20030605

HK civil liberties gradually erode

AP , HONG KONG

Memories of Beijing's crackdown on pro-democracy activists in Tiananmen Square still resonate in Hong Kong, where activists marked yesterday's 14th anniversary by warning that civil liberties here could be crushed by a pending anti-subversion bill.

The Hong Kong government is about to gain legislative approval of the measure -- which carries life prison sentences for many crimes against the state. Critics fear the special administrative zone could find itself subjected to communist-style suppression of unpopular views, although Hong Kong insists this is not an issue.

Thousands of Hong Kong people gather for a candlelight vigil marking each anniversary of Beijing's deployment of troops and tanks on June 4, 1989, to stop the student democracy movement. But this year, some are worried about how long they'll be able to keep speaking out.

"If our system erodes bit by bit with this legislation in place, no matter how much the government says, `We'll be liberal,' once the laws are in place, they will be used," said Law Yuk-kai, director of the Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor, a nongovernmental organization.

Even the harshest critics of the law acknowledge Hong Kong is not likely to start using it immediately.

Protesters holding an effigy of Hong Kong's Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa and placards march in a Hong Kong downtown street on Sunday. The Tung effigy reads ``You are superficial, and I am incompetent.'' The placards read ''Anti Article 23, and overturn the June 4 crackdown.''

Secretary for Security Regina Ip has said all along that Hong Kong's freedoms will be protected.

Hoping to quell the criticism, Ip appeared before lawmakers on Tuesday and announced changes that will make some crimes harder to prosecute -- for example by imposing a three-year statute of limitations for any prosecution of publishing seditious materials.

Any members of a group banned on national security grounds could not be prosecuted for actions committed before the ban, Ip told lawmakers.

The founding chairman of Hong Kong's Democratic Party, attorney Martin Lee, wrote in an op-ed piece for The New York Times. "The law would introduce Chinese legal standards through the back door."

While SARS spread across Tai-wan, the World Health Organiza-tion (WHO) refused to open its doors for Taiwan. Even though Taiwan applied for observer status as a "health entity," it still suffered as a result of the Chinese delegation's overbearing pressure.

Such frustration and humiliation once again reminds Taiwan-ese of their nation's lack of international status and that the cold truth is that Taiwan is an international orphan.

As the leader of the nation, President Chen Shui-bian must have experienced this frustration and humiliation the deepest. At the DPP's Central Standing Committee meeting on May 20, Chen said that he would invite all political parties and all circles of society to discuss a referendum on the WHO bid. Such a referendum would show the world the consensus and determination of this nation's people.

Who could have expected that such a rational suggestion would meet with scorn and harsh words from the pan-blue camp, who accused Chen of playing a populist game, of seeking independence and of blurring the focus of the presidential election.

Referendums are everyday business in many nations. Taking advantage of the presidential election to hold a referendum on entry into the WHO could lead to widespread debate. A clarification of the position of each pair of presidential and vice-presidential candidates would help all voters make a rational choice.

Following the president's announcement, the Cabinet said that in addition to holding a consultative referendum on the WHO bid together with the presidential election next year, it would also be possible to hold a referendum concerning the continuation of the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant.

Because the controversy surrounding the power plant issue involves energy policies and a huge budget, the budget was frozen as early as 1986 when the KMT was still in power and then unfrozen in 1992. But that was not the only glitch early on in the project. The Control Yuan twice handed out reprimands regarding the lack of an environmental impact assessment and illegal licensing for the power plant in 1995 and 1999, but it was still unable to block construction. Nor do we need mention the constitutional dispute arising from the work stoppage and continuation of construction following the transfer of power in 2000.

This shows over and over again that the major political parties and the existing political mechanisms are incapable of stopping this dispute. This is why Lin Yi-hsiung and the Nuclear 4 Referendum Initiative Association persist. Based on a sense of historical responsibility and persistence in democratic ideals, this should not be simplified into a matter of unification or independence, nor is it a matter of shirking one's responsibility and solving just about any problem by resorting to a referendum.

To sum up, we support holding a referendum on the question of Taiwan's entry into the WHO and the question of whether or not to continue building the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant together with the presidential election next year. These two issues reflect Taiwan's international situation and our difficulties with sustainable development. We demand that each party's presidential candidates clearly state their views on these issues and engage in thorough debate so that the people of Taiwan at the same time as they choose a new president can show that sovereignty rests in them, thus further confirming the fact that Taiwan already has developed into a civil society.

Wu Shu-min, Tseng Kui-hai, Ho Li-hsing and Peter Huang are the chairmen of the Northern, Southern, Central and Eastern Taiwan Society, respectively.