Yes, this is very concerning indeed, and please do keep us up to date,
especially if any of these measures are used against someone for editing
Wikimedia projects or being a part of one of our communities or groups. I
know that some countries are considering economic sanctions for these types
of measures being taken in Hong Kong, so it is a matter that many are aware
of.
Todd
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:53 AM William Chan <william(a)wchan.hk> wrote:
Diane and all,
It seems the the bill is far more dangerous than what we the local
community have expected:
1. The bill exerts prosecution power on anything Hong Kong, from Hong Kong
soli to water to Hong Kong-registered ships to Hong Kong-registered
aircrafts, and applies on both Hong Kong citizens and non-Hong Kong
citizens.
2. You can commit this crime anywhere on Earth. Even if such "crime" is
carried outside of Hong Kong by non-Hong Kong citizens, this law makes Hong
Kong have the judicial power to expirate such "criminal"
3. This means that non-Hong Kong contributors writing positively about the
Hong Kong protests and topics about Hong Kong independence in a
pro-protester tone can technically violate the bill.
4. If such a person steps onto a Hong Kong registered Aircraft (such as
Cathay Pacific Airline Planes) or Hong Kong-registered ships, they can
logically be arrested and brought to Hong Kong for trial for acts
documented on sec. 3. Even when both the origin and destination is not in
Hong Kong.
There seems to be much more problems than expected considering how China
manipulates its laws to its own good by violating international treaties
and protections on human rights (when it is against their agenda).
Grave Concern,
William
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 23:08, William Chan <william(a)wchan.hk> wrote:
Dear our beloved global community members,
The National Security Bill for Hong Kong is passed today (30 Jun, HKT
2300). Most members within Hong Kong’s recovering community are shocked,
considering how much it affects local politics, and at the same time,
uncertainty brought from this decision to the local community (including
much of the Hong Kong people). Even until this moment, not to mention its
accessibility for the general public, the full text is only to be found
at
the time of implementation (30 Jun, HKT 2300).
However, this unknown text
will precede all common law principles within 30 minutes’ time for those
who are currently in Hong Kong.
There are a few points that we would like to bring up -- our worries this
piece of completely unconsulted legislation (apart from few well-known
local pro-Beijing figures), from the drafting phase to the implementation
phase, could change the Chinese-dominant Hong Kong community work:
1. This piece of legislation has never entered a public consultation
phase. The legislation is passed in a way to effectively circumvent local
legislative council opposition. It imposes unnecessary restrictions on
free
speech, and is against all norms within local
(Hong Kong) politics, where
most bills, including the most controversial Article 23 implementation
bill
that was brought to a halt in 2003, had open
public consultation. This
piece of legislation didn’t do so, and citizens have not even read what
is
written before it became a law.
2. This piece of legislation seems to interfere with freedom of speech
even out of local boundaries. This includes, most possibly the
criminalization of speeches and acts that promote Hong Kong independence.
This can include, according to what the so-called “people’s congress
representative” which most within the city cannot vote for, said acts
committed online could also be counted. This may mean writing for, for
example, reasons that lead to the rise of the Hong Kong independence
movement, may become a criminal act if written in Hong Kong. This is
unprecedented, and, as we all know, IP addresses can be documented and
tracked to prosecute personnels. If writing for Wikipedia becomes a
criminal act, what can go right?
3. It narrows the editor base. For example, the ban of Wikipedia in China
had completely changed the community environment for Mainland editors of
the Chinese Wikipedia. Off-site insults became common where local
policies
could not act on as the editor base became much
narrower. Without the
input across
the political spectrum, Wikipedia will become
harder to remain neutral
for its content.
4. Uncertainty brings whether accessing Wikipedia articles related to
Hong Kong independence can become a crime. It’s interpretation of the
bill is unknown, and it seems possible as the implementation of the bill
violates how local laws are passed.
The local offline and most members of the online community has accessed
the effects in the short run and the long run:
In the short run, we expect the community base to retain mostly intact,
while meetups (currently run in an online mode due to the coronavirus
pandemic) would attract fewer members, particularly when local
pro-democracy (not pro-independence) figures are warned to be sent into
jail with this piece of legislation.
In the long run, if nothing changes, we expect the recovering user group
will most likely descend into non-compliance like the former chapter, and
similar to the current state of the offline-inactive Chinese User Group,
Wikimedia User Group China, which ceased its offline operations after the
Chinese government blocked Wikipedia. In the worst case scenario, the
local
community may be replaced with a pseudo-community
that works more like a
propaganda service than a User Group advocating for free speech and open
access.
We, as Hong Kong editors have tried expressing our concern but it is in
vain because of fierce opposition from some Chinese Wikipedia editors who
are mostly pro-Beijing. Uncertainty from the legislation, where original
plans to react to the bill when it became open to the public, became in
vain because of “local editors’ desire to respond when the bill is
publicized” and the Standing Committee of National People’s Congress of
China act to hide the bill from public access. This rendered the local
community’s inability to react before the bill was implemented. This
included plans to “shut down” some articles related to the ongoing
2019-20
Hong Kong protests. Of course, this turns out to
be in vain both because
of
its controversy of bringing Wikipedia into media
attention, and whether
such an act violates neutrality principles, plus fierce opposition from
editors from China (excl. Hong Kong and Macao).
We hope the glocal community can pay attention to the effects of this
bill
in Hong Kong, as it would most probably limit
free speech and may affect
most citizens (including Wikimedia (incl. Wikipedia) editors in Hong
Kong),
instead of what it proclaimed to be the few,
unlawful separatists.
In grave concern of our future,
The Hong Kong offline Wikipedia Community
Wikimedia Community User Group Hong Kong
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>