in the spirit the fairness can provide comfort you don't like reality create another. film about knowledge and belief trust and deception. democracy and the gullible starts july 1st d w. look in detail at how beijing uses its national security laws on the mainland you don't really understand the real situation in hong kong i also will come back to the situation in hong kong how one can feel through system when we operate hong kong never leaves the news for long these days now it's the draft of a new security law to be imposed by beijing that's provoking controversy and protests joining me this week from hong kong is regina if a member of the city's legislative council and chair of the probate jink new people's party will the communist authorities try to use this law as they have with

other security statutes on the mainland to violate basic rights and restrict free expression. i. think you know you're welcome to a conference on how low you recently wrote an article about the controversial new security law that china's going to impose on hong kong and you said this does not to necessarily spell the death of hong kong separate systems but you're taking a huge gamble backing this law aren't you because beijing has done everything it can to prove that it's not interested in those separate systems not interested in freedom of expression human rights or the rule of law is it. i don't think we need to come to a conclusion because china already has its own national security law you know which

is only a few pages long what consists mainly of principles exhortations duties obligations . i think the fact that it needs it fills or pla is true and that the hong kong version reflects its understanding that hong kong to russia which is consistent with our common law system that's why payton is going ahead to an actor in special hong kong specific national security law for us but region if you say don't jump to conclusions let's look at china's record mass surveillance on hundreds of thousands of people from c.c.t.v. cameras up to a 1000000 we get locked up in shin jang region many without charge or trial booksellers from hong kong disappeared doubtless all of them dealt with under the same kind of security laws that are coming to hong kong all day and none of that you say necessarily spells the death of hong kong separate system of course it does

. well you are talking about mainland china you're not talking about hong kong in hong kong you know we have a common law system and we have the presumption of innocence anyone arrested can apply for haiti as kopper's conviction on criminal offense needs a very high burden of proof in fact proving beyond reasonable doubt which we know these safeguards are here they're over we already implemented the international covenant on civil and political rights through our basic law and the bill of rights in hong kong so called has a different system you shouldn't alum our system to gether what mainland china system we have strong protection of person no data privacy so what you just said simply does not apply to hong kong where you say you have these common law safeguards how long are you going to have them for when the new law comes into into effect look in detail at how beijing uses its national security laws on the

mainland to curtail personal freedoms and snuff out dissident voices that's that's what is in store out of all of the us do you know you don't really understand the real situation in hong kong our law enforcement agencies are prosecution lawyers and judges are all trained in a common law system if beijing introduces a version. including on fences which are wide open not sufficiently clearly to find out people won't be able to implement it and our judges won't be able to achieve cage on those of fences so that's why i think beijing is taking advice from hong kong especially the common law lawyers as to how to delineate the specific over answers they have in mind why or why should we accept the china is going to adopt this benign attitude that you described towards hong kong where

needs. justice system on the mainland according to amnesty international remains plagued by unfair trials torture and of the ill treatment in detention why do you think you'll be able to carry on with the same common law safeguards that you have at the moment you can't truthfully make that assertion because beijing hasn't said it will has it well again you are ignoring the fact that beijing has respected our common law system and we have carry on with our common law system for 23 years since the reunification you know the stability and the predictability of a common law system is here for everybody to see what you kit kat describing is a situation in in mainland china according to certain human rights organization they do this sort of the scription does not apply to hong kong i must ask you how do you know where lee harvey you know such action in hong kong how do you know that

it doesn't know you're not all i know that i know i know because i was lazy internet has been working whereas beijing said you know that they are methods will not apply to hong kong in the basic law in the basic law it says all ecosystems previously in force will continue to apply at least up to 2 or 47. really in the last couple of games also some is highly regarded in the last couple of days later in the last couple of days let me finish you are interviewing being you should let me finish give me a chance to finish my answer luis you know i heard the well justice project the well justice project weights our legal system number 16 well why 3 places higher than that of the american system you should respect that yes and for how long will it remain that way. at least until 2 or 47. and our courts at the highest level our courts at the highest level have nonpermanent such

as highly respected jurists from the commonwealth jurisdictions these are not people who can't be pushed around they were to take a cases according to common law jurisprudence in the last couple of days you've made clear that not only will beijing security law be imposed but at the same time a major pillar of the justice system is also to be got rid of jury trials for those indicted under this new legislation you say juries might not be appropriate i think that was the term you used not appropriate why because they might not deliver the verdict that you politicians want to see. that's i said nothing's that we're undermining our existing system jury trial is only appropriate for over fences tried in our high court it often says sentences below 7 years imprisonment they can go to lower courts that's effect as to whether courts as to

where he or france are should be tried are caught up file appeal has held that it should be at this decision for our pos occlusion people of course nowadays we're so much online bullying going on you know so much boxing you know it's a fact that some jurors might be so intimidated as true as to become worried about serving as jurors in these cases that is effect a reality that i wish to point out and why shouldn't judges be intimidated either who in future judges who might be told in advance what the verdict is just like the system on the mainland that's how it's going to be isn't it in hong kong what i can tell you as legislators i am being intimidated too because there are people urging the u.s. and the u.k. to put me on sanctions list is that fair what do you say to that people threatening my freedoms and rights. regina beijing's draft law already suggests that the

independence of judges will come under direct threat doesn't it article 3 of the draft decision says hong kong's legislative and judicial organs must in accordance with the relevant laws effectively prevent stop and punish acts in danger and national security that's telling the judges are to do their job isn't it so much for the independence of the judiciary being safeguarded. being independent being an independent branch up the government doesn't mean that they are not they are not sworn loyalty to the basic law or allegiance to the country or touches on picking up their office they have sworn allegiance to the country they have a duty to protect the welfare of hong kong being a part of the nation i see nothing wrong with that i wrong equate that with fattening independence up. you hold up a copy of the basic law but the hong kong bar association which knows

a thing or 2 about law has what it calls a fundamental constitutional and legal concerns about this new law they point out that article $23.00 agreed by joint declaration says hong kong shall enact laws on its own to prohibit treason succession subversion having a law imposed security law imposed by beijing is not an acting laws on its own is it. well you better quote palling then why did the bar association did not support the trough national security legislation i championed back in 200 to try very hard to help hong kong to an act national security laws on our own why did they object to that and in the course of the public scrutiny i gave then many concessions now the awful trade you 3 imposes a constitutional duty on the us to prohibit certain national security over answers

but it does not preclude the p.r.c. of origins from acting under their constitution the problem with our parcels here is that it ignores the laws of china only focuses on the basic law of hong kong which is really what she sets out a constitution or arrangements for hong kong but the national people's congress is the highest of already in mainland china and the pa is so haitian have persisted in persisted in ignoring these realities so the national people's congress can just sweep aside the basic laws it feels like the bar association says it would appear that the national people's congress has no power to the national security law that it's proposing. and the article 23 the n.p.c. has not swept away the powers of our are under the basic law the decision the

decision of the n.p.c. the 7 point assertion in 2 of the points they urged the hong kong government to get on with and acting legislation locally on our own to fulfill our constitutional obligations you know our duty under article 3 does not preclude baiting or thora teams from doing their own thing to protect national security certainly every country has a right to protect its security and territorial integrity let's look at what happened back in 2003 when you were security minister and you tried and failed to push through a security law against subversion and treason for hong kong it brought the people out in the hundreds of thousands against it and you had to resign your post because why because people didn't trust this law and they didn't trust the provisions of it and they still don't do they they still don't. or well home call has undergone ever

many crises of confidence in the past 100 years you know but our systems have remained robust you know and on a lot of people are now regretting they should have supported the version that i championed 17 years ago moreover a lot of people came out to protest not just because of the national security law but because of the sars epidemic at that time and many who normally problems and the difference between then and now is that it's at that time after the then chief executive announced he would. not go ahead with the legislation people went home peacefully but in the past year we have seen a lot of violence a lot of subversive activity a lot of terrorist activities harm done a lot of protests are extremely dangerous. as in the u.s. as into us you know we've got legal right hold on but we have also had we are or we

also have all of smashing of windows beating up innocent bystanders holding up explosives ransacking of the legislative council and the holding of the truth on the tucson creasy tended a lot of police brutality are you ok. not a single citizen has been mortally wounded by our police force on the other hand in the past week 3 police officers have died of exhaustion after off duty we are totally unlike the us where the policemen kill at least $1000.00 people every year you must be fair there no such thing as police brutality in hong kong well let's not bring in the us you have to show me a single you know we are not talking about the us but give me one specific instance of police brutality you cannot just pick the words up the lights up joshua one for granted whether by setting people on fire that was one of the military saw we saw on a bus or not if you go clean or work break you say they give you

a single example we saw on video few months ago a policeman shooting a demonstrator an unarmed demonstrators directly in the stomach you must have seen it as well wasn't that police brutality regina ip that's not police brutality the policeman was trying to protect himself the from a con artist trying at him from an unnamed man well an armed man can also be dangerous the the happiest several shooting incidents in the past 12 months each incident has been carefully examined by the police and they have basically been exculpated by the expert groups and gauge by our independent police complaints council you say that the bar association raises the issue of how this new law is going to be enforced by china the draft decision says that when needed relevant national security organs of the central people's government will set up agencies in hong kong to safeguard national security in accordance with the new law what are we

talking about here regina in beijing secret kind of thing are you are we talking about beijing secret police operating in hong kong as and when they want i don't think that talking about direct and forstmann of law enforcement of laws will continue to be. the responsibility of our policeman that's not what it says it is against the basic on no no no that's what what you described they did not say what it is quote they only said that some national security agency may be set up on the need basis as an mcconnell macao as our national security council you have known what was that moment that i am arguing holmes that means doesn't mean the beignets not be creative only when it's actually for the details so you can't give a countable resolution not you can't give any comforting but as you have not about this and you cannot give any unwarranted accusations. if there are no facts you are making unwarranted accusations will these agencies operate under

mainland law or hong kong law or you don't know do you. no no no it's in the basic law they must obey hong kong law when i said this it is not clear yet what any new national security agency would be responsible for it could simply be responsible for public education publicized here and promotion you know you cannot come to the conclusion that they are they will be enforcing hong kong law that's what they broke that's what they do when they bring in their national security organs of the central police government is a central people's government that's what they are looking for education is it you don't know that again you aren't you and you have no no factual basis for making those sort of statements you are simply making our broad sweeping allegations based on your own assumptions and bias when there's no assumptions and bias when you look at how the national security organs of the central people's government operate when

they're in on the mainland we're not talking about mainland we're talking about one country 2 systems let's come back to hong kong. it doesn't look as though it's one country 2 systems that have really international security organs have an imposing their security laws on hong kong it doesn't look like 2 systems it looks like one country one system if you do that they are an acting they are trying to an eco hong kong specific version which is consistent with our common law systems if they just wish to implement impose china's system on us they could just apply this to us china's national security law but they are not doing this they are now consulting hong kong experts about and. trafficking a hong kong specific version for us to take account of our separate systems. one of the things you said recently in your article was that beijing has a tacit understanding that the new law needs to be drafted in

a way that's consistent with common law norms and strikes a balance between protecting national security and up holding personal rights and freedoms 1st point regina tacit understanding is are by definition meaningless and well protected understanding you know is reflected by the fact that they are not imposing the national law on hong kong they are trafficking a hong kong specific law in fact because they understand our system is different in the basic law they asked us to do it on our own but because we failed to do so in the past 20 through years so a chain of thora he's had no option but look at hong worth introducing a set up laws that will protect national security and discourage separatists activities that's what they are doing they're not imposing national laws on hong kong tell me why no our system is different tell their own fences that they are worried about for example succession subversion under the common law these offenses

need to be very clearly spelled out and they will need expert help from hong kong perhaps your assurances would carry more weight if what we've been seeing in hong kong hadn't been taking place and that's the erosion of existing rights isn't it last month un human rights experts severely criticized police for the arrest of peaceful demonstrations in violation they said of norms international norms and rights they demanded that the hong kong government immediately trump the criminal prosecution of 15 pro-democracy activists who took part in peaceful protests last year if you're so concerned about the rule of law in hong kong why are you not going to release these people i think you have been talking to the wrong people and take a listening only to one side that opinion. take for example june 4th commemorations can you can you to take place in hong kong even though note the participants

violate our public or public health laws prohibiting group. gatherings the police allow them to gather in factorial park and facilitate at the gathering no difference i don't think there will be any difference after the national hong kong for sure not the national security law it's been an exit peaceful gatherings peaceful possible processions will continue to be allowed the police tried to ban that vigil as you know in victoria park didn't they and the bullies did not talk did not bend that the police facilitated at least 10000 public meetings and processions the police have been pending not giving approval in recent months because up a covert 900 situation because we have enacted public health laws prohibiting group gatherings of more than 8 people you've had only 5 we have not officially stayed at home orders you have you have only 5 locally transmitted infections 5 in the week

of june the 1st after more than 2 weeks with no local cases taking the total number of infections to just over a $1004.00 deaths prodemocracy canberra's it was just an excuse excuse to try and block an unwelcome event and they were right one day thank you for pointing out that we have done well in fighting covert 19 but we should not take anything for granted we should not 2nd feis public safety you know just to accommodate these protests request they can't do it after the covert 19 is completely under control moreover we have detected 2 local outbreaks recently in public housing estates the sources of which have not yet been traced. beijing's declared reason for this new law is to maintain order in hong kong and to counteract what it calls characteristics of terrorism and separation but that's not the real worry is it the

fact is the security law reflects beijing's paranoia about free speech and freedom in general doesn't live that's a very unfair statement in the past 12 months the police have uncovered at least 22 cases up extremely dangerous here t.p. explosive haul that inch and one in the school and lots of weaponry dangerous weapons have been using a lot of so-called peaceful protests you know and innocent people have been killed and these are violent events have never occurred in hong kong and there are people waving promoting hong kong independence you know waving hong kong flacks or chanting revolutionary songs you know these are activities that no government would allow a lot of hong kong people are very angry about it john john revolutionary song never an order trying to get allusion yes absolutely are perfectly entitled to chant

revolutionary songs in free countries regina europe you can go to london or washington and chant whatever revolutionary songs you want why don't you try it. it depends on whether the songs are chanted as in an opera les miserables la or chant as a part up a well organized and well planned action plan to stalk separatist sentiments. at the end of the day your your reason your pitch to the people of hong kong is trust beijing this security law will not be used in the same way that beijing uses its security laws to tamp down on freedoms on the mainland this is what you are asking them to accept that china is not going to behave the way it behaves on the mainland in hong kong do you really believe that of course trust our motherland our motherland has nothing but good intentions for the people of hong kong and also

trust the basic law trust one country 2 systems which has worked well in the past 23 years you know why doesn't it have better attentions towards its own people on the mainland why is it torturing them in prisons and locking up a 1000000 weakness in riyadh so-called reeducation camps why is it doing that i must answer you took i must ask you not to confuse and fills the issues but keep talking about making allegations about a name that would have nothing to do it one country 2 systems i ask you to come back to the situation in hong kong how one country 2 systems really operate and don't allow your bias to color your you know your reports on the hong kong that's totally unfair to hong kong people i take strong objection to that regina it's been good to have your own coverage zone thank you very much.

oh. we're all set. to go beyond beyond just. as we take on the world. we're all about is the stories that matter to you. about something behind the prime minister for what ever

it takes to go running not me know how much. experience but the run up that w. martin made for mines. w.'s crime fighters are back to africa is my. successful radio drama series continues this season the stories focus on hate speech prevention and sustainable chocolate production. all of this is are available online and of course you can share and discuss songs africa's facebook page and other social media platforms. crime fighters tune in now. get to know that 77 percent. are younger than 65. that's me and me and.

you know what time of course is. the 77 percent talk about the issues. from the politics of classes from housing boom boom time this is what. welcome to the 77 percent. this weekend d.w. . like. a muggle or just was. sued for the russian soul count it runs deep the 1st so many different books of life. songs are something. probably. both come straight from the heart. of the russians and turning from birth to death starts june 18th column d. w.

. play. play play play. this is the w. news live from berlin tonight the brother of george florida goes to washington and makes an emotional plea before congress. i'm here the next to make it stop stop the pain stop must be a tired george copperhill and he was ignored please listen to the crowd on make it to you now. and as he was speaking the police chief of many.