Pro-Chinese Communist Party groups flooded the United Nations two-day hearing on mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macau that concluded on Feb. 16.
The committee reviewed the situation of Hong Kong’s implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It is a multilateral treaty that commits nations to respect individuals’ civil and political rights, including the right to life, freedom of religion, speech, assembly, electoral rights, and rights to a fair trial.
Multiple organizations submitted individual documents on the human rights and political situation in Hong Kong. The United Nations Committee said up to 38 civilian organizations submitted their opinions.
These groups included many overseas Hong Kong people’s organizations such as Hong Kong Human Rights Information Center, Hong Kong Labour Rights Monitor, Scottish Hongkongers, and Hong Kong Watch.
There were also submissions from traditional non-governmental organizations, such as community organization associations and Amnesty International.
Many pro-Beijing government and political groups, such as the New Territories Association of Societies, the Hong Kong and Mainland Legal Professional Association, the Yuen Long Youth Association, and the Tin Shui Wai Resident Association, also handed in reports.
Among the CCP-worshiping groups, the Hong Kong Young Current Affairs Commentator Association said the accusation of the Hong Kong National Security Law endangering the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents is groundless.
The pro-Beijing youth group claimed that the National Security Law “strengthened the protection of national security and allowed Hong Kong citizens to enjoy their rights and freedoms.”
The New Territories Association of Societies claimed, “Hong Kong has far more academic freedom than the United States.”
The Chairman of the Family Church of Po Leung Kuk Lam Man Chan English Primary School, Lau Chung-chin, gave his opinion.
As a father of four, Lau claimed he and his wife heard from children and colleagues “enjoyed the national education activities very much.”
He said the children and colleagues enjoyed National Security Law events.
Lau also said, “Hong Kong teachers must actively promote national education … teachers should report potential illegal acts or moral bias information, according to the professional code of conduct.”
The primary school chairman also suggested revoking the teacher registration should they disobey.
In an interview with The Epoch Times, the Hong Kong Human Rights Information Center (HKHRIC) said that pro-CCP groups were more proactive than the last review of Hong Kong’s implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The human rights group believed that the pro-CCP parties did not submit many documents in the last review, leading to the Committee’s strong criticism of the government.
For example, when the committees urged the Hong Kong government to repeal the Hong Kong National Security Law in the last review harsher than that of other regions or countries.
The HKHRIC suspected the authorities had been actively mobilizing their people to influence the Committee by posing as “non-governmental organizations.” “The regime is trying to conceal the truth and the regression of Hongkongers’ rights.
Another review submission by the convenor of Scottish Hongkongers, Kwok Tsz-kin, said, “The Pro-CCP group and government representatives would continuously repeat how the National Security Law safeguarded the economic, social and cultural rights of Hongkongers.”
Hong Kong and Chinese Communist Party officials refused to commit to no reprisals against groups attending the U.N. review.
At the meeting, a Chinese delegation comprised 26 mainland Chinese officials, ten Hong Kong officials, and three Macau officials.
In response to many questions raised by the committee members, the mainland and Hong Kong officials refused to promise that they would not retaliate against the civilian groups attending the meeting.
Wong Tim-pui, Principal Assistant Secretary of the Hong Kong Security Bureau, stated, “The Basic Law and Hong Kong law guarantee normal interaction and contact with international organizations.”
HKHRIC expressed great disappointment and concern about the government’s response, emphasizing the importance of civic groups, adding that they assist the Committee and other international organizations in understanding the ongoing human rights situation.
HKHRIC also warned if civic groups reduce or refuse to participate in future reviews in fear of the threat or possible retaliation, it would significantly weaken the ability to monitor the human rights situation in China and Hong Kong from afar.
Kwok, who attended the review meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, pointed out that in a closed session on the first day, the U.N. Committee members seemed uninterested or even frustrated with the opinions of pro-communist groups.
Kwok said, “during a private discussion with the committee members, they wanted us to elaborate on Hong Kong, hoping that more authentic civil society groups will submit their thoughts.”
The HKHRIC told The Epoch Times that the members’ questions in the meeting showed that they were concerned and were considering the situation in Hong Kong carefully.
For example, when the national security law considers particular speech non-problematic, the members questioned the meaning of national security and whether it was based on the definitions of the Beijing government or the international communities.
In addition, there were also rising concerns about trade unions, culture, and education, such as textbook reviews, reflecting the Committee’s efforts to understand the issues in Hong Kong and refusal to accept or believe the statements of pro-communist groups at face value.
HKHRIC mentioned that the latest meeting differed from the previous review of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Committee members only reviewed Hong Kong previously, but this time, mainland China was a state party; hence, its representatives also participated.
Despite the limited time, the committee members discussed Hong Kong in some detail, as well as the general situation in mainland China, plus Xinjiang, and Tibet.
HKHRIC expects that the final report of the Committee will reflect the regression of human rights and economic, social, and cultural rights in Hong Kong in recent years. They said, “The United Nations committee comprises international experts and has special authority. If the Hong Kong government wants to “tell the Hong Kong stories well overseas,” it will have no choice but to respond to the U.N. review.”
The United Nations Human Rights Committee will publish its deliberations on Mar 6. The report will present its concerns and suggest improvements in China, Hong Kong, and Macao’s social, economic, and cultural rightsShowed .