An issue of accountability
I refer to the article headlined 'A case of double standards: America's stance on Article 23' (June 18), in which Michael Chugani contends that Hong Kong's anti-sedition legislation is comparable to the USA Patriot Act, enacted by the US Congress in October 2001.
Space does not permit a rehearsal of all of the debate concerning the merits of the USA Patriot Act, but I assume readers would agree that American legislators who passed this act are ultimately accountable to their constituents.
If American voters were to prove less than satisfied with this or any other law, they have the right to vote the law's supporters out of office at the next election. This is an important distinction.
SUSAN N. STEVENSON, Spokesperson,
US Consulate General
Article 23 hypocrisy?
Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee has called upon us to join in the protest march on July 1 against Article 23.
If it were to be a rally in support of Article 23, Ms Ng would brand it as an act to 'split the community'. It would appear that the right to protest or rally is the right of only those who oppose. What a farce!
I am fed up with these hypocrites and I, for one, will certainly not take part in any such protest.
C. S. CHANG, Causeway Bay