Yes, this is very concerning indeed, and please do keep us up to date,
especially if any of these measures are used against someone for editing
Wikimedia projects or being a part of one of our communities or groups. I
know that some countries are considering economic sanctions for these types
of measures being taken in Hong Kong, so it is a matter that many are aware


On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:53 AM William Chan <> wrote:

> Diane and all,
> It seems the the bill is far more dangerous than what we the local
> community have expected:
> 1. The bill exerts prosecution power on anything Hong Kong, from Hong Kong
> soli to water to Hong Kong-registered ships to Hong Kong-registered
> aircrafts, and applies on both Hong Kong citizens and non-Hong Kong
> citizens.
> 2. You can commit this crime anywhere on Earth. Even if such "crime" is
> carried outside of Hong Kong by non-Hong Kong citizens, this law makes Hong
> Kong have the judicial power to expirate such "criminal"
> 3. This means that non-Hong Kong contributors writing positively about the
> Hong Kong protests and topics about Hong Kong independence in a
> pro-protester tone can technically violate the bill.
> 4. If such a person steps onto a Hong Kong registered Aircraft (such as
> Cathay Pacific Airline Planes) or Hong Kong-registered ships, they can
> logically be arrested and brought to Hong Kong for trial for acts
> documented on sec. 3. Even when both the origin and destination is not in
> Hong Kong.
> There seems to be much more problems than expected considering how China
> manipulates its laws to its own good by violating international treaties
> and protections on human rights (when it is against their agenda).
> Grave Concern,
> William
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 23:08, William Chan <> wrote:
> > Dear our beloved global community members,
> >
> > The National Security Bill for Hong Kong is passed today (30 Jun, HKT
> > 2300). Most members within Hong Kong’s recovering community are shocked,
> > considering how much it affects local politics, and at the same time,
> > uncertainty brought from this decision to the local community (including
> > much of the Hong Kong people). Even until this moment, not to mention its
> > accessibility for the general public, the full text is only to be found
> at
> > the time of implementation (30 Jun, HKT 2300). However, this unknown text
> > will precede all common law principles within 30 minutes’ time for those
> > who are currently in Hong Kong.
> >
> > There are a few points that we would like to bring up -- our worries this
> > piece of completely unconsulted legislation (apart from few well-known
> > local pro-Beijing figures), from the drafting phase to the implementation
> > phase, could change the Chinese-dominant Hong Kong community work:
> >
> >
> > 1. This piece of legislation has never entered a public consultation
> > phase. The legislation is passed in a way to effectively circumvent local
> > legislative council opposition. It imposes unnecessary restrictions on
> free
> > speech, and is against all norms within local (Hong Kong) politics, where
> > most bills, including the most controversial Article 23 implementation
> bill
> > that was brought to a halt in 2003, had open public consultation. This
> > piece of legislation didn’t do so, and citizens have not even read what
> is
> > written before it became a law.
> >
> > 2. This piece of legislation seems to interfere with freedom of speech
> > even out of local boundaries. This includes, most possibly the
> > criminalization of speeches and acts that promote Hong Kong independence.
> > This can include, according to what the so-called “people’s congress
> > representative” which most within the city cannot vote for, said acts
> > committed online could also be counted. This may mean writing for, for
> > example, reasons that lead to the rise of the Hong Kong independence
> > movement, may become a criminal act if written in Hong Kong. This is
> > unprecedented, and, as we all know, IP addresses can be documented and
> > tracked to prosecute personnels. If writing for Wikipedia becomes a
> > criminal act, what can go right?
> >
> > 3. It narrows the editor base. For example, the ban of Wikipedia in China
> > had completely changed the community environment for Mainland editors of
> > the Chinese Wikipedia. Off-site insults became common where local
> policies
> > could not act on as the editor base became much narrower. Without the
> input across
> > the political spectrum, Wikipedia will become harder to remain neutral
> > for its content.
> >
> > 4. Uncertainty brings whether accessing Wikipedia articles related to
> > Hong Kong independence can become a crime. It’s interpretation of the
> > bill is unknown, and it seems possible as the implementation of the bill
> > violates how local laws are passed.
> >
> >
> > The local offline and most members of the online community has accessed
> > the effects in the short run and the long run:
> >
> >
> > In the short run, we expect the community base to retain mostly intact,
> > while meetups (currently run in an online mode due to the coronavirus
> > pandemic) would attract fewer members, particularly when local
> > pro-democracy (not pro-independence) figures are warned to be sent into
> > jail with this piece of legislation.
> >
> > In the long run, if nothing changes, we expect the recovering user group
> > will most likely descend into non-compliance like the former chapter, and
> > similar to the current state of the offline-inactive Chinese User Group,
> > Wikimedia User Group China, which ceased its offline operations after the
> > Chinese government blocked Wikipedia. In the worst case scenario, the
> local
> > community may be replaced with a pseudo-community that works more like a
> > propaganda service than a User Group advocating for free speech and open
> > access.
> >
> > We, as Hong Kong editors have tried expressing our concern but it is in
> > vain because of fierce opposition from some Chinese Wikipedia editors who
> > are mostly pro-Beijing. Uncertainty from the legislation, where original
> > plans to react to the bill when it became open to the public, became in
> > vain because of “local editors’ desire to respond when the bill is
> > publicized” and the Standing Committee of National People’s Congress of
> > China act to hide the bill from public access. This rendered the local
> > community’s inability to react before the bill was implemented. This
> > included plans to “shut down” some articles related to the ongoing
> 2019-20
> > Hong Kong protests. Of course, this turns out to be in vain both because
> of
> > its controversy of bringing Wikipedia into media attention, and whether
> > such an act violates neutrality principles, plus fierce opposition from
> > editors from China (excl. Hong Kong and Macao).
> >
> > We hope the glocal community can pay attention to the effects of this
> bill
> > in Hong Kong, as it would most probably limit free speech and may affect
> > most citizens (including Wikimedia (incl. Wikipedia) editors in Hong
> Kong),
> > instead of what it proclaimed to be the few, unlawful separatists.
> >
> > In grave concern of our future,
> >
> > The Hong Kong offline Wikipedia Community
> >
> > Wikimedia Community User Group Hong Kong
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> and
> New messages to:
> Unsubscribe:,
> <>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: and
New messages to:

Reply via email to