Opinion | Hong Kong legislators leveraging US power to settle personal scores hurt city’s interests

The suggestion that Hong Kong officials could fall foul of US legislation on human rights has in itself caused reputational damage to the city. Hong Kong politicians seeking to use the legislation against enemies do a disservice to voters

Reading Time:3 minutes

An anti-government protester covers his face with a scarf printed with the stars and stripes of the US flag during a march in Hong Kong on December 1. Pro-democracy legislators should not try to push for US sanctions just to satisfy their radical base. Photo: Reuters

Published: 9:00am, 15 Mar 2020Updated: 9:36am, 15 Mar 2020

For the first time in Hong Kong’s history, four members of the Executive Council (three of whom also serve in the legislature, myself included) went to California to participate in the US-Hong Kong Dialogue hosted by the World Affairs Council.

This meeting earlier this month was a follow-up to the HK-US Legislative Exchange hosted by the Mansfield Foundation, which I attended last August. That event in Montana provided a forum for American and Hong Kong legislators from opposing political camps to exchange views on Hong Kong issues.

These unprecedented meetings no doubt came about because of new US legislation on Hong Kong that was introduced and enacted last year, riding on a wave of concerns about perceived Chinese encroachments on Hong Kong’s high level of autonomy that is provided under the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic Law. The Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2019 introduces new reporting requirements with regard to Hong Kong, in addition to the annual report already mandated under the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992.

A particularly worrisome development is the provision in the new act that requires the US president to identify persons determined to be responsible for “gross violations of internationally recognised human rights” in Hong Kong – such as extrajudicial rendition, arbitrary detention or torture – and to impose sanctions accordingly.

Given the high legal threshold for imposing sanctions, and the fact that Hong Kong officials are hardly known for such behaviour, it is inconceivable that any sanctions will be imposed on Hong Kong persons. Yet, the threat of sanctions hangs over Hong Kong like a sword of Damocles. The very suggestion that Hong Kong officials could fall foul of US legislation on human rights has in itself caused considerable reputational damage to the city.

If any sanctions were to be imposed one day – either for political reasons more related to China than Hong Kong, or as the result of high-octane lobbying by anti-government activists – a body blow would be dealt to Hong Kong’s international status and relations with the West. That would run counter to the US Congress’ objective of supporting “one country, two systems” in Hong Kong, as stated in the Hong Kong Policy Act.