hsequent to an event that took place in January) and a member of an activist organisation called "April 5th Movement".
In view of the prominence of those involved, it is thought that this is unlikely to be a case of misplaced administrative enthusiasm. Rather, it is assumed the decision to prosecute must have been made at senior level.
There is considerable concern at the implications of these charges, on several grounds:
The offences themselves are open to criticism and possibly infringe civil liberties, including liberties that will be protected under the new Bill of Rights now being introduced by the Hong Kong government.
The use of small offences that protect the public from nuisance to inhibit the peaceful expression of political views has not hitherto been government practise and it has alarming implications for the future.
Those charged are all very prominent political activists in the territory. The laws concerned are trivially breached very frequently. This prosecution will be widely interpreted as a politically motivated attack against Hong Kong's democracy
movement.
Collectively, these grounds refresh fears in the territory that the Hong Kong government is willing to restrict political dissent under pressure from the Chinese government, either by intimidating prominent critics or by reducing the area of legal dissent in other ways.
We understand that the four individuals whose cases are described will go to court in mid-July. They will plead innocent and, if found guilty, will go to prison rather than pay the fine involved.
Please let us know whether you would like further information from us.
Yours sincerely,
Rower Arche
Robert Archer
CIIR and Hong Kong Link
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.