Essay Question:
Read
Text A carefully and write an argumentative essay of about 600-700 words in
response to the following question.
The National Security Law China imposed was considered as a
violation of human rights and autonomy. On the other hand, some people believe
it is beneficial to keep Hong Kong a safer place. Which view do you agree with?
Use
the information from the text below as well as your knowledge to support your
arguments. When using the information from text A, you are expected to
acknowledge the source of it.
Text A
The Guardian view on Hong Kong: still fighting
Hong
Kong is not yet cowed. That was, unquestionably, Beijing’s aim in imposing the
draconian National Security Law after a year of protests. The law has
demolished the pledge to allow the region to maintain its freedoms until 2047.
It has struck fear into the city. In the hours after it took effect, Demosisto,
the pro-democracy party founded by young protesters including Joshua Wong,
disbanded itself. Individuals deleted social media accounts.
Yet
Mr Wong was among thousands who took to the streets once more for the annual 1
July protest march, defying a ban. More than 370 were arrested, including at
least nine under the new law – one a 15-year-old girl waving a Hong Kong
independence flag. Though the law is purportedly aimed at a small minority
intent on separatism, subversion, terrorism and “collusion with foreign or
overseas powers”, these are vaguely defined offences routinely used to punish
dissent on the mainland. The intent of the law was made clear by the police’s
own banners, which warned protesters that chanting or holding signs with calls
for independence could constitute a crime.
The
new law is extraordinarily wide-ranging and frighteningly vague in its wording.
It allows people to be taken to the mainland, tried in party-controlled courts
and locked up for life, for peacefully expressing political dissent. It appears
to apply to anyone, whether or not they are a Hong Kong resident, and even if
they are outside the region. Foreign companies will think much more carefully
about doing business there.
The
chief executive will be able to pick judges, and trials can be held without
juries and behind closed doors. Hong Kong police have greater powers of
surveillance. Chinese security services will be able to operate openly in Hong
Kong, and will be immune from local laws. They will be tasked with
“strengthening” the management of foreign NGOs and news organisations. Not only
did Hong Kong’s people have no say in whether this legislation should be
passed; they were not even allowed to see it until it had become law. While
some support it, many feel despair.
As
the prime minister told parliament, this is a clear and serious breach of the
Sino-British joint declaration, a legally binding international treaty. It is
also a breach of Hong Kong’s own mini-constitution, the Basic Law. Never have
the people of Hong Kong been more in need of support. Britain has made a clear
commitment to recognising its historical responsibilities by extending a path
to citizenship for up to 3 million Hong Kong citizens with a right to a British
Nationals (Overseas) passport, as it should have done years ago. A
Magnitsky-style act targeting sanctions at individuals responsible for human
rights abuses is due to be introduced this month, though it is not yet clear
whether Chinese officials will be among the initial designations.
These
are welcome developments, though the details of the “bespoke” immigration path
will be critical. As the shadow foreign secretary said, it must not become a
scheme simply for the wealthy. Many young activists will not be eligible:
asylum claims must be considered sympathetically.
And
it should be a cause of shame as well as regret that there was not a more
forceful response to the earlier erosion of Hong Kong’s freedoms, that
countries have been poor at pulling together in challenging Beijing, and that
the US response to China still veers between reasoned opposition, nationalist
hawkishness and Donald Trump’s transactional approach. Though China is set upon
a course of increasing repression under Xi Jinping, greater international
solidarity and willingness to challenge Beijing might have helped Hong Kong.
Though
protesters scattered funeral joss papers on Wednesday in mourning for the Hong
Kong they knew, they have not given up. They have the courage to defend their
beliefs. Others must stand with them.
Adapted
from
Koh,
A. (2020, July). The
Guardian view on Hong Kong: still fighting. The Guardian,
Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/01/the-guardian-view-on-hong-kong-still-fighting