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 : B9-0174/2020

Téacsanna arna gcur síos :

B9-0174/2020

Díospóireachtaí :

PV 18/06/2020 - 3
CRE 18/06/2020 - 3

Vótaí :

Téacsanna arna nglacadh :


<Date>{10/06/2020}10.6.2020</Date>
<NoDocSe>B9‑0174/2020</NoDocSe>
PDF 153kWORD 46k

<TitreType>MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION</TitreType>

<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>

<DocRef>(2020/2665(RSP))</DocRef>


<RepeatBlock-By><Depute>Harald Vilimsky, Marco Zanni, Jörg Meuthen, Susanna Ceccardi, Lars Patrick Berg, Bernhard Zimniok, Gerolf Annemans, Jaak Madison, Marco Campomenosi</Depute>

<Commission>{ID}on behalf of the ID Group</Commission>

</RepeatBlock-By>


B9‑0174/2020

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

(2020/2665(RSP))

The European Parliament,

 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 statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 18 June 2020 on the PRC national security law for Hong Kong and the need for the EU to defend Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy,

 having regard to the Joint Declaration of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 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 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 on Hong Kong, 20 years after handover[1],

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

A. whereas in the summer of 2019, mass protests began in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region against a proposed law on fugitive offenders and mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, which would, inter alia, have allowed the extradition of prisoners to the People’s Republic of China; whereas opponents of this bill feared that it would undermine Hong Kong’s liberal legal system, which has so far been largely independent of that of the People’s Republic of China under the ‘one country, two systems’ principle; whereas the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s Government has since withdrawn the controversial bill;

B. whereas on 28 May 2020, the Chinese Communist Party adopted in the National People’s Congress in Beijing, without the participation of the Hong Kong Parliament, a national security law that makes opposition activities punishable and also provides for the deployment of security forces in Hong Kong; whereas this led to new demonstrations in Hong Kong, which resulted in further clashes between the police and demonstrators and numerous arrests;

C. whereas the European External Action Service (EEAS), despite its criticism of the events surrounding the national security law, has recently pursued a policy of appeasement towards the Chinese Government, by allegedly watering down elements of a key report on disinformation following pressure from Beijing; whereas the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy should therefore be questioned;

D. whereas the territorial integrity of the People’s Republic of China and the Joint Declaration of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Question of Hong Kong must not be called into question;

E. whereas to date, a cross-party international coalition of around 900 parliamentarians and policymakers from more than 40 countries, led by the former Governor of Hong Kong, Lord Patten, and the former UK Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, has issued a statement decrying Beijing’s unilateral introduction of national security legislation in Hong Kong, and stating that ‘if the international community cannot trust Beijing to keep its word when it comes to Hong Kong, people will be reluctant to take its word on other matters’[2];

1. Expresses concern about the current situation regarding the adoption of the national security law on 28 May 2020 in the National People’s Chamber, as this unilateral decision violates the ‘one country, two systems’ principle and thus undermines Hong Kong’s autonomous rights as a Special Administrative Region;

2. Fears that the decision of the National People’s Chamber will once again put Hong Kong in an unstable situation and lead to more protests; reminds the Government of the People’s Republic of China that the controversial Law on Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters has already been withdrawn and that the national security law will have much further reaching implications and will significantly lower Hong Kong’s status in the international community as an autonomous region, with economic consequences for the People’s Republic of China;

3. Supports any form of peaceful protest and condemns the use of violence by either side; stresses that both sides should try to find a consensus in order to resolve the situation peacefully; hopes that the Government of the People’s Republic of China will meet the demonstrators’ demands by guaranteeing that Hong Kong will remain a Special Administrative Region, in order to calm the heated situation;

4. Stresses that all Member States should develop their foreign policy relations with China bilaterally and that no unilateral EU decisions can call them into question; stresses that the EEAS and Commissioner Borrell have been strongly criticised for supposedly adopting an appeasement policy towards the Chinese Government, as demonstrated by the EEAS special report on disinformation during the COVID-19 crisis, which appears to have been significantly modified and watered down following pressure from Beijing; is therefore convinced that the EEAS does not represent the respective foreign policy interests of the Member States;

5. Underlines that China’s integrity must not be compromised by third parties; stresses, furthermore, that the Sino-British Joint Declaration on Hong Kong must be respected by all sides;

6. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the European External Action Service, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the accession and candidate countries, the Government and the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Government of the People’s Republic of China.

 

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

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