Meetings with magazine founder possibly impinged on ‘one country, two systems’
PHILA.SIU@SCMP.COM
UPDATED : Friday, 08 April, 2016, 6:49pm
Lau Tat-man was asked by mainland security agents about his ties to former missing bookseller Lee Po. Photo: Oliver Chou
Mainland security officers could be deemed to have carried out their official duties in Hong Kong and trampling on the “one country, two systems” principle when they probed a local publisher about his ties with the Causeway Bay booksellers, legal experts said.
The observation came after Lau Tat-man, founder of Frontline magazine and Ha Fai Yi Publication which specialised in materials critical of the Communist Party, told the Post that Guangdong security officers met him three times in Hong Kong between December last year and January.
During the meetings, the officers probed his connection with some of the missing booksellers. They suspected that Lau could have been the mastermind of the Causeway Bay business, which Lau denied.
Hong Kong officials have repeatedly made clear that only local law enforcement officers have legal authority to enforce laws in the city, after the five associates from Mighty Current publishing house and its Causeway Bay Books store individually went missing from October last year.
The disappearances sparked fear that they had been kidnapped by mainland agents because their companies specialised in books critical of the central government. But all the booksellers, including Lee Po who disappeared from Hong Kong in December, later surfaced in the mainland and stated they went to the mainland of their own accord.
Lau was visited by the security agents three times, between December last year and January. Photo: Oliver Chou
Professor Johannes Chan Man-mun, formerly the University of Hong Kong’s law dean, said collecting information and conducting interviews in the city was tantamount to carrying out their official duties here.
“This is indeed something worrying,” he said. “Strictly mainland law enforcement agents have no power to carry out any duties in Hong Kong ... such as compelling an interview, questioning a witness, search and seizure, and so on.”
Chan said if the purpose of the visit was to perform their duties by collecting information and conducting an interview, then they could not do so unless they had “the prior consent of the Hong Kong authorities”.
Johannes Chan Man-mun said strictly mainland agents had no authority to carry out their duties in Hong Kong. Photo: Edward Wong
Eric Cheung Tat-ming, principal lecturer in law at HKU, expressed concern that mainland authorities sent officers to Hong Kong and interfered with the banned books business under the pretext that the business effects were felt across the border.
“It’s worrying that the mainland is using this impact theory,” said Cheung.
“That is a violation of the spirit of the ‘one country, two systems’ principle.”
Professor Simon Young, associate dean of research at the HKU law school, said the three visits the mainland security officers paid Lau raised questions, including whether the officers were in Hong Kong only as visitors or on official business as members of mainland government offices authorised to be in the city.
Eric Cheung Tat-ming called the agents’ actions a violation of the spirit of “one country, two systems”. Photo: Felix Wong
“Did the Hong Kong government knowingly authorise such investigations? If they did, then technically there would be no breach of the Basic Law,” he said.
Young described the situation as “quite unsatisfactory because neither the Basic Law nor local law provides guidance on when the Hong Kong government can and should authorise mainland officers stationed in Hong Kong to conduct mainland investigations”. He added there was an absence of transparency as to when authorisations had indeed been granted.
http://m.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-crime/article/1934697/hong-kong-legal-scholars-fret-about-mainland-chinese-agents
