ARTICLE 19 and The Hong Kong Journalists Association
unauthorized coverage, Beijing has certainly boosted its capacity to induce caution and discretion in the independent media. Outright bans on certain journalists in 1990 were specifically aimed at such publications as Pai Shing Semi-monthly and Contemporary.
Beijing has also punished local journalists for having transgressed the regulations. Applications from Chung Sze-mui of Ming Pao and Wong Shau-ying of Metro News to cover the visit to Beijing of then British minister responsible for Hong Kong, Lord Caithness, were turned down by Chinese authorities on the grounds that the two reporters had "violated the rules" on a previous visit to Beijing by covering an event outside the terms of their application.38 Though Xinhua News Agency did not elaborate when relaying the refusal, the event in question was clearly the impromptu press conference given by dissident journalist Dai Qing during the visit of US Secretary of State James Baker in late 1991.
The application of the regulations has not always been consistent, though, and China seems to be prepared to waive the rules in exceptional circumstances. This was the case when Beijing chose to ignore the many local journalists who had failed to apply for reporting permission to cover the disastrous floods in Jiangsu Province in mid-1991. The opportunity of a propaganda coup arising from the sympathetic coverage of a natural (rather than political) calamity, and the subsequent patriotic call for assistance to overseas Chinese, appeared to outweigh considerations of the clear breach of procedure.
However, the arbitrary enforcement of the rules is also a cause for considerable concern. One important illustration of this was the attitude of the Chinese authorities towards Hong Kong journalists assigned to cover the release of share applications to the public in Shenzhen in August 1992 - and the subsequent violence between applicants and the Shenzhen authorities. Numerous journalists covering the story experienced some form of obstruction from the authorities, ranging from the confiscation of equipment to threats with firearms. Some reportedly were physically assaulted by the public security police and apparently forced to write "confessions". In other cases, after the violence began, Hong Kong reporters were refused entry to Shenzhen, and applications for permission from Xinhua News Agency were not processed. Moreover, those working without proper permission (journalists who had entered on their home visit visas) had the threat of "unlawful reporting" hanging over their heads. Above all, Xinhua News Agency's actions revealed the real purpose of the regulations as being to control the access of Hong Kong journalists to China as and when it suits its purpose to do so.
There has in fact been a growing flexibility in the application of the regulations. Journalists can now apply for permission closer to an event, provided there is sufficient time for correspondence with the relevant authorities in Beijing (though there is no guarantee that applications can be processed in time). Xinhua News Agency has also said that it may allow more than one reporting item in a single application. Rather than being a response to local opposition to the rules, as some have suggested, the relaxation appears to be the result of a
38
"HK reporters punished for Dai coverage", South China Morning Post, 28 Nov. 1991.
76