COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 15.9.2003 COM(2003) 544 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT Annual Report by the European Commission on the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region CONTENTS 1. Introduction 3 2. Reaffirmation and implementation of the "one country, two systèmes" 3 3. Institutional developments 5 4. Legislative Developments 7 5. Rights of assembly and demonstration. 10 6. The Economy 11 7. European union - Hong Kong relations. 12 8. Conclusion 14 2 HONG KONG: Annual Report 2002 1. INTRODUCTION As in the Commission’s previous annual reports, this 2002 report aims to assess the state of development of the Hong Kong SAR and its relations with the European Union. In accordance with the Commission’s mandate, the report analyses progress in the implementation of the “One Country, Two Systems” principle, and reviews developments in the legislative, institutional and individual rights fields. The document also provides an assessment of economic developments, and reports on the main aspects of EU-Hong Kong relations. 2. REAFFIRMATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE “ONE COUNTRY, TWO SYSTEMS” PRINCIPLE - Reaffirmation of the principle The Central Government of Beijing again reiterated its adherence to the “one country, two systems” principle in its official statements. In a speech to the National People’s Congress (NPC) on 5 March 2002, Prime Minister Zhu Rongji stated: “We should fully implement the principle of “one country, two systems” and the Basic Law of Hong Kong and Macao Special Administrative Regions. It is our firm and unswerving objective to maintain the long-term stability, prosperity and development there. The Central Government will continue to render full support to the efforts of the governments and Chief Executives of Hong Kong and Macao to govern the regions in accordance with the law, and it will further strengthen economic, trade, scientific, technological, cultural and education exchanges and cooperation between the Mainland and Hong Kong and Macao. We have full confidence in the futures of Hong Kong and Macao.” In a speech during the 1 July celebrations on the fifth anniversary of Hong Kong’s return to China and the inauguration of the second term of the HKSAR government, President Jiang Zemin said: “In a nutshell, what we have learnt in the past five years is that the policy of “one country, two systems” and the Basic Law of the Hong Kong SAR must be implemented in a comprehensive and accurate manner under all circumstances.” - Implementation of the principle • The practice of Falun Gong The Falun Gong, a legally registered group in Hong Kong, continues to enjoy the freedom to practice and does so in venues which include those run by government departments (Leisure and Cultural Services Department). 3 Nevertheless its practice and sit-in protest outside the Central People’s Government Liaison Office on 16 March was considered as causing obstruction. The police moved 16 Falun Gong demonstrators, including four from Switzerland, from outside the Central Government Liaison Office. Both police and demonstrators claimed to have sustained injuries during the removal. The 16 were subsequently arrested and charged with obstruction or assault. The trial started on 16 June with about 30 Falun Gong practitioners and a representative from the Swiss Consulate in Hong Kong in attendance. The verdict, delivered in mid-August, found all 16 guilty of causing public obstruction. Three were also convicted of assaulting police officers. They were fined between HK$ 1,300 and HK$ 3,800, well below the maximum penalties. In his verdict, the magistrate recalled that the right to protest and hold demonstrations is not absolute and its exercise requires a very delicate balance. The magistrate ruled that the arrests were lawful, noting that the 16 had ignored repeated warnings and that police officers had been sensible and reasonable in asking the practitioners to move on. • Right of abode The Court of Final Appeal ruled on 29 January 1999 with a broad definition of the right of abode of mainland Chinese in Hong Kong. The Court’s interpretation was then overturned in June 1999 by the interpretation of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, made at the request of the HKSAR Government. 5,073 applicants in the appeals who considered themselves to be in the same situation as the parties to the case of 29 January 1999 claimed that they should have their claims for right of abode re-examined in accordance with the Appeal Court’s judgement. In a new ruling on 10 January 2002, the Court of Final Appeal ruled by a majority of four judges to one, that most of the claimants did not have the right of abode. However it recognised that several hundred appellants had a “legitimate expectation” based on reassurances from government departments and would be entitled to the same right of abode, as those involved in the Court’s 29 January ruling. The fifth judge’s opinion was that all the applicants should benefit from the notion of “legitimate expectation”. The majority verdict of the Court was warmly welcomed by academics, lawyers and the government, although some politicians and various social bodies urged the government to grant the right of abode to all applicants on humanitarian grounds. The SAR government decided to keep to the ruling of the Court of Final Appeal, but together with mainland authorities, agreed to a period of grace until the end of March to allow unsuccessful claimants to return to the mainland without being charged for illegally entering or overstaying in Hong Kong. Many of the unsuccessful claimants returned voluntarily ahead of the 31 March deadline. The government removed others who tried to remain illegally. The 10 January ruling of the Court of Final Appeal laid down broad legal principles in the handling of right of abode cases and -this could help to avoid future disputes over abode. 4 3. INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTS – Election of the Chief Executive for a second term In the secondelections for Chief Executive in Hong Kong, the Chief Executive Mr Tung Chee-hwa was the only validly-nominated candidate. His nomination was supported by 714 of the 800-member Election Committee. Other candidates were de facto excluded, as nominations needed to be supported by at least 100 members, following the adoption of the Chief Executive Election Bill in 2001. Mr Tung was therefore elected for a second term at the end of February, without a formal vote. The legislator from the Legal constituency Margaret Ng, urged democratic forces to unite and make immediate preparations for the third Chief Executive elections. She apologised to the people of Hong Kong on behalf of the democratic parties for not having participated in the second election process (the democratic parties had an extensive debate about whether to participate in the election and failed to put up candidates in time). – Introduction of the accountability system As announced in his Policy Addresses of 2000 and 2001, the Chief Executive unveiled the accountability system for members of Government on 17 April 2002. The new scheme means that political appointees rather than senior civil servants have been put in charge of government departments. These new Secretaries serve for a contract period not exceeding the term of the Chief Executive, and are answerable to him for both policy-making and policy implementation. The Secretaries are fully accountable and may be required to resign for serious failure in policy outcome, serious mishaps in implementation or for grave personal misconduct. According to the Chief Executive, the new accountability system will have the following implications : – All Secretaries will also become members of the Executive Council (ExCo), which advises the Chief Executive and also includes members from the community and some legislators. – The top senior civil servants in each government department will be renamed Permanent Secretaries. Their responsibilities will be limited to policy implementation, rather than policy-making as in the past. – The government will seek to improve its working relationship with the legislature. All Secretaries will work personally with Legislative Council (LegCo) members and seek their support for policy and other initiatives. The new system was widely debated by academics, the media and LegCo members, who called for the new Secretaries to be also held accountable to LegCo by appearing for audition before appointment and by agreeing to resign should a motion of no confidence be adopted. Nonetheless, LegCo passed a government motion on 29 May endorsing the new system. On 24 June, the Chief Executive announced the composition of his new government, after approval by the Central Government. The new government took up its duties on 1 July, the date of commencement of the Chief Executive’s second term. 5 The first six months of the new system saw Government members become aware of their images vis-à-vis public opinion and LegCo members. This led some of them to make public statements on policy issues without apparent prior coordination within ExCo. After a public protest by an ExCo member, the Chief Executive called several brainstorming and co­ ordination meetings to establish more cohesion in the new government. The introduction of the accountability system on 1 July resulted in the traditional October Policy Address by the Chief Executive being postponed until January 2003. – Pace of democratisation The Basic Law stipulates that, after a review in 2007, elections for Chief Executive and all members of LegCo may be held by universal suffrage, which is the “ultimate aim” set by the Basic Law. An interview with Chinese Vice-Premier Qian Qichen in the South China Morning Post at the end of June triggered concerns among some about the commitment to these aims by both the Central and Hong Kong SAR Governments.