For Hong Kong and a bit more

The new Hong Kong National Security Law is a clear violation of the legal process as established by the territory’s Basic Law – there was no consultation with the local population and their representatives – as well as of the agreed principle “One Country, Two Systems”. Furthermore, the key offences it contemplates – subversion, secession, terrorism, and collusion with foreign powers – are defined in overly broad terms. That means the Hong Kong Executive is given extensive flexibility to judge and condemn. They are the ones, not the judiciary, that will apply the law, meaning, they will decide on the offences and the punishments. They will certainly follow a targeted approach to repression.

Another “innovation” of such new law is that it also applies to people outside Hong Kong and Mainland China. If someone in Paris, a French citizen resident in France, says that the territory should be independent and later in life travels to Hong Kong, he or she can be prosecuted for such a statement.

I feel sorry for the people of Hong Kong who cherish freedom and democracy. I have the same feeling for those in the Mainland that share these same values. And I ask myself what kind of political relationship our democracies should have with the leadership in Beijing. It is time to reflect on that before it is too late. The message should be simple. It must tell them that we are not prepared to accept their vision of politics. And we should keep an all-weather distance, as wide as possible, between them and us.

The international arena must be guided by values. It is time to say that again, loud, and clear. Very straightforward values, that take their inspiration from individual rights, the protection of each person against authoritarian States, from our inherent right to freedom and human security. Some might see this aspiration as a utopic one. I hear you. But, please, believe me, the post-covid world opens the door to imagine a more dignified approach to each human being.