Níl an doiciméad seo ar fáil i do theanga féin. Roghnaítear teanga eile as na teangacha atá ar fáil.

Nós Imeachta : 2020/2665(RSP)
Céimeanna an doiciméid sa chruinniú iomlánach
An doiciméad roghnaithe : B9-0171/2020

Téacsanna arna gcur síos :


Díospóireachtaí :

PV 18/06/2020 - 3
CRE 18/06/2020 - 3

Vótaí :

Téacsanna arna nglacadh :


PDF 133kWORD 52k


<TitreSuite>to wind up the debate on the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy</TitreSuite>

<TitreRecueil>pursuant to Rule 132(2) of the Rules of Procedure</TitreRecueil>

<Titre>on the PRC national security law for Hong Kong and the need for the EU to defend Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy</Titre>


<RepeatBlock-By><Depute>Kati Piri, Evelyne Gebhardt, Tonino Picula</Depute>

<Commission>{S&D}on behalf of the S&D Group</Commission>


See also joint motion for a resolution RC-B9-0169/2020


European Parliament resolution on the PRC national security law for Hong Kong and the need for the EU to defend Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy


The European Parliament,

 having regard to its previous resolutions on Hong Kong, in particular those of 17 July 2019 on the situation in Hong Kong[1], of 24 November 2016 on the case of Gui Minhai, jailed publisher in China[2], of 4 February 2016 on the case of the missing book publishers in Hong Kong[3], of 15 December 2005 on human rights situation in Tibet and Hong Kong[4], of 8 April 2003 on the Third and Fourth Annual Reports by the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region[5], of 19 December 2002 on Hong Kong[6], of 26 October 2000 on the First and Second Annual Reports by the Commission on the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong[7],of 8 October 1998 on the communication from the Commission to the Council on the European Union and Hong Kong: Beyond 1997[8], and of 10 April 1997 on the situation in Hong Kong[9],

 having regard to its previous resolutions on China, in particular those of 12 September 2018 on the state of EU-China relations[10] and of 16 December 2015 on EU-China relations[11],

 having regard to its recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council, the Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) on Hong Kong, 20 years after handover[12],

 having regard to the Basic Law of the Special Administrative Region (SAR) of Hong Kong adopted on 4 April 1990, which entered into force on 1 July 1997,

 having regard to the Joint Declaration of the Government of the United Kingdom and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Question of Hong Kong of 19 December 1984, also known as the Sino-British Joint Declaration,

 having regard to the joint report of 8 May 2019 from the Commission and the VP/HR to Parliament and the Council entitled ‘Hong Kong Special Administrative Region: Annual Report 2018’ (JOIN(2019)0008), and the other 20 similar reports preceding it,

 having regard to the 13th annual Structured Dialogue that took place in Hong Kong on 28 November 2019,

 having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the VP/HR to the European Parliament and the Council of 12 March 2019 entitled ‘EU-China – A strategic outlook’(JOIN(2019)0005),

 having regard to the EU’s ‘One China’ policy,

 having regard to the declarations by the VP/HR on Hong Kong of 22 May 2020 and 29 May 2020;

 having regard to Rule 132(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A. whereas the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration guarantees, and the 1990 Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) stipulates that Hong Kong will maintain the autonomy and independence of the executive, legislature and judiciary as well as basic rights and freedoms, including freedom of speech, of assembly, of association and of press for 50 years after the handover of sovereignty; whereas both the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law enshrine the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ principle’ as agreed between China and the United Kingdom;

B. whereas in 2003, the Hong Kong Government attempted to enact the National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill 2003 to comply with the requirement under Article 23 of the Basic Law that it should enact national security legislation ‘on its own’; whereas the bill was abandoned after mass demonstrations;

C. whereas an extradition law amendment bill proposing to allow extradition to China was proposed in 2019, sparking the 2019–2020 Hong Kong massive protests, and was later withdrawn;

D. whereas the third session of the 13th National People’s Congress debated the bill, ‘Decision of the National People’s Congress on Establishing and Completing the Hong Kong’s Special Administrative Region’s Legal System and Implementation Mechanisms for the Preservation of National Security’, submitted by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress for review; whereas the decision was promulgated on 28 May 2020; whereas the draft law comprises seven Articles: Article 1 reiterates the importance of ‘one country, two systems’ and ‘ruling according to the law’, and states that the ‘state’ will ‘complete’ legal and enforcement mechanisms to preserve national security; Article 2 sets out that the state will stop and punish ‘overseas forces’ use of Hong Kong’ for separatist, subversive or destructive activities; Article 3 states that maintaining China’s sovereignty is Hong Kong’s constitutional responsibility and further requires Hong Kong to enact national security legislation ‘as soon as possible’, and its executive, legislature and judiciary to ‘stop and punish conduct that endangers national security’; Article 4 requires Hong Kong to establish institutions to protect national security, and provides for a central government presence in Hong Kong to maintain national security; Article 5 requires regular reports from the Chief Executive of Hong Kong on national security; Article 6 authorises the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress to draft a national security law, and then to include it in Annex III of the Basic Law; Article 7 provides that the decision as a whole shall take effect on promulgation;

E. whereas Article 18(3) of the Basic Law states that laws to be added to Annex III of the Basic Law by the Standing Committee (NPCSC) of the National People’s Congress ‘shall be confined to those relating to defence and foreign affairs as well as other matters of the autonomy of the [HKSAR] as specified by this law’ and hence there are severe concerns that Article 18(3) does not provide the NPCSC with the competence to legislate in these domains in Hong Kong;

F. whereas there are serious suspicions concerning two aspects regulated by the law: first, the absence of consultations and the fact that there was no guarantee that any eventual law would comply with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which is ‘entrenched in the Basic Law’; second, the presence of mainland Chinese security organs, mooted by Article 4 of the decision, while it is not clear whether their agents would be required to comply with Hong Kong law, or how their deployment could be compatible with Article 22(1) of the Basic Law, which proscribes interference in affairs administered by the HKSAR ‘on its own’;

G. whereas the pan-democratic camp in Hong Kong, human rights organisations and the international community have criticised the decision as a threat to the ‘one country, two systems’ principle, the rule of law and civil liberties and a direct violation of China’s international commitments;

H. whereas on 6 June 2020, 17 out of 18 District Councils held a joint meeting to discuss the legislation of the national security law, with 329 out of 458 councillors attending, and all 17 District Councils passed the motion to demand the withdrawal of the national security law;

I. whereas the EU and Parliament strongly support the ‘one country, two systems’ principle and Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy under China;

J. whereas on several occasions over the past years, the people of Hong Kong have taken to the streets in unprecedented numbers, exercising their fundamental right to assemble and to protest; whereas instead of reducing the ongoing tensions in Hong Kong’s politics and society, this law further intensifies existing unrest; whereas by banning ‘subversion’ as an act endangering China’s national security, the protection of freedom of assembly and speech in Hong Kong is no longer guaranteed;

K. whereas the new national security law empowers the Chinese-appointed Hong Kong government to crack down on peaceful protesters for ‘acts and activities endangering national security’ with the assistance of both mainland People’s Republic of China (PRC) and dedicated Hong Kong security agencies; whereas mainland China’s enforcement agencies have reportedly been operating in Hong Kong illegally; whereas any operation of PRC law enforcement agencies in Hong Kong is a serious violation of the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ principle;

L. whereas, in the Hong Kong District Council Elections of 24 November 2019, the pro-democracy camp achieved a landslide victory with 388 out of 479 seats and 17 out of 18 District Councils amid an unprecedented turnout of 71 %;

M. whereas the European Union has deep concerns regarding the PRC national security law for Hong Kong; whereas this is a sensitive issue, with potentially far-reaching consequences for Hong Kong and its people, for EU and foreign citizens, for EU and international civil society organizations, as well as for business confidence in Hong Kong; whereas about 2 200 EU companies have their headquarters in Hong Kong and an estimated 350 000 EU citizens reside there; whereas the entry into force of the national security law would increase the risks for the EU citizens in Hong Kong;

1. Condemns the unilateral introduction of national security legislation by Beijing in Hong Kong, as this is a comprehensive assault on the city’s autonomy, rule of law, and fundamental freedoms; stresses that the integrity of ‘one-country, two-systems’ is seriously under threat;

2. Calls for the full withdrawal of the law ‘Decision of the National People’s Congress on Establishing and Completing the Hong Kong’s Special Administrative Region’s Legal System and Implementation Mechanisms for the Preservation of National Security’, which would damage Hong Kong’s international status by eroding its autonomy, the independence of the justice system and its respect of human rights; stresses that the law will generate talent drain, will affect business processes, and has triggered new protests in Hong Kong in recent weeks;

3. Stresses that the introduction of the planned national security legislation would be seen as a breach of the PRC’s commitments and obligations under international law, namely the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and threatens to severely damage the relationship of trust between China and the EU, and their future cooperation;

4. Calls on the Commission to make use of all means at its disposal, together with the ongoing negotiations for a bilateral investment agreement, to put pressure on the Chinese authorities to preserve Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy as well as the basic rights and freedoms of its citizens and independent civil society organisations and to improve the human rights situation in the mainland and in Hong Kong; reiterates its call to include a binding sustainable development chapter in the agreement, and calls for the integration of a strong penalty clause for the cases of violations of the treaty;

5. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to address the issue of the national security law for Hong Kong as a top priority on the agenda of the planned EU-China summit with all 27 Member States, and to resolutely address the issue in diplomatic consultations in preparation of the summit;

6. Strongly condemns all cases of human rights violations in Hong Kong, in particular arbitrary arrests, rendition, forced confessions, incommunicado custody and violations of the freedoms of publication and of expression; calls for an immediate end to human rights violations and political intimidation; expresses grave concern over the reported practices of secret detention, of torture and ill-treatment, and of forced confessions;

7. Calls for the immediate. unconditional release and dropping of all charges against all Hong Kong peaceful protesters, including Martin Lee, Margaret Ng, Lee Cheuk-yan, Benny Tai, Jimmy Lai, Albert Ho and Leung Kwok-hung; calls for independent, impartial, effective and prompt investigations into the use of force by Hong Kong police against protesters;

8. Calls for the immediate and unconditional release of Swedish bookseller Gui Minhai imprisoned in the PRC;

9. Calls for the EU institutions and the Member States to offer all needed support to the human rights activists in Hong Kong, in full application of the relevant EU guidelines;

10. Calls for the Member States that are members of the UN Security Council to do the necessary diligences aiming to convene an ‘Arria meeting’ to discuss the situation in Hong Kong with activists, non-governmental organisation (NGO) representatives and UN Special Rapporteurs; calls, in this context, for exploring the possibility that the UN Secretary General or the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights appoint an UN Special Envoy on the situation in Hong Kong;

11. Calls for the EU institutions and the Member States to monitor and report on the preparations of the Legislative Council elections (planned for the month of September), paying particular attention whether candidates are discriminatorily obstructed when it comes to running for the elections, and whether the new national security legislation will not be used to hamper the electoral process and undermine the basic and political rights of citizens of the HKSAR as provided by the Basic Law;

12. Reiterates its call for a systematic reform to implement direct elections for the position of Chief Executive and to the Legislative Council, as enshrined in the Basic Law, and calls for an agreement on an electoral system that is overall democratic, fair, open and transparent and that grants the people of the HKSAR the right to elect candidates and to stand for election in the selection process for all leadership positions;

13. Calls for the EU, its Member States and the international community to work towards the imposition of appropriate export control mechanisms to deny China access to technologies used to violate human rights;

14. Calls on the Member States to swiftly find an agreement on an EU global sanctions regime for human rights violations and calls on the Council to adopt targeted sanctions and assets freeze against Chinese officials responsible for devising and implementing policies that violate human rights;

15. Recalls the importance of the EU continuing to raise the issue of human rights violations in China, in particular the case of minorities in Tibet and Xinjiang, at every political and human rights dialogue with the Chinese authorities, in line with the EU’s commitment to project a strong, clear and unified voice in its approach to the country; further recalls that in its ongoing reform process and increasing global engagement, China has opted into the international human rights framework by signing up to a wide range of international human rights treaties; calls for the EU, therefore, to pursue dialogue with China to ensure that it lives up to these commitments;

16. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Government and Parliament of the People’s Republic of China and the Legislative Council of Hong Kong;


[1] Texts adopted, P9_TA(2019)0004.

[2] OJ C 224, 27.6.2018, p. 78.

[3] OJ C 35, 31.1.2018, p. 46.

[4] OJ C 286E, 23.11.2006, p. 52.

[5]. OJ C 64E, 12.3.2004, p. 130.

[6]. OJ C 31E, 5.2.2004, p. 261.

[7] OJ C 197, 12.07.2011, p.115.

[8] OJ C 328, 26.10.1998, p. 139.

[9] OJ C 132, 28.4.1997, p. 222.

[10] OJ C 433, 23.12.2019, p. 103.

[11] OJ C 399, 24.11.2017, p. 92.

[12] OJ C 369, 11.10.2018, p. 156.

An nuashonrú is déanaí: 11 Meitheamh 2020Fógra dlíthiúil - Beartas príobháideachais