Editorial | More important than timing is the wording of Article 23 laws
- Hong Kong has a duty to pass national security legislation, but the government should take great care that the right balance is in place as the city reconnects with the wider world
Twenty years have passed since the Hong Kong government’s last attempt to pass national security laws as required by the city’s Basic Law. The plans were shelved after a mass protest in July 2003. Since then, top officials have promised the legislation will be enacted when the time is right.
Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu is now considering when that will be. He has already set a broad timetable. Last week, Lee confirmed the bill would be introduced this year or in 2024.
The timing, to be decided by the government, is important. The laws have been controversial in the past. The proposals must be well-researched and carefully drafted. A public consultation will be needed.
Concerns have, understandably, been expressed that this complex, sensitive exercise might distract the city from other priorities. Hong Kong desperately needs to boost its economy now that most Covid-19 restrictions have finally been lifted and borders reopened.
This is a valid point to be taken into consideration when the timing of the new laws is determined. But Hong Kong has had a constitutional duty to pass the legislation since its return to Chinese rule in 1997. It cannot defer the process indefinitely. Article 23 of the Basic Law requires the city to pass specific types of national security law.
