Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 71
View Lenore Zann Profile
Lib. (NS)
Thank you very much.
Thank you all so much for being here. This is a very serious issue, and it's very concerning, about democracy, really, around the world.
I watched a television interview recently with the Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai. He had tears in his eyes as he was talking about his love for his country and also his fears about possibly being arrested, but he said he had to say what he had to say because he was dedicated to the truth and making sure that the truth gets out. My heart is with him and with his family. He said he has some family members here in Canada. I'm truly concerned for him and for all other journalists who are being arrested and who are in a state of chill right now in Hong Kong. Several other pro-democracy supporters were also arrested when he was, and the Apple Daily's offices were apparently searched by as many as 200 police officers.
My question is this: Is there any particular timing on this? Were they looking for anything in particular, do you think? How should the international community, including Canada, respond to the arrest of media representatives and student leaders in Hong Kong?
Who would like to respond to that? Would you, Mr. Davis?
Michael C. Davis
View Michael C. Davis Profile
Michael C. Davis
2020-08-13 11:48
Yes, I'd be happy to.
I think, of course, the searching of the newsroom was a fishing expedition. I've been told that they're doing a case approach, so the case that explains a lot of the arrests so far is really important to Canada and the United States because it's the case against people who have formed organizations abroad to support Hong Kong.
One of those organizations is called Stand with Hong Kong. Another one is the Hong Kong Democracy Council. I think your hearings will include a member of that council who's already the target of an arrest warrant for basically lobbying his own Congress, the U.S. Congress. He's an American citizen, Samuel Chu, and his work with the Hong Kong Democracy Council was essentially to lobby Congress for the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act.
What we're doing right now in this hearing could wind up getting arrest warrants for all of us, because under that law, which extends globally, one of the things they target is the seeking of sanctions against China or Hong Kong by a foreign government. Lobbying to get sanctions...and the questions and answers we're having today might be interpreted accordingly, or even if we say things today that might cause people to hate China, then we also run afoul of that law. This hearing is very much in the target of that.
What I think they're doing now is using these cases, so I'm expecting more and more targeting of people who have these organizations abroad that are seeking sanctions and people who testify abroad.
Jimmy Lai was apparently a long shot in this, but he's been a target for them for many years, as they would view him as a great sinner. His only sin, apparently, was allegedly providing funding for organizations that lobby governments and parliaments such as yours.
These are things that are basic freedoms that people, even lobbying their own government, are going to be charged with, serious crimes where the punishment is three years to life in prison. This is what's going on.
View Lenore Zann Profile
Lib. (NS)
This is for any of you. When you see the news, you see people on the streets of China interviewed, and they say, “No, this is fine. It's to protect China and to protect our society so that we're all one.” Can any of you speak to that and how the people in mainland China are receiving a certain type of news or getting mixed news? Or are they only getting state news that is telling them one thing?
Cheuk Kwan
View Cheuk Kwan Profile
Cheuk Kwan
2020-08-13 11:52
I believe that, as of July 1, the Hong Kong people have it worse than the Chinese citizens in mainland China. This is an anecdote, but this is something very true. In the past, I have not seen as much censorship and self-censorship imposed on Chinese citizens as we can see in Hong Kong. I think this is a grave situation that we need to worry about. In my mind, China doesn't care. China will sacrifice Hong Kong. What's six million people when Mao or Deng Xiaoping once said, “What's a million peopled killed in a famine? We have a hundred billion”, or whatever it may be.
In this case, I think the callous attitude that China has right now for Hong Kong is equivalent to what they are doing in East Turkestan, in Xinjiang, as well as in Tibet. It almost approaches a cultural genocide.
Samuel M. Chu
View Samuel M. Chu Profile
Samuel M. Chu
2020-08-13 12:49
Thank you, Chair and committee, for having me.
I am the managing director of the Hong Kong Democracy Council, HKDC, based in Washington, D.C. We are the first U.S.-based organization advocating on behalf of Hong Kong's autonomy and basic freedoms that is led by U.S. citizens. Our mission is focused on influencing and informing U.S. policy towards Hong Kong and China.
I want to make that clear up front, because on July 30, I went to bed and woke up the next morning with notification and media reports that I am now a wanted felon, or at least a wanted fugitive. Chinese media leaked a report on July 30 that the Hong Kong authorities and police have issued arrest warrants for six pro-democracy activists who are promoting democracy in Hong Kong but are currently overseas. I am one of the six, and the charges are for incitement of secession and collusion with foreign powers. This was part of the national security law that was concocted by Beijing in secret and then rolled out on July 1 and implemented at the same time it was made public for the first time. Both of the crimes that I am allegedly accused of are punishable by life in prison.
I am different from the others on the list and others who have experienced and encountered harassment and arrests in Hong Kong since implementation of the law. I have been an American citizen for 25 years. I left Hong Kong and arrived in Los Angeles, California, in 1990. However, the national security law in article 38 states the following specifically: This Law shall apply to offences under this Law committed against the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region from outside the Region by a person who is not a permanent resident of the Region.
In other words, every provision of the national security law applies to everyone outside of Hong Kong. Nobody is beyond the law's reach, not me as a U.S. citizen on American soil, not the 85,000 Americans who are living and working in Hong Kong, and not the estimated 200,000 to 250,000 Canadian citizens who are living and working in Hong Kong itself.
My surprising status as an international fugitive illustrates the imminent threat to freedom and free expression that not only Hong Kong pro-democracy activists are experiencing and have been experiencing, but also that we have been warning over the past year is coming to not just American soil but Canadian soil.
Since the implementation of the national security law, we have already seen the direct impact it has had on crackdowns in Hong Kong, specifically with regard to the rights of free speech, free press, free assembly and protest. The first arrest made under the national security law in Hong Kong was of a young person who was wearing a T-shirt that said “Free Hong Kong”. The authorities also targeted a 19-year-old protester whose crime was having a sticker on the back of his phone that simply had the word “conscience” written in Chinese.
In the following days, the government disqualified 12 separate pro-democracy candidates from the LegCo election, which the government eventually postponed for a year. Benny Tai, a professor, who was a co-founder with my father of the umbrella movement in 2014, was ousted from his job as a tenured professor at Hong Kong University. Four young protesters were arrested for posting online that the government claims were inciting secession. Schools have now banned the use of slogans and the singing of the protest anthem Glory to Hong Kong in all schools.
As the assault on basic freedoms has been happening, as Ms. Boyajian pointed out, Americans, Canadians and folks in western countries have been watching from afar, from a safe distance, with solidarity through social media and our solidarity protests and rallies. But now, as my experience has shown, you don't have to be in Hong Kong to be in trouble with the Chinese regime and the Hong Kong government. Simply tweeting or re-tweeting someone else's tweet could earn you an arrest warrant and a prison sentence.
Article 38 as written can seem very outlandish, impractical and unenforceable. Its impact is not just in what it can or cannot do legally, but is designed to create a chilling effect that essentially threatens and tries to implicate anyone and everyone who is not just directly speaking out for Hong Kong, but is also connected to people who are speaking out to Hong Kong.
In my case, for example, I can no longer travel to Hong Kong or any countries with any active extradition treaties with Hong Kong or China, or any countries that have friendly relations with China, without risking arrest and almost certain extradition to the mainland. I cannot speak to my elderly parents in Hong Kong without opening them up to, and subjecting them to, investigation and invasive searches by the police. Even anyone who is in contact with me here and who is not in Hong Kong could be blacklisted by the Chinese government or by Chinese-backed financial interests, whose influence is vast, extending from Hollywood to the NBA, Apple and Zoom, which we are using right now for this meeting.
I might be the first to be targeted as a foreign citizen under the national security law, but I will not be the last, because if I can be a target, then anyone who speaks on behalf of Hong Kong, who speaks out against the CCP, can also be targeted.
As I said in my introduction, I am a second-generation pro-democracy advocate. Only about 18 months ago, I was in Hong Kong attending the trial of my father, the Reverend Chu Yiu Ming, who was arrested and then charged for his role in “inciting the protests of the 2014 umbrella movement”. He, along with eight others, was convicted of the charges. He was sentenced to two years and, fortunately, because of his age and health problems, his sentence was suspended. This has been happening and will continue to escalate more quickly and more broadly.
My father supported the student movement in Tiananmen Square in 1989 and helped to build the underground railroad that smuggled dissidents out of China into western countries. I was sent away in consideration of the anticipated risk involved in building those operations and being a part of that movement.
That crackdown has happened every day since June 4, 1989. It has been spreading rapidly in Hong Kong since July 1. Two weeks ago, it spread to American soil and it will soon be, and already is, on Canadian soil.
Human rights may not have been a priority in U.S. policies toward China a year ago, but you can be assured that human rights, along with the control and violation of human rights, is the top priority of the Chinese regime. I say this because without it, they will lose control of their government and lose the control they are trying so hard to implement, not just on the mainland and in Xinjiang and Tibet, but also in Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan and now in western nations.
Thank you for allowing me to speak today.
View John Williamson Profile
CPC (NB)
Mr. Chu, I'm going to make a few statements [Technical difficulty--Editor].
In your opinion, have I now violated China/Beijing's, national security law, making me a potential problem for the PRC?
View John Williamson Profile
CPC (NB)
“I support a democratic China.”
“I believe the PRC should embrace democracy.”
Samuel M. Chu
View Samuel M. Chu Profile
Samuel M. Chu
2020-08-13 13:11
You've demonstrated that. We're half joking, but I think the implication here is that having this hearing, talking about any kind of Canadian policy toward Hong Kong and China that involves sanctions over human rights violations particularly, is apparently something that will trigger.... I think, in your case, it might start with sanctions, but definitely under the national security law, you would now be subject to arrest.
Aileen Calverley
View Aileen Calverley Profile
Aileen Calverley
2020-08-11 11:25
Thank you very much for having me here. It's my honour to speak to you today.
Since the national security law came into force on June 30, it has already been used to suppress freedom of expression and assembly on the streets, in the classroom and overseas. Over 30 protesters and activists have been arrested. Democracy itself has also been targeted by this new law. The Hong Kong government and Beijing officials in Hong Kong have used the threat of the national security law to quash dissent and undermine democracy by disqualifying 12 pro-democracy candidates who won primaries, and have threatened over 600,000 Hong Kongers who turned out to vote for those candidates in the primary elections. They then chose to postpone the elections.
Our concern now is that by invoking emergency colonial-era ordinances, Beijing will suspend democracy in Hong Kong indefinitely.
The new law is not limited to quashing opposition at the ballot box or on the streets. The introduction of national security education and encouraging students and teachers to monitor each other, as well as the firing of pro-democracy academic Professor Benny Tai, are blows to academic freedom.
Similarly, the arrest of Jimmy Lai, the owner of pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily, with 200 police officers raiding his headquarters, is a blow to press freedom.
Meanwhile, tech firms like Telegram, Facebook, Google and WhatsApp are in a standoff with authorities over the requirement that they co-operate with the police data requests in national security cases. These developments demonstrate the chilling effect the national security law is having on all sectors of Hong Kong society.
Recently, the U.K. All-Party Parliamentary Group on Hong Kong launched its inquiry report into human rights abuses by the Hong Kong Police Force. In direct breach of international humanitarian law, the police arrested dozens of medical workers who were trying to help injured protesters.
This does not only matter to Hong Kongers whose freedom has been stripped away; it matters to us in Canada. With over 900,000 Hong Kong Canadians living in Canada and Hong Kong, Canada has a special relationship with Hong Kong. If Canada, with its long history of defending human rights, is not willing to stand with like-minded partners in defence of Hong Kong's freedoms, then the values we believe in will be degraded, along with Canada's standing in the world.
The announcement by the Beijing government of a list of individuals overseas wanted under the national security law validates the authorities' worrying claim to overseas jurisdiction, its ability to target foreign nationals, and the fact that the law will be applied retroactively. As we have a large Hong Kong Canadian community in Canada, it is extremely concerning that six Hong Kong activists living in the U.K., Germany and the U.S. are all wanted under the law. One of the activists in question is a U.S. citizen who has lived in the U.S. for over 25 years. These activists are accused of inciting secession and colluding with foreign forces. The maximum penalty is lifelong imprisonment.
The law also harms Canada's business interests in the region. A recent report published by Hong Kong Watch, “Why Hong Kong matters”, found that the city, as a financial centre, continues to be indispensable to Chinese and international business, precisely because of the one country, two systems model, which guarantees freedoms and the rule of law.
Hong Kong remains the most important financial conduit between China and the rest of the world, and a key hub for Canadian businesses. Strip away the city's rule of law, and one of Asia's most important hubs will collapse. China must step back from the brink.
Before turning to what we should do, we must dispel a myth. It is often said that China is Canada's second-largest trading partner and Canada cannot afford to upset China, but let's look at the numbers.
In 2019, Canada's exports to China were 3.9% in total. Canada does not rely on China. The biggest trading partner of Canada is, of course, the United States, with 75% of Canadian exports going to the U.S. The second-largest trading partner of Canada is the European Union. A recent report published by the Henry Jackson Society found that, among the Five Eyes countries, Canada is the least reliant on China as an export market. The Canadian government should not hide behind the myth instead of standing up for its values.
Canada is not dependent on China. Canada must find its backbone and stand up to the CCP. There are three ways to do this: sanctions, diplomacy and refuge.
In response to the violation of the Joint Declaration, the U.S. government last week imposed sanctions on 11 Hong Kong and Chinese officials, including Carrie Lam. This follows the enactment of the financial sanctions bill, the Hong Kong Autonomy Act, which enables the government to sanction individuals and financial institutions that have violated Hong Kong's autonomy. Canada should join them.
At Hong Kong Watch, our reasoning for supporting targeted sanctions has always been threefold. First, we recognize that targeting Hong Kong and Chinese officials is a deterrent, ensuring that continued violations of human rights are met with a steep personal price that includes the restriction of travel and financial penalties.
Second, despite the claims of a Chinese official that sanctions will have little personal impact, as he doesn't have a U.S. bank account or travel to the U.S., we know that they work. One executive with a China unit of a major European bank described all officials on the U.S. sanction list as “toxic” in the eyes of international banks. This is not to mention that, since many of the officials named on the list have family with foreign citizenship, a visa ban would create a considerable obstacle for them. The partners of Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng and the Secretary of Education Kevin Yeung have Canadian citizenship, and the Secretary for Home Affairs, Caspar Tsui, owns property here in Canada.
Third, target sanctions fall into a wider discussion about the international community's response to the Chinese Communist Party's expansionist strategy.
For Hong Kong, it is five minutes to midnight. We hope the Canadian government will play its part and have the courage to follow the example set by the U.S. and enact sanctions under the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act in defence of Hong Kong's rights and freedoms.
For too long, Carrie Lam and CCP officials have been able to act with impunity in suspending freedoms and violating human rights. Of course, Magnitsky sanctions on their own are not the whole answer. They should be part of a wider approach that includes the offer of a lifeline to Hong Kongers, especially the young protestors who are in need, and the endorsement of the creation of a UN special envoy/rapporteur for Hong Kong to monitor and report on the situation on the ground. This would cover a comprehensive strategy of diplomacy, refuge and sanctions, which should be the bedrock of Canada's response with international partners to the crisis in Hong Kong.
Some who favour placing trade over human rights may argue that these measures will have little effect with Canada undertaking them alone and will serve only to antagonize China; however, Canada is not alone. In the last month, we have seen countries across the world suspending extradition treaties with Hong Kong and implementing export controls.
I am certain that if Canada chooses to act, it will find itself in close company with its key allies from the free world. It's time to take action. It's time to stand up for Hong Kong.
Thank you very much.
View Peter Kent Profile
CPC (ON)
Thank you very much, Chair.
I have a final question for the Minister of Digital Government.
Can the minister tell us whether she read the House of Commons cybersecurity email, titled “IT Security Alert”, on risks with the WeChat application?
View Jean-Yves Duclos Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The minister in question has already made it clear that this is not part of her own work. This is something else in her network, which is now out of the network. She has clearly said that the views expressed by that person are not her views.
View Ziad Aboultaif Profile
CPC (AB)
It was revealed that the Liberal minister, Joyce Murray, allowed her WeChat social media platform to be used to advance the interest of an arm of the Chinese Communist Party.
Does the minister accept responsibility for this attack on Canadian journalists?
View Jean-Yves Duclos Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The minister made clear two things. First, that person was not part of her network. Second, she does not share the views that were shared.
View Ziad Aboultaif Profile
CPC (AB)
Is the minister aware of the espionage activities that the United Front carries out on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party, yes or no?
View Jean-Yves Duclos Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Chair, I'll repeat in French what I said in English.
La ministre a dit deux choses très clairement: premièrement, la personne ne fait pas partie de son réseau; deuxièmement, les avis et les opinions exprimés par cette personne ne sont pas partagés par la ministre.
Results: 1 - 15 of 71 | Page: 1 of 5

1
2
3
4
5
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data