Government/Politics - 70. page

On June 30, China passed the Hong Kong national security law, which went into effect immediately. The official Xinhua News Agency published the full text of the law. Four crimes now all carry a maximum sentence of life in prison.
The law is more far-reaching than most people expected.

A foreigner who exercises freedom of speech in a foreign country and advocates Hong Kong independence may be arrested in Hong Kong. As long as any of the “criminal acts or results” occur in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), it will be deemed to be a crime in Hong Kong. The law also applies to any Hong Kong permanent resident or a Hong Kong based company that commits a relevant crime outside of Hong Kong. For non-Hong Kong permanent residents outside Hong Kong, they are also punishable even if they commit the relevant crimes outside Hong Kong.

The Hong Kong national security law stipulates four crimes.

Separatism. The chief offenders are subject to life imprisonment or imprisonment of more than ten years. Active participants imprisonment may be between three and ten years, while others imprisonment will be less than three years.

Subversion. Any act of subversion shall be punishable by imprisonment of from less than three years up to life imprisonment.

Anyone who incites, assists, abets, or sponsors with money or other property the commission of the above two crimes can be sentenced to from less than five years to more than ten years in jail.

Terrorism. Those that cause significant losses can be sentenced to life imprisonment or imprisonment for more than 10 years. Lessor offenders may receive between three and ten years imprisonment. Propagating terrorism and inciting terrorist activities are also crimes and can be subject to imprisonment of less than five years or less than ten years.

Collusion with foreign countries or external forces endangering national security. Offenses include stealing, purchasing, and illegally providing state secrets or intelligence to foreign or overseas organizations and personnel. Offenses also include requesting relevant organizations or individuals to implement or conspire to implement, directly or indirectly accepting their instructions, control, and funding to support the implementation of five actions.

The five actions include conducting sanctions, blockades or other hostile actions against the HKSAR or China; manipulation and sabotaging of the elections, causing possible serious consequences; various illegal methods that trigger the hatred of the Hong Kong residents towards the central government or the HKSAR government that may cause serious consequences.

The HKSAR government will establish a new Committee for Safeguarding National Security (CSNSC), and Beijing will set up a corresponding Commission for Safeguarding National Security in Hong Kong (CSNSHK), headed by a vice minister of Public Security. For the first time, the national security law clearly stipulates that the CSNSHK, instead of the HKSAR, will exercise direct jurisdiction over the case under three circumstances: First, the case involves the intervention of foreign or external forces, making it difficult for the HKSAR to exercise jurisdiction; second, it involves a serious situation in which the HKSAR government cannot effectively implement the national security law; third, a situation where national security faces a major and real threat.

There are also other controversial stipulations in the national security law.

The work of the CSNSC is free from interference from any other agencies, organizations and individuals in the HKSAR government. The information is not disclosed and decisions made are not subject to judicial review.

The law emphasizes that neither the suspect nor the defendant shall be released on bail unless the judge has sufficient reason to believe that the suspect or the defendant will not continue to endanger national security.

The law stipulates that the Chief Executive of the HKSAR shall appoint a number of judges to handle crimes against national security. Anyone who has expressed words or committed deeds that endanger national security shall not be designated as a judge to hear national security criminal cases. During the appointment, if the judge has words or deeds that endanger national security, the qualification of the appointed judge will be terminated.

If there is any inconsistency between the local laws of HKSAR and the national security law, the provisions of the latter shall apply. The right to interpret the Hong Kong national security law belongs to the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress.

Source: Central News Agency, July 1, 2020
https://www.cna.com.tw/news/acn/202007010006.aspx
https://www.cna.com.tw/news/acn/202007010005.aspx

The Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region is a Chinese province where most ethnic Mongols live and Mongolian has been the native language throughout its history.

Recently officials from the education bureau of Tongliao, a city in eastern Inner Mongolia, passed verbal notices to local schools that, starting from the second half of this year, all courses will stop using Mongolian as the major language for academic activities, except the Mongolian language course. The issue went viral among schools and local residents. Parents worry that, in the future, their children will not understand Mongolian.

A former teacher in Hohhot, the capital city of Inner Mongolia, told Radio Free Asia that most courses taught in the Mongolian language will disappear beginning on September 1st. The authorities will dispatch personnel to strengthen the supervision, and push through Chinese language education in the Mongolian region. In short, the mother tongue education in Inner Mongolia is facing an unprecedented crisis. Although China’s own Law on Regional National Autonomy guarantees the freedom to use its own native language for education, people are concerned that the policy will lead to the “disappearance” of the Mongolian culture.

The Inner Mongolian authorities have long intended to abolish education in the native language. At the end of 2018, due to the protests by the parents of students, the government aborted its plan to enforce Chinese language teaching in East Ujimqin Banner of Xilinguole League, in the northeast area of the Inner Mongolia. In mid-December 2017, the Bayinguoleng Mongolian Autonomous Prefecture in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region suddenly stopped all courses taught in Mongolian, triggering strong dissatisfaction among the local Mongolians.

Source: Radio Free Asia, June 24, 2020
https://www.rfa.org/cantonese/news/language-06242020071829.html

On June 20, the Standing Committee of the 13th National Congress reviewed and passed a Law on disciplinary measures which apply to Public Officials. Among the list of violations, in addition to corruption, bribery, abuse of power, and misuse of public funding, the following have been added and will also be considered violations: tampering with and forging one’s personal history; obtaining a foreign nationality or an overseas permanent residence; or illegally obtaining a passport for personal use.” These will also be considered violations. Moreover, falsely framing others when it results in damage to their reputation and refusing to pay child support or other obligations to family members have been added to the list as well.

Source: Sohu,June 20, 2020
https://www.sohu.com/a/403336823_260616

Liang Yanping, a professor at the School of Liberal Arts of Hubei University in China, was dismissed from her CCP party membership and suspended from teaching. Liang was alleged to have “repeatedly published and reposted erroneous remarks about Japan and Hong Kong on social media which seriously violated the party’s political disciplinary rules and the teachers’ professional ethics.” According to the official statement from Hubei University, she was also said to have had an extremely negative social impact. Liang is also the first university professor who was disciplined for openly supporting Fang Fang for her Wuhan Diary.

In her personal Weibo and WeChat account, on November 8, 2019, Liang posted an article to commemorate a Hong Kong college student who died during an anti-extradition protest. She also posted a selfie wearing a black hat and facial mask to support Hong Kong protesters. On December 9, 2012, Liang posted a comment and questioned the death toll of the Nanjing Massacre and whether 300,000 was the accurate count. Liang was also accused of being “pro-Japan.”

Fang Fang published her comments in her weibo account, calling Hubei University a disgrace to universities in China and Hubei province and made the accusation that the leftists and online thugs hijacked Hubei University, the media, and the publishers.

Source: Radio France Internationale, June 20, 2020
http://www.rfi.fr/cn/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD/20200620-%E6%8C%BA%E6%96%B9%E6%96%B9%E9%81%AD%E4%B8%BE%E6%8A%A5-%E6%B9%96%E5%8C%97%E5%A4%A7%E5%AD%A6%E6%95%99%E6%8E%88%E6%A2%81%E8%89%B3%E8%90%8D%E8%A2%AB%E5%BC%80%E9%99%A4%E5%85%9A%E7%B1%8D%E5%81%9C%E6%AD%A2%E6%95%99%E5%AD%A6

In Shenzhen, on Monday June 15th, The Chinese Association of Hong Kong & Macao Studies (CAHKMS), a government think tank under the State Council’s Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, held a forum on the Hong Kong Basic Law. Deng Zhonghua, deputy director of the Hong Kong and Macao Office, mentioned in his speech that both the central government and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) government need to establish agencies to maintain national security, and that the central government will supervise and guide relevant work in Hong Kong. Deng emphasized that most of the law enforcement and judicial work should be completed by the HKSAR government, but the central government will retain jurisdiction over some cases.

Deng added, “The central government has jurisdiction over crimes against national security in the HKSAR. It must have an effective control and produce effective deterrence. It cannot be merely shouting some slogans or putting on some show. The central government should also, under extremely special circumstances, retain the power to exercise jurisdiction over crimes in the region that seriously endanger national security. Of course, very few cases will come under the jurisdiction of the central government, which will not take over the responsibilities of the relevant authorities in the HKSAR; nor will it affect the independent judicial power and final adjudication power enjoyed by the HKSAR under the Basic Law.”

Billy Li, a Hong Kong barrister and Convener of the Progressive Lawyers Group, a pro-democracy civil group formed by legal professionals, commented that, “If the (central government) enforces the law in Hong Kong, I think it is a violation of the Hong Kong Basic Law. Judicial, administrative and legislative rights are all part of Hong Kong’s autonomy, as codified by the Basic Law. Once (the central government) enforces the law in Hong Kong, even if it (the central government) adjudicates these cases, it is violating the autonomous rights of Hong Kong.”

Johannes Chan, Chair Professor of Law and former Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Hong Kong, also pointed out that if the national security organs can supervise and guide the work of Hong Kong agencies, this will almost completely destroy the “two systems.” It is equivalent to the “nationalization” of Hong Kong’s autonomy and will change the Basic Law beyond recognition. Chan expressed concern about Deng Zhonghua’s remarks, that if the mainland’s national security organs exercise jurisdiction in Hong Kong, it would mean the one-stop process of arrest, investigation, trial, sentencing, and even the procedure of imprisonment.

Hong Kong’s Legislative Council member Dennis Kwok expressed strong opposition to the possibility of transferring national security cases to the mainland for trial. Kwok asked, “Why can some cases suddenly be handled without going through the jurisdiction of the Hong Kong courts? Article 19 of the Basic Law makes it clear that the HKSAR has jurisdiction over all cases (in Hong Kong). That is to say, all cases related to Hong Kong must be tried in the Hong Kong courts. This further proves that the ‘National Security Law’ is unconstitutional and illegal.”

Source: Radio Free Asia, June 15, 2020
https://www.rfa.org/cantonese/news/htm/hk-security-06152020082647.html

China’s Premier Li Keqiang recently pushed for a “street vendor economy,” encouraging people to set up street stalls as tens of millions have lost their jobs. However, the media in Beijing city and even the official mouthpiece did not follow suit. The Central Propaganda Department of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has reportedly issued a directive requesting the media to delete past reports that promote Li’s proposal. It is believed that the discord highlights a disagreement between Xi Jinping and Li Keqiang’s economic policy.

During his trip to Yantai, Shandong, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang praised the street vendor economy as the vitality of China. For a time, the words “street stalls,” and “night market” became a hot topic among the people and the media.

Even before the heat died down, first-tier cities, including Beijing and Shenzhen, clearly stated that they are not suitable for a street vendor economy. Beijing Daily, the mouthpiece newspaper of the CCP committee in the capital city, published a commentary article on June 6, claiming that the street vendor economy is not suitable for Beijing. “As the capital of the country, Beijing carries the national image. As the country’s first super-scale city, it has its own functional positioning and management requirements.”

The official website of the Shenzhen city government posted an article entitled, “Forget about ‘Setting up the Stalls!” The article said, “At present, Shenzhen has not yet promulgated any management measures for the ‘street vendor economy’ and will not announce any locations for temporary stalls.”

China Central Television (CCTV), the CCP’s official TV network, followed up on June 8. It said that for large cities such as Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou, refined management is the right way and that major first-tier cities have not “blindly followed the trend.” It added that some cities have “clear minds” to say no to chaotic street vendors.

Radio Free Asia quoted some insiders from Beijing’s official Xinhua News Agency that, on the evening of June 4, executives from major official media received an injunction from the CCP’s Central Propaganda Department and began to delete previous reports (that promoted the street vendor economy). The Central Guidance Commission on Building Spiritual Civilization, a CCP commission in charge of brainwashing, withdrew previous official documents on the street vendor economy.

A Chinese independent scholar, Wu Qiang, reported that Hong Kong based Apple Daily, believed that this was an expression of the debate on whether the central government should strengthen or relax economic control after the epidemic. Li Keqiang has been promoting economic freedom policies such as reducing government approvals and giving the market a free hand; but Xi Jinping has continued to intervene to strengthen control of the economy. The two were always at odds.

On June 9, Frédéric Lemaître, a reporter from the French newspaper Le Monde, wrote that people believe Li Keqiang is more inclined toward the market economy, while Xi Jinping prefers a regulated economy through large state-owned enterprises. Li once said that China “still has about 600 million people whose monthly income is only 1,000 yuan (US $141), not even enough to be able to rent a room in an ordinary city.” His words stirred up a lot of discussions and also cast a shadow over Xi Jinping’s boasting about China’s anti-poverty “success.”

Source: Radio Free International, June 14, 2020
http://rfi.my/63lK.T

Cai Xia, a former professor of the Central Party School of the CCP, made some remarks at a private forum saying that the CCP has become a political zombie. The remarks were then reported and appeared on the Internet.

Cai Xia stated that there is no way out of the current system itself. “There is no point in reforming the system. Speaking from the bottom line, this system must be cast away.” Cai Xia believes that after the CCP reform and opening up, the two most fundamental problems have not been solved: one is the system and the other is theory.”

Cai Xia stated that the CCP has become a “political zombie.”  “The CCP has come to its end.”

Cai Xia warned that if nothing is done now, “we will only be able to watch the free fall of the system, wait for him [Xi Jinping] to have a free fall and for the society to collapse; then we would start from the beginning. I think this is a highly probable path. If so, China will be in major chaos within five years.

Source: Radio France Internationale, June 4, 2020

http://www.rfi.fr/cn/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD/20200603-%E5%89%8D%E4%B8%AD%E5%85%B1%E4%B8%AD%E5%A4%AE%E5%85%9A%E6%A0%A1%E6%95%99%E6%8E%88%E8%94%A1%E9%9C%9E-%E6%8D%A2%E4%BA%BA-%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD%E6%89%8D%E6%9C%89%E5%B8%8C%E6%9C%9B