| | |
|
GillianHoFirstEssay 8 - 07 Apr 2023 - Main.GillianHo
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
Rethinking My Practice | | | Prior to the passage of the NSL and the implementation of the "patriots only" election in 2021, I had aimed to gain admission to the groups that would be debating Hong Kong's political and constitutional structure at the expiration of the 50-year "One Country, Two Systems" policy as either a business leader or trained lawyer. There was historical precedent for such a path. In 1985, the National People's Congress formed the HKSAR Basic Law Consultative Committee (BLCC) to canvass views and provide input on drafts of the Hong Kong Basic Law in advance of the 1997 handover. The BLCC was comprised of representatives of the political, legal, business, education, cultural, and diplomatic sector and debated submissions on electoral issues and civic rights to be codified in the Basic Law. Nevertheless, the independent passage of the NSL with no outside consultation and the exclusivity of "patriots" in the legislature foreshadow unilateral passage and enforcement of any future changes in the law. As such, the aim of my practice is moot. | |
<
< | In rethinking the goals I would like to accomplish, I have decided to continue doing work relating to the dwindling rights of Hong Kong citizens. Instead of fruitlessly advocating for the government to maintain these rights, an alternative avenue would be to inform and advise citizens of their rights. As of now, the definition of "national security" and the scope of the charges within the NSL still lack clarity and predictability. The ambiguity of the NSL's language may be subjected to evolving interpretations as more cases are decided, and it is important for citizens to understand their potential exposure to liability in a changing landscape. The new goal of my practice would be the education of Hong Kong citizens of their rights and possible civil protections as Hong Kong is reintegrated into China. | >
> | I would prefer to continue pursuing work relating to the rights of Hong Kong citizens. Instead of fruitlessly advocating for the government to maintain these rights, an alternative avenue would be to inform and advise citizens of their rights. As of now, the definition of "national security" and the scope of the charges within the NSL still lack clarity and predictability. The ambiguity of the NSL's language may be subjected to evolving interpretations as more cases are decided, and it is important for citizens to understand their potential exposure to liability in a changing landscape. The new goal of my practice would be the education of Hong Kong citizens of their rights and possible civil protections as Hong Kong is reintegrated into China. | | | What My Practice Could Look Like | | | The risk of potential charges of collusion with foreign forces could be ostensibly minimized by reducing the practice's interactions with overseas scholars and refusing any assistance from foreign bodies, particularly those attached to foreign governments. Additionally, the practice could emphasize that it is not asking to overturn the government's legislation but simply trying to inform citizens of their rights and the current status of legislation. Nevertheless, the extensive police powers granted by the NSL to investigate activists and civil society organizations may allow the police to cobble together loose pieces of information to accuse the practice of endangering national security. A potential solution would be to use encrypted software and communication tools, but any communications outside of the work of the practice could still be used in considering criminal charges.
The risk of violating the NSL is exacerbated by the eroded right to liberty and fair trial in Hong Kong. Under Article 44 of the NSL, the Chief Executive may exercise the power to designate judges at each court level to handle issues relating to the National Security Law. At the 2022 National People’s Congress, the Standing Committee ruled that Hong Kong’s chief executive can decide which lawyers are permitted to represent defendants and appoint judges for trials in NSL cases. The Hong Kong government has also previously proposed to remove legal aid applicants' right to choose legal counsel unless there are "exceptional circumstances" and reduce the number of legal aid cases lawyers can take on each year. As such, if the Hong Kong government and/or the CCP were determined to shut down the practice, the impartiality of the judicial system in the adjudication of these cases and the likelihood of political intervention would result in likely conviction. | |
<
< | Acceptance of Exile | | | \ No newline at end of file |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |