Safeguarding National Security: Basic Law Article 23 Legislation Frequently Asked Questions (2024)

　Truth:

• According to Article 12 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance, the offences under the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance (“the Ordinance”) have no retrospective effect on acts committed before the enactment of the Ordinance.

　Truth:

• Such defendants will not be sent to the Chinese mainland for trial.
• Article 55 of the Hong Kong National Security Law (on the exercise of jurisdiction over a case concerning offence endangering national security by the Office for Safeguarding National Security of the Central People’s Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region) is only applicable to the four categories of offences stipulated under the Hong Kong National Security Law. It is not applicable to the offences enacted under the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance.

　Truth:

• This remark has disregarded the constitutional duty of the HKSAR: of the seven types of acts which the HKSAR shall enact laws to prohibit as prescribed under Article 23 of the Basic Law, the Hong Kong National Security Law only provides for secession and subversion against the Central People’s Government. Existing local laws (e.g. the Crimes Ordinance, the Official Secrets Ordinance and the Societies Ordinance) only cover some of these acts. There is a need for improvement.
• Also, there is indeed a practical need to enact the legislation. During the Hong Kong version of the “colour revolution” in 2019, rioters committed evil acts under the banners of “Hong Kong independence” and “revolution”. There were a series of large-scale riots, arsons and attacks, leading to the deterioration of law and order. The consequences were unbearable to the society. International landscape is ever-changing, and in fact, national security risks exist every day. Hostile elements are still watching out for opportunities to advance their cause. Therefore, we must complete legislation on Article 23 and improve laws relevant to safeguarding national security, so as to better cope with the constantly arising national security risks and threats.
• Every country will, from time to time, examine the development of the social situation and international landscape, and formulate new or amend existing laws to effectively cope with new national security risks.

　Truth:

• What the legislation targets are acts and activities endangering national security. The HKSAR law enforcement agencies have been taking law enforcement actions based on evidence and strictly in accordance with the law in respect of the acts of the persons or entities concerned, and have nothing to do with their occupation, background or political stance.
• Background or occupation, such as the media sector, foreign investors, etc. are also not elements of the enacted offences.
• Article 23 legislation is ultimately for better safeguarding the fundamental rights and freedoms of HKSAR residents and other people in the HKSAR, and ensuring that the properties and investments in the HKSAR are protected by law.

　Truth:

• No one will commit the offences relating to “seditious intention” by merely making well intentioned comments about the Government.
• The offence of “seditious intention” mainly targets the intention to induce hatred against the Government and covers, for example, inciting any other person to do a violent act in the HKSAR, or to do an act that does not comply with the law of the HKSAR. [See section 23 of the Ordinance for details]
• The Ordinance provides for the circ*mstances that do not constitute “seditious intention”. Making reasonable and genuine criticism of government policies based on objective facts, or pointing out issues, offering views for improvement, etc. does not constitute an offence of sedition. [See section 23 of the Ordinance for details]

　 Truth:

• The offence applies to public officers or government contractors, but not the media. [See section 37 of the Ordinance for details]
• The offence aims to prevent and impose punishment for acts of disclosure by any public officer or government contractor of information that appeared to be confidential in his or her possession by virtue of his or her capacity as a public officer or a government contractor, regardless of whether the relevant information is true or not, with intent to endanger national security.

　 Truth:

• The existing provisions relating to societies and the provisions relating to local organisations under the legislative proposals do not prohibit societies or local organisations from accepting financial aid from foreign organisations across the board.
• The crux of the matter is whether the local organisation concerned is a “political body” (i.e. a political party, or an organisation which promotes or prepares a candidate for an election), and whether the foreign organisation which provides the financial aid is a “foreign political organisation” (e.g. a government of or a political party in a foreign country, or its agent).
• If the local organisation is not a “political body” , or the foreign organisation which provides the financial aid is not a “foreign political organisation”, the local organisation concerned will not be prohibited from operation only because it receives financial aid from a foreign organisation.
• An organisation with the objective of promoting environmental protection, charities, etc., which do not engage in activities endangering national security, will by no means be affected by the legislation on Article 23.