15 November 2002

The Editor
BusinessWeek

Dear Sir, My answer to the question raised in your article "Is the sun setting on HK's freedom?" (November 18) is a categorical "no".

Our proposals to implement Article 23 of the Basic Law to protect national security are largely drawn from existing laws, and fully comply with Hong Kong's well-established common-law traditions and international human rights principles.

With regard to the theft of "state secrets", the existing and proposed offences are extremely narrowly drawn and based on the UK Official Secrets Act 1989. The claim that journalists could be prosecuted merely for "unauthorized possession" of information is simply not true.

Nor is it true to say that our proposals would let authorities ban activities whenever they believe that doing so is "in the interests of national security or public safety or public order". All of our proposed measures are subject to the guarantees of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which are constitutionally entrenched and promulgated in Hong Kong through the Basic Law. Our proposals would only apply in the most severe of circumstances, and in most cases, an act of violence, or a threat of violence, or grave criminal conduct will be required before an offence is committed.

Finally, in the unfortunate and highly unlikely event that any of these offences were committed, the cases will be heard in our own courts, which draw on a long common law tradition and are fully cognizant of the international human rights laws and standards that apply in Hong Kong. There is no question of extending Mainland laws or concepts on national security to Hong Kong.

Yours faithfully, ( Mrs Regina Ip ) Secretary for Security Hong Kong Special Administrative Region