| Legislative Council Panel on Security
Categorization of views of organizations and individuals on specific proposals to implement Article 23 of the Basic Law
Introduction
This note seeks Members' views on the way forward
regarding the request raised at the joint meeting
of the Panel on Security and Panel on Administration
of Justice and Legal Services on 15 February
2003. The Administration has been asked to provide
information regarding the categorization of views
of organizations and individuals relating to
specific proposals to implement Article 23 of
the Basic Law as set out in the Consultation
Document published in September 2002, namely
the proscription mechanism, unauthorized disclosure
of protected information obtained by unauthorized
access, and ˇ§public interestˇ¨ defence for offences
relating to unauthorized disclosure of protected
information. The request is listed in Part B
at item 1(b)(i) to (iii) in Appendix I of the
background brief prepared by the Legislative
Council (LC Paper No. CB(2)1378/02-03(03)).
Response
| 2. |
In response to the request, which requires
a re-examination of all the submissions
received during the consultation period,
the Administration proposes to adopt the
following schemes of categorization for
the respective issues -
|
| (a) |
Proscription mechanism |
| |
| Category A - |
Identifiable as supporting
the inclusion of proscription mechanism
in the proposals to implement Article
23 of the Basic Law. |
| Category B - |
Identifiable as opposing the inclusion
of proscription mechanism in the proposals
to implement Article 23 of the Basic
Law. |
| Category C - |
Not identifiable as Category A or
Category B above, or had not expressed
any views on the issue. |
|
| (b) |
The offence of unlawful disclosure of
protected information obtained by unauthorized
access |
| |
| Category A - |
Identifiable as supporting
the inclusion of the offence of unlawful
disclosure of protected information
obtained by unauthorized access in
the proposals to implement Article
23 of the Basic Law. |
| Category B - |
Identifiable as opposing the inclusion
of the offence of unlawful disclosure
of protected information obtained by
unauthorized access in the proposals
to implement Article 23 of the Basic
Law. |
| Category C - |
Not identifiable as Category A or
Category B above, or had not expressed
any views on the issue. |
|
| (c) |
ˇ§Public interestˇ¨ defence for offences
relating to unlawful disclosure of protected
information |
| |
| Category A - |
Identifiable as supporting
the inclusion of the ˇ§public interestˇ¨
defence for the offences of unlawful
disclosure in the proposals to implement
Article 23 of the Basic Law. |
| Category B - |
Identifiable as opposing the inclusion
of the ˇ§public interestˇ¨ defence for
the offences of unlawful disclosure
in the proposals to implement Article
23 of the Basic Law. |
| Category C - |
Not identifiable as Category A or
Category B above, or had not expressed
any views on the issue. |
|
| 3 |
As with the categorization of whether
a submission can be identified as generally
supportive or opposing the proposals to
implement Article 23 of the Basic Law,
categorization of submissions on the above
issues would frequently involve subjective
judgements, since organizations and individuals
can freely express their views in their
submissions without limitation on the form
of presentation.
|
| 4 |
A list of expressions excerpted from
sample submissions with their corresponding
categorization according to the proposed
scheme of categorization is attached at
Annex. The list reflects the proposed standards
which would be adopted in the forthcoming
exercise.
|
Way Forward
| 5 |
Subject to Members' views, we would
proceed with the proposed scheme of categorization.
The task is expected to take four weeks,
after which the categorization will be
announced in this Panel and also via the
Government web site on the implementation
of Article 23 of the Basic Law. As with
the categorization of the views on the
overall proposals, those who disagree with
the categorization will be invited to raise
their objections, with justifications and
explanations with a view to removing the
initial ambiguities. A finalized categorization
will be published in due course.
|
Security Bureau
April 2003
|
