Ex-Hong Kong minister doubles down on warning national security law can be ‘weaponised’ by any side
- Former secretary for transport and housing Anthony Cheung argues he earlier mentioned the risk only as a precaution and did not mean abuse had happened
- He points to other countries with their own strict legislation and how events had shaped the way governments used national security regulation
Former secretary for transport and housing Anthony Cheung Bing-leung told the Post on Wednesday he had only sounded a reminder of the potential risk of the controversial law being abused. He was speaking a day after Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor rejected his earlier comments.
“I didn’t say the abuse of the law has happened,” Cheung said. It’s just a precautionary note.”
Now a research chair professor of public administration at Education University, Cheung said the law was supposed to tackle extreme acts that endangered national security.
“The government should invoke the national security law sparingly and instead use other existing legislation to make arrests or prosecution as far as possible,” he said.
In a book talk on Monday, Cheung had argued that the biggest problem with the issue of national security around the world was not whether countries had laws or enforcement agencies to safeguard this, but whether such legislation could be “weaponised”.
“Since the law is really easy to use, many things, which could just be public order issues and are not within the scope of national security, could be elevated to become national security issues,” he said.
She said the greater concern was how anti-establishment forces were using financial systems and social media.
Cheung on Wednesday said he fully understood that the chief executive “has to leave no doubt as to supporting the need for and the merit of the present national security law”.
“I raised the precautionary note about weaponisation for political purposes because that is the risk experienced in other countries, including the United States after the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001,” he said. “Right now the US and its close allies are targeting China and firms linked to China in the name of national security.”
He said national security legislation in some Western countries was also quite harsh. “For instance, Australia’s national security laws allow trials to be held in secret,” Cheung noted. “Weaponisation can occur when political opponents of the government use the issue of national security law to play up political fear and conflict.”
But the government should not invoke the legislation lightly, he argued.
Most were accused of either displaying or possessing banners carrying messages deemed by the government to be pro-independence.
Where does the Apple Daily raid fit in with other national security arrests?
Only one has been charged in court so far – a man accused of incitement of secession and terrorism, who allegedly rode his motorbike into a group of officers. The suspect had mounted on his bike a flag with the slogan “Liberate Hong Kong”, often seen at anti-government protests over the past year.
The message has been branded a call for independence by the local government – illegal under the new law.
The largest operation involving the law came on August 10 when Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, one of his sons and an executive at his media group, as well as three opposition activists, were arrested in separate raids. More than 200 police officers also raided the Tseung Kwan O premises of the tabloid-style newspaper. The six have yet to be charged.
