Hong Kong

Caption: Hong Kong Bloggers' Facebook accounts were blocked after the forth Chief Executive was elected.

Leung Chun-ying (CY), the forth Chief Executive of Hong Kong was elected by 1200 election committees on March 25, 2012. He is alleged as underground communist party member and violated freedom of speech in the past. A famous Hong Kong blogger Kay Lam’s Facebook account was suspended after posting a picture with caption “Finally the lights are all gone, The Death of Hong Kong 1841-2012”, just three hours after CY was elected as Chief Executive.

If stalking law was passed, Hong Kong journalist may no longer took their pictures at Henry Tang’s mansion in this way (Picture from)

[Note: The Hong Kong government is consulting the public on stalking. Journalists and activists are worried that their right of reporting and demonstration will be threatened. Chong Yiu-kwong, a Hong Kong lawyer, wrote articles to express view on this issue.]

Chinese original text:Ming Pao (25.2.2012)

Would the magnificent view of derrick cars lining up outside Henry Tang’s (Hong Kong former Financial Secretary, current candidate of Chief Executive election 2012) mansion still appear after stalking is legislated? Whoever from the pro-government camp win the election would very likely push for this regulation that shelter the powerful and the rich.

Stalking law may threaten Hong Kong freedom of press and assembly.

[Editor: The Hong Kong government is consulting the public on stalking. Journalists and activists are worried that their right of reporting and demonstration will be threatened. Chong Yiu-kwong, a Hong Kong lawyer, wrote articles to express view on this issue.]

Chinese original text Apple daily (27.2.2012)

The government is consulting the public on stalking. There have been a number of abuses in Britain after stalking was legislated. In 2007, Npower, a British energy company accused demonstrators for harassing their staff and applied for a restraining order according to anti-stalking acts in order to get rid of demonstrators and stop journalists from reporting. An exemption was granted after 3 months of legal process. Articles in The Guardian pointed out that the British anti-stalking acts had been used to suppress demonstrations. In 2001, a group of demonstrators who protested at a US military intelligence agency were prosecuted under the anti-staling acts as American staff felt harassed by the slogan “George W Bush? Oh dear!” written on the signboard held up by demonstrators. In 2004, a woman sent an email to the administration staff of a medicine company twice, urging them to stop using animals for experiments. Despite her politeness she was arrested. Laws in Hong Kong are greatly influenced by cases in Britain, abuses as such would easily happen frequently if stalking is legislated.

Caption: Shall Hong Kongers enjoy freedom of assembly if the anti-stalking law is passed?

After Commissioner of Police (CP) Mr Tsang took office, his tough measures against the demonstrators have raised social concerns about the anti-stalking legislation. Law Reform Commission (hereinafter referred to as "LRC") published "anti-stalking" consultation document on 19 December last year which is called "The press 23" by the society. According to the document, stalking "may be described as a series of acts directed at a specific person which, taken together over a period of time, causes him to feel harassed, alarmed or distressed”. These acts might not be objectionable but, when combined over a period of time, interfered with the privacy and family life of the victim, and causing him distress, alarm or ever serious impairment of his physical or psychological well being. These acts may cause annoying or panic but still lawful at the beginning act, evolve into a dangerous, violent or likely to cause others to death. If a person ought to have known a course of conduct which amounted to harassment of the other, he should be guilty of a criminal offense. A maximum penalty would be a fine of $ 100,000 and imprisonment for two years, and with civil liability. The victim would be able to claim damages for any distress, anxiety and financial loss resulting from the pursuit and apply for an injunction to prohibit the stalker from doing anything which causes him alarm or distress.

Translated by: Kenny Choi

Editor note: This article, originally published in inmediahk.net tells significant issues on free speech at Hong Kong, China, Taiwan and Macao.

Caption: Hong Kong Netizens against the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2011，which forbid the exemption of derivative works as not being infringing.

At the beginning of the year, the Office for Personal Data Protection of Macau government issued the Guidelines on Publication of Personal Data on the Internet. In addition to include individual identification information, private life, medical records and other information as “personal data”, the guidelines also consists of “data revealing philosophical or political beliefs, political society or trade union membership, religion and racial or ethnic origin.” The Guideline states that except the consent of the litigants has been acquired or their information been published, any sensitive information cannot be publicized. Daily practice on the internet today could infringe Personal Data Protection Act. Therefore people who concern with freedom of speech requested amendment of the Guidelines.

Below is a summary of an advocacy meeting on "Cross-border feminist strategy" which took place in Hong Kong on June 11, 2011. The meeting is part of the research effort on "Gender, ICT and citizenship" coordinated by IT for Change. It aims to bring together feminist activists from China and Hong Kong to address debate over citizen rights in relation to the authoritarian regime in Mainland China and the border politics under the post-colonial conditions of One Country Two System in Hong Kong.

Chair: Ip Iam Chong (Hong Kong In-Media, Hong Kong)

Speakers:
Lu Ping (Gender Watch China, Beijing)
Li Jun (Gender Action Network, Guangzhou)
Sally Choi (AAF, Hong Kong)
Oiwan Lam (Hong Kong In-Media, Hong Kong)

Blindfolded for 22 years, it is time to lift the shroud of pseudo-democracy.

22 years ago, in December 1988, the public consultation of the draft for Basic Law came to an end. It was a historical moment of political awakening for Hong Kong citizens. Indifferent to the 60,000+ proposals submitted by Hong Kong people (see note), Beijing was adamant on adopting the conservative package going against popular opinion at that time. This decision triggered two historic social actions: burning of the Basic Law draft and initiation of a hunger strike in protest. This was a critical moment for Hong Kong citizens to safeguard the ideals of “Self-Governance, High degree of Autonomy”, to tear away the façade of delusions and deceptions. The criticism received by the conservative package then: “An undemocratic beginning; taking leaden steps along the way; but with no end in sight” is unfortunately still applicable to the current political reform package. This statement has foreshadowed our painful struggle for democracy over the past 22 years.