The Rights of the Deceased: Moral Rights Incidental to Copyright Law
- Vanshika Agrawal
- 2024-04-25
“We know No one seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it[1]”, these words were penned down in the year 1948. It is astonishingly veracious, given the present situation of democratic institutions around the globe. The world changed a lot after the second World war. It got a global Guardian Body, United Nations that restored world peace to some extent. Whereas it has successfully restored the status quo of the number of disputes, it has fundamentally failed to pave a meddling ground on certain issues. One such issue is Hong Kong Agitations and the newly unveiled National security law,formulated by,
“Democratic Republic of China”.The protests at the former British colony have turned highly volatile to be discredited as an internal matter,
although every attempt by the member states to highlight the issue on the national radar has been futile.
Contents hide
2.1 Disproportionally structured sentencing policy
2.2 Mainland China’s Jurisdiction on special cases
2.5 Regulation of foreign bodies including NGOs and News organizations
The unusual status of Hong Kong conferred by the treaty of 1997 whereby, one country and two systems shall persist[2]has brought the agitations on the global scale.With The atrocities, deaths,and violence, Hong Kong has seen it
all in these nine dreadful months. Protests that started on a peaceful note lately turned volatile and brought the entire island to the core of mayhem. Hong Kong was a British colony until 1997 when Margret Thatcher then Prime Minister
of the United Kingdom returned the island to the Chinese under the policy of one nation two systems, thereby
securing a democratic structure for Hong Kong independent from the autocratic and Communist regime of China.
It all started with the murder of a 20-year-old pregnant woman by her boyfriend while they were vacationing in Taiwan. The man fled from Taiwan and returned to Hong Kong where the Taiwanese officials cannot get hold of him owing to
the lack of extradition agreement treatment between Taiwan and Hong Kong. It was the first time when Hong Kong’s special character was at stake. Hong Kong Government proposed an extradition agreement between the two respective states which would also facilitate the exchange of offenders between Hong Kong and Mainland China
thereby creating the cloud for inhumane treatment of the offenders at the mainland. The insinuation of the fear among the people, of China treating offenders barbarically fueled the protest.
The rage and fire created on extradition row were yet to be settled when China introduced its newly formulated National Security Law. A sixty-six-article document that tends to create legal apparatus in the city of Hong Kong[3],
thereby giving China a greater autonomy over the Semi-autonomous character of the territory which is not due until 2047 by the agreement of 1997 signed between China and Britain. The law prima facie criminalizes politically inspired actions especially act of separatism, collusion, or any act facilitating cessation. The document more than 7000 words is believed to be effective in curbing the dissenting voices against China’s Expansionist policy.
The controversial law accelerated by Beijing has been primarily in the air due to its outrightly blunt features and the tendency to undermine the semi-autonomous status of the island. Geopolitical conditions of the island do not affect
the fact that although it has been conferred a special status, nothing cedes it from China’s rightful claim over the
territory, thereby technically making it a part of the Republic of China and not an independent Institution. Key features of the law that are also the reason why the protests have been engaging and nasty are[4];
Primarily defined offenses under the statute are secession, subversion of state power, terrorist activities, and collusion with external forces to endanger national security. The language of the document lacks accuracy in defining the sentencing slabs under the statute. It provides for lead perpetrators and serious offenders imprisonment for a term of
10 years and above for all offenses in all categories but fails to definethe meaning of serious offenses. Accounting uncalloused act of nuisance as an act of terrorism is what makes it a highly apprehensive law thereby leaving a vast
room for discretion in the executive body. The act talks further of criminalizing political demonstrations and labeling them collusion with foreign agents to destabilize the status quo of Hong Kong.
The semi-autonomous status of Hong Kong is due until 2047 by the treaty of 1997, the special character of the state provides it a legal apparatus that is independentof china’s autocracy, but the newly contrived Law reclines China’s interference in the legal deliberation inside Hong Kong, thereby, disrupting hopes of a fair trial. According to the law, China may take over the cases of foreign interventions right from the arrest to the trial and treat them as
“very serious crimes” citing emergent dangers to the national security. The opaque criminal justice system of China has 99% conviction report out of which bulk are the result of political aspirations. The law might have not given the entire control to Beijing,
but has handed over the recipe to the mainlanders to threaten and therefore erase the special character of the former British colony.
The new law encompasses provisions securing trials behind close doors where the matters of national security are involve although the verdict shall be make public,however the process and the actual mechanism of the trial should
only be known to the involve officials. The appointment of the judges shall be look after by Carrie Lam, the chief executive, and their tenure shall be limit to a period of one year. Offenders shall be liable to bail only when the
deciding authority is satisfied that such an act shall not be repeat by the offender.
The newly conceived law plans to invest vats powers under a body that will by-pass Hong Kong Government’s dominion. Its officials shall be unsusceptible from accountability to local authority while performing their duty under this law. The law gives prodigious powers to the police thereby authorizing tapping communications and spying on suspects. Beijing through this law also controls the flow of information in the territory.
China has always had its differences with the idea of a free press and democratic functioning of News organizations
but the democratic climate in Hong Kong and China has been far different from each other until now. The newly introduced law focuses on extensive regulations of the home media as well as foreign news outlets and organizations,
thereby discrediting one legit resource that was left with dissenting voices against the unjust interference of China.
The effects of this policy have been all around the world as Hong Kong now operatively falling in the hand of the Republic of China has entirely changed the business paradigm globally. The European Union after the incorporation of NSA in Hong Kong has failed to articulate its stand on the event thereby securing cautious ground over its cordial relation with China. Although,
the United states has outrightly defenestrated the policy and decided to seize the export of weapons for civil or military use with an immediate effect. The British counterpart termed the policy offensive and the Canadians responded by suspending their extradition treaty with Hong Kong[5].
The chilling effects of the law are panoptical and atrocious, the widespread arrests and rampant detentions have now become customary. The social media exposure in Hong Kong is just not what it use to be,
the online activity of users has been copiously censore and regulated. Books and literature on sensitive issues are ban and the shops selling them have been seal. Within one week after the law was introduce seven political groups were disband, thereby
crushing every opportunity to form an association. The issue that was geopolitical in nature has now become an international affair by offending the fundamental ideals of the democratic world and free will.
The Special character of any state that is technically a part of another territory by all the rightful claim does not tend to be permanent, it’s like a fort station on the wet sand. China in the international playground has always escaped its
responsibilities due to its communist comraderies with Russia and it won’t be a surprise if it escapes this one too. Global pressure and prolonge sanctions seem to be the only options available for the time being in the international arena. Although its time that the leaning violations in China should come to an end, not through act of aggression or
sweeping politics but through mutual cooperation and democratic mechanism thereby securing sustainability for a better future.
[1]GEORGE ORWELL, 1984 (Secker & Warburg, 1949).
[2] History.com Editors, Britain agrees to return Hong Kong to China, HISTORY (Feb 14, 2021, 10:25 AM),
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/britain-agrees-to-return-hong-kong-to-china.
[3]Javier C. Hernández, Harsh Penalties, Vaguely Defined Crimes: Hong Kong’s Security Law Explained, N.Y. TIMES, June 30, 2020.
[4]AFP, Hong Kong Security Law: Five Facts You Need to Know, THE HINDU, July 01, 2020
[5]Clémence Dogniez, translated by Christian Gibbons, Europe’s Response to Hong Kong Security Law:
Between Condemnation and Restraint, EUROPE IN THE WORLD (Feb 14, 2020, 12:30 PM)
https://www.thenewfederalist.eu/europe-s-response-to-hong-kong-security-law-between-condemnation-and?lang=fr.
Drop your comment