In a joint letter, 16 international experts in freedom of religion and belief have expressed “profound and grave concerns” about the implications of the new security law, known as “Article 23” legislation, under consideration in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR).
Hong Kong’s Secretary for Justice Paul Lam Ting-kwok recently said that under the new security law a person could be punished with up to 14 years in prison for knowing that another person has committed “treason” while not informing the authorities within a reasonable time, reports Hong Kong Watch, whose co-founder Benedict Rogers helped organise the joint letter.
The new law potentially has grave implications for the confidentiality of Confession in the Catholic Church and for other Christian traditions, argue the letters signatories, who are “profoundly alarmed” by the provision.
In effect, the new law could force a priest to reveal against his will and conscience, and in total violation of the privacy of the individual confession and of Church doctrine, what has been said during Confession.
It would also be in violation of Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which upholds an individual’s religious freedom and rights.
“For many religious traditions, and especially for the Catholic Church, the practice of what is known as the Sacrament of Penance (otherwise known as the Sacrament of Reconciliation or Confession) is a religious act of absolutely pivotal, sacrosanct importance,” states the joint letter.
“At the heart of the Sacrament of Penance is the
absolutely vital principle of confidentiality. A confession is made by
an individual, before a priest, in front of God and what is said in that
conversation stays completely confidential between only three beings:
the person making their confession, the priest hearing that confession,
and God.”
The signatories highlight that “for the Catholic
Church, what is known as the ‘Seal of Confession’ is exactly that”, and
hence though “a priest might encourage a penitent who has committed a
serious crime to confess that crime to the authorities, the priest
cannot report it himself and must never be held criminally liable for
having heard that confession”.
More broadly, the letter notes,
the proposed new security law – being introduced on top of the National
Security Law imposed on Hong Kong by the National People’s Congress in
Beijing on 1 July 2020 – “carries with it very serious implications for
basic human rights, fundamental freedoms, the rule of law and Hong
Kong’s autonomy”.
This is because “vague provisions within the law” grant so-called national security concerns far too much sway, thereby opening “the potential for politically-motivated prosecutions under illegitimate ‘national security’ grounds”.
The new legislation also lacks safeguards found in other common-law jurisdictions, such as a periodic review of the need for continued detention, and it undermines due process and the right to a fair trial, specifically through the proposal of “eliminating certain procedures” to “speed up” national security trials.
It also enables extending police detention without charge, preventing contact between arrestees and lawyers of their choice, and denying those convicted under national security offences eligibility for up to a one-third reduction in their sentences for good behaviour.
The proposed legislation ultimately criminalises as “sedition” any
attempt to advocate for legislative changes or to criticise the People’s
Republic of China, the letter notes.
It highlights that the trial of Jimmy Lai, a Catholic and the founder of the Apple Daily publication,
has already demonstrated how “innocuous text exchanges with foreign
journalists” can count as evidence of courting what the government deems
as malign “foreign interference” in Hong Kong, thereby enabling the government to take punitive action.
The letter’s signatories include the former Chair of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom Nadine Maenza, the Director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom Nina Shea, and the Ethics and Public Policy Center’s Senior Fellow George Weigel, as well as several academics and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs).
Rogers was assisted in organising the letter by Frances Hui, an exiled Hong Kong activist who is the Policy and Advocacy Coordinator at the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation, and the author of a recent report titled “Hostile Takeover: The CCP and Hong Kong’s Religious Communities”.
The letter concludes: “We call on Pope Francis and the Vatican, the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, and all other global religious leaders to speak out and to use their good offices to ensure that this new security legislation in Hong Kong does not result in further violations of freedom of religion or belief, freedom of expression or increased repression for practitioners of all faiths in Hong Kong.”