Additional Materials to the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade

Additional materials to the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade

Australia-Hong Kong Link

Victoria HongKongers Association (Australia) Inc.

Perth-HK Students’ Anti-ELAB Concern Group

Brisbane Internal Student Solidarity with Hong Kong

Canberra Hong Kong Concern

Adelaide – Stand with Hong Kong

Once again, Australia Hong Kong Link would like to thank the committee for providing such a valuable opportunity for us to contribute to the inquiry and we thank the committee for working hard to consider this important piece of legislation during these challenging times.

Here are some questions we have taken on notice and additional information that we have included in this additional submission.

1. What sort of threshold do you think would constitute human rights abuses? There has been a fair bit of outrage about the recent arrest of Martin Lee, Jimmy Lai and others in Hong Kong. Where would you suggest the line be drawn in terms of human rights abuses there that would trigger action under something like a global Magnitsky act?

2. Are there any Hong Kong Australian business people who receive benefit or who are benefited by their links to the Chinese Communist Party and mainland officials? And is there an understanding that, for their business interests to continue to be supported, they must remain silent about the erosion of democracy in Hong Kong? Further to that, does it go further, whereby these individuals actually contribute to the suppression of activists and/or the democracy movement in Hong Kong? If so, could those individuals be captured by potential Magnitsky style laws in Australia?

3. Have you got any information about Hong Kong international students that went back before COVID-19 shut the borders? Have they been impacted in any way, or caught up? We've talked about the arrests of some of the democracy leaders and other activists. With any of those Hong Kong students that have gone back to Hong Kong, have you got any information as to whether they or their families have been harassed in any way, but also, for those that are still here—and I assume there are still some here or who have stayed in Australia—whether that kind of interference of harassment has continued. Whether you would consider Australian companies linked to mainland China engaging in sending PPE back to China to be an example of it, when that is clearly against Australia's interest and actually forms part of a Chinese Communist Party propaganda campaign?

4. Current situation in Hong Kong

What sort of threshold do you think would constitute human rights abuses? There has been a fair bit of outrage about the recent arrest of Martin Lee, Jimmy Lai and others in Hong Kong. Where would you suggest the line be drawn in terms of human rights abuses there that would trigger action under something like a global Magnitsky act?

Requirement for using the Act

We suggest that the threshold set in the scheme in the U.S. demonstrates an appropriate threshold. The Executive Order 13818 (EO 13818)1 published by U.S. Government allows the Government to impose sanctions on any foreigners determined by the Secretary of the Treasury.

Based on a report published by Human Right First, they suggested that the requirement for using the sanction act is based on those person who are:

- responsible for or complicit in, or to have directly or indirectly engaged in, serious human rights abuse

- as a current or former government official, or even any person acting for or on behalf for them, who is responsible for complicit in, or has directly or indirectly engaged in: - corruption, including the misappropriation of state assets, the expropriation of private assets for personal gain, corruption related to government contracts or the extraction of natural resources or bribery; - the transfer the facilitation of the transfer of the proceeds of corruption

- To be or have been a leader or official of: - (i) an entity, including any government entity, that has engaged in, or whose members have engaged in, serious human rights abuse, corruption, or the facilitation of the transfer of the proceeds of corruption relating to the leader’s or official’s tenure; or - (ii) an entity whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order as a result of activities related to the leader’s or official’s tenure;

EO 13818 also allows the U.S. Government to sanction any person (not limited to be foreign) determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General who have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of any activity mentioned above that is conducted by a foreign person.

Definition of serious human right abuse

1 Executive Order 13818 was issued December 20, 2017. It is titled “Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption,” and is available at Exec. Order No. 13818, 82 Fed. Reg. 60839. Serious human right abuse should be “Torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, prolonged detention without charges and trial, causing the disappearance of persons by the abduction and clandestine detention of those persons, and other flagrant denial of the right to life, liberty, or the security of the person.” Torture2

Torture is an act that intentionally inflicts severe mental or physical pain or suffering for such purposes as obtaining information or a confession, as punishment, to intimidate or coerce, or for any reason based upon discrimination of any kind, when inflicted by, at the instigation of, or with the consent of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity, or where such a person has prior awareness of the activity constituting torture and breaches a legal responsibility to intervene to prevent it. Torture can only be committed against individuals in the offender’s custody or physical control.

“Severe mental pain or suffering” means prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from: (1) The intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering; (2) The administration, or threatened administration, of mind altering substance or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality; (3) The threat of imminent death; or (4) The threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality. This threat may be directed against family, friends, or other loved ones.

A breach of applicable legal procedure standards does not automatically constitute torture. Additionally, pain or suffering arising from a lawful sanction does not generally constitute torture. For example, use of lawful and appropriate force during a lawful arrest would generally not be considered torture.

It is an open question whether or not the EO would expand the definition of torture to include acts perpetrated by non-state actors.

Extrajudicial Killing 3

An extrajudicial killing (EJK) is deliberate killing of an individual and not authorized by a previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court after a trial affording all requisite fair trial and appeal guarantees.

Enforced Disappearance4

2 This definition of torture is from Article 1 of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, to which the United States and 157 other countries are part. The language of the Article is simplified slightly here for ease of application. 3 This definition of extrajudicial killing is derived from the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 (28 USC 1350). 4 This definition of enforced disappearance is derived from the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, proclaimed by the U.N. General Assembly as a body of principles for all states in resolution. An enforced disappearance (colloquially referred to as a “forced disappearance”) is when government officials, or groups acting on behalf of the government, or with the government’s direct or indirect support, consent, or acquiescence (meaning where a government official has prior awareness of the following activity and breaches a legal responsibility to intervene to prevent it):

(a) arrest, detain, or abduct a person, or otherwise deprive a person of liberty, and (b) subsequently refuse to disclose that person’s fate, whereabouts, or deprivation of liberty, (c) thereby placing the person outside the protection of the law. It is an open question whether or not the EO would expand the definition of enforced disappearance to include acts perpetrated by non-state actors.

In addition, we would like to provide an example sanction list that relates to the current situation in Hong Kong with the reasoning of how these examples fulfill the proposed threshold. The sanction list will be finalised soon.

Are there any Hong Kong Australian business people who receive benefit or who are benefited by their links to the Chinese Communist Party and mainland officials? And is there an understanding that, for their business interests to continue to be supported, they must remain silent about the erosion of democracy in Hong Kong? Further to that, does it go further, whereby these individuals actually contribute to the suppression of activists and/or the democracy movement in Hong Kong? If so, could those individuals be captured by potential Magnitsky style laws in Australia?

Hong Kong's MTR

The Hong Kong Government owns 75.09% share of the MRT Corporation Limited. Since the Anti-Extradition Bill movement began , Hong Kong's MTR has facilitated countless civilian and protestor injuries by working alongside the HKPF .

On the 21st July , when trials attacked and occupied the Yuen Long station , the administration at MTR advised passengers on board their trains to evacuate rather than letting the train leave on schedule . Those present suggested that a lot of injuries could have been avoided by minimising the time civilians had to spend at the occupied station and letting the trains depart as they should have .

On the 11th of August, the HKPF deployed tear gas inside the enclosed underground sections of Taikoo and Kwai Fong MTR stations in an arrest operation . They also fired pepper spray pellets at fleeing protestors on escalators , this careless use of force could have easily led to severe injuries or even the deaths of the protestors but the HKPF decided that their internal guidelines allowed them to do so .

Over a hundred MTR staff started a petition to have their company look into these incidents and urged the MTR administration to issue a statement condemning the HKPF’s disregard for the safety inside the transport network . The petitioners claimed that “the MTR was too cooperative and reliant on the HKPF and this effectively took away the ability to oversee the railways from the MTR administration. The administration was not able to protect either its staff or its passengers , and is suspicious of being politically biased . “

MTR did not directly address their complaint.

On the 31st of August , the HKPF assaulted protestors and civilians with batons and pepper spray inside Prince Edward station . On the same night , the HKPF and the MTR quoted a court order as their supporting reason for the immediate evacuation of reporters at the station . Even the firefighters and first aid workers were refused entry . According to arrestees and those injured in the incident , those in need of aid were denied timely medical attention , there were also claims that there were civilian deaths caused in the incident . The MTR refused to release CCTV footage at Prince Edward station on the night of August 31st due to alleged concerns over privacy . When the people of Hong Kong made a court appeal requesting to have the evidence released , the MTR responded with an incomplete version of the footage , leading the public to suspect that MTR was participating in a coverup .

MTR owns Metro Trains Melbourne Pty. Ltd and Metro Trains Sydney Pty. Limited , and is responsible for overseeing the operation of Melbourne’s railways and Sydney’s North western railway line . John Holland and UGL rail has 20% of shares in the aforementioned railway companies . MTR also operates the Hangzhou , Beijing and Shenzhen railways in China and therefore makes a considerable profit in the Chinese mainland .

Something worth mentioning is that on December 11 of 2014 . The state owned China Communications Construction acquired John Holland from Leighton Australia (now known as CIMIC) . Then Chief Executive of Hong Kong CY Leung was accused of receiving a $50,000,000 HKD bribe from UGL, associated companies of John Holland and Leighton . https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news-49724831 https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/en/component/k2/1515266-20200318.htm https://hd.stheadline.com/news/realtime/hk/1761394/%E5%8D%B3%E6 %99%82-%E6%B8%AF%E8%81%9E-831%E4%BA%8B%E4%BB%B6-% E6%95%99%E5%A4%A7%E7%94%9F%E6%8C%87CCTV%E7%89%87 %E6%AE%B5%E4%B8%8D%E9%BD%8A%E5%85%A8-%E6%B8%AF% E9%90%B5-%E9%8C%84%E5%BD%B1%E5%8A%9F%E8%83%BD%E5 %8F%97%E6%90%8D

Television Broadcast company

Hong Kong’s Television Broadcast company has been a mouthpiece to the Chinese state and has taken information out of context in aid of the state, their actions have been met with ridicule from the public . Staff discontent with the company uploaded their company IDs onto social media platforms in support of the public’s criticism over the company’s loss of journalistic integrity. In August of last year, over 20 employees were fired from TVB for voicing their support of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement .

The primary stakeholder of TVB right now is Li Ruigang, a member of the Chinese Communist Party ,ex-Deputy Secretary of Shanghai’s Municipal Party Commitee and director of office in the city . TVB also owns TV Media Australia Pty Ltd. and currently provides television broadcasting services locally in Australia. https://www.thestandnews.com/politics/%E8%98%8B%E6%9E%9C-%E7 %B4%84-20-%E5%90%8D-tvb-%E5%93%A1%E5%B7%A5%E8%A2%A B%E7%82%92-%E5%9B%A0%E7%B6%B2%E4%B8%8A%E7%99%BC %E8%A1%A8%E5%8F%8D%E9%80%81%E4%B8%AD%E8%A8%80%E 8%AB%96/

Whether you would consider Australian companies linked to mainland China engaging in sending PPE back to China to be an example of it, when that is clearly against Australia's interest and actually forms part of a Chinese Communist Party propaganda campaign?

We believe the circumstances of these cases raises reasonable suspicion that these companies may be acting on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party and against Australian interests.

The Sydney Morning Herald (Kate McClymont March 26,2020) reported that as the staff from the Sydney office of the Chinese government-backed global property giant Greenland Group were instructed to source bulk supplies of essential medical items to ship back to China, including 3 million protective masks, 700,000 hazmat suits and 500,000 pairs of protective gloves from "Australia, Canada, Turkey and other countries.". The company even posted its efforts of packing pallets in the company’s Sydney headquarters on social media. The Greenland group, which is majority owned by the Shanghai government, has sold more than a billion dollars worth of residential apartments in Sydney and Melbourne since its arrival in 2013. https://www.smh.com.au/national/chinese-backed-company-s-mission-to-source-austral ian-medical-supplies-20200325-p54du8.html

Consul General of the People’s Republic of China in Sydney cordially met with members of the Board of Directors of the Australian Chinese Medical Association. https://www.acma.org.au/index.php/stories/40-acma-meeting-with-chinese-consul-gene ral

During the outbreak of Covid-19 in China, an Australian organization named “Way in Network” and Australian Chinese Medical Association have bought $15500 aud medical supplies from Australia to China. Most of them are surgical masks and safety goggles. Some of them have been sent to Hong Kong pro-beijing political parties. http://www.wayinnetwork.org.au/2020/03/04/obq%e6%be%b3%e6%b4%b2%ef%bc% 9a%e6%85%a7%e8%b4%a4%e4%bc%9a%e6%94%af%e6%8f%b4%e4%b8%ad%e6 %b8%af%e4%b8%a4%e5%9c%b0%e3%80%81%e4%b9%89%e6%8d%90%e6%8a% 97%e7%96%ab%e5%8c%bb%e6%8a%a4%e7%89%a9%e8%b5%84/ https://m.facebook.com/Derektsangwingfai/posts/1074273556249382/

Here are the organizations that are involved in buying medical supplies and PPE back to China. https://www.wesydney.com.au/202002191452-2/

Organizations have donated a total 2 million cash, bought 8 million medical supplies and five hundred thousand surgical masks back to Wuhan. http://www.chinaql.org/n1/2020/0206/c431699-31574507.html

When taken together, the fact that these companies, all having close ties to the CCP, are shipping Australia’s critical medical supplies to China at the midst of a pandemic is a matter of concern.

Have you got any information about Hong Kong international students that went back before COVID-19 shut the borders? Have they been impacted in any way, or caught up? We've talked about the arrests of some of the democracy leaders and other activists. With any of those Hong Kong students that have gone back to Hong Kong, have you got any information as to whether they or their families have been harassed in any way, but also, for those that are still here—and I assume there are still some here or who have stayed in Australia—whether that kind of interference of harassment has continued.

Chinese influence towards Australian tertiary education

Australia has been a popular destination for Chinese international students. According to ICEF Monitor (2019), there were 720,150 international students in Australia while 28% of them (i.e. more than 200,000) were from China. This brought Australian universities a great deal of funding. At the same time, the over-reliance on Chinese funding also brought potential threats to academic freedom and national security.

Case Study: The University of Queensland

In 2019, nearly 9000 Chinese students enrolled at The University Queensland (UQ) and that comprised 50% of the international students at UQ (UQ, 2019a). It is estimated that these Chinese students altogether contributed over AUD 250,000,000 to UQ every year. An internal email from the Chancellor, Peter Varghese, stated “Under his (Peter Høj) leadership, the university budget has returned to surplus through significant growth in international student numbers”. This significant overreliance on the Chinese students, especially in the financial aspect, has raised some serious red flags in the UQ community. This document aimed to report the suspicious and maybe the wrong doings of the Confucius Institute and Chinese students’ activities, relating to the influences at UQ from China. It is important that the reader of this document treat these allegations very seriously as it is confronting the balance between academic freedom and national security at UQ, potentially involving quid pro quo among parties of interests.

To protect the authors of this document and UQ post-grad students, their names will not be disclosed.

I. Confucius institute

The presence of Confucius Institute in UQ is concerning. It is a Chinese government-funded education centre, which courses and its materials are provided and authorized by Hanban, Beijing-based headquarters (Gertz, 2019). The ABC Four Corners (Rubinsztein-Dunlop, 2019b) revealed that UQ are accepting over AUD 400,000 from the Confucius Institute annually. These financial details should be disclosed to the public to ensure there is no enticement of monetary incentive for a breach of standard.

The Sydney Morning Herald (Hunter, 2019a) disclosed the UQ-Confucius Institute Agreement. There is one particular clause that raised concern in the academic community. It stated that the courses and materials delivered by Confucius institute at UQ the “must accept the assessment of the Headquarters (Hanban) on teaching quality” (p.107 on the Sydney Morning Herald attachment). Although UQ repeatedly stated that the Confucius Institute was not involved in teaching any university degree (UQ, 2019b), UQ approved and agreed to censorship by a foreign government department on courses taught on the university campus. In other words, UQ complies with Beijing’s decision-making authority over teaching on campus.

In February 2018, the FBI warned US universities about Chinese infiltration on their campuses in a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing (SCMP, 2019). The FBI outlined how China gathered intelligence through Confucius Institute to serve its global ambitions. As a result, a number of universities, colleges, and high schools in different states of US terminated their Confucius Institute (Gertz, 2019).

Confucius Institute was not only about culture and language as stated in the UQ response. Deutsche Welle (Yang, 2019) obtained the learning materials from a student who enrolled in a formal degree courses, “Understanding China”, which was co-sponsored by the Confucius Institute and designed by a lecturer who received a fellowship from Hanban recently (Rubinsztein-Dunlop, 2019a). In this course, there was a slide, where a photo of Hong Kong recent protest was shown and the title suggested the protests were a form of terrorism.

There was also a large amount of content about terrorist attacks in relation to Uyghurs to serve as justification of the establishment of “re-education camps” in Xinjiang, China. These “re-education camps” were in fact functioning as prison camps for indefinite detention and brainwashing up to 1 million innocent Uyghurs, reported by the BBC (BBC, 2019).

When it comes to education related to China, propaganda is a major part of its institutions. Confucius Institute is an extension of the Chinese Comminost Party’s propaganda apparatus on university campuses. When the courses come across topics like Tibet, Taiwan, Tiananmen Square, Uyghurs, Hong Kong and Xinjiang, it is likely to be biased under the agreement clause forementioned. A Chinese government-directed education institute at UQ means that there will be a continuing diminishing of academic freedom on issues relating to China.

There are signs that UQ has a close tie with the Chinese Communist Party and its government. The Confucius Institute plays a crucial role in this issue, including the supply of financial interest at UQ, influencing China-topic courses, and propaganda. The NSW government and several states in the US had terminated their Confucius Institutes. While Peter Høj was a senior consultant to Hanban and a member of the governing Council of Confucius Institute Headquarters, UQ does not seem to be particularly concerned. The negotiation of a new UQ-Confucius Institute is still ongoing.

II. Funding in UQ Courses

UQ first stated that Confucius Institute was not involved in any university degree, while its role is to promote Chinese culture and language (UQ, 2019b). However, the ABC brought the matter into spotlight that the Chinese government has co-funded at least four courses at UQ. Peter Høj then stated on Four Corners (Rubinsztein-Dunlop, 2019b) to the effect that, “They're (Confucius Institute) not involved in the design of the course. They're not involved in the delivery.” UQ later admitted that the Confucius provided seed funding in 2018 and 2019 (Hunter, 2019b). We suggest that it would be prudent to review courses funded by Chinese government and delivered by Chinese scholars.

At UQ, tuition fees from students are not necessarily contributing towards teaching and research. In the recent campaign led by Peter Høj, UQ expanded tremendously in the management level, hiring a large number of management level staff which positions did not exist before. While funding and revenue from student fees at UQ increased by multiple factors, the contribution towards academic and research may not be proportional to that increase.

Apart from university courses, there was also a concern regarding scholars developing surveillance technology at UQ and implementing it in Xinjiang, China as part of the Chinese Community Party’s surveillance network against the Uighurs. Professor Hengtao Shen was a scholar, professor, and researcher at UQ. From 2006–2018, he received an accumulated AUD 2,600,000 research grants from the Australian government.

In particular, one of the projects was called “Realising the value of mobile videos with context awareness”. After his employment at UQ, he started a USD 2,000,000 company called Koala AI which provides surveillance technology used by the Chinese government to monitor Uighurs and Muslims (Karp & Doherty, 2019; Packham, 2019). In other words, he developed this surveillance technology at UQ with Australian resources and funded by Australian taxpayers. He then started a company and is gaining profit by implementing this technology in China which enabled serious violation of human rights on a large scale. To date, he remains an honorary professor at UQ.

It is troubling that Australian taxpayers' money is being used to fund such a project which presents a serious conflict between the values of academic freedom and ethical issues. We recommend these projects be identified and stopped.

III. Chinese students’ influences

In February 2018, the FBI warned US universities about Chinese infiltration on their campuses that China has aggressively placed operatives at universities including professors, scientists and students (Gertz, 2019; SCMP, 2019). A HKBU lecturer recently disclosed that the Chinese government has been instructing Chinese overseas students in Hong Kong to monitor lectures delivered in the universities, such as the Department of Government and Public Administration at CUHK and the Faculty of Law at HKU (Daily, 2019). These types of espionage and spying activities are not likely to be restricted to Hong Kong and the US.

Chinese Students and Scholars Associations (CSSA) in Australian universities are deeply linked to the Chinese embassy (Christodoulou, Rubinsztein-Dunlop, Koloff, Day, & Bali, 2019). Four corners (Rubinsztein-Dunlop, 2019b) revealed that part of the mission of CSSA is to "assist the Embassy of the People's Republic of China". CSSA has been accused of peddling Chinese propaganda and helping the Chinese Government to keep an eye on its overseas students. The UQ conflict that happened in July this year is likely to be orchestrated by the CSSA and influenced by the Chinese embassy.

In the report of Chinese spy----Wang Liqiang, it was claimed that the Chinese government has infiltrated universities in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Australia (Mckenzie, 2019). Chinese government would also recruit Chinese-Australia immigrants as spies. Here we present some cases of harassment that happened at UQ, reported by Hong Kong students that approached us to express their concerns.

Part2: Hong Kong international students in Australia regarding the anti-China extradition movement

2.1 Case study: The University of Queensland

The UQ conflict happened on the 24 July 2019,UQ market day. There were two events prior to the conflict. One was an assembly at the great court led by local students protesting against Confucius Centre and Peter Høj’s link with the Chinese government. Another one was a group of Hong Kong students setting up a ‘Lennon Wall’ where messages of encouragement and support for the Hong Kong protest are displaced.

These two events began peacefully and only became violent when a group of Chinese students with strong nationalist sentiment arrived. A male student first brought an amplifier and blasting Chinese national anthem repeatedly in an attempt to disrupt the events. The group of pro-Beijing students vandalized the Lennon Wall installations, removed some of the memos on the wall and tore down posters. They were also filmed assaulting Hong Kong students, choking one of them.

The UQ security formed a human chain to protect the Hong Kong students from the pro-Beijing students as they were highly aggressive. It resulted in a standoff between around 200 pro-Beijing and 60 pro-democracy students for 4 hours. The Chinese students continued to attack pro-Hong Kong students verbally with vulgar language and hate speech. Pro-democracy Students left the scene with the protection of UQ security as they did not feel safe on campus anymore.

As police officers and UQ security staff tried to cool down the crowd and resolve the situation, a female student then started to negotiate on behalf of the pro-Beijing crowd with the securities and police officers.

It is believed that these pro-Beijing students were organised and led by the two students. Most importantly, the male student gave a nationalist speech to the pro-Beijing crowd after the pro-democracy students were escorted to safety by police officers. The male student is believed to be a student at UQ. He told a journalist (off record) that he is an Australian and showed his Australian passport. The female student is believed to be a post-graduate student at UQ. It is unsure if they are members of the UQ CSSA.

A day later, the Chinese consulate-general issued a statement affirming the behaviour of the Chinese students as righteous and patriotic. The Australia's Foreign Minister Marise Payne later criticised the actions of the consulate-general as inappropriate.

After the incident, we understand that some pro-Hong Kong students were being harassed by Chinese students and became victims of doxxing, who have their photos and personal information posted on Chinese social media, Weixin and Weibo with threatening contents. Drew Pavlou, a local student had even received life threats from Pro-Beijing nationalists. i. Consulate-General of the PRC in Brisbane response to the incident

Consulate-General of the People's Republic of China in Brisbane issued a statement on the next day which refers to the incident at The University of Queensland happened on the 24th of July. It stated that "The Consulate General concerns about the safety of Chinese students at Brisbane and approves their voluntary patriotic action."

The statement approved the behaviour of the nationalists, which radical Chinese students disturbed the peaceful protest at UQ and destroyed their posters, attacked them with hate speech, assaulted students and sent death threats on social media. Using mob rule and intimidation tactics to suppress students’ freedom of speech and assembly is inappropriate.

The Consulate-General might be indifferent to the wishes of the people of Hong Kong, but they should respect the rights of students to peacefully express their views, well protected by the rule of law in Australia. Regratebbly, the statement from the Consulate-General encouraged the pro-Beijing nationalists, and enabled them to continue with their threats ii. 20th August Lennon Wall Attack

On 20 August, a group of Hong Kong students was harassed by a Chinese student at the University of Queensland. The incident occurred at the Lennon Wall situating next to the Student Union’s office. Notes of encouragement and posters have also been torn down by the student.

The incident began when the Chinese student, wearing a light blue top and speaking fluent mandarin, approached and attempted to vandalise the Lennon Wall. The group of Hong Kong and local students present at the scene tried to stop the Chinese student by standing in front of the wall, telling him to ‘calm down mate’. However, these actions did not put an end to the Chinese student’s attempt, who then proceeded to push and assaulted the students, until campus security arrived at the scene and interfered.

During the conflict, superficial injury was inflicted to a male Hong Kong student’s elbow when he was pushed over onto the ground. The phone of a female student was also brushed onto the floor by the Chinese student and suffered minor damage.

A witness reported to have seen the same Chinese student walk pass the Lennon Wall the day before, during which he demanded to shake hands with a Hong Kong student and proceeded to swear at the student in Cantonese. Seeing the Hong Kong student replied to his profanity with respectful manners, he left the scene without initiating any conflict.

II. Vandalism

A group of Hong Kong students had set up a permanent Lennon Wall at the UQ St. Lucia Campus, which the venue was provided by the student union, authorised by school management and security. Additionally, the group has also created a mobilized Lennon Wall, which displays updated development of the Hong Kong movement during day time and is kept in the student union building at night. The Lennon Walls gained supports and written notes from not only the HongKonger student community, but also from people from all different backgrounds.

Both walls had been ripped and destroyed several times, but the organisers and supporters of the Lennon Walls kept rebuilding them after being vandalised. i. 4th August The first incident took place on 4 August between 7 to 9 pm. Walking past what remained of the Lennon Wall, a student found parts of the Wall dumped into a rubbish bin nearby. The notes being ripped off were simply messages showing support towards Hongkongers. The missing parts of the Lennon Wall were then restored the next day. ii. 6th August The second incident happened on 6 August at around 1 am. This time, the entire wall was ripped off. The student union president had requested the security to revise CCTV footages, which found four masked vandalizers ripping down the wall. Again, students swiftly restored the Lennon Wall the next day. iii. 7th August The wall was entirely ripped off again during midnight. CCTV footage showed clear face of two men who vandalized the Lennon Wall. The student union and Lennon Wall organizers notified UQ Security, the authorities in the University of Queensland, as well as the police. iv. 9th August At around 12:00am, three people were found trying to destroy the Lennon Wall again. Students who walked past contacted the UQ Security for help. The perpetrators had not only torn the posters down, but also threw them into the rubbish bin. They claimed they have the right to do so because the Lennon Wall is embarrassing China on an international level and they thought the information on the wall is untrue. UQ security had recorded their UQ Student ID.

Students that discovered the act had also offered to notify the police, but were asked not to do so by the school security, as they said that they will take this incident very seriously if organizers lodge an official complaint. Following his advice, Hong Kong students had lodged an official complaint to the schoo , which urged concrete actions to address the unbearable behaviors of the students. v. 20th August On 20th August at around lunch time, a Chinese student attempted to ripped off the mobilised Lennon Wall in public, despite being witnessed by hundreds of people walking by the student union complex. The nationalist student believed he was doing to right thing and did not feel guilty when security staff were recording the incident. vi. 1st September The Lennon wall was torn down again at about 7 to 9 pm. Part of the permanent Wall was destroyed. vii. 6th September All the posters and photos from the Lennon Wall had been torn away. viii. 7th October Lennon Wall was completely torn down again. Provocative notes were left to mock and attack pro-democracy students, including local supporters were left on the wall. ix. 21st October Lennon Wall was completely torn down again. Provocative notes were left to mock and attack pro-Hong Kong students, including local supports were left on the wall. x. Response from the University of Queensland

Regarding the violent attacks and vandalism incidents, Hong Kong students representatives had attended two meetings with representative from the UQ security, student service and student union. Although the UQ Union and security were generally supportive and willing to assist any investigation, school management refused to make the investigation report public, nor to notify victims with any results. After rounds of clarification and deliberation on the issues, consensus was reached on the following:

1. With regards to the investigations, staff at UQ Student Services have been in touch with a number of students to clarify the details of the incidents. The acts of vandalism were partially captured on CCTV footage along with the appearance of those responsible.

2. Having regard to privacy laws and the need for maintaining independence in the investigations, the University declines to manage the investigation process with greater transparency; neither the outcome of the investigations nor any penalties given to the perpetrators will be made public.

3. As pointed out by UQ Security's representative, any person, under reasonable circumstances, has the right to report to the police any illegal acts taking place within the University campus. UQ Security, as a third party, is unable to report incidents to police on behalf of students.

4. The UQU President and UQ Security's representative expressed their willingness to cooperate with police investigations and provide CCTV footage with the University's approval.

5. UQ Security have strengthened their late-night patrol strategy of the vicinity around the Lennon Wall to prevent any further acts of vandalism.

6. The UQU President has been putting pressure on the University to actively assist any affected students and to toughen its stance against violence and vandalism.

V. Calligraphy Club

A Chinese calligraphy teacher stated in social media that there were embassy-linked students participating at UQ calligraphy club activities (Appendix 2a). Lin is calligraphy master who is currently teaching at the UQ Chinese Painting and Calligraphy Club (Appendix 2b) and the Queensland Taiwan Centre (Appendix 2c). He migrated to Australia in the 1990s as a calligraphy artist and is now a famous figure in the Brisbane Taiwanese community. He observed that there were some Chinese students attending in his classes and recording what Lin says in the classes relating to Taiwan and mainland issues at UQ. He believed that they were sent by the Chinese authorities and will be reporting to them.

2.2 Case Studies: The Australian National University & University of Technology Sydney － Hong Kong students set up the Lennon wall in different universities including ANU and UTS due to the anti-extradition movement in Hong Kong. People were invited to put down their view on the wall.

There are similar incidents at ANU and UTS where there were Lennon Walls set up during the pro-democracy movement. Similar incidents of harassment and abuses were reported by students. Photo records of the incidents are shown in the appendix.

2.3 Hong Kong Police recruiting in Australia

Australian-Hong Kong Link discovered that the Hong Kong Police Force (HKPF) advertised to recruit police officers at multiple Australian universities. The HKPF planned to hire 2,000 more police officers by 2020, and had written to many foreign tertiary institutions, including those in Australia, to invite students to join the HKPF. The University of Melbourne, University of New South Wales, University Technology of Sydney and the University of Adelaide have been advertising career positions for the HKPF, and multiple universities from across the world have run similar job ads.

Australia-Hong Kong Link reiterated that the Hong Kong Police Force’s law enforcement actions against the pro-democracy movement in the past year were extremely inappropriate, and the problem of police brutality had not been responded to. (For details of police brutality, refer to appendix.) It is believed the HKPF had to resort to a global campaign to recruit a new generation of officers abroad as they have not been successful in recruiting local university graduates in Hong Kong ---- the HKPF saw a 50% reduction in recruitment and over 450 officers quit the force over the past year. Some of the universities have already withdrawn the advertisement. We note that advertising for HKPF is potentially damaging to the reputations of Australian universities, as multiple NGOs have openly condemned the HKPF’s handling of the pro-democracy movement across the global. Australian universities would not be put into good light if they advertise for an organisation that has been deemed to commit serious violations of human rights.

International students returning to Hong Kong

Australia-Hong Kong Link has not received any reports of Hong Kong international students being harassed due to the shutting of borders. However, there are cases of harassment in July 2019, a month after the start of the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong. According to the two Legislative Councillors from The Democratic Party (Hong Kong), Hon Lam Cheuk-ting and Hon James To Kun-sun, a number of Hong Kong international students studying in Australia were stopped by 8-10 police officers once they stepped out of the cabin in Hong Kong International Airport. They were asked to show their passports, air tickets and student ID cards, and were questioned about their reasons for going back to Hong Kong. Among the young people being investigated, some of them had participated in pro-democracy rallies in Melbourne. Lawmaker James To Kun-sun claimed the aim of the Hong Kong police is to intimidate international students not to take part in demonstrations, even when they are overseas.

With the proposed national security laws being implemented in Hong Kong, we anticipate that these students will be increasingly at risk, as their actions can be regarded as acts of subversion under the Chinese national security laws.

Current situation in Hong Kong

On 28 May 2020, the Chinese Communist Party moved to directly impose a new national security legislation in Hong Kong, bypassing Hong Kong's parliament, its judiciary, and its people entirely.

This legislation would mark the end of many of the Hong Kong’s unique freedoms, in breach of the legally binding Joint Declaration signed by China and the UK. The new law prohibits activities that the CCP deems as crimes of secession, subversion terrorism, and activities by foreign forces, all of which are not clearly defined and open to interpretation.

As seen in Xinjiang and Tibet, these national security laws are frequently used by the CCP to eliminate individual freedoms and enable gross human rights violations.

As part of the CCP’s surveillance efforts, the law will allow the establishment of a national security organization in the city, answerable to the CCP itself, which can operate in the likes of a secret police.

The CCP has also indicated that they are willing to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in Hong Kong or having links with overseas bodies.

This law can apply to anyone, including over 100,000 Australians residing in Hong Kong. It also means that Hongkongers, including us, who lobby for international support for Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement may be considered as a crime once the law comes into effect. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/21/china-proposes-controversial-nationa l-security-law-for-hong-kong https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52759578?at_custom3=BBC+News&at_cu stom1=%5Bpost+type%5D&at_campaign=64&at_medium=custom7&at_custom4=05A0 0F02-9B6C-11EA-8F1B-C5E7FCA12A29&at_custom2=facebook_page&fbclid=IwAR0uyj2 TUJrUCDIqC0xv8VqnvmZ4QHzTD3mrm0XVZtCv7C9R7IO7_U6dRko

Using coronavirus restrictions to suppress protests

On 18 April 2020, while the international community was dedicating its attention on fighting off the pandemic, the Hong Kong Government arrested 15 predominant pro-democracy activists, politicians, parliamentarians and media tycoons. At the time of writing, while Hong Kong has had zero local confirmed cases of COVID 19 for more than 2 weeks, the Hong Kong government had extended the gatherings restriction numerous times. While police largely left the packed restaurants and bars alone, when it came to activists, they aggressively enforced a coronavirus-related restriction on gatherings of more than eight people. The Hong Kong Government also outlawed this years’ annual candle light vigil for the Tiananmen Square massacre, quoting coronavirus concerns. Meanwhile, in early May, the Hong Kong Government arrested

On 1st of April, protesters gathered outside the Prince Edward subway station in Hong Kong to mark seven months since a major event in last year’s protests, when riot police officers stormed into the station beating innocent passengers indiscriminately. The protesters were quickly dispersed, subdued, and detained, as police warned them to leave “to avoid the spread of the disease in society.” https://time.com/5835103/hong-kong-protesters-coronavirus-restrictions/ https://www.bangkokpost.com/world/1911104/hong-kong-braces-for-labour-day-democ racy-protests-despite-virus https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3083886/hong-kong-police-arre st-230-mothers-day-protests-local

Appendix:

Data base of Hong Kong police misconduct action https://tl.hkrev.info/en/police-timeline/

Photos related to Lennon wall

Chinese student stand in front of the wall and stop students express their view

original photo of anu wall.

Poster destroyed by Chinese student and with pro beijing posters

References:

BBC. (2019). Data leak reveals how China 'brainwashes' Uighurs in prison camps. BBC News. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-50511063

Christodoulou, M., Rubinsztein-Dunlop, S., Koloff, S., Day, L., & Bali, M. (2019). Chinese Students and Scholars Association's deep links to the embassy revealed. Retrieved from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-13/cssa-influence-australian-universities-docume ntsrevealed/ 11587454

Daily, A. (2019). 【文革回魂】呂秉權：港大法律系中大政政系有「監聽」. Apple Daily. Retrieved from https://hk.news.appledaily.com/china/realtime/article/20191104/60227041?utm_campai gn=hkad_social_hk.nextmedia&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_conte nt=link_post

Gertz, B. (2019). FBI investigating Confucius Institutes. The Washington Times. Retrieved from https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/14/inside-the-ring-fbi-investigatingco nfucius-instit/

Hunter, F. (2019a). Universities must accept China's directives on Confucius Institutes, contracts reveal. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/universities-must-accept-china-s-directives-on confucius-institutes-contracts-reveal-20190724-p52ab9.html

Hunter, F. (2019b). UQ course on 'understanding China' established with Chinese government funding. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/uq-course-on-understanding-china-established with-chinese-government-funding-20191011-p52zun.html

Karp, P., & Doherty, B. (2019). Australian universities to work with security agencies to combat foreign interference. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/australianews/2019/aug/28/australian-universities-to-wor k-with-security-agencies-to-combatforeign-interference

Mckenzie, N. (Writer) & G. Tobin (Director). (2019). Chinese spy spills secrets to expose Communist espionage. In 60 Minutes. Australia: 9 News.

Packham, B. (2019, 2 Dec 2019). UQ researcher probed over AI Uighur surveil. The Weekend Australian. Retrieved from https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/uq-researcherprobed- over-ai-uighur-surveil/news-story/33a6ae6b304c6363d2a4be6a22bc4887

Rubinsztein-Dunlop, S. (2019a). The Chinese Government co-funded at least four University of Queensland courses. ABC News. Retrieved from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-15/chinese-government-cofunded-four-universit y-of-queensland-course/11601946Rubinsztein-

Dunlop, S. (Writer) & S. Rubinsztein-Dunlop (Director). (2019b). Reg Flags. In Four Corners. Australia: ABC.

SCMP. (2019). FBI chief says Chinese operatives have infiltrated scores of ‘naive’ US universities. South China Morning Post Retrieved from https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-statescanada/article/2133274/fbi-chief-says- chinese-operatives-have-infiltratedUQ.(2019a).

UQ and China. Global Engagement. Retrieved from https://globalengagement. uq.edu.au/north-east-asia/chinaUQ. (2019b).

UQ responds. UQ News. Retrieved from https://www.uq.edu.au/news/uqresponds

Yang, W. (2019). 澳大學中國教材曝光學生質疑紅色洗腦. Deutsche Welle - Chinese. Retrieved from https://www.dw.com/zh/%E6%BE%B3%E5%A4%A7%E5%AD%A6%E4%B8%AD%E5% 9B%BD%E6%95%99%E6%9D%90%E6%9B%9D%E5%85%89-%E5%AD%A6%E7%94 %9F%E8%B4%A8%E7%96%91%E7%BA%A2%E8%89%B2%E6%B4%97%E8%84%91 /a-50833725