A New Study Says The Malaria Drug Touted (And Taken) By Trump Looks Deadly For Coronavirus Patients

“If there was ever hope for this drug, this is the death of it.

 May 22, 2020



The malaria drug that President Donald Trump has said he is taking as a coronavirus preventive, hydroxychloroquine, was linked to a higher rate of deaths and serious heart problems, according to a massive study of COVID-19 hospital patients released Friday.

The drug, also used to treat arthritis and lupus, has emerged as a medical flashpoint in the coronavirus pandemic, seeing the FDA issue a warning against its use outside of hospitals even as Trump said he was taking it.

The six-continent report released by the Lancet journal effectively slams the door on the suggestion that hydroxychloroquine helps COVID-19 patients, showing no signs of benefit among the 96,000 patients in the study.

Instead, it found the drug linked to an increased risk of dying — by over 35% — while also more than doubling the risk of heart arrhythmia.

"It's no longer that hydroxychloroquine has no sign of efficacy — it is associated with an increase in mortality," said cardiologist Eric Topol of the Scripps Research Institute in a tweet on the study.

“It’s one thing not to have benefit, but this shows distinct harm,” Topol told the Washington Post. “If there was ever hope for this drug, this is the death of it.”
To generate its statistical power, the study tallied the experience of nearly 15,000 hospital patients taking some combination of hydroxychloroquine drugs against more than 80,000 who didn't. More than 10,000 patients among the 96,000 in the study died.

Patients given a combination of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, taken with or without an antibiotic as some regimens suggested, died at a higher rate compared to the patients who didn't get the drug.
"Our findings suggest not only an absence of therapeutic benefit but also potential harm with the use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine drug regimens," concluded the study.

It's possible that the heart arrhythmias documented in the study aren't what killed the patients, noted a commentary led by Christian Funck-Brentano of France's Sorbonne University that the journal ran with the study. Instead, those might be due to a separate problem for people already on heart drugs, and hydroxychloroquine drugs, they suggested, simply "could worsen COVID-19 severity in some patients."

MORE ON THIS
Trump Said He's Taking Hydroxychloroquine To Try To Prevent COVID-19 In Spite Of An FDA Warning

Amber Jamieson · May 18, 2020

The FDA Is Warning That Drugs Promoted By Trump To Treat COVID-19 Pose Serious Heart Risks

Zahra Hirji · April 24, 2020

Dan Vergano is a science reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in Washington, DC.
Contact Dan Vergano at dan.vergano@buzzfeed.com.

Explainer |

 What you need to know about the national security law for Hong Kong

• China’s legislators will discuss a new national security law specifically crafted for Hong Kong
• The issue has long been controversial in the city, despite the Basic Law requiring its enactment

The Chinese and Hong Kong flags. Photo: Shutterstock

Chinese legislators are expected to discuss a
new law concerning Hong Kong’s national security at the upcoming parliamentary session. The law would ban all seditious activities aimed at toppling the central government and external interference in the city’s affairs, as well as target terrorist acts in the special administrative region, sources say. Here is a rundown of the background of the issue.

Hong Kong democrats bash national security law from China’s two sessions, US also voices concern

What does Hong Kong need a national security law for and why does it not have one?
Under Article 23 of the Basic Law, or the city’s mini-constitution, the Hong Kong government must enact its own national security law prohibiting acts of “treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the central people’s government, or theft of state secrets … and to prohibit political organisations or bodies of the region from establishing ties with foreign political organisations or bodies”.
In 2003, the Hong Kong government was forced to shelve a national security bill after an estimated half a million people took to the streets to oppose the legislation, which they warned would curb their rights and freedoms.

A Causeway Bay rally against proposed Article 23 legislation on July 1, 2003. Photo: Dickson Lee


How has the issue developed since then?


The Hong Kong government has steered clear of introducing the legislation. After the 2014 Occupy Central protests, Hong Kong’s pro-Beijing politicians urged the city administration to consider reviving the Article 23 bill. National People’s Congress deputy Stanley Ng Chau-pei had suggested incorporating mainland China security laws into the Basic Law.

Since taking office as the city’s chief executive, Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor has repeatedly said that Article 23 legislation could only be enacted when the timing and the political atmosphere were right.

Pressure to bring in the legislation has been mounting since protests erupted in June last year, initially over the now-withdrawn extradition bill, but which morphed into a wider
anti-government movement.



What other options are available under the Basic Law?
Under Article 18,
national laws can only be applied in Hong Kong if they are listed in Annex III of the mini-constitution and relate to defence, foreign affairs and “other matters outside the limits” of the city’s autonomy. The national laws would then either be promulgated – taking effect automatically – or adopted through local legislation.


What happens next?
This week – A resolution paving the way for the legislation will be presented on Friday to
the National People’s Congress (NPC), the country’s legislature.

By the end of May – The NPC is expected to vote on th resolution at the end of the annual session, likely on May 28. The resolution will then be forwarded to the NPC Standing Committee to flesh out the details of the legislation.

By the end of June – The Standing Committee is expected to hold its next meeting as early as June. A draft law will be presented at the start of the gathering, which could last for about a week. That draft could be approved and promulgated in Hong Kong by the end of the meeting.

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as: looking back – and ahead

Hong Kong crisis: China presents security laws banning subversion and separatism

Details emerge of security laws Beijing wants to impose, overriding territory’s constitution and prompting threat of US retaliation
Lily Kuo in Beijing and Helen Davidson 

THE GUARDIAN Fri 22 May 2020
 

Pro-democracy activists hold up placards of Chinese President Xi Jinping with slogans including ‘End one party state’ at a ferry terminal in Hong Kong. Photograph: Kin Cheung/AP


China’s proposal for imposing new national security laws on Hong Kong would bar subversion, separatism or acts of foreign interference against the central government and would allow the central government to set up “security organs” in the territory, it has emerged.

The Communist party’s efforts to impose a national security law have been widely interpreted as a move to fully take control over the territory, wracked by pro-democracy protests for the last year. Critics say it will effectively erase the “one country, two systems” framework that is meant to grant Hong Kong a high degree of autonomy.

According to a draft of the legislation, China’s parliament has set up a legal framework “prevent, stop and punish any act to split the country, subvert state power, organise and carry out terrorist activities and other behaviours that seriously endanger national security.”

The bill bars any “activities of foreign and external forces to interfere” in Hong Kong’s affairs. “When needed, relevant national security organs of the Central People’s Government will set up agencies in [Hong Kong] to fulfil relevant duties to safeguard national security”.News of China’s plan has prompted broad international condemnation and raised the prospect of further unrest.

Successive Hong Kong governments have attempted to pass a national security law – the most recent was shelved after half a million people took to the streets in protest in 2003.

Wang Chen, vice-chairman of the standing committee of the national people’s congress, said on Friday at the opening of China’s annual parliament in Beijing that a draft decision on the proposal had been submitted to the legislature, according to state media.

“Law-based and forceful measures must be taken to prevent, stop and punish such activities,” the document said, according to the state news agency Xinhua. The legislation appeared to be aimed at compelling Hong Kong to pass national security laws as required under the territory’s mini-constitution, the Basic Law, after the former British colony’s handover to Chinese control in 1997.

Article 23 says the territory must enact, “on its own”, national security laws to prohibit “treason, secession, sedition [and] subversion” against the Chinese government.

The document said, according to Xinhua: “More than 20 years after Hong Kong’s return, however, relevant laws are yet to materialise due to the sabotage and obstruction by those trying to sow trouble in Hong Kong and China at large as well as external hostile forces.

“Efforts must be made at the state level to establish and improve the legal system and enforcement mechanisms for [Hong Kong] to safeguard national security, to change the long-term ‘defenceless’ status in the field of national security.”

Fear and fighting spirit in Hong Kong as China 'rams through' security law

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/22/fear-and-fighting-spirit-in-hong-kong-as-china-rams-through-security-lawHong Kong’s security laws: what are they and why are they so controversial?

The latest protests against the Beijing-backed government began over another controversial law that would have allowed extradition to mainland China. As those protests approach their one-year anniversary, Chinese authorities appear more determined to put down the movement with unprecedented measures that experts say will irreparably damage the territory’s autonomy, as protected under the “one-country, two-systems” framework.

The Chinese premier, Li Keqiang, said on Friday that his government would “establish sound legal systems and enforcement mechanisms for safeguarding national security” in Hong Kong and see that the region “fulfils its constitutional responsibilities”.

Former legislator and veteran pro-democracy activist, Lee Cheuk-yan, told media the draft allowed Beijing to set up its own national security agency bureau in Hong Kong.

Pro-democracy camp legislator Helena Wong said: “even the SAR government will not be able to regulate what the agents do in Hong Kong”.

But pro-Beijing legislators supported the move, citing a rise in “localism”, independence-motivated violence, and collusion with Taiwan independence groups and “anti-China forces”.

Denunciations of the decision continued to pour in on Friday as Chinese lawmakers were expected to reveal more details of the proposal. Taiwan’s mainland affairs council called on Beijing not to push Hong Kong into “bigger turmoil” and said authorities had wrongly blamed external influences and “Hong Kong separatists” for the demonstrations.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/21/china-to-propose-controversial-hong-kong-security-measureCall for reprisals over China's Hong Kong security proposals

The US Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, said any further crackdowns from Beijing would “only intensify the Senate’s interest in re-examining the US-China relationship”.

The US senators Marco Rubio and Cory Gardner, and the chairman of the Senate committee on foreign relations, Jim Risch, said it would begin “an unprecedented assault against Hong Kong’s autonomy”.

“The Chinese government is once again breaking its promises to the people of Hong Kong and the international community … The United States will stand resolute in its support of the Hong Kong people,” they said. “These developments are of grave concern to the United States, and could lead to a significant reassessment on US policy towards Hong Kong.”

A bipartisan bill being introduced by US senators Chris Van Hollen and Pat Toomey would also sanction officials and entities that enforced any new national security laws, and penalise banks that did business with the entities, the Washington Post reported. That bill appears to expand on existing laws in the US, which require lawmakers to examine the level of autonomy from China Hong Kong holds, and adjust its special status with the US accordingly.

Virginie Battu-Henriksson, spokeswoman for the European Union on foreign affairs and security, said the EU was watching developments “very closely … We attach great importance to the ‘one country two systems’ principle.”

Chinese state media lauded the move by Beijing. State-run tabloid the Global Times called the decision “overdue” and intended to “prevent internal and external forces from using the region as a tool or creating situations that threaten national security”. Hong Kong “did not enjoy a single peaceful day” in 2019, it said. “It was like a city in an undeveloped country engulfed in turmoil.”

On Friday protesters in Hong Kong called for a march while pro-democracy activists vowed to continue demonstrating. Observers say the law could be used to target critics of the central government, especially protesters.

“This is potentially the end of constitutional autonomy and legal separation. It’s several magnitudes worse than the extradition bill,” said Jeppe Mulich, who teaches global history at the University of Cambridge, and focuses on Asia.

“Given how severe Chinese law is on issues like sedition and secession, and given the frequent use of ‘terrorism’ by Beijing when characterising the protests, I would guess it could get really, really bad.”

With Reuters

'This is the end of Hong Kong': China pushes controversial security laws

Proposed legislation would effectively end one country, two systems status, say critics


Lily Kuo in Beijing, Verna Yu in Hong Kong, and Helen Davidson
THE GUARDIAN Thu 21 May 2020

China plans to push through sweeping national security laws for Hong Kong at its annual meeting of parliament, in a move that critics say will effectively end the territory’s autonomy.

Beijing has been making it clear it wants new security legislation passed since huge pro-democracy protests last year plunged Hong Kong into its deepest turmoil since it returned to Chinese rule in 1997.

“National security is the bedrock underpinning the stability of the country,” said Zhang Yesui, spokesman for the National People’s Congress (NPC), the annual meeting of parliament that kicks off its full session on Friday.

Zhang announced that delegates at the NPC – a largely rubber-stamping exercise – would “establish and improve a legal framework and mechanism for safeguarding national security” in Hong Kong.

Condemnation of the proposal was swift, amid fears it could erase the “one country, two systems” framework that is supposed to grant the territory a high degree of autonomy.

“This is the end of Hong Kong,” said pro-democracy Hong Kong legislator Dennis Kwok. “Beijing, the Central People’s Government, has completely breached its promise to the Hong Kong people ... They are completely walking back on their obligation.”

Article 23 of Hong Kong’s mini-constitution, the Basic Law, says the city must enact national security laws to prohibit “treason, secession, sedition [and] subversion” against the Chinese government.

But the clause has never been implemented due to deeply held public fears it would curtail Hong Kong’s cherished rights, such as freedom of expression. An attempt to enact article 23 in 2003 was shelved after half a million people took to the streets in protest.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/22/what-better-time-than-now-fears-china-will-use-crises-to-cement-grip-on-hong-kong'What better time than now?' Fears China will use crises to cement grip on Hong Kong

By passing a law in the NPC, Chinese authorities will effectively bypass local opposition.

Zhang said details of the proposal would be announced at NPC proceedings on Friday. The resolution is likely to be passed by China’s parliament next week.

The US president Donald Trump, who has ratcheted up his anti-China rhetoric as he seeks re-election in November, told reporters at the White House that “nobody knows yet” the details of China’s plan. “If it happens we’ll address that issue very strongly,” Trump said, without elaborating.

US State Department spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus warned that imposing such a law would be “highly destabilising, and would be met with strong condemnation from the United States and the international community”.

China’s announcement came as anti-government protests that have overwhelmed Hong Kong since last June approach their one-year anniversary. In recent months the protests have been paused as a result of the coronavirus pandemic and much of the world has been distracted. In the meantime Beijing has appeared more determined to definitively quell the demonstrations.

Critics say the measure severely undermines Hong Kong’s legal framework, established under the terms of the former British colony’s handover to Chinese control in 1997. Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong, described it as a “comprehensive assault on the city’s autonomy”.

Under its Basic Law, Hong Kong is meant to enact security legislation on its own. “This spells the beginning of the end of Hong Kong under ‘one country, two systems’,” said Kenneth Chan, a political scientist at the Baptist University of Hong Kong.

“It would mean also communist-style political struggles have trumped the rule of law and a dagger that has stabbed into the heart of the city’s liberal foundations,” he said.

“This is an expedient way to control Hong Kong,” said Johnny Lau, veteran China watcher and former journalist at the pro-China Wen Wei Po.

Legal observers and human rights advocates worry the law will be used to target critics of the central government. Over the last year, Hong Kong and Chinese authorities have often described demonstrators as terrorists.

“The obvious worry is that in China, we have seen ‘national security’, as well as related concepts like ‘counter-terrorism’, being used as an excuse for all sorts of human rights abuses, including the arbitrary arrest and imprisonment of dissidents, activists and human rights lawyers,” said Wilson Leung, a Hong Kong barrister who is part of the Progressive Lawyers Group.

According to legal experts, Chinese lawmakers may be able to enforce the law in Hong Kong through a provision, article 18, of the Basic Law that allows certain national laws in mainland China to be applied in Hong Kong, either through declaration or local legislation.

Martin Lee, the founder of the Democratic Party and a senior barrister who helped draft the Basic Law, said he insisted on the language in the document that “Hong Kong shall legislate on its own” national security laws.

“This is a blatant breach of their promise, they have reversed things completely,” he said. “This is the wrong procedure.”

He said the article 18 provision should apply to national laws only, not laws that specifically relate to Hong Kong. “If this precedent is set, then there is no need for [Hong Kong’s] legislative council,” he said.

Eric Cheung, the director of clinical legal education of the faculty of law at the University of Hong Kong, said: “The problem here is that if they want to do it, of course they can do it in any way they want to. The reality is that we are powerless.”

As China’s most important political event opens this week, after almost three months of delay, there are other signs of measures to stop the protests in Hong Kong. At the opening of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference on Thursday, Wang Yang, the head of the political advisory body, said the party supported strengthening the ability of its members in Hong Kong to “speak out, stop chaos, and reinstate order”.

till, demonstrators, who have begun to take to the streets again, appeared more determined to pursue their demands.

“At this time last year, didn’t we believe that the extradition law was sure to pass? Hong Kongers have always created miracles,” Nathan Law, a pro-democracy activist, wrote on Facebook.

“People will continue to protest on streets,” tweeted Joshua Wong, an activist and former student leader during the 2014 protest movement. “Hong Kongers will not be scared off.”

Additional reporting by Lillian Yang

Play Video
1:00 'Saddest day in Hong Kong's history': China pushes controversial security laws – video

Timeline
Hong Kong protests

February 2019

A new Hong Kong extradition law is proposed, which would allow people to be transferred to mainland China for a variety of crimes. Residents fear it could lead to politically motivated extraditions into China's much harsher judicial system.

31 March 2019

Large public demonstrations start as thousands march in the streets to protest against the extradition bill.

11 May 2019

Hong Kong lawmakers scuffle in parliament during a row over the law.

30 May 2019

Hong Kong's leader, Carrie Lam, introduces concessions to the extradition bill, including limiting the scope of extraditable offences, but critics say they are not enough.

12 June 2019

The scale of protests continues to increase as more than half a million people take to the streets. Police use rubber bullets and teargas against the biggest protests Hong Kong has seen for decades.

15 June 2019

Lam says the proposed extradition law has been postponed indefinitely.

1 July 2019

The protests continue as demonstrators storm the Legislative Council, destroying pictures, daubing graffiti on the walls and flying the old flag of Hong Kong emblazoned with the British union flag. The protests coincide with the 22nd anniversary of the handover of Hong Kong from the UK back to China.

21 July 2019

Armed men in white T-shirts thought to be supporting the Chinese government attack passengers and passers-by in Yuen Long metro station, while nearby police take no action.

30 July 2019

44 protesters are charged with rioting, which further antagonises the anti-extradition bill movement.

September 2019

By now the protest movement has coalesced around five key demands: complete withdrawal of the proposed extradition bill, withdrawal of the use of the word "riot" in relation to the protests, unconditional release of arrested protesters and charges against them dropped, an independent inquiry into police behaviour and the implementation of genuine universal suffrage.

15 September 2019

The mass protests enter their fifteenth week, with police resorting to teargas and water cannon against the demonstrators, and a wave of "doxxing" using digital techniques to unmask police and protesters as a new front in the battle.

1 October 2019

Police shoot a protester with live ammunition for the first time, as demonstrations continue on the day marking the 70th anniversary of the declaration of the People's Republic of China.

7 October 2019

The first charges are brought against protesters for covering their faces, after authorities bring in new laws banning face masks in order to make it easier to identify or detain protesters.

11 October 2019

Hong Kong officials spark outrage in the city as it revealed that nearly a third of protesters arrested since June have been children. Seven hundred and 50 out of the 2,379 people arrested  were under 18, and 104 were under 16.

16 October 2019

Lam is forced to deliver a key annual policy speech via video link after after being heckled in parliament, as the legislative council resumed sessions after it was suspended on 12 June. Later in the day one of the protest leaders, Jimmy Sham, was attacked by assailants wielding hammers and knives.

23 October 2019

Chan Tong-kai, the murder suspect whose case prompted the original extradition bill is released from prison, saying that he is willing to surrender himself to Taiwan. The extradition bill is also formally withdrawn, a key demand of protesters.

8 November 2019

Chow Tsz-lok, 22, becomes the first direct fatality of the protests. Chow, a computer science student at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST), was found injured in a car park in Tseung Kwan O in Kowloon, where he was believed to have fallen one storey. Protesters had been trying to disrupt a police officer’s wedding, which was being held in the area. A week later a 70-year-old cleaner who is thought to have been hit by a brick during a clash between protesters and pro-Beijing residents becomes the second person to die.

18 November 2019

Hundreds of protestors are trapped as police lay siege to a university, firing tear gas.

24 November 2019

Local elections deliver a landslide victory for pro-democracy campaigners.


SEE https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2020/05/china-security-law-could-be-end-of-hong.html

China security law 'could be end of Hong Kong'

AFP Image Tanya Chan (C) said this was "the saddest day in Hong Kong history"

Pro-democracy activists say they fear "the end of Hong Kong", after China announced plans for a new security law.

The US said the move could be "highly destabilising" and undermine China's obligations on Hong Kong's autonomy.

China's National People's Congress will on Friday debate the law, aimed at banning sedition and subversion.

Supporters say it is needed to tackle the violence in political protests that erupted last year. Opponents fear it will be used to remove basic freedoms.

Hong Kong has observed a "one country, two systems" policy and a "high degree of autonomy" since Britain returned sovereignty to China in 1997.

But activists, and the pro-democracy movement, feel that this is being undermined by Beijing. 

What is the Basic Law and how does it work? 

Why are there protests in Hong Kong? All the context you need

Last year, millions took to the streets over seven months to protest against a bill that would have allowed extraditions to mainland China. Many of the protests turned violent. The bill was eventually paused, and then withdrawn.

The BBC's Helier Cheung on Hong Kong's 2019 protests

The security law is more controversial still. According to the Basic Law, the territory's mini-constitution, Hong Kong's government is required to pass national security legislation. However, an attempt in 2003 failed after 500,000 people took to the streets in opposition.


That is why an attempt now to force through national security legislation - which one legislator on Thursday called "the most controversial [issue] in Hong Kong since the handover" - has caused such outrage.

The BBC's China correspondent, Robin Brant, says that what makes the situation so incendiary is that Beijing can simply bypass Hong Kong's elected legislators and impose the changes.

China can place them into Annex III of the Basic Law, which covers national laws that must then be implemented in Hong Kong - either by legislation, or decree.

Pro-democracy activists fear the law will be used to muzzle protests in defiance of the freedoms enshrined in the Basic Law, as similar laws in China are used to silence opposition to the Communist Party.
What have opponents of China's move said?

A number of pro-democracy figures in Hong Kong, including Democratic Party leader Wu Chi-wai, said the announcement was the death of "one country, two systems".

Civic Party lawmaker Dennis Kwok said "if this move takes place, 'one country, two systems' will be officially erased. This is the end of Hong Kong."

His colleague Tanya Chan added that this was the "saddest day in Hong Kong history".

Student activist and politician Joshua Wong tweeted that the move was an attempt by Beijing to "silence Hong Kongers' critical voices with force and fear".

Meanwhile, the US state department said that "any effort to impose national security legislation that does not reflect the will of the people of Hong Kong would be highly destabilising, and would be met with strong condemnation".

President Donald Trump said the US would react strongly if China followed through with its proposals, without giving details.

The US is currently considering whether to extend Hong Kong's preferential trading and investment privileges. It must decide by the end of the month.


Former Hong Kong governor Chris Patten: "UK should tell China this is outrageous"

The last British governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten, called the move a "comprehensive assault on the city's autonomy".

A spokesperson for the British Foreign Office said that the UK expected China "to respect Hong Kong's rights and freedoms and high degree of autonomy".
What is China's position?

Sources at the National People's Congress (NPC) have said that Beijing can no longer wait for Hong Kong to pass its own law, nor can it continue to watch the growth of what it sees as a violent anti-government movement.

One source told the South China Morning Post: "We can no longer allow acts like desecrating national flags or defacing of the national emblem in Hong Kong."

AFP Image Zhang Yesui announces the move ahead of the opening of the NPC

Beijing may also fear September's elections to Hong Kong's legislature. If last year's success for pro-democracy parties in district elections is repeated, government bills could potentially be blocked.

Announcing the move on Thursday, spokesman Zhang Yesui gave little away, saying the measure would "improve" on one country, two systems.

Mr Zhang said: "National security is the bedrock underpinning the stability of the country. Safeguarding national security serves the fundamental interest of all Chinese, our Hong Kong compatriots included." 

Profile: Carrie Lam, Chief Executive of Hong Kong 

Hong Kong's year in seven intense emotions

After debating the issue, the NPC - generally a rubber stamp - will vote on it next week. The matter would then not advance until June, when it goes before the Standing Committee.

An editorial in the state-run China Daily said the law meant that "those who challenge national security will necessarily be held accountable for their behaviour".

In Hong Kong, the pro-Beijing DAB party said it "fully supported" the proposals, which were made "in response to Hong Kong's rapidly worsening political situation in recent years".

Pro-Beijing lawmaker Christopher Cheung told Reuters: "Legislation is necessary and the sooner the better."

What is Hong Kong's legal situation?

Hong Kong was ruled by Britain as a colony for more than 150 years up to 1997.

The British and Chinese governments signed a treaty - the Sino-British Joint Declaration - that agreed Hong Kong would have "a high degree of autonomy, except in foreign and defence affairs", for 50 years.

This was enshrined in the Basic Law, which runs out in 2047.

As a result, Hong Kong's own legal system, borders, and rights - including freedom of assembly and free speech - are protected.

But Beijing has the ability to veto any changes to the political system and has, for example, ruled out direct election of the chief executive.


Uproar on Monday in Hong Kong's legislature

Hong Kong saw widespread political protests in 2019 but these became much smaller during the coronavirus outbreak.

However, there were chaotic scenes in Hong Kong's legislative chamber on Monday, when a number of pro-democracy lawmakers were dragged out during a row about a bill that would make it illegal to disrespect the national anthem.

A group of 15 prominent pro-democracy activists also appeared in court on Monday charged with organising and taking part in unlawful assemblies related to last year's protests.

USING COVID-19 TO CRACK DOWN ON PROTESTERS
China parliament eyes Hong Kong national security law after unrest

AFP / Anthony WALLACE

Beijing has made clear it wants new security legislation passed after Hong Kong was rocked by massive and sometimes violent pro-democracy protests last year

China's parliament said Thursday it will introduce a proposal for a national security law in Hong Kong at its annual session, in a move likely to stoke unrest in the financial hub.

Beijing has made clear it wants new security legislation passed after the semi-autonomous city was rocked by seven months of massive and sometimes violent pro-democracy protests last year.

The proposal will be introduced on Friday, the first day of the National People's Congress, and would strengthen "enforcement mechanisms" in the financial hub, the parliament's spokesman Zhang Yesui said.

China's parliament considers it "necessary to improve and uphold the 'One Country, Two Systems' policy," Zhang said, referring to the arrangement that has underpinned the city's liberties and free market economy.

Article 23 of Hong Kong's mini-constitution, the Basic Law, says the city must enact national security laws to prohibit "treason, secession, sedition (and) subversion" against the Chinese government.

ut the clause has never been implemented due to deeply held public fears it would curtail Hong Kong's widely cherished civil rights.

AFP / LEO RAMIREZ

Zhang Yesui said China's parliament considered the move necessary

The city enjoys freedoms unseen on the Chinese mainland which are protected by an agreement made before former Britain handed the territory back to Beijing in 1997.

An attempt to enact Article 23 in 2003 was shelved after half a million people took to the streets in protest.

The controversial bill has been put back on the table in recent years in response to the rise of the city's pro-democracy movement.

Zhang did not provide more details about the proposed law.

But if it is introduced to the NPC it is likely to be approved, as the body rubber-stamps decisions already made by Communist Party policymakers.

- 'End of Hong Kong' -

Hong Kong's largest pro-Beijing political party DAB was quick to voice its support for the proposal, describing it as a "responsible move".

AFP / Anthony WALLACE

The controversial bill has been put back on the table in recent years in response to the rise of the city's pro-democracy movement

But pro-democracy lawmakers in Hong Kong were furious.

"This is the end of Hong Kong, this is the end of One Country, Two Systems, make no mistake about it," Civic Party lawmaker Dennis Kwok told reporters.

Pro-democracy lawmaker Tanya Chan said Beijing had "shown zero respect for Hong Kong people" by attempting to enact the law without consultation.

"Many Hong Kongers must be as angry as us now, but we must remember not to give up," she added.

Chris Patten, Hong Kong's final British governor before the 1997 handover, said the proposal signalled a "comprehensive assault on the city's autonomy".

"This will be hugely damaging to Hong Kong's international reputation and to the prosperity of a great city," Patten said.

AFP / Anthony WALLACE

Pro-democracy lawmaker Tanya Chan (C) said Beijing had "shown zero respect for Hong Kong people"

Hong Kong has its own lawmaking body, but at least two Hong Kong deputies to the NPC have openly said they would propose the idea of introducing the national security law without going through city's legislature.

Article 18 of Hong Kong's basic law allows the NPC to add legislation to an annex of the mini-constitution after consultations with a Basic Law committee and the Beijing-backed Hong Kong government.

The legislation can then be applied to Hong Kong without being scrutinised by the city's lawmakers.

The NPC's move comes after Beijing appointed a hardline senior official, known for a crackdown on Christians in mainland China, as its main policymaker for Hong Kong.

Xia Baolong, previously secretary-general at the national committee of China's top political advisory body, was promoted to director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office of the State Council in February.

China set to impose new Hong Kong security law, Trump warns of strong U.S. reaction

James Pomfret, Yew Lun Tian, Steve Holland
MAY 21, 2020

HONG KONG/BEIJING/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - China is set to impose new national security legislation on Hong Kong after last year’s pro-democracy unrest, a Chinese official said on Thursday, drawing a warning from President Donald Trump that Washington would react “very strongly” against the attempt to gain more control over the former British colony.

The U.S. State Department also warned China, saying a high-degree of autonomy and respect for human rights were key to preserving the territory’s special status in U.S. law, which has helped it maintain its position as a world financial centre.

China’s action could spark fresh protests in Hong Kong, which enjoys many freedoms not allowed on the mainland, after often violent demonstrations of 2019 plunged the city into its deepest turmoil since it returned to Beijing’s rule in 1997.



RELATED COVERAGE

U.S. senators seek to sanction Chinese over Hong Kong

U.S. State Department warns China over new Hong Kong security law

Trump, who has ratcheted up his anti-China rhetoric as he seeks re-election in November, told reporters “nobody knows yet” the details of China’s plan. “If it happens we’ll address that issue very strongly,” he said, without elaborating.

Zhang Yesui, spokesman for the China’s National People’s Congress, said details of the legislation would be given on Friday when the parliament holds its annual session.

“In light of the new circumstances and need, the National People’s Congress (NPC) is exercising its constitutional power” to establish a new legal framework and enforcement mechanism to safeguard national security in Hong Kong, he told a briefing.

Pro-democracy demonstrators have for years opposed the idea of national security laws, arguing they could erode the city’s high degree of autonomy, guaranteed under the “one country, two systems” formula in place for two decades.

A senior Hong Kong government official said details on the move and its implementation remained unclear, but Hong Kong media have reported the legislation would ban secession, foreign interference, terrorism and all seditious activities aimed at toppling the central government.

The “Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act” approved by Trump last year requires the State Department to certify at least annually that Hong Kong retains enough autonomy to justify favourable U.S. trading terms.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on May 6 he was delaying this assessment to account for any NPC actions.

FILE PHOTO: Demonstrators protesting the proposed extradition bill aim their flashlights towards riot police as they are chased through the streets of Hong Kong, China, August 25, 2019. REUTERS/Willy Kurniawan/File Photo

If the State Department decertified the territory, it would still ultimately fall to Trump whether to decide to end some, all, or none of the privileges Hong Kong currently enjoys.

Ending Hong Kong’s special status would be a big blow for U.S. firms. According to the State Department, 85,000 U.S. citizens lived in Hong Kong in 2018 and more than 1,300 U.S. companies operate there, including nearly every major U.S. financial firm.

State Department spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus said any move to impose legislation that did not reflect the will of the people would be highly destabilising and met with strong U.S. condemnation.

A previous attempt to introduce Hong Kong national security legislation, known as Article 23, in 2003 was met with mass peaceful protests and shelved.

Online posts had urged people in Hong Kong to protest on Thursday night and dozens were seen shouting pro-democracy slogans in a shopping mall as riot police stood nearby.

Opposition democrats said the move would gravely wound Hong Kong’s reputation as a financial centre and its autonomy.

“If this move takes place, ‘one country, two systems’ will be officially erased,” said democratic lawmaker Dennis Kwok.

“This is the end of Hong Kong.”

Daniel Russel, the top U.S. diplomat for Asia until early in the Trump administration, suggested Chinese President Xi Jinping might see “muscle-flexing” on Hong Kong as a means to make up for a series of setbacks, most notably the coronavirus pandemic that began in China - and this, despite the risk of severe economic consequences for Hong Kong, China and others.

U.S.-China tensions have heightened significantly in recent weeks, as they exchanged accusations on the handling of the pandemic, souring an already worsening relationship over trade.

Additional reporting by Greg Torode, Clare Jim, Sarah Wu, Jessie Pang, Steve Holland, David Brunnstrom and Humeyra Pamuk; Writing by Marius Zaharia, Alistair Bell and David Brunnstrom; Editing by Toby Chopra, Nick Macfie and Howard Goller


SEE https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2020/05/hong-kong-crisis-china-presents.html

‘This is the end of Hong Kong’: Reactions pour in as Beijing proposes security law

by RACHEL WONG 22ND MAY 2020 HKFP

Beijing is to discuss introducing national security legislation in Hong Kong following almost 12 months of protest and unrest. The move comes 17 years after such plans were scrapped following city-wide demonstrations. HKFP rounds up reactions…

Photo: May James/HKFP

Activist Joshua Wong

I know everyone is panicking and worrying. I also wonder what will become of Hong Kong after the National Security Law has passed. How many will be prosecuted? How many [political] groups will be replaced? To what extend will the oppression be? Will we be transferred to China? Arrest or imprisonment?…

The calm before the storm is often depressing and overwhelming. The Chinese Communist Party is definitely trying to wipe out Hong Kong’s connection with the international community with a catch-all tactic. But no matter what, I think I have the duty to stand firm with my position. There is no reason to give up on fostering possibilities for gaining international support. I never regret pushing the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act forward. Even though this could someday incriminate us and be the excuse to wipe us out, Demosisto takes pride in our devotion to connect Hong Kong and the world.

It’s normal to be frustrated. I am still fathoming, but I wish to continue standing in solidarity with everyone and fight this battle towards the end. It’s not even a year yet and surrender is never an option for Demosisto and I. The democracy movement is at a juncture to test our determination.

US senator Marco Rubio

By proposing national security laws for Hong Kong, the Chinese government and Communist Party will push Hong Kong’s autonomy to the breaking point… Congress provided the U.S. government with powerful tools when it passed my bipartisan Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act, and the administration should use this law to hold Beijing accountable for its interference in Hong Kong’s internal affairs and violations of the Sino-British Joint Declaration. It is in the interest of the United States to respond swiftly to Beijing’s repeated attacks on Hong Kongers, their autonomy, and their basic rights.
Pro-democracy lawmaker Tanya Chan of the Civic Party

Today I think is the saddest day in Hong Kong history. It confirms “One Country, One System.” It’s so clear that it’s a huge setback. In 2020, we can see that the Chinese government intervenes in Hong Kong matters in all aspects…the Chinese government can’t wait and they can’t really stand the freedom and rights that we have in Hong Kong. So they try to take [them] away as quickly as possible…

Patrick Poon, human rights researcher

It’s the most alarming development I have seen in the past 20 years. It’s yet another sign further declaring the death of ‘One Country, Two Systems’. It actually means Beijing no longer cares about the system. Where is the notion of ‘Two Systems’ here? It’s particularly appalling to see this when we have experienced jaw-dropping incidents threatening freedom of speech and the rule of law in Hong Kong
Alliance Canada Hong Kong

Beijing’s complete disregard for the Sino-British Joint Declaration, a binding international agreement, is reflective of their agenda. The Chinese State has demonstrated that they have no interest in adhering to international norms, but plans to rewrite the rules and reshuffle the international order in their favour. Hong Kong is no longer an autonomous region, and therefore must be treated as such. We demand the Canadian government and the international community to immediately revoke Hong Kong’s special administrative status. We must consider Hong Kong’s democratic future outside of the confines of the One-China fantasy.

Activist Nathan Law

It is a battle we must fight – Article 23 legislation is not a matter of “yes or no,” but “how and when.” We are blessed with an ideal battlefield nonetheless…

One of the major reasons the Chinese Communist Party has opted for doing it now is to restrain the international community from standing with Hong Kong, but we must strive for the world’s support. Using Twitter, Facebook, sharing news, personal commentary, signing petitions, raising concerns are basic freedoms on the Internet. If the autocracy unreasonably stifles Hongkongers’ mildest acts, it will definitely fuel resistance…

We need the strongest determination to confront the most evil era in history.

EU security spokesperson Virginie Battu-Henriksson

[The] EU is following very closely developments related to #HongKong. We attach great importance to ‘One Country Two Systems’ principle. Democratic debate in Hong Kong and respect for rights & freedoms are the best way to preserve it in [the] context of poss. national security legislation.
European Union

The EU considers that democratic debate, consultation of key stakeholders, and respect for protected rights and freedoms in Hong Kong would represent the best way of proceeding with the adoption of national security legislation, as foreseen in Article 23 of the Basic Law, while also upholding Hong Kong’s autonomy and the ‘One Country Two Systems’ principle.
US State Dept. spokesperson

Any effort to impose national security legislation that does not reflect the will of the people of Hong Kong would be highly destabilizing, and would be met with strong condemnation from the United States and the international community.

Consulate General of Japan in Hong Kong

There is a close economic relationship and human exchange between Japan and Hong Kong and Hong Kong is an extremely important partner for us. We would like to reiterate the importance of a free and open Hong Kong to continue to thrive stably under the principle of “One Country, Two Systems”.


Pro-Beijing New People’s Party

As a matter of fact, Hong Kong has been returned to the motherland for 23 years. As a Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong has the constitutional duty to defend national security, ensure territorial integrity and protect interests with regards to the country’s long-term development.

Over the past year, there has been all kinds of violence, terrorism and separatism with a hint of subverting the country and the SAR government, but Hong Kong lacks the legislation to tackle it… Therefore, the New People’s Party supports the country to take the initiative to enhance national security and perfect “One Country, Two Systems.”

Legal expert Johannes Chan, speaking to Citizen News

If Article 23 can be legislated in such a way, can we possibly avoid other laws? It means that all laws in China can be applicable in Hong Kong. They [the NPCSC] made it explicit that it is a law imposed by them. There is no “One Country, Two Systems” in it…

If we accept everything Beijing mandates, the judiciary can barely play its role. If the court insists on ruling under common law jurisdiction, will the NPCSC interpret the law? If the case involves national security, should we allow the People’s Liberation Army military court to handle it inside the high-speed railway station?

Maya Wang, Human Rights Watch

The end of #HongKong is alarming not only for its people but also for the world. Today’s Hong Kong, tomorrow’s the world: #HongKong has been the safe habor [sic] for dissent; it’s the light, the conscience, the voice that speaks truth to an increasingly powerful China.
Joshua Rosenzweig, Amnesty International

China routinely abuses its own national security framework as a pretext to target human rights activists and stamp out all forms of dissent. This dangerous proposed law sends the clearest message yet that it is eager to do the same in Hong Kong, and as soon as possible.

The Hong Kong government has progressively embraced the mainland’s vague and all-encompassing definition of ‘national security’ to restrict freedom of association, expression and the right to peaceful assembly. This attempt to bulldoze through repressive security regulations poses a quasi-existential threat to the rule of law in Hong Kong and is an ominous moment for human rights in the city.

Hu Xijin, state-run Global Times

Hong Kong surely needs a national security law, which is the cornerstone of “one country, two systems.” The entire society of Chinese mainland is willing to see HK maintains a capitalist system and unique social customs based on it. We don’t want the mainlandization of HK.

China expert Bill Bishop
This move affirms that Hong Kong as we knew it is gone and rule of law is now rule by law, with the CCP determining what the laws are and how they will be enforced. The legal complexities of how they justify imposing this law from Beijing will not get in the way of the brutal political reality. The reaction in Hong Kong could be intense, and violent.
Simon Cheng, activist in exile

My fear of being kidnapped from Hong Kong to China becomes an undeniable reality. After Beijing promulgates the National Security Law in Hong Kong, my enforced confession tape on “treason” would be the “evidence”, and our pro-democracy activists could be also in danger. I hereby urge the UK Government and international societies to reckon the death of “One Country Two Systems”, the CPC essence of totalitarianism and expansionism, to accept and grant asylums to Hong Kongers in exiles, and to protect our lives and rights of Hong Kong citizens. We will continue to work on the international front by grouping Hongkongers overseas, engaging in community service and charities globally, and setting up Shadow Parliament of Hong Kong, until the end.

Eric Cheung, law scholar

The Central Government is enacting a tailor-made law designed for the situation in Hong Kong under the guise of enforcing a nationwide law through the use of Appendix III of the Basic Law, which indicates that the Central Government is legislating laws on Hong Kong’s behalf. This act would utterly violate the Basic Law, and annul the One Country Two Systems model.

Activist Ventus Lau

It may be better to implement the National Security Law now than in the future. At least Hongkongers at this stage are not yet completely replaced by new immigrants. At least we have trained ourselves with the determination to resist. At least the world still has its attention on Hong Kong. At least Hong Kong still has its value to the Chinese Communist Party. If we slowly wait until the future, Hongkongers may even lose the edge to threaten “burning with China.”

We have waited long enough for the moment of an endgame. We are not doing a bad job if our opponents have to use their ace card. Hongkongers shouldn’t be overwhelmed by fear.
US President Donald Trump

I don’t know what it is, because nobody knows yet. If it happens, we’ll address that issue very strongly.

Pro-democracy lawmaker Dennis Kwok
When the world is not watching they are killing Hong Kong, killing one country, two systems, and using social distancing rules to keep people from coming out to protest… This is the most devastating thing to happen to Hong Kong since the Handover.

State-run China Daily editorial
The overreaction of those rioters and their foreign backers, who see such legislation as a thorn in their side, only testifies to the pertinence of the decision and the urgent need for such legislation, which will accelerate the construction and improvement of China’s legal system regarding national security, and enhance the efficiency of the country’s response to national security concerns. Thus it is an integral component of the country’s overall efforts to modernize its governing capacity and system.

When rolled out, those who challenge national security will necessarily be held accountable for their behavior, and with the backing of the State, the SAR will have sufficient means to make each word of the legislation count

RACHEL WONG
Rachel Wong previously worked as a documentary producer and academic researcher. She has a BA in Comparative Literature and European Studies from the University of Hong Kong. She has contributed to A City Made by People and The Funambulist, and has an interest in cultural journalism and gender issues. More by Rachel Wong

Beijing reveals its Orwellian plan to shackle Hong Kong, but can they kill an idea?

by STEPHEN VINES 22ND MAY 2020 HKFP

Beijing did not send in the tanks to crush Hong Kong’s protests. Instead, it mobilised its grey men (and a few women) in the capital to put down the revolt excruciating-step-by-excruciating-step. All with a weaponised law that threatens to make protest illegal and will bring the Orwellian prospect of thought crimes to the SAR.

The names of the Hong Kong Quislings who gathered in the capital to cheer on the death of One Country Two Systems will live in infamy. When Hong Kong is freed from the shackles, as it will be, they will go down in history as the Wang Jingweis of the second decade of the 21st century. Like Wang, who headed the Japanese puppet government of occupied China, they will be reviled for their betrayal.

Police surrounded student protests at the Civic Square on September 27, 2014. File Photo: Occupy Central with Love and Peace.

The hard, unflinching face of the Chinese Communist Party has now been revealed without the smallest attempt at disguise. The idea of Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong has been swept away while Chief Quisling Carrie Lam stood there blinking and applauding.

The high degree of autonomy that was consistently promised has also been flicked aside as so much dust lingering on the sleeves of the Beijing Mandarins.

The Party knows that this move to crush Hong Kong will not come without cost but, as ever, it believes that no price is too high to pay for exerting control and exacting obedience.

Before the Quislings even get to “vote” on the new national security law at the rubber-stamp National People’s Congress, the usual suspects have been lining up to airily proclaim that although there will inevitably be protests and widespread international condemnation, it is far better to bring matters to a head, suffer some short term pain before clamping down and extinguishing the flame of liberty.

File photo: Lukas Messmer/HKFP.

Look what happened after the Tiananmen Square massacre, they say. Sure, China went into diplomatic deep freeze, the economy took a bashing and yes, there was blood but, they add, we bounced back.

The memory of foreigners is short, the blood can be washed away and the mighty engine which fires the economy was fired up to produce even more spectacular results.

However the world has changed since 1989. China has propelled itself far higher up the international agenda, attracting fear and admiration in unequal ways. Fear has now triumphed over admiration as nations throughout the world reassess their relationship with the PRC and start seeing it as more of an enemy than a friend.

The implications for this are not merely political, it will also impact an economy highly dependent on exports

.

File Photo: May James/HKFP.

It is fair to say that even China’s most implacable opponents would not, in the last analysis, risk their own interests for those of the people of Hong Kong. But they are more than prepared to add this latest attack on liberty to the list of reasons why they need to stand up to Beijing.

Meanwhile, three decades on from the Tiananmen massacre, much has changed in Hong Kong itself. Indeed it can be argued that Hongkongers’ response to this event gave birth to the mass protest movement that, despite enormous setbacks, has stubbornly refused to go away. On the contrary, it has grown bigger and stronger.

Popular support for the democracy movement is at an all-time high. That support is even more tenacious among the younger generation, proudly identifying as Hongkongers and not even slightly convinced by the barrage of propaganda telling them that the best way to survive is to shut up and accept their fate.

Armed with fearsome powers under the new national security legislation, the state will not hesitate to mount a crackdown on dissent. It will be brutal and could well cow the people to an extent that they dare not venture out to defy the government.Tiananmen Massacre Vigil, Victoria Park 2019. Photo: Dan Garrett.

But, is this it? Is this the end?

Channelling the great American civil rights leader Medgar Evers, the slain Pakistani President, Benazir Bhutto said, ‘you can imprison a man, but not an idea. You can exile a man, but not an idea. You can kill a man, but not an idea.’

Who seriously believes that the idea of liberty can be extinguished in Hong Kong? The answer is only those who despise this place and its people.

The defenders of autocracy really believe that dictatorships are impregnable and will live forever. History tells another story which is that they are brittle and have a relatively short shelf life.

The Chinese dictatorship has lasted longer than most, even exceeding the life of its mentor, the Soviet Union.

In tiny Hong Kong, the Chinese Communist Party had a unique opportunity to show the world that it is big and strong enough to accommodate an island of freedom within its sovereign borders. But it was scared by this challenge and ended up revealing its weakness by reverting to the only means of control it knows and really trusts.

STEPHEN VINES
Stephen Vines is a Hong Kong-based journalist, writer and broadcaster and runs companies in the food sector. He was the founding editor of 'Eastern Express' and founding publisher of 'Spike'. In London he was an editor at The Observer and in Asia has worked for international publications including, the Guardian, Daily Telegraph, BBC, Asia Times and The Independent. Vines is the author of several books, including: Hong Kong: China’s New Colony, The Years of Living Dangerously - Asia from Crisis to the New Millennium and Market Panic and most recently, Food Gurus. He hosts a weekly television current affairs programme: The Pulse. More by Stephen Vines