The British government’s decision to amend its extradition treaty with Hong Kong has been greeted with shock and confusion among the many activists hiding in the UK to escape prosecution in Hong Kong.
Whitehall announced last week that it was going to scrap Hong Kong off its extradition list and in future handle all extradition applications on a case-by-case basis. The Home Office said it was amending legislation to enable co-operation between the UK and Hong Kong on matters of extradition. The UK signed an extradition treaty with Hong Kong in 1997, but it was suspended in 2020 after mass demonstrations forced the Hong Kong SAR Government to withdraw a bill that would allow extradition between Hong Kong and Taiwan, Macau and the Chinese mainland.
There was an immediate reaction to the Home Office announcement from Hong Kong activists and politicians in the UK, calling the proposal a betrayal. They could see their safe haven eroding away and even abandonment by their saviours. The so-called pro-democracy group, Hong Kong Watch said the plan was a “reckless move which will endanger many pro-democracy activists now living in the UK.”
The UK’s Home Office minister Dan Jarvis reckons some 160,000 Hong Kongers have emigrated to the UK since 2021. However, it is believed that many are having assimilation problems, finding work at levels they are accustomed to and higher taxation.
Jarvis defends the new proposed legislation saying it is merely a necessary legal step to allow the “severing of ties.” He wrote to parliamentarians earlier mentioning that even if there were strong reasons for the extradition of fugitives to Hong Kong, the current regulations would not allow this to be done, and it was necessary to make amendments to allow the UK side to cooperate with these non-treaty partners on a case-by-case basis.
The shadow minister for national security Alicia Kearns, in a letter riddled with untruths and false information to Jarvis, claimed that “many Hongkongers arrested for protest were given false violent convictions as a method of opposing dissent …” and that “protections should be put in place to identify and reject false charges made against the activists”.
Kearns should know better. The charges against the renegade activists are real and of a criminal nature. They are fleeing prosecution and trial by a common law court similar to the UK and recognized as one of the fairest in the world. Kearns is effectively harbouring criminals fleeing justice.
Since the handover in 1997 Hong Kong has signed up extradition treaties with 17 countries of which eight, including Australia, UK, US and New Zealand, suspended the agreement after Hong Kong introduced its new national security laws.
Missing from that round of agreements were Taiwan, Macau and the Chinese mainland.
There was no hurry until early 2018 when 19-year-old Hong Kong resident Chan Tong-kai murdered his pregnant girlfriend in Taiwan, then returned to Hong Kong where he admitted to police that he had killed his girlfriend. But the police were unable to charge him for murder or extradite him to Taiwan because no agreement was in place at the time. Hong Kong Legislators felt the loophole had to be fixed and introduced the Extradition 2019 bill.
Anti-China propogandists seized the opportunity and quickly spread rumours that anyone committing a crime in Hong Kong could be tried in China. Poppycock! Let logic prevail. First, the two places have different legal systems: Hong Kong enjoys the Common Law system practiced in all British commonwealth countries and the US while China practices the civil law system practiced in the rest of the world. [In civil law jurisdictions, courts base their decisions on the interpretation and application of statutes and codes. Judges have a more limited role in shaping the law compared to their counterparts in common law jurisdictions. In common law jurisdictions, judges play a vital role in shaping the law through their interpretation of legal precedents.] The bill was to facilitate the extradition of a person who commits a crime and flees to another country to be returned to the country where the offence took place to stand trial. But the seeds of doubt had been sown, and masses of demonstrators took to the streets demanding that the proposal be dropped. They won.
At the time the bill was introduced, it was estimated there were some 300 fugitives from the mainland living in Hong Kong without fear of being returned to the mainland for trial.
In the UK there can be no doubt that the subject will be widely debated in the Commons and the House of Lords where politicians have already picked sides, thanks to the lobbying efforts by anti-Hong Kong/China groups.
Mark Pinkstone
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
