Written evidence from Hong Kong Journalists Association (HNG0629)

1. The Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) is run by working journalists and seeks to enhance press freedom and the integrity of news coverage and, as a trade union, also aims to improve working conditions for journalists and to remove barriers to news gathering.

2. This submission is made in response to the inquiry led by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons to assist its consideration and assessment of the implementation of the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law.

Introduction

3. This year marks the 30th anniversary of the Sino-British Joint Declaration under which Britain returned the sovereignty of Hong Kong to the People’s Republic of China on the principle that “basic rights and freedoms will be protected by law.”

4. Ironically, it also marks the darkest moment of Hong Kong’s press freedom.[1] Diversity, creativity, honesty is vanishing. Truth is being replaced by travesty.

5. This submission will detail how press control is happening despite the existence of protection by law.

Media owners inevitably succumb to Mainland pressure

6. On three occasions in the past 20 years, the policy “to regain Hong Kong media” has been enunciated. That was after the crackdown of the 1989 pro-democracy movement; the 2003 rally by half-million Hongkongers against the national security law; and the shelving of the plan to introduce national education in Hong Kong in 2012 after strong public protests.

7. The desire to secure a controlling influence over the media so that it can be used by the Chinese government as its mouthpiece is becoming a reality.  

8. 90% of Hong Kong media owners have businesses on the Mainland. Over half of media owners have been appointed to the two national bodies, i.e. the National People’s Congress (NPC) and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC).

9. Going by their concerns and their companies’ interests, succumbing to Mainland pressure is inevitable. The result is support for the policies of Beijing or the censorship of negative and sensitive news about China. Examples will be provided in the section titled “Increasing Self-Censorship”.

Personnel changes to muzzle media

10. Over the years, personnel changes in the media industry have prompted public concern over efforts to muzzle independent voices and place pressure on editorial integrity.

11. Among them is the decision by the English-language South China Morning Post (SCMP) to appoint Mr. Wang Xiangwei, a then member of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, as its Editor-in Chief.

12. In mid-January, influential Chinese daily Ming Pao Daily News moved its Chief Editor, Mr. Kevin Lau, to its online business. He is to be replaced by an editor of a Chinese newspaper in Malaysia where free press does not exist. Its editorial staff saw that as a move to avoid antagonising Beijing and to reposition the newspaper, particularly in a critical year when intense debate over political reform was expected. They put up a strong protest but the management remained adamant on the removal of Mr. Lau.

13. Major management reshuffle also happened at the Chinese financial daily Hong Kong Economic Journal following a complaint to its controlling shareholder Richard Li by a China Liaison Office official of the paper’s editorial line during the 2012 Chief Executive election. In 2013, several of its core managerial and editorial team left the paper. Among them were its Chief Executive Officer, its Acting Chief Editor and the head of its political team. 

14. Following these reshuffles, all three news outlets have been decried by the general public for its various degrees of self-censorship as detailed below.

15. In a no less controversial decision, privately-owned Commercial Radio fired talk-show host and an outspoken government critic Ms. Li Wei-ling in mid-February 2014. Its management denied Ms. Li’s allegation that her contract was terminated in return for the government renewing the radio’s licence but refused to give any explanation on Ms. Li’s sacking. It is worth noting that in 2004, Commercial Radio dismissed two outspoken talk-show hosts at the time of licence renewal.

16. At the same time, senior officials at China’s Liaison Office or the Hong Kong government are frequently contacting senior editors in the newsrooms in their attempt to influence the editorial line. In one specific instance, the Director of China’s Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, Mr. Wang Guangya, reportedly told a Hong Kong delegation consisting of senior management personnel of leading news organisations to increase their coverage of opposition to the pan-democrat Occupy Central movement.

Increasing self-censorship

17. On the surface, some people may say that Hong Kong still enjoys a free press because  government opponents can still be seen criticising the government and Beijing in the papers every day. In the newsroom the picture is, however, far more worrying. Here are some public cases.

(A)  Hong Kong Economic Journal

On November 11, 2013, noted columnist Mr. Lian Yi-zheng found his column in the financial daily edited without his agreement. A paragraph – which said the government should investigate whether corruption is the primary cause of its denying Hong Kong Television a free-to-air TV licence – had been taken out. The paper’s new chief editor Ms. Alice Kwok Yim-ming said the editing was done out of legal concern. At least two other columnists – namely Chan Ka-ming and Chin Chi-kin have complained of censorship since Ms. Kwok took over the paper’s leadership. All except Mr. Lian subsequently left. In the meantime, the paper’s publishing house conceded that it had removed three of Mr. Lian’s columns from a book under preparation. 

(B)  Ming Pao Daily News

A few days before the July 1 demonstration, a management-backed editor of this Chinese daily flew into the paper’s Hong Kong office from Canada – his usual base. In the early hours of July 2, he bypassed the paper’s internal control system, stopped the print machine and changed the paper’s front page headline on the July 1 demonstration. He insisted that it was done to update the headline. Its editorial staff issued a strong protest against that. The editor concerned has since returned to Canada.  

(C) South China Morning Post

In June 2012, the SCMP carried a 438-word report on the suspicious death of a Tiananmen activist Mr. Li Wangyang in its first edition. In the second edition, the story was reduced to a 101-word news brief. When queried by a sub-editor, Chief Editor Mr. Wang conceded that it was his decision to trim the story. “I don’t have to explain to you anything. I made the decision and I stand by it. If you don’t like it, you know what to do,” wrote Mr. Wang in his email reply. This resulted in a petition by some 100 journalists and editors of the paper. Subsequently, the sub-editor involved left when his contract was not renewed.

18. These specific instances make up the tip of the iceberg. Many journalists have complained in private of last minute removal of negative news against the government; blacklisting of certain stories in the run-up to the legislature meetings of Beijing; and a blacklist of academics who are considered “too liberal”. None of them would go on the record to admit this due to fear of losing their jobs.

Brutal attacks endanger media freedom

19. Physical attacks on journalists can be regarded as direct attacks on press freedom. Such attacks have escalated in recent years.

20. At least 20 incidents of violence targeting the media have taken place since mid-2012. The most prominent and alarming instance was the brutal attack against former Ming Pao Daily News Chief Editor Mr. Kevin Lau Chun-to on the morning of 26 February 2014, which was widely believed to be related to his journalistic work.

21. No less alarming was the attempt by the Hong Kong police to dissociate the attack from press freedom. Only hours after arresting the knife men, the police chief Mr. Tsang Wai-hung said he saw no evidence to suggest that the attack was linked to Mr. Lau’s journalistic work. He also said that Mr Lau had not given the police any statement which was not true. When Mr Lau pointed out the error, the police did not make any clarification.

22. Less than a month after the attack on Kevin Lau, four men armed with metal pipes attacked Hong Kong Morning News Media Group director and vice-president Lei Lun-han and senior executive Lam Kin-ming in a busy street. The group was then preparing to launch a new newspaper. The plan was shelved later.

23. There were other attacks targeting bosses of news outlets. In June 2013, a stolen car rammed into the gate of the home of Next Media chairman Mr. Jimmy Lai Chee-ying. In July 2013, two attackers ambushed the owner of the free newspaper am730, Mr. Shih Wing-ching and smashed the windows of his car while he was at the wheel. Mr. Shih barely managed to avoid getting hurt.

24. More than 13,000 citizens took to the streets in protest against these wanton attacks on the press. However, like most of the earlier attacks, these cases remain unsolved.

Invisible hand against media independence

25. The media relies on advertising as a vital source of revenue. There is increasing evidence that an invisible hand, or economic inducement, is being deployed to encourage news media to fall in line with Beijing or the Hong Kong establishment. Thus dissenting voices have almost evaporated.

26. The outspoken Next Media Group, which publishes Next Magazine and Apple Daily, has been subjected to such pressure. International banks such as HSBC, Hang Seng Bank and Bank of East Asia have stopped advertising in the paper over the past year. In an interview, Apple Daily’s Chief Editor, Mr. Cheung Kim-hung added that Standard Chartered Bank, Hongkong Land and the Kerry Group have also withdrawn adverts.
27. The free newspaper, am730, an independent and comparatively moderate voice in the Hong Kong media, also faced advertising boycott, although on a smaller scale. According to the newspaper’s owner Mr. Shih, mainland-associated companies pulled their adverts from the newspaper without explanation in late 2013. Mr. Shih said he thought the act had something to do with the newspaper’s relatively critical stance on the Hong Kong government.

Licences become tool to gag media

28. Media diversity is of the utmost importance for press freedom. However, the government’s commitment to media diversity was brought into serious question in October 2013 when the Executive Council refused to issue a free-to-air TV licence to Hong Kong Television Network, which triggered large-scale protests staged outside the government headquarters.

29. The renewal of licences for the two commercial radio broadcasters i.e. Commercial Radio and Metro Radio also prompted controversy, with allegations that a controversial talk show host was sacked to pave the way for her station to have its licence renewed.

30. This illustrates how the issue of licences or their renewal can become a way for the government to pressure TV and radio stations.

New media faces a critical moment

31. The period since 2012 has seen a blossoming of internet news sites. These sites have become increasingly important as a source of news and opinion for Hong Kong people. However, their future is gloomy.  

32. Firstly, a popular pro-democracy news website “House News” was closed suddenly in July 2014 due to what its founder Mr. Tony Tsoi Tung-ho called “white terror”. In a statement, Mr. Tsoi, who is also an activist of Occupy Central movement, said, “a feeling of white terror is experienced and spread throughout society’ and “to act as a normal citizen, a normal media outlet and to do something right for society is becoming difficult, or even terrifying, not that you feel alienated, but fearful.”

33. Considering Hong Kong's current political atmosphere and the fact that the majority of the mainstream media have been co-opted to the government's side, the closure of House News is not only a loss to Hong Kong people, but also poses further threats to press freedom.

34. Second, the government has denied journalists access to official functions and government information services. Third, they suffer from cyber-attacks. The most alarming was an attack on Apple Daily, both in Hong Kong and Taiwan, just before an unofficial referendum was launched in Hong Kong on nomination methods for the chief executive election in 2017.

Secretive government refuses to open up

35. Hong Kong journalists face many difficulties accessing government information because there has been little movement to enact freedom of information legislation notwithstanding that the fundamental right of access to information is explicitly stated in the Hong Kong Bill of Rights[2] and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.[3]

36. Since 1995, Hong Kong people have only been able to access public information by using a non-binding administrative code. The government can ignore requests without giving detailed reasons.

37. In March 2014, the Ombudsman made a recommendation that the government shall consider introducing a law to underpin citizens’ right of access to information, covering information held by both government bureaus and departments and public organisations, to be overseen by an independent body with enforcement power.[4]

38. The government’s only response to the recommendation was that it would wait for the Law Reform Commission’s report before deciding whether to enact legislation. The reality is commission work often takes years, and the government is under no obligation to act on its reports. The HKJA questions whether the Law Reform Commission study is just a government’s delaying tactic.

39. In the meantime, there is growing secrecy within the government. There are fewer press conferences. Instead, there is a growing number of written statements and write-ups by top officials on their internet blogs. All these preclude journalists from seeking clarification or challenging government policy.

Survey results show press freedom deteriorating

40. The above factors have resulted in some very unsatisfactory rating of Hong Kong’s press freedom by both local and international press bodies.

41. The HKJA, with the help of several academics, designed a scientific research method to collect data to produce the first Hong Kong Press Freedom Index.[5] According to its 2014 findings, local journalists rated press freedom at 42 on a 100-point scale and slightly better at 49.4 among the general public. The Index reflects the fact that Hong Kong’s press freedom is at a low level.

42. When asked how common self-censorship was, the journalists rated it at 6.9 with 10 representing very common. The rating of general public was 5.4. This suggests that, from the view of journalists, self-censorship is common within the Hong Kong media. 

43. In another survey by the University of Hong Kong in 2014, the net satisfaction rate with media freedom among the public had dipped to its lowest level since the 1997 handover. It reported that the net satisfaction was 15 percentage points – 10 percentage points lower than in the previous poll. Both polls were done after the brutal attack of Mr. Lau and the sacking of Ms. Li. 

44. Paris-based Reporters Without Borders ranked Hong Kong 61st worldwide in its latest World Press Freedom Index, compared with 58th in 2013 and 18th in 2002.[6] The report further stated: “China’s growing economic weight is allowing it to extend its influence over the media in Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan…Media independence is now in jeopardy in these three territories, which are either “special administrative regions” or claimed by Beijing. The Chinese Communist Party’s growing subjugation of the Hong Kong executive and its pressure on the Hong Kong media through its “Liaison Office” is increasingly comprising media pluralism there.”

Renewed debate over national security law

45. Article 23 of the Basic Law requires Hong Kong to pass laws prohibiting acts of “treason, secession, sedition or subversion’ against the central government. An attempt to pass such a law in 2003 triggered a strong protest by half a million people

46. Debate over this law was re-ignited after a break-in at the People’s Liberation Army barracks in Central by independence advocates in December 2013.

47. Former Basic Law Committee member Professor Wang Zhen-min, also Dean of Law at Tsinghua University and a senior researcher at the State Council’s Institute of Hong Kong and Macau called for the implementation of Article 23 in the wake of barracks break-in.

48. The Hong Kong government denied that was its priority. However, this controversy remains amid increasing tension between Beijing and Hong Kong.  

Recommendations

49. The HKJA urges the Committee to express to both the Central People’s Government and the HKSAR Government its most serious concern about the state of press freedom in Hong Kong, and urges the Committee to question closely the HKSAR Government over its efforts in defending press freedom with the following recommendations:

(1)   Take vigorous measures to repeal any unreasonable direct and indirect restrictions on press freedom and freedom of expression.

(2)   Take all possible steps to prevent violence against journalists and pursue perpetrators, including the masterminds, with the full weight of the law. All too often these cases, especially attacks of an intimidating nature, remain unsolved. It is time, given the horrific attack on Kevin Lau, for the government and law enforcement agencies to take all such incidents seriously and to get to the bottom of what are, without doubt, attempts to undermine press freedom and freedom of expression.

(3)   Enact as a matter of urgency freedom of information and archives laws to ensure that Hong Kong residents, including journalists, have proper access to government information and documents. The legislation should be based on the principles of maximum disclosure, limited and narrowly drawn exemptions and an effective and independent appeal mechanism. Given the urgency of the matter, the government should take the initiative to enact such laws without going through a potentially lengthy Law Reform Commission procedure.

(4)   Resist Chinese pressure to legislate under Article 23 of the Basic Law. There is no pressing need for such legislation and existing laws suffice to prohibit offences contained in Article 23. However, if the government does decide to enact such legislation after securing consensus in the community, then the law must contain safeguards that are robust enough to protect freedom of expression and press freedom.

(5)   Review its policy on law reform to ensure that freedom of expression concerns are taken into full account in determining the content of new laws or amendments to existing ordinances.

October 2014