Sec. 3. Findings
1,101 words·~5 min read·
/bill/118/s/5454/is/section-3A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
Section 101 of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992 ( 22 U.S.C. 5711 ) is amended to read as follows: Congress finds the following: The passage and implementation of this Act in 1992 reflected an expectation that the People’s Republic of China would faithfully adhere to the conditions set forth between the Governments of the United Kingdom and the People’s Republic of China in the Joint Declaration, which declared that Hong Kong would enjoy a high degree of autonomy under the principle of one country, two systems of the People’s Republic of China, for 50 years after the transfer of Hong Kong from the United Kingdom to the People’s Republic of China in 1997.
The Government of the People’s Republic of China, in the lead-up to the 1997 transfer of Hong Kong from the United Kingdom to the People’s Republic of China, did not consult Hong Kongers on the conditions for the transfer of sovereignty, did not provide Hong Kongers the ability to decide the future of Hong Kong, and continues to deny Hong Kongers the free exercise of human rights as protected under international law. Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights provide, and Article 2 of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples states, that all peoples have the right of self-determination.
By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development . Despite the rights and freedoms for Hong Kong delineated in the Joint Declaration and in the Basic Law, the Government of the People’s Republic of China has repeatedly undermined the autonomy of the Government of Hong Kong since the transfer of Hong Kong in 1997, including through actions that have resulted in widespread political protests in Hong Kong.
On June 30, 2020, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China enacted the National Security Law, which provided a legal pretext to drastically reduce the autonomy of Hong Kong and led to widespread repression by Hong Kong authorities. The National Security Law has eroded the rights and freedoms promised to the people in Hong Kong under the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law, including freedoms of speech, assembly, and the press.
Since the passage of the National Security Law— hundreds of pro-democracy activists, lawmakers, and journalists have been arrested; civil society organizations have been disbanded; independent media outlets have closed; and academic freedoms and an independent judiciary in Hong Kong have been eroded. Forty-seven individuals (commonly known as the Hong Kong 47 ), including Joshua Wong and Gwyneth Ho, are facing politically motivated charges of conspiracy to commit subversion after holding an unofficial primary election in 2020, less than 2 weeks after the National Security Law came into effect, and 14 of these individuals were found guilty on May 30, 2024, in a judicial proceeding that lacked independence, and now face prison terms ranging from 3 years to life.
Jimmy Lai, a 76-year old Hong Kong pro-democracy advocate and media entrepreneur, has been subjected to multiple prosecutions for his peaceful activities, has spent approximately 4 years in prison, has been sentenced to more than 5 years of imprisonment under politically motivated fraud charges, and is awaiting a verdict on additional charges of collusion with foreign forces and sedition , which could carry a sentence of life in prison. The Government of the People’s Republic of China and the Government of Hong Kong are— using the National Security Law to pursue acts of transnational repression against members of Hong Kong diaspora communities outside of Hong Kong; and harassing, threatening, and placing extraterritorial bounties on Hong Kong and non-Hong Kong residents, including a United States citizen, for their courageous advocacy for the rights and freedoms of people in Hong Kong.
On March 19, 2024, despite widespread opposition from the international community, civil society, and other stakeholders in Hong Kong, and after a limited period of public consultation for the legislation, the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region passed legislation to implement Article 23, the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, which grants authorities in Hong Kong additional powers to further curtail civil rights and freedoms, establishes severe penalties, including life imprisonment, for vaguely defined offenses, and creates risks for Hong Kong residents who interact with foreigners.
The Safeguarding National Security Ordinance— includes other offenses such as external interference and state secrets , which could create risks for multinational companies and international groups operating in Hong Kong; in combination with the ongoing implementation of the National Security Law, likely will have a further chilling effect on a wide range of individuals and organizations in Hong Kong, including civil society representatives, independent journalists, pro-democracy lawmakers, entrepreneurs, businesses, and others; and has already been applied by Hong Kong authorities to target Hong Kongers for peacefully expressing their views, including Chow Hang-tung, who was arrested on May 28, 2024, for alleged seditious social media posts related to the commemoration of the Tiananmen Square massacre.
Annually since 2020, the Secretary of State has certified that Hong Kong does not warrant treatment under United States law in the same manner as United States laws were applied to Hong Kong before July 1, 1997. Despite the commitments made by the People's Republic of China in the Joint Declaration, the People’s Republic of China has declared that the legal basis for the Chinese government’s governance of Hong Kong is China’s constitution and the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, not the Sino-British Joint Declaration .
The People’s Republic of China and the Government of Hong Kong continue to insist that they are implementing the one country, two systems framework and the Basic Law. During a June 2017 press conference, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China referred to the Joint Declaration as a historical document that no longer has any realistic meaning . During a February 2024 press briefing, in response to criticism from the United Kingdom regarding the undermining of the autonomy of Hong Kong by the People's Republic of China, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China stated that the Joint Declaration by no means put the UK in a position or gave it any right to interfere in Hong Kong affairs.
Second, one of the principles that guide the legislation on Article 23 of the Basic Law is to respect and protect human rights . .
Connectionstraces to 1
Traces to 1 document