[ad_1]
Hong Kong police seeking to ban a pro-independence party began to monitor it closely shortly after its creation in 2016, the Post learned, while other groups have voiced their opposition to
A group of liberal defense advocates said "deeply concerned" by the proposed action against the Hong Kong National Party (HKNP) for reasons of national security , while he had not resorted to force or violence. In a statement, the Progressive Lawyers Group urged the city's security minister to respect the principle of freedom of association as a fundamental right when deciding on the fate of the party. The HKNP has until August 7 to justify its ban.
According to the Johannesburg Principles, considered an international standard, no restriction of rights would be legitimate unless "to protect the existence of a country or its borders". The police said that party propaganda, cabarets and the commitment of the founder Andy Chan Ho-tin to obtain China's independence by "all effective means" amounted to "concretize the country". territorial integrity against the use or threat of force ". measures "and constituted an" imminent threat "to national security, even without violence.
The group of lawyers has questioned the prohibition of a political party according to its program. Earlier judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, the group said, had claimed that the calls for secession were not sufficient grounds for dissolving a party.
An exception was a political party in Spain previously linked to a terrorist group.
In the middle of the debate, the Post finds that the police began to monitor the HKNP, created in March 2016, more than a year and a half ago, before deciding to ask l & # 39; ban.
They captured at least 11 images or text messages posted on the party's social media platforms in 2016, as cataloged in an 800-page document sent to Chan on Tuesday.
Images included photos of party booths across the city, and from Chan to forums in Japan and Taiwan from April to December 2016. One of the images was captured only 14 hours after an article from HKNP on Facebook marking his six-month anniversary on the night of October 17, 2016.
group of lawyers sp Among the some 50 civil organizations and political parties that issued Thursday a joint statement condemning the # Proposed ban, Chan stated that freedom of association was threatened.
Common sense tells us if we are waiting and see if they take [violent] action that would already be too late. So the law is still against what a group will do, not what he did
Ronny Tong, Executive Advisor
Tam Tak-chi of People Power, one of the Signatories, argued that Chan had simply spoken of independence and could maintain his views even though his party was closed.
"How can the government take care of him then? How can he restrain an individual's freedom of speech?" Said Mr. Tam.
The groups, as well that other pro-democracy parties, had planned to participate in a protest march organized by the Human Rights Front.Ronny Tong Ka-wah, an adviser to the Director General Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor , rejected the argument that only the use of force deserves action against the HKNP, noting that the Societies Ordinance was designed to prevent groups from mobilizing for violence. [19659002] "Common sense tells us if we are waiting and see if they take [violent] an action that would already be too late," Tong writes on Facebook. "So the law is still against what a group will do , not what he did. "
Separatism goes backwards – thanks to the Hong Kong government
Defending repression, a government source argued that freedom of speech was not an absolute right. "[Verbal] sexual harassment and claiming to be a member of the triad are both considered criminal offenses, even if they are only a speech," said the source. "We should leave it up to the court to judge whether the police have actually adopted a" threshold of freedom ", as some have suggested."
On Thursday, the police refused to comment further.
report by Jeffie Lam
[ad_2]
Source link
