary of the HKSAR is being or will be instructed to act in a particular way. Independence of the Judiciary is the cornerstone of the success of the HKSAR and should not be undermined in any way.
News of the imminent enactment of proposed HK National Security Law by the NPCSC and promulgation of the same by the HKSAR Government in the HKSAR has caused deep unease in the local and international community. We note that the Chief Executive stated on 22 May 2020 that the Government will fully cooperate with the NPCSC in the enactment of the HK National Security Law, and further stated that the new legislation would not affect the legitimate rights and freedoms presently enjoyed by the people of HKSAR and that the independence of the Judiciary would remain unchanged. In light of those assertions which were made without further explanations, the HKBA calls upon the HKSAR Government to address the fundamental constitutional and legal concerns raised above as a matter of urgency. HKBA may make further observations when details of the HK National Security Law are disclosed.
HONG KONG BAR ASSOCIATION
Dated: 25 May 2020
香港大律師公會就全國人民代表大會（）「全國人大」)審議《全國人民代表大會關於建立健全香港特別行政區維護國家安全的法律制度和執行機制的决定（草案）》（「草案」）之聲明
全國人大正審議草案，旨在授權全國人民代表大會常務委員會（「人大常委」）制定建立健全香港特別行政區維護國家安全的法律制度和執行機制相關法律（《香港國安法》）以防範、制止和懲治任何分裂國家、顛覆國家政權、組織實施恐怖活動等嚴重危害國家安全的行為以及外國和境外勢力干預香港特別行政區事務的活動。草案並建議人大常委將《香港國安法》列入《基本法》附件三，由香港特別行政區政府（《特區政府》）在本地公佈實施。
雖然《香港國安法》的內容有待公佈，但大律師公會認為草案擬授權人大常委制定《香港國安法》有幾點令人憂慮。
首先，《基本法》第18（）3)條規定，任何列入《基本法》附件三的法律，僅「限於有關國防、外交和其他按本法規定不屬於香港特別行政區自治範圍的法律」。根據《基本法》第23條，香港特別行政區「應自行立法禁止任何叛國、分裂國家、煽動叛亂、顛覆中央人民政府及竊取國家機密的行為，禁止外國的政治性組織或團體在香港特別行政區進行政治活動，禁止香港特別行政區的政治性組織或團體與外國的政治性組織或團體建立聯繫」。草案中所建議的《香港國安法》看來涉及《基本法》第23條涵蓋的範圍，理應由香港特別行政區在自治範圍內自行立法。根據《基本法》第66條，「香港特別行政區立法會是香港特別行政區的立法機關」，除《基本法》第73（1）條訂明香港特別行政區立法會「根據本法規定並依照法定程序制定、修改和廢除法律」。因此，人大常委看來並沒有權力以《基本法》第18條的機制將《香港國安法》納入《基本法》附件三。
其次，草案沒有保證作為一條建議經由人大常委制定的《香港國國安法》將會或需要符合《公民權利和政治權利國際公約》的條文。而該公約內談及的權利及自由受《基本法》所保障。中華人民共和國為聯合國安全理事會（「安理會」）的其中位永久會員。安理會重複強調所有關於國家安全的措施，包括反恐措施，均需要符合「國際人權法的要求。在特區政府於2003年嘗試就《基本法》第23條立法而提出《2003年國家安全（立法條文）條例草案》（「23條草案」）時，當時社會上已有真誠及廣泛的擔憂該23條草案會否侵害香港居民的公民權利和政治權利，包括言論自由及新聞自由。於2003年，特區政府有就23條草案作出一個廣泛諮詢及於激烈的公眾反對下做回23條草案。是次全國人大正審議草案建議《香港國安法》以特區政府公佈而非經立法會立法實施。草案並沒有保證於《香港國安法》公佈前會就這項重要的法例作出公眾諮詢。這是史無前例的。公眾理應有機會考慮及辯論一條影響他們權利及義務的法例。安理會決議1624（2005）、2005年9月14日及安理會決議2178（2014）、2014年9月24日，兩個決議均獲得一致通過。
第三，草案第4條提出「中央人民政府維護國家安全的有關機關根據需要在香港特別行政區設立機構，依法履行維護國家安全相關職責」。這提議對於該機構是否會以香港法律行事、是否受香港法律所規管、是否有執法權力及該機構的執法權力是否受香港現行法律所限制等問題均非常含糊不清。再者，這提議是否符合《基本法》第22（1）條的規定，即「中央人民政府所屬各部門、各省、自治區、直轄市均不得干預香港特別行政區根據本法自行管理的事務」，亦是非常含糊不清。
第四，草案第3條提出「香港特別行政區行政機關、立法機關、司法機關應當依據有關法律規定有效防範、制止和懲治危害國家安全的行為」。「司法機關」在此被提及會令人產生一個司法機關現正或將會被指示如何判決的觀感。司法獨立為香港特別行政區的基石，不應以任何方式被削弱或動搖。
人大常委短期內為香港特別行政區制定《香港國安法》的消息已引起本地及國際社會的極度不安。大律師公會留意到特首於2020年5月22日聲稱特區政府將全力協助人大常委制定《香港國安法》，並聲稱《香港國安法》不會影響香港居民所享有的合法權利和自由及司法機關會保持獨立。基於上述未有詳加解釋的說法，大律師公會呼籲特區政府緊急處理以上所述的最根本合憲及合法的關注。在更多《香港國安法》的細節公佈時，大律師公會或會再發出聲明。
香港大律師公會
2020年5月25日
留言
張貼留言