A Proposta de Lei da Extradição de Hong Kong revisitada, a Lei da Segurança Nacional e a ironia da proteção de direitos humanos em “um país, dois sistemas”
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v8i3.701Palavras-chave:
Proposta de Lei da Extradição, Hong Kong, Lei da Segurança Nacional, República Popular da China, Direitos Humanos, “Um País, Dois Sistemas”Resumo
O presente artigo incide sobre dois recentes acontecimentos que agitaram a Região Administrativa Especial de Hong Kong da República Popular da China. Além de analisar as principais características da falhada Proposta de Lei da Extradição de Hong Kong e de contrastá-las com as da Lei da Segurança Nacional subsequentemente aprovada pela República Popular da China, o artigo avalia se as disposições do segundo instrumento jurídico se encontram em conformidade com as políticas fundamentais para HK acordadas em 1984 entre o Reino Unido e a China. O artigo conclui que, ironicamente, a Proposta de Lei da Extradição respeitava em grande medida aquelas políticas e os direitos humanos nelas ínsitos, o que não acontece com a Lei da Segurança Nacional.Downloads
Referências
BAKER, Scott / Perry, David / Doobay, Anand, A Review of the United Kingdom’s Extradition Arrangements (Following Written Ministerial Statement by the Secretary of State for the Home Department of 8 September 2010), Presented to the Home Secretary on 30 September 2011, Home Office, HO_01859_G. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/117673/extradition-review.pdf
BRABYN, Janice M., “Extradition and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region”, Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 20 (1988), p. 171-172. https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol20/iss1/9/
CAEIRO, Pedro / Costa, Miguel João, “Extradition and Surrender: from a Bilateral Political Arrangement to a Triangular Legal Procedure”, in Kai Ambos / Peter Rackow (eds.), Cambridge Companion to European Criminal Law, Cambridge University Press, forthcoming 2023. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-companion-to-european-criminal-law/6A7551D51A2EB97CCD932D710D4F3854
CAEIRO, Pedro, “Proibições Constitucionais de Extraditar em Função da Pena Aplicável”, Revista Portuguesa de Ciência Criminal 8 (1998), p. 155-170. https://www.fd.uc.pt/~pcaeiro/1998_Proibi%C3%A7%C3%B5es_Constitucionais_de_extraditar.pdf
CAEIRO, Pedro, “Reconhecimento Mútuo, Harmonização e Confiança Mútua (Primeiro Esboço de uma Revisão)”, in Margarida Santos / Mário Ferreira Monte / Fernando Conde Monteiro (eds.), Os novos desafios da cooperação judiciária e policial na União Europeia e da implementação da Procuradoria Europeia, Centro Interdisciplinar em Direitos Humanos da Escola de Direito da Universidade do Minho, 2017. https://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/50677/1/Ebook_Os_novos_desafios_da_coop_judiciaria_e_policial_na_UE_e_da_implementacao_da_PE.pdf
CHAN, Cora, “Can Hong Kong Remain a Liberal Enclave within China? Analysis of the Hong Kong National Security Law”, Public Law (2021), p. 271-292. https://hub.hku.hk/handle/10722/298998
CHAN, Cora, “Demise of ‘One Country, Two Systems’? Reflections on the Hong Kong Rendition Saga”, Hong Kong Law Journal 49(2) (2019), p. 447-458. https://web.law.hku.hk/hklj/2019-Vol-49.php
CHAN, Cora, “Thirty years from Tiananmen: China, Hong Kong, and the ongoing experiment to preserve liberal values in an authoritarian state”, International Journal of Constitutional Law 17(2) (2019), p. 439–452. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moz034
CHAN, Johannes M. M. / Fu, H.L. / Ghai, Yash (eds.), Hong Kong’s Constitutional Debate, Conflict over Interpretation, Hong Kong University Press, 2000. https://hkupress.hku.hk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=218
CHAN, Johannes, “Five Reasons to Question the Legality of a National Security Law for Hong Kong”, Verfassungsblog: On Matters Constitutional, May 2020. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0301-20200602-013143-0-6
CHAN, Johannes, “Judicial Responses to the National Security Law: HKSAR v Lai Chee Ying”, Hong Kong Law Journal 51(1) (2021), p. 1-14. https://web.law.hku.hk/hklj/2021-Vol-51.php
CHAN, Johannes, “Ten Days that Shocked the World: The Rendition Proposal in Hong Kong”, Hong Kong Law Journal 49(2) (2019), p. 431-445. https://web.law.hku.hk/hklj/2019-Vol-49.php
CHEN, Albert H.Y., “A Perfect Storm: Hong Kong–China Rendition of Fugitive Offenders”, Hong Kong Law Journal, 49(2) (2019), p. 419-429. https://web.law.hku.hk/hklj/2019-Vol-49.php
CHEN, Albert, “Constitutional Controversies in the Aftermath of the Anti-Extradition Movement of 2019”, Hong Kong Law Journal 50(2) (2020), p. 609-631. https://web.law.hku.hk/hklj/2020-Vol-50.php
CHEN, Jianfu, Chinese Law: Context and Transformation, Revised and Expanded Edition, Brill, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004228894_005
CHEUNG, Alvin Y.H., “Unpalatable Realities, No Choices”, International Journal of Constitutional Law 19(3) (2021), p. 1154–1168. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moab080
COSTA, Miguel João, Extradition Law: Reviewing Grounds for Refusal from the Classic Paradigm to Mutual Recognition and Beyond, Brill, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004411210_008 / https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004411210_009
DINGJIAN, Cai, Constitution: An Intensive Reading (宪法精解), Law Press China, 2004
Efrat, Asif / Tomasina, Marcello, “Value-free extradition? Human rights and the dilemma of surrendering wanted persons to China”, Journal of Human Rights 17(5) (2018), 605-621. https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2018.1533454
GHAI, Yash, “Litigating the Basic Law: Jurisdiction, Interpretation and Procedure, in Hong Kong’s Constitutional Debate, Conflict Over Interpretation”, in Johannes M. M. Chan / H.L. Fu / Yash Ghai (eds.), Hong Kong’s Constitutional Debate, Conflict over Interpretation, Hong Kong University Press, 2000, p. 3-51. https://hkupress.hku.hk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=218
HAREL, Alon, “The Duty to Criminalize”, Law and Philosophy 34(1) (2015), p. 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-014-9209-6
JAMES, William, “UK says China’s security law is serious violation of Hong Kong treaty”, Reuters 7 July 2020. https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-hongkong-protests-britain-idUKKBN2425IO
LEMOS, Miguel Manero de / Young, Simon N.M., “Regional Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters: Mainland, Hong Kong and Macau”, in Pedro Caeiro / Sabine Gless / Valsamis Mitsilegas / Miguel João Costa / Janneke de Snaijer / Georgia Theodorakakou (eds.), Elgar Encyclopedia of Crime and Criminal Justice, Edward Elgar Publishing, forthcoming 2023. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789902990
LEMOS, Miguel, “The Basic Laws of Hong Kong and Macau as Internationally Shaped Constitutions of China and the Fall Off of “One Country, Two Systems’ ”, Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 27 (2019), p. 277-338. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/tulicl27&div=17&g_sent=1&casa_token=&collection=journals
LO, P.Y., “The Unprosecuted Taiwan Homicide, the Unaccepted Extradition Law Amendment Bill and the Underestimated Common Law”, Hong Kong Law Journal 50(2) (2020), p. 373-394. https://web.law.hku.hk/hklj/2020-Vol-50.php
LO, P.Y., “Two Kinds of Unconstitutional Constitutional Interpretations in China’s Hong Kong”, I-CONnect – Blog of the International Journal of Constitutional Law, 23 December 2016. http://www.iconnectblog.com/2016/12/two-kinds-of-unconstitutional-constitutional-interpretations
PETERSEN, Carole J., “The Disappearing Firewall: International Consequences of Beijing’s Decision to Impose a National Security Law and Operate National Security Institutions in Hong Kong”, Hong Kong Law Journal 50(2) (2020), p. 642-643. https://web.law.hku.hk/hklj/2020-Vol-50.php
PINTO, Mattia, “Romeo Castaño: ‘Meticulously Elaborated Interpretations’ for the sake of Prosecution”, Strasbourg Observers, 10 September 2019. https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/09/10/romeo-castano-meticulously-elaborated-interpretations-for-the-sake-of-prosecution/
SCHEININ, Martin, “European human rights as universal rights: In defence of a holistic understanding of human rights”, in Eva Brems / Janneke Gerards (eds.), Shaping Rights in the ECHR. The Role of the European Court of Human Rights in Determining the Scope of Human Rights, Cambridge University Press, 2014, p. 259-272. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107337923.015
TURNS, David, “Pinochet’s fallout: jurisdiction and immunity for criminal violations of international law”, Legal Studies 20 (2000), p. 566-591. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121X.2000.tb00160.x
YOUNG, Simon, “Why Beijing must respect Hong Kong courts’ interpretation of national security law”, South China Morning Post, 8 July 2020. https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3092022/why-beijing-must-respect-hong-kong-courts-interpretation-national
ZAMBONI, Matteo, “Romeo Castaño v Belgium and the Duty to Cooperate under the ECHR”, EJIL:Talk, 19 August, 2019. https://www.ejiltalk.org/romeo-castano-v-belgium-and-the-duty-to-cooperate-under-the-echr/
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2022 Miguel Lemos, Miguel João Costa
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Os direitos autorais dos artigos publicados são do autor, com direitos do periódico sobre a primeira publicação, impressa e/ou digital.
Os autores somente poderão utilizar os mesmos resultados em outras publicações indicando claramente este periódico como o meio da publicação original. Se não houver tal indicação, considerar-se-á situação de auto-plágio.
- Portanto, a reprodução, total ou parcial, dos artigos aqui publicados fica sujeita à expressa menção da procedência de sua publicação neste periódico, citando-se o volume e o número dessa publicação, além do link DOI para referência cruzada. Para efeitos legais, deve ser consignada a fonte de publicação original.
Por se tratar de periódico de acesso aberto, permite-se o uso gratuito dos artigos em aplicações educacionais e científicas desde que citada a fonte, conforme a licença da Creative Commons.
A partir de 2022, os artigos publicados na RDPP estão licenciados com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional. Os artigos puliicados até 2021 adotaram a Licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional.
---------------
Arquivamento e distribuição
Permite-se sem restrições o arquivamento do PDF final publicado, em qualquer servidor de acesso aberto, indexador, repositório ou site pessoal, como Academia.edu e ResearchGate.
Como Citar
