Why invoking Hong Kong’s oppressive, outdated Emergency Regulations Ordinance won’t stop the protest violence
- Existing laws already give the government broad powers to ban assemblies, introduce curfews, and protect the airport and MTR stations
- Invoking draconian emergency powers to push through a controversial anti-mask law or ban social media is likely to contravene Hong Kong’s Bill of Rights and only deepen the mistrust of authority
Some argue that the government does not need to invoke full emergency powers, and that the targeted and measured use of the ordinance can solve the crisis.
An anti-mask law is very controversial and any bill must be fully debated and deliberated on in Legco in the usual manner. Pushing through such legislation using emergency powers may be counterproductive – imagine thousands of people deliberately wearing masks on the street in defiance.
Practically, it is difficult to regulate communication platforms, which have many users and may have servers or headquarters outside Hong Kong. A ban would also affect users’ normal social activity. With so many different platforms in the market, should the government ban all social media?
Third, some have suggested emergency regulations to prohibit processions and public meetings for a certain period, and to extend the detention period for suspects.
Indeed, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides for extraordinary situations, stating: “In time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation and the existence of which is officially proclaimed, the States Parties to the present Covenant may take measures derogating from their obligations under the present Covenant to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation.”
A strong China can afford to grant Hong Kong protesters’ wishes
In summary, the government has sufficient legal means to deal with the crisis, including the powers conferred by the Public Order Ordinance, Police Force Ordinance, Societies Ordinance and Crimes Ordinance.
Under the Aviation Security Ordinance and Airport Authority Bylaw, any act that endangers airport operations or people’s safety are offences punishable by jail. Railways and stations are also protected by Hong Kong’s Railways Ordinance and subsidiary legislation, with anyone in breach liable to a fine and jail.
The use of an out-of-date and oppressive statute like the Emergency Regulations Ordinance is unlikely to solve the crisis, which is rooted in people’s deep distrust of the police and government.
C.M. Chan is a practising solicitor and a research fellow at the Hong Kong Policy Research Institute