British Judges To Withdraw From The Hong Kong Court Of Final Appeal

By Ewelina U. Ochab

On March 30, 2022, the U.K. Foreign Secretary issued a statement in support of the withdrawal of serving U.K. judges from the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal. As the Foreign Secretary Liz Truss commented, “The situation has reached a tipping point where it is no longer tenable for British judges to sit on Hong Kong’s leading court, and would risk legitimizing oppression.”

Over the years, British judges have played an important role in supporting the judiciary in Hong Kong. However, recent years have seen the ever-growing erosion of fundamental rights and freedoms in Hong Kong, and especially, after the imposition of the controversial National Security Law in 2020. The Deputy Prime Minister, Justice Secretary and Lord Chancellor, Dominic Raab, commented, “Since 2020 and the introduction of the national security law, our assessment of the situation in Hong Kong is that it has shifted too far from the freedoms that we hold dear – making free expression and honest critique of the state a criminal offense.” This suppression of human rights put into question the future of British judges in the Hong Kong’s judiciary.

Judges wearing robes and horsehair wigs attend a ceremony to mark the opening of the legal year in ... [+]

AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

The move comes weeks after Ben Rogers, a British national and co-founder of Hong Kong Watch, a non-governmental organization monitoring human rights in Hong Kong, was threatened with investigations and prosecutions. The letter from the Hong Kong National Security Bureau and a notice from the Hong Kong Police ordered him to take down the Hong Kong Watch website within 72 hours of receipt of the notice. The letter alleged that a “criminal investigation reveals that Hong Kong Watch has been engaging in activities seriously interfering in the affairs of the [Hong Kong Special Administrative Region] and jeopardizing the national security of the People’s Republic of China’ and as such, committed the offense of collusion. This offense triggers punishment of no less than three years’ imprisonment.

Will Judges step down from the now dysfunctional Hong Kong Court of Appeal

America to Stand with Ukraine says Rob Portman

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Tuesday, December 7, 2021

MEDIA CONTACT: Matt Lloyd | 202-224-5190

https://bit.ly/3Dul1JP

At Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, Portman Urges Strong U.S. Response to Russian Aggression Toward Ukraine, Tells Administration that Ukraine “Chose to Stand With Us, and Now it is Our Turn to Stand With Them”

WASHINGTON, DC – During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing today, U.S. Senator Rob Portman (R-OH) questioned Victoria Nuland, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, regarding the Russian military buildup on the borders of Ukraine. Senator Portman urged the United States to stand with Ukraine and demonstrate our resolve through the passage the FY 2022 National Defense Authorization Act, since it includes funding for lethal defense weapons for Ukraine. He also made the point that the Ukraine military has had the opportunity to modernize so Russian forces would face a more organized and better prepared military if they decide to invade.

A transcript of Senator Portman’s questioning can be found below and video can be found here.

Senator Portman: “Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We live in dangerous times, don’t we? This is a deadly serious moment in the history of Ukraine and the history of the region. I thank you, Ambassador Nuland, for your time and your effort and spending some time with us last night, as well. I know that President Biden spoke with President Putin on this subject today, and I look forward to getting the readout from that. I know we all do. Senator Risch and I sent a letter last week to the President urging him to show absolute support for Ukraine and to let President Putin know that under no uncertain terms that there would be serious consequences. And also to reject unreasonable Kremlin demands. I’d like that letter, without objection, to be included in the record.

“I visited the Maidan in 2014. The tires were still smoldering and that revolution of dignity changed everything. Ukraine decided to turn to us and to the West and to freedom and democracy. It was a momentous decision, they chose to stand with us. And now it’s our turn to stand with them. We’ve done that over the years. If you look at what happened with regard to the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which I co-authored, over the past six years the United States has transferred defense articles, conducted training with the Ukrainian military, we have been very engaged. I would ask you, Ambassador, this week we have the NDAA likely to be voted on and likely it will include an increase in that lethal defense funding, what defensive weapons has Ukraine asked for and what is the State Department willing to provide them under an expedited process?”

The Honorable Victoria Nuland, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs: “So Senator, we had a chance to talk about this at some length in the classified session last night and I appreciate the time and the detail we were able to go into there. I think that given the fact that the threat is now coming not simply from the East but from three sides of Ukraine, what they are seeking is largely more of the defensive lethal equipment that we have already given them. These same kinds of things that you actually don’t deploy in an offensive way but are essential for defenses.”

Senator Portman: “Anti-aircraft, anti-tank weaponry?”

Under Secretary Nuland: “Exactly.”

Senator Portman: “Let me ask you this, if there is an invasion, I believe that Russia will not face anything like the same Ukrainian resistance it did in 2014. With all due respect, at that time the Ukrainian military had not been modernized, they were disorganized, they were a new country in essence. The Ukrainian military has now made significant strides in professionalism and enacted important defense reforms. And again, the United States and our NATO allies have been very involved in that. What domestic factors is President Putin considering when weighing the option to invade Ukraine? Does he have sufficient domestic support despite that all calculations indicate that Russia is going to experience high casualties? Has he factored in the cost of additional sanctions, including severe sanctions such as denial of access to the swift banking mechanism?”

Under Secretary Nuland: “I think it’s important that not just President Putin, as he got the message very clearly from President Biden today, but that the Russian people also appreciate the kinds of things that are being contemplated. And the kind of risk that their president is potentially taking them into, including for their sons and daughters who serve. I would just add to your list, with regard to the capability of the Ukrainian forces, and obviously Russia is so much bigger and their force is so much bigger, but Ukraine is better trained now. But in addition to that, many, many Ukrainians have served and are now returned to civilian life, some of them with that training as well so that’s something to factor in. I haven’t seen any Russian polling but what I have seen is the Kremlin spreading huge amounts of disinformation, including inside Russia, to try to make the case that Russia is under threat from Ukraine and nothing could be further from the truth. There is no threat to Russia from Ukraine. So he is trying to prepare the ground in his own body politic, but, again, he might do better to listen to the needs that they have as they try to come out of COVID, which they have much more to do with their daily lives and their roads, and schools, and hospitals, and healthcare.”

Senator Portman: “Well I agree with that. I think it would be a grave mistake if Putin were to decide to invade again and I think this time he would meet a very different and more capable resistance. My hope is that in the next several days we’ll be able to continue to send those strong messages through a vote on the National Defense Authorization Bill, but also in other ways to let Russia know in no uncertain terms of the severe sanctions that would accompany any kind of invasion

There is a huge party going on in China: Xi wants us to join

A reply to the Chinese Communist Party’s invitation to join its 100th birthday party

By Charles Parton

Reprinted from the Telegraph UK

It would be greatly appreciated if you could stop putting the Uyghurs in concentration camps and committing crimes against humanity. 7/2/2021 A reply to the Chinese Communist Party’s invitation to join its 100th birthday party

In May President Xi Jinping called upon the Chinese Communist Party to become ‘more lovable’. As the 100th anniversary of its founding approaches, the Party’s International Department, which is important in setting foreign policy, has been following up Xi’s call.

Its think tank, the China Center for Contemporary World Studies, sent a letter to foreign counterparts asking them to congratulate the CPC on the 100th anniversary. In its words: “We're expecting congratulatory letters from our partners and friends around the world.

We suppose your institution would be among those organizations that congratulate us

A reply to the Chinese Communist Party’sinvitation to join its100th birthday party It would be greatly appreciated if you could stop putting the Uyghurs in concentration camps and committing crimes against humanity.

We look forward to receiving your congratulation and hosting you in person in the near future!” Helpfully, it suggested topics for inclusion: the Party’s success in poverty alleviation and in controlling Covid, its advances in ‘diplomacy with Chinese features, the Belt and Road Initiative, the Party’s role in building a ‘new type of international relations and community with a shared future for mankind’.

Besides those topics we are encouraged to share ‘other topics of your interest that you deem crucial for furthering our cooperation and building a better world for all’.

One should not be churlish about such a request.

After all, in 2034, the Conservative Party will celebrate its 200th anniversary. Perhaps we can prevail upon the Center to send a congratulatory letter. In this spirit, here is draft letter of congratulation to the Center: "Thank you so much for alerting us to the 100th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party and for the encouragement to write.

As it happens, I do have a few comments for your consideration on how to further cooperation and build a better world. In no particular order: ADVERTISING 7/2/2021 A reply to the Chinese Communist Party’s invitation to join its 100th birthday party

- Might the Party be more transparent, particularly on the matter of the origin of the Covid virus? This would help the world to prepare its defences against any future pandemic and perhaps the bigger threat of anti-microbial resistance.

- It would be greatly appreciated if you could stop putting the Uyghurs in concentration camps and committing crimes against humanity in Xinjiang and Tibet. The same applies to slave labour.

- The Party puts a lot of effort and resources into influence work. Nothing wrong with that. We all do it. It’s called public diplomacy. But just as you vociferously demand, might you stop interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, in our academic freedoms, politics, media?

- When it comes to furthering cooperation and building a better world, how about ceasing to claim islands and waters in the South China Sea which abut other countries, but which are a thousand miles from China? And militarising them? Neither international law nor common sense recognise the so-called ‘nine dash line’, which was drawn on an old map in 1946 by some of Chiang Kai-shek’s ministries. That does not constitute ‘historic rights’, but it does lead to tension in the waterways through which a third of the world’s trade passes

. - And could you perhaps allow 24 million people on Taiwan to decide their own future? Your perpetual president keeps talking about 'people centred governance’. Isn't the essence of that allowing them to decide freely how they might want to live?

- You will understand that, as a Brit, I have to mention Hong Kong. We signed the Joint Declaration with you in 1984 and it is an international treaty lodged at the United Nations. Abiding by international obligations is a good way of ‘furthering cooperation and building a better world’. ‘One country, two systems’ was an innovative approach. Is it too late to return to it? - A small thing, but might you tone down the hypocrisy? It grates.

- And while I appreciate the sentiment in wishing to host me in the near future, you will perhaps understand that while my friend Michael Kovrig languishes in jail for the third year as a hostage, I think I'll pass up on the invitation for the moment. Actually, it would be reassuring to all of us foreigners, if you released both Canadians, a brace of Australians, Yang Hengjun and Cheng lei, as well as a couple of other foreigners whose freedom has been curtailed. What we ex-diplomats call CBMs - confidence building measures

Finally, don't worry, we do love you, although, goodness, you do make it hard. Some years ago one of your diplomats had to behave badly with me over a human rights problem. As he walked me to the ministry’s door, he whispered, "But you do understand that we are professional, don't you?" Yes, I do understand: it is not easy being a member of the Chinese Communist Party. You have our sympathies. -

Oh, by the way. I am a bit puzzled. On which date should we send our congratulations for the 100th anniversary? The Party was founded on 23 July 1921. Is the Party's party being held on the real birthday, or the ‘Queen’s birthday’ one of 1 July, as has been announced? Mindful that denying Party history is a crime in China, we are a tad nonplussed by this very minor example of what your president Xi Jinping condemns as ‘historical nihilism’. Always a bad idea to get on the wrong side of history. Thanks. Charles Parton was a diplomat for 38 years, 22 of which he spent working on or in China.