Why Hong Kong social workers stand against the extradition law
Published by Professional Social Work magazine - 14 June 2019
Last Sunday more than a million people in Hong Kong took to the streets to protest against the government’s proposal to allow extradition to Mainland China.
Days later, with the policy due to be considered at the Legislative Council, thousands of protesters gathered around the Council building and other government offices calling for the proposal to be stopped.
Devastatingly, their peaceful protest was met by a police crack down. Officers showed excessive use of force, including using tear gas and pepper spray and in some instances guns firing bean bags and rubber bullets. This led to severe injuries.
The controversial extradition law proposal undermines the constitutional principle of ‘one country, two systems’ on legal independence of Hong Kong.
It would allow the chief executive, who is the head of the Hong Kong government but is also accountable to the Chinese government, to have the authority to decide on the extradition of suspects to Mainland China. There are fears that if the proposal is passed the Chinese authorities could use it to target political and human rights activists.
For social workers, however, opposition to the extradition law proposal is not solely based on the eradication of political autonomy, but fundamental violations the plans could have on human rights and social work values and practices.
Life threatening human rights violations
The current legislation deliberately excluded Mainland China from extradition due to the country’s poor track record on human rights. However, the proposal could lead to extradition to Mainland China irrespective of a person’s residential status. This includes residents of Hong Kong, persons travelling to or working in Hong Kong, or even people in transit.
The extradition to Mainland China could lead to serious human rights violations, especially regarding a person’s fundamental safety and security. The death penalty is still being sentenced in Mainland China. Among the 20 countries that used the death penalty in 2018, Mainland China topped the number of executions.
While the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) does not prohibit the death penalty, Article 6 of ICCPR states that its use should be restricted to the “most serious crimes”. The UN Human Rights Committee has stated: “The expression ‘most serious crimes’ must be read restrictively to mean that the death penalty should be a quite exceptional measure.” However, in Mainland China the death penalty has been issued for economic crimes.
Under The International Social Work Code of Ethics, social work professionals should uphold the principle of prohibiting any contribution to inhumane treatment of people. In 2011, the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) confirmed its position that the death penalty should be abolished. The IFSW also supported the UN resolution 62/149 calling for a worldwide moratorium on executions.
Given Hong Kong has abolished the death penalty since 1993, social workers in Hong Kong should halt the extradition proposal as it would put people in the territory under life threatening situations and goes against social work's fundamental value on the right to life.
Threats to rights protections
The UK Government ratified ICCPR in 1976 and extended its application to Hong Kong when it was a UK colony. This continued after the change of sovereignty in 1997 from UK to China under the ‘one country, two systems’ principle.
The right to fair trial is stipulated in Article 14 and 16 of ICCPR. The position is echoed by social work professional standards on human rights as ‘every person has a right to protection against arbitrary arrest or interference with privacy, and to equal protection under the law. Where laws have been violated, every person has a right to a prompt and fair trial by an objective judicial authority. Those convicted are entitled to humane treatment whose purpose is to secure the reform and social readaptation of the individual.’
Given China’s severe track record on unfair trials and the question of judicial independence, including arbitrary detention and torture, the Hong Kong government should ensure judicial protection under ICCPR and eliminate the risk of unfair trial. Yet the Hong Kong government is reluctant to ensure the provisions of ICCPR to be included in the bill, offering only non-binding policy statements instead.
The failure to include ICCPR does not only fail to guard against human rights violations, but is also a strong indication on the retreat of human rights protection mechanisms and the Hong Kong government’s duty in fulfilling international human rights obligations.
As under the rights-based social work framework, civil and political rights are closely tied with economic, social and cultural rights for the promotion of individual and social development.
Social workers should strongly ensure the application of ICCPR and other human rights mechanisms in all forms of law and policy and make the Hong Kong government accountable for its obligations on human rights protection.
The Hong Kong government’s irresponsiveness towards the massive protests and the use of violence to crackdown peaceful assembly seriously threaten freedom of speech and assembly of people. This alarming development towards authoritarian governance puts the social work profession and practices under jeopardy.
Along with collective actions by social workers in Hong Kong against the extradition law proposal, international support in calling for human rights protections are significant in this moment. We call upon international social work organisations to show solidarity and pressure the Hong Kong government to retreat the extradition law proposal.
Raees Begum Baig is Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Work at The Chinese University of Hong Kong
This article is published by Professional Social work magazine which provides a platform for a range of perspectives across the social work sector. It does not necessarily reflect the views of the British Association of Social Workers.