JANUARY 24, 2010, 12:25 P.M. ET
The sentencing of Zhou Yongjun suggests they're not.
In the 12 years since Hong Kong's handover to China, the two have coexisted with separate judicial and legal systems under "one country, two systems." Last week's conviction of United States resident Zhou Yongjun, however, raises serious questions about the real independence of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
Mr. Zhou first became famous for his part in the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, when he and other students knelt before the Great Hall of the People and begged government officials to listen to student demands for democratic reform. For that "crime" he spent three years in a labor camp. This time, he was sentenced to nine years in prison and fined 90,000 yuan ($13,184) for attempted financial fraud in the southwestern city of Shehong.
The story of Mr. Zhou's arrest and prosecution is bizarre. He traveled to Hong Kong from Macau in September 2008 under a fake Malaysian passport purchased from a travel agent in Los Angeles. The name used on that document happened to match the name registered to a bank account which suspiciously had a previous request to transfer 6 million Hong Kong dollars ($772,320). The signature on the transfer form did not match the signature of the account bearer so the request was denied, and bank authorities notified Hong Kong officials, who had the name placed on a watch list. Mr. Zhou was then reportedly transferred to Hong Kong police, who, according to his lawyer, determined he had no relation to the suspicious signature and then transferred him back to immigration authorities. After Mr. Zhou refused to reveal his identity, immigration officials transported him across the border to Shenzhen, where he was detained until being transferred to Sichuan and tried. Hong Kong authorities then allegedly provided information to help convict Mr. Zhou of attempted financial fraud.
In the past, if someone was caught at the Hong Kong border under a false passport, he was either sent back to his "place of embarkation" or where he claimed residence. In this case, neither of these are mainland China. More disturbingly, Mr. Zhou committed his alleged crime in Hong Kong, thus Chinese courts have no jurisdiction over him. In all likelihood, mainland authorities will claim jurisdiction over Mr. Zhou in coming days because, as a mere U.S. resident, he is still a mainland citizen. This comes as no surprise, as mainland China has previously prosecuted its residents for crimes committed in Hong Kong.
Mr. Zhou's repatriation sets a disturbing precedent for the rendition of those wanted for crimes, real or political, on the mainland. The fact that the Hong Kong authorities were so cavalier about protecting their own jurisdiction also suggests that the will to maintain "one country, two systems" may be fading. In that case, other countries would be justified in reconsidering whether Hong Kong deserves to be treated differently from the mainland on a whole range of issues. And that would spell disaster for the territory's economy and its residents.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment