SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Hong Kong has a population of nearly 7.5 million people. Last Sunday (June 7) organizers reported that one million of them peacefully protested against a controversial extradition bill. As the protests continued and the government resisted, the protests changed. For now, the government has indefinitely suspended deliberations:
Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam acquiesced, at least in part, to massive protests in the city this week as she announced Saturday the controversial extradition bill will be suspended indefinitely.
"The original urgency to pass the bill in this legislative year is perhaps no longer there," Lam said at a press conference. "After repeated internal deliberations over the last two days, I now announce that the government has decided to suspend the legislative amendment exercise."
[...] Thousands of mostly-young protesters shut down Hong Kong's Legislative Council complex and paralyzed parts of the semi-autonomous Chinese territory on Wednesday. Riot police fired multiple rounds of tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse the throngs of demonstrators, who hurled bottles, umbrellas and other objects at them.
At least 72 people were injured, including 22 police officers. Eleven people were arrested for disorderly conduct, unlawful assembly, assaulting officers and riot-related activities stemming from Wednesday's protests, authorities said.
Heavy rain prevented most organizers from carrying out fresh demonstrations the following day. Still, the president of the Legislative Council cancelled all planned sessions again Thursday and Friday, pushing debate on the bill to next week.
Under the extradition law amendment, any country -- including China -- could request the extradition of an individual to their home country from Hong Kong for trial. Many who oppose the proposed legislation fear that China could use it to arrest political dissidents.
Does any other country have such an open extradition policy?
[*] One million people represents over 13% of the population of Hong Kong. That is quite the protest! To get a protest of the same scale in the United States, you would need 18.5 million people: the combined populations of the four most-populated cities: New York, NY (8.4M), Los Angeles, CA(3.9M), Chicago, IL(2.7M), and Houston, TX(2.3M) plus #10 San Jose, CA (1M).
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 17 2019, @10:40AM (4 children)
"to their home country"
Which in this case would be arqued by China, that every citizen of HK is a citizen of China and as such, can be taken from HK to be judged in China.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday June 17 2019, @11:31AM (2 children)
Looking only at the sovereignty/jurisdiction (mind the context**), how is this something worse than the right of US to ask for the extradition of Assange?
** reminder of the context: "does any other country have such an open extradition policy?"
Answer: US seems to have an even more open one. Unless I'm missing something, isn't this evident enough?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Monday June 17 2019, @02:23PM (1 child)
And Assange is not defenseless here. The very fact that the US only pressed charges when he was in UK custody demonstrates both a considerable mendacity and an strong indication that once Assange is in US hands, he'll be charged with more. Extradition can be denied in cases where the defendant isn't going to receive a fair trial and/or where the extradition request is made in bad faith. Not saying it will in this case, but there's still a ways to go for the US to complete this particular scheme.
I wouldn't be surprised if the law in question also reduces the threshold for extradition in other ways. Bad law usually isn't bad for just one reason.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 17 2019, @04:52PM
i understand that if a crime is commited in country A and "flees" to country B (home country) but is a crime there too, then country A should be able to get the person.
however, i think a "crime" against (?) another person (or corporation) is not the same as a crime against a "nation"?
so i would be really pissed of if i "spied" on country A FROM country B (home) and home would send me off to A, because information gathering is a human right even if country A doesn't think so.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 17 2019, @02:46PM
And every citizen of Taiwan. Taiwanese citizens have already been extradited from third rate European countries to China, and judging by their interests in Africa, that continent sounds risky for Taiwanese to operate in.
The fact that like 80% of the globe is subject to the whims of the US empire is orthogonal.