This Young Man Spent His Twenties Imprisoned On A Pacific Island Before Finding Safety In Canada

Amir Sahragard hoped for safety in Australia but ended up in a brutal offshore camp. He is still dealing with the trauma as he starts a new life.

BUZZFEED NEWS Posted on May 20, 2020

Chloë Ellingson for BuzzFeed News
Amir Sahragard recently arrived in Canada after six years at the Papua New Guinea detention centre.

Amir Sahragard thinks he would be dead if it weren’t for the group of civilians who sponsored his passage to Canada after six long and brutal years in migrant detention centres in Papua New Guinea.

“The only thing that [kept] me alive in the last two years was this,” he told BuzzFeed News.

“I've been mentally and physically sick and the only reason that I didn't kill myself or that I'm still alive was this sponsorship process, because I didn't have another option.”

Sahragard is one of thousands who tried to claim refugee status in Australia but were instead routed to offshore detention centres in the Pacific because of their mode of transport: boat. Under this harsh regime, people like Sahragard who sought safety in Australia by sea were instead subjected to brutal conditions and years of limbo.

But Sahragard is also one of the lucky ones. He found a way out, and not just to another centre on the Australian mainland, but to Canada — where refugees shunned by Australia are increasingly placing their hopes of freedom.

Sahragard, now 28, began his long journey in 2013 when he fled his home country of Iran. Anxious about his family, who remain in Iran, he won’t talk about why he left the country.

His next stop was Indonesia, where he boarded a ship he hoped would bring him to Australia, where he could declare refugee status. The ship was filled with families and other single men, some that he got to know as they waited for the ship to leave.

They were at sea for four days. “The boat was like a scary movie,” Sahragard said.

When the ship arrived at the remote Australian territory of Christmas Island, it was intercepted by the Australian Navy. Officers brought them onto the island, taking everything the asylum seekers had with them, Sahragard said.

Sahragard and his shipmates were processed, given medical checkups and new clothes, and told they’d be sent to an offshore detention centre. After being bounced around to various compounds, Sahragard said he was asked to sign a paper that would transfer him to Manus Island in Papua New Guinea. At the time, Australia was paying the government of Papua New Guinea to take migrants and hold them in a facility on the island.

Sahragard didn’t sign the paper, but was sent “by force”, he said. Guards put him on a bus, then a plane, and half a day later he landed at the Manus Regional Processing Centre.

The scene there, Sahragard said, was “the worst thing that I [have] ever seen”. Some people were ill, others didn’t have clothes, and everyone was terrified.

“I was alone and like 21 years old and I'd never seen things like that and everything was by force, so I didn’t have any choice,” he said.

He was put in a small room with three other men and two bunk beds, in a compound called Foxtrot. Again, he was shuffled around, sometimes to tents, sometimes to facilities that lacked air conditioning and were sweltering in the tropical environment. Eventually, he landed at a compound called Mike. It would become his home for four years.


Jonas Gratzer / Getty Images
Children bypassing the barracks where the asylum seekers are living on Manus Island, February 2018.

At Mike, detainees were permitted to use the internet once and have two 10-minute phone calls per week. They had access to laundry and a mess hall, but were also subject to abuse and violence by locals and guards, Sahragard said.

In February 2014 a riot broke out. A friend of Sahragard got hit in the face with a stone and his eyes were bleeding. With the lights out, Sahragard tried to take care of him and wait for a medical response. It was chaos. It was hard to tell who was in the fray — locals, police, guards — and he distinctly remembers the smell of the bullets being fired. Another friend was shot in the buttocks.

After the chaos, the detainees were gathered outside, he said, and beaten.

“They beat people with whatever they had. They had rods, iron, everything like that,” he said. “They were just assaulting and beat[ing] people and when they gather us in the yard they said ‘you can't remain in our country, this is our country, this we run it and you can't do something that we don't want you to do’.”

For a month after, the detainees lived in the mess hall without access to phones or the internet, according to Sahragard. When he finally returned to his room, he saw a bullet hole that went straight through two walls.

At this point, he wasn’t sleeping, and his days were filled with paranoia, stress and the agony of not being able to do anything or make any decisions for himself. He was also shedding pounds and getting dangerously underweight.

They were not being fed properly, he said, and nobody was cleaning the compound. Detainees were continuing to rebel with hunger strikes.

In 2016, the PNG Supreme Court declared the facility illegal. Detainees were suddenly able to sign out for the day and leave the compound. They could shop in Lorengau or swim in the ocean, but it wasn’t any safer outside. The locals were hostile to the migrants and would rob and assault them, leaving some people with long-term neurological injuries, he said.

Soon he was transferred to Hillside Haus, another facility on the island. This one had hot showers — a luxury Sahragard didn’t even realise he’d missed.

“It was like rich that I could have hot water for shower. It's really funny when I think about it but it was something that I really was missing,” he said.

In all this time, there had never been a glimmer of hope of getting out. Sahragard clearly wasn’t going to make it to Australia, and even the NGOs like UNHCR, Red Cross and Amnesty International that were on the ground in PNG hadn’t been able to help him get out. He had not applied for refugee status in PNG, for fear he would be stuck there forever if the claim was approved. But remaining as an asylum seeker presented a huge issue: he was not allowed to apply for resettlement in the United States under the refugee swap deal struck in 2016.

Finally, in 2017, Sahragard heard of a Syrian refugee who made it to Canada through a private sponsorship program. In Canada, a group of citizens can raise funds to bring a refugee to the country and provide settlement assistance when they arrive. He managed to connect with volunteer refugee advocates who were eager to help him.

In 2018 he submitted his application and began the long waiting process to get approved. At that time, talking to the volunteers helping him was the only thing keeping Sahragard going


Chloë Ellingson for BuzzFeed News

“The last year [in detention] was the hardest time for me,” he said. “I was really scared and I couldn't sleep [for] months, and can't eat, and it was the worst time.”

Fifteen months passed. Then, Sahragard was told he had to get a medical checkup, and he thought he might finally get out. He was approved for travel, landing in Brisbane before being escorted onto a Canada-bound plane by Australian immigration enforcement.

Even when Sahragard saw the travel documents, he still couldn’t believe it was happening. The disbelief lingered through the 14-hour flight, and through his arrival at the airport, where his sponsors greeted him by draping him in a Canadian flag.

It took weeks for him to truly accept what had happened. “I thought that I still might wake up and see that I'm in Manus or I’m still in Papua New Guinea in detention,” he said.

That was in November. When he spoke to BuzzFeed News in February, Sahragard had been settling into his new life in Toronto, first staying with an Iranian family who also came to Canada as refugees, and now renting his own room. He was attending college for English and making friends, but he was still plagued by the trauma of his time on Manus.

He has continued to sleep poorly, but was recently approved for Ontario’s public health care system, where he can access a family doctor.

Sounds are still a problem, too.

“There was a fire alarm in our building yesterday which really drove me crazy,” he said. “It was really scary for me because when I hear those things or the ambulance in downtown it really gives me stress and I get really paranoid about these things because of all the experience or the memories that I have.”

It’s getting better, day by day, but it’s still hard for Sahragard to imagine a future, of any kind, in any place, after spending most of his 20s scared, alone and detained.

“I live my life in a day for now,” he said. “[The present] is the only thing that I think of for now because I really don't want to think about something that I couldn't reach. That would be really hard for me, and I've lost like six years of my life for nothing.”


Chloë Ellingson for BuzzFeed News


For others — at one time Sahragard’s peers — Canada remains a dream.

Abdolah Sheikhypirkohy also fled Iran in 2013 only to be sent to Manus Island, and like Sahragard, the 2014 riot is one of his most traumatic memories. Local police arrested him and put him in a cell with almost 40 others, including six refugees.

“They beat me up, they punch me, they hurt me, cut my lips,” he said.

Over his six years in PNG, Sheikhypirkohy thinks he lost 12 teeth. For the first few years in detention there was no dentist at all. After three years, one arrived, but they had one solution for dental problems.

“They just pull it out. Not crown or filling or root canal, nothing. Just pull out. I don’t have many teeth now. I have problem with chewing,” Sheikhypirkohy said. It was his missing and infected teeth that brought him to Australia for medical treatment in July 2019. He has been detained in a hotel in Melbourne since then.

He applied for private resettlement in Canada over six months ago. Like Sahragard, he had never applied for refugee status in PNG and could not apply to go to the US, where more than 700 people have been successfully resettled.

Sheikhypirkohy has written to Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau three times: to tell him about the situation on Manus, to send condolences about the Canadians killed when Iran shot down a plane flying to Ukraine, and to ask him to help get his application for resettlement approved.

Trudeau’s office replied each time to tell him there was nothing they could do. His latest request was forwarded to the Canadian immigration minister, and a representative emailed Sheikhypirkohy telling him where his application was up to and explaining the process.

Sheikhypirkohy was stoked to get the replies. “Even though he said he cannot interfere in the matter...at least someone answer, replied my letter,” he said.

“I said to myself, if my application get approval, I’m sure I’m going to be in the perfect country, that cares about people. Here they just call me, ‘go back to your freaking country, boat people’.”


Jonas Gratzer / Getty Image
Karam Zahirian, another refugee seeking asylum, is seen on Manus in February, 2018.
Jafar (a pseudonym to protect his identity) has been trying to go to Canada from Nauru for the last two years. He was sceptical the plan would work at all — “in seven years, we had many news, many rumour, but nothing happen” — before hearing about the first flight to Canada.

His US application rejected, he has high hopes for Canada. “I saw on the internet about the Canadian prime minister, he is very humble. I see also Canadians, very, very good people. They are welcome to refugees, very incredible,” he said.

Sheikhypirkohy and Jafar may be waiting a while. The volunteer efforts that helped Sahragard reach Canada have ramped up. There are now dozens of people in Canada, Australia and the US organising to fill out applications, fundraise and ultimately free the men from detention. But so far, only 11 people have made it to Canada: a handful in 2015 and 2017, then eight more last year.

The process is slow: each application requires sponsors to prove they have thousands of dollars to support the refugee, and the Canadian government offers limited sponsorship spots each year. Now the coronavirus pandemic has paused resettlement in Canada entirely, though applications are still being processed.

The arduous process also means the groups helping to file the applications — Ads-Up, an Australian-North American group dedicated to helping refugees stuck on Manus and Nauru; the volunteer group Operation Not Forgotten; Canadian non-profit MOSAIC; and UNHCR — have to figure out who to prioritise. At the moment, that’s people still held offshore, those with medical conditions, and people who have no other resettlement options.

Still, the volunteers working to make it happen are committed to ending Australia’s offshore detention program.

“To get everyone off would be hundreds of submissions and millions of dollars,” said Ben Winsor, the founder of Ads-Up. “But that’s our ultimate aim.”

The softly-spoken Sahragard feels safe in Canada. But now he is dealing with a new challenge: the pandemic. His classes have moved online and the social isolation is triggering traumatic memories.

“It reminds me of the time I’ve been in detention, because it’s the same situation, I can’t do anything.”

But he’s chosen to speak out — reliving memories he’d rather not — because he hopes his friends back in Manus can get out too.

“It's really hard for me to talk about all these memories, all these things, but the only reason that I'm doing this is because I get the help, and I want them to get the help also, to have their future and save their life.”


Chloë Ellingson For Buzzfeed News



MORE ON THIS
The US, Struggling Under The Pressure Of The Coronavirus, Is Still Taking Refugees From Australia

Hannah Ryan · May 8, 2020

Men Held Incommunicado In A PNG Detention Centre For Five Months Have Been Released

Hannah Ryan · Jan. 23, 2020

This Man On Nauru Hasn’t Eaten Fruit In More Than A YearHannah Ryan · Jan. 26, 2020
Australia Detained People On Islands For Years. Now It Wants To Ban Them From Ever Visiting.

Hannah Ryan · Aug. 22, 2019




Lauren Strapagiel is a reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in Toronto, Canada.

Hannah Ryan is a reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in Sydney.

A Doctor Told Lawmakers The Country Is Not "Prepared For A Second Wave" Of The Coronavirus

Nearly every essential worker who testified before lawmakers at a hearing on the coronavirus said the lack of personal protective equipment remains a huge problem.

Clarissa-Jan Lim BuzzFeed News Reporter Posted on May 21, 2020


Joe Raedle / Getty Images
A supermarket cashier in Miami, Florida.

A doctor testifying at a virtual congressional subcommittee briefing on the coronavirus on Thursday told lawmakers that the country is not prepared to handle a second wave of the virus should it come later this year.

"I do not think that we are currently prepared for a second wave," Dr. Megan Ranney, an emergency physician and researcher at Brown University, said in a stark warning to the public and members of Congress.

Ranney said the inconsistent public health messaging from authorities and the lack of scientific understanding of the novel coronavirus mean the country is not ready for another surge in infections, which public health experts have said will possibly hit in the fall.

"We still lack adequate science. I'm so thankful for the funding that you all have given to the NIH and CDC, but that's not enough, and we need more," she told lawmakers. "We also lack adequate public health messaging. We need consistency in our messaging to the public so that they can believe us. We need to give them accurate data, and we need to give them straightforward answers. We also need to be clear about when and why our answers change and how those depend on science."

But the most crucial barrier to preparing for another wave of the coronavirus, Ranney said, is the continued shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) and testing for essential workers.

"Everyone who's out there facing the public needs to be safe. And to do that they need to be tested, and they need masks, and gowns, and gloves, and sanitizer," she said


Frontline workers have raised the alarm about inadequate access to testing and a lack of PPE since the first outbreaks in the country were reported. As state governments engaged in bidding wars with each other and the federal government in an attempt to obtain supplies, employees deemed essential — many of whom work minimum wage jobs — were forced to reuse masks over and over, all while fearing for their health and safety.


Trump, who himself has refused to wear a face mask around others, has repeatedly dismissed concerns about testing and PPE shortages, saying that "everyone who wants a test can get one."

Earlier this month, he disputed an account from a nurse he invited to the White House when she brought up the "sporadic" availability of PPE in some parts of the country.


Brendan Smialowski / Getty Images

The lack of PPE was an issue raised by nearly every frontline worker who gave testimony Thursday.

Diana Wilson, an EMT with the New York Fire Department, said that despite being one of the first people coming into contact with a potential COVID-19 patient in crisis, she has gone to work "not knowing if I was going to be provided a medical N95 mask."

"The government failed us by not protecting first responders by providing us with a plan and PPE," Wilson said.

Marcos Aranda, a janitor in San Francisco who lives with his wife, six children, his mom, his sister, and her two children, said he's lucky to have some protective gear, which not all custodians are afforded.

He wears latex gloves and dust masks while at work, "but nothing medical-grade," he said. "I'm not only worried about my health, but also worried about the health of my family."

Eric Colts, a Detroit bus driver whose colleague Jason Hargrove died days after talking about a woman coughing openly on his bus in a viral video, said though the city is now providing passengers with masks when they board the bus, it's not enough.

"But me, working in the inner city, we have a box of 50 masks that by the time I do a round trip, those masks are gone," Colts told lawmakers. "Personal protective equipment has been a constant, constant battle."

As states around the country make the push to reopen businesses against the advice of experts, Ranney, who is part of a grassroots group helping frontline workers access protective gear, cautioned that there still isn't enough PPE for many hospitals at the moment.

"On a national level, we still are millions and millions and millions of pieces of PPE short from what hospitals need currently," she said, "much less what they need in order to build the normal stockpiles that we all keep in order to face pandemic situations."

MORE ON THIS
The Mental Health Crisis For Frontline Workers Has Already BegunScaachi Koul · May 4, 2020
“We Are Desperate”: 10 Nurses And Doctors Explain What It's Like To Fight The Coronavirus Without Enough Face Masks 

Zahra Hirji · March 18, 2020

They Still Have Jobs At Grocery Stores And Pharmacies. Does That Mean They'll Catch The Coronavirus?

Julia Reinstein · March 18, 2020

Doctors And Nurses Fighting The Coronavirus Outbreak Are Getting Sick And Dying — And No One Is Keeping Track

Zahra Hirji · March 26, 2020

Clarissa-Jan Lim is a reporter and editor at BuzzFeed News. She is based in New York.

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