Macau SAR government issued a draft bill enacting Article 23 of the Macau Basic Law in October.
The Law is very sensitive and it would affect every citizen's freedom and rights. Now it is
supposed to be the public consultation period, but it seems that the government has been giving
pressure to independent social groups, organizations and universities to prevent them from having
open discussion. However, in spite of all the pressure, activists urge to rally on 23 of Nov
(this weekend) against the legislation.
Public forum canceled
Chong from inmediahk.net was supposed to attend a public forum organized by a group of Macau
University student this weekend on 22 of November, however he got an email this morning saying
that the forum has been canceled because they couldn't find a venue.
According to Chong's report at
inmediahk.net:
這個活動原來是由一群熱心åŒå¸èˆ‰è¾¦çš„，å³ã€Žé—œä½ 廿三事ã€æ´»å‹•ç±Œå‚™å°çµ„，但他們想有å¸ç”Ÿæœƒçš„å義，辦起事來比較方便，所以把幾個å¸ç”Ÿåœ˜é«”找來，包括澳大å¸ç”Ÿæœƒã€æ¾³é–€ç§‘技大å¸å¸ç”Ÿæœƒã€æ¾³é–€é«˜ç‰æ ¡éš›å¸é™¢åŒå¸æœƒã€æ¾³é–€ç†å·¥å¸é™¢å…¬å…±è¡Œæ”¿é«˜ç‰å¸æ ¡å¸ç”Ÿã€‚å¯æ˜¯ï¼Œç¾åœ¨æ¾³å¤§å¸ç”Ÿè‡¨æ™‚「縮沙ã€ï¼Œä»¤æ´»å‹•èƒŽæ»è…¹ä¸ã€‚
This activity is originally initiated by a group of students, a preparatory committee on
“To you Article 23 Concern”. Since they want to organize it with under the student
unions' umbrellas, they invited several student organizations to co-host, including: The Student
Union of Macau University, The Student Union of Macau UST, The Alumni Organization of Macau Higher
Education, students from the School of Public Administration at Macau Polytechnic University.
Suddenly the SU of Macau University decided to withdraw from the organization team and the forum
has to be canceled.
很難令人相信，å–æ¶ˆçš„åŽŸå› è·Ÿå ´åœ°æœ‰ä»»ä½•é—œä¿‚ã€‚æˆ‘å¾Œä¾†å¾žå°é“消æ¯è™•å¾—知，å一月二åæ—¥ï¼Œæ¾³å¤§æ ¡æ–¹æœ‰äººæ‰“é›»è©±çµ¦æ¾³å¤§å¸ç”Ÿæœƒï¼Œè¦æ±‚它å–消這個活動，若有ä¸å¾žï¼Œå¾Œæžœå¦‚何，我未能得知。而澳大å¸ç”Ÿæœƒä¸äººå‰‡å®³æ€•æœƒéå—æ ¡æ–¹è™•åˆ†ï¼Œæ˜¨å¤œè‡¨æ™‚æ‰¾äº†ç±Œå‚™å°çµ„的人開會，決定ä¸æžäº†ï¼Œè€Œä¸”還於當晚å³æ™‚發公告å–消。
It is hard to believe that the venue be the reason for canceling the event. Then sources told
me that on 20 of Nov, the university contacted the student union demanding them to cancel it.
However, he doesn't know what exactly will be the consequence if they rejected the school's demand.
The students were intimidated by the university officials, they called up the preparatory committee
last night to discuss about the issue and decided not to host the forum. A notice on the
cancellation was put up immediately.
Below is a poster for the forum:
Protect University's autonomous space
Chong makes some suggestions to follow up the issue:
1.
澳大å¸ç”ŸåŠè€å¸«æ‡‰è©²è¦åŽ»è³ªå•æ¾³å¤§å¸ç”Ÿæœƒï¼Œæ˜¯å¦å—åˆ°æ ¡æ–¹çš„å£“åŠ›ï¼Œæ‰ä½œå‡ºå¦‚æ¤å€‰å’決定？亦該質å•æ ¡æ–¹ï¼Œæ˜¯å¦åœ¨æš—地裡壓制å¸ç”ŸåŠå¸ç”Ÿåœ˜é«”的言論自由åŠæ´»å‹•è‡ªç”±ï¼
2.
æ¾³é–€å…¬æ°‘åœ˜é«”ä¹Ÿæ‡‰è©²åŠ å…¥ï¼Œå‘澳門政府質詢，是å¦æ”¿åºœæœ‰å‘æ ¡æ–¹æ–½å£“ï¼Œç¦æ¢å…¬é–‹è¨Žè«–廿三æ¢ï¼Œä¸¦è¦æ±‚政府ä¿è‰å¤§å¸è‡ªä¸»ï¼Œä»¥åŠæ¾³é–€çš„言論自由ï¼
3.
澳門公民身體力行，繼續公開討論廿三æ¢ç«‹æ³•çš„å„種å•é¡Œã€‚
1. Macau university students and teachers should ask the student union if they had been
pressured by the university officials for making such a sudden decision. They should also question
the university for repressing students and students organizations' free speech and activities.
2. Civic groups from Macau should post questions to the government and check out if the
government has been involved in giving pressure to the university for repressing the discussion
on article 23. They need to demand the government to ensure the autonomous space in university
and freedom of speech in Hong Kong.
3. Macau citizens should continue to discuss the problems of article 23 in the public.
He also points out that what he has encountered is not an isolated incident:
澳門的「國家安全ã€é‚„未到，白色æ怖已到來ï¼é€£å…¬é–‹è¨Žè«–的權利也é壓制，這是個怎樣的社會？在æ¤å‰ï¼Œæˆ‘也收到消æ¯ï¼Œæ¾³é–€å¤©ä¸»æ•™æ•™å‹å”é€²æœƒå±¬ä¸‹çš„ã€Šæ¾³é–€è§€å¯Ÿå ±ã€‹æ›¾æ–¼å五日辦了一個討論會，原來打算邀請香港的天主教æ£ç¾©å’Œå¹³å§”員會（簡稱æ£å§”）代表，大家份屬天主教，是很æ£å¸¸çš„é¸æ“‡ã€‚å¯æ˜¯ï¼Œåœ¨è¨Žè«–會å‰å¹¾å¤©ï¼Œæ£å§”çªç„¶æ”¶åˆ°è¨Šæ¯ã€Œä¸è¦ä¾†äº†ã€ã€‚究竟讓æ£å§”來澳出å¸å€å€ä¸€å€‹è«–壇，有何大ä¸äº†ï¼Ÿå¯¦åœ¨ä¸å¾—而知，åªæ˜¯æ“šèžï¼Œé€™æ˜¯ä¾†è‡ªæ¾³é–€å¤©ä¸»æ•™ä¸Šå±¤äººå£«çš„æ„æ€ï¼Œè€Œæ¾³é–€å¤©ä¸»æ•™é«˜å±¤ä¹Ÿè·ŸåŒ—京政府åŠç‰¹å€æ”¿åºœå¾ˆã€Œè¦å¥½ã€ã€‚
“National security” hasn't arrived at Macau yet, but we can already see the white
terror! What kind of society it is to repress public discussion? Before this happened, I have heard
that the publication “Macau Observe” under Catholic Lay Association of Macau planned to
organize a discussion in Nov 15 and they had invited representative from the committee of justice
and peace from the Catholic Church in Hong Kong. As both organizations belong to the same church,
such meeting is considered very ordinary. However, a few days before the meeting, the Hong Kong
counterpart received a message to ask them not to go to Macau. What's the big deal for letting JP
for attending the Macau Catholic forum? Sources said that the instruction was delivered by the
higher rank Catholic Church in Macau and that Macau Catholic Church's relation with Beijing and
Macau SAR government has been very close.
What's the rush?
Bobo, also from inmediahk.net, wrote a citizen report in early November with some statistical information about the public knowledge of
this bill:
澳門街åŠç¸½æœƒæ—¥å‰å‘一åƒå¤šå居民調查，åªæœ‰å…æˆå—訪者知é“政府推出《ç¶è·åœ‹å®¶å®‰å…¨æ³•ã€‹è‰æ¡ˆï¼Œå°è‰æ¡ˆæœ‰æ‰€çžè§£çš„å—訪者ä¸è¶³äº”æˆã€‚而建è¨æ¾³é–€è¯ç›Ÿäº¦ç™¼ç¾çµ•å¤§å¤šæ•¸æ¾³é–€å·¿æ°‘å°æ¾³é–€åŸºæœ¬æ³•å»¿ä¸‰æ¢èªè˜ä¸è¶³ï¼Œèª¿æŸ¥çµæžœé¡¯ç¤ºï¼Œå°åŸºæœ¬æ³•23æ¢çš„èªè˜ã€Œå¹¾å°‘ã€ã€ã€Œå¥½å°‘ã€ã€ã€Œå®Œå…¨å””èªè˜ã€åˆå…±
85.4%；「完全èªè˜ã€ã€ã€Œå¥½å¤šã€ã€ã€Œå¹¾å¤šã€åˆå…±åƒ…ä½”9.1%，這說明這è‰æ¡ˆéœ€è¦æ›´å¤šæ°‘間的討論。
The neigborhood organization in Macau conducted a survey and collected more than 1000
questionnaires. The survey result shows that only 60% of the interviewees actually knows that the
government has drafted the “National security” bill. Less than 50% of the interviewees
knows about the content of the bill. Macau Union for the construction of Macau pointed out that
most of the Macau citizens don't have enough knowledge about article 23. Their survey shows that
85.4% respondents has little to no knowledge of the law. And only 9.1% of the respondents have
adequate to full understanding of the law. It shows that a lot more public discussion is needed.
Since Hong Kong government has decided to defer the enacting of Article 23 until there is public
consensus, China briefing wondered why Macau has to go ahead of Hong Kong to
implement the bill:
Given no signs of an epidemic terrorism or separatism wave sweeping Macau, one is left to wonder
the urgency a security bill as intrusive as Article 23 is needed for. Then of course, gamblers
are highly suspect people with a record of government overthrow and sabotage...
Rally on 23 of November!
A few independent voices can be found on the internet against the legislation and drafted bill.
Funny sister gives a summary of the bill and concluded that:
總括黎講…佢廿三æ¢ç«‹æ³•ä¹‹å¾Œå°±é€£è¨€è«–自由都冇!我地就冇曬å¯ä»¥è¡¨é”ga自由,連去éŠè¡Œéƒ½å””å¯ä»¥äº‚講野!如果唔係åˆä¿¾ä½¢è©±æˆ‘地呢d星豆市民å政府!!!!
In a nutshell… with the article 23 bill passed, we don't even have freedom of speech! We
don't even enjoy freedom of expression, can't demonstrate and our slogans would be monitored! All
these can be viewed as anti-government activities!
Tennedy posts two ads on his blog, one is urging Macau citizen to stand up against
the legislation, the other one is about the rally on 23 of Nov:
人權ã€è‡ªç”±æ˜¯äººé¡žç”Ÿå˜çš„基本權利，
共產黨å¼çš„å°é–‰ä¸»ç¾©å·²ç¶“æ²’è½ï¼Œ
è«‹å„澳門朋å‹å€‘發起大éŠè¡Œï¼Œ
è¦æ±‚澳門政府åœæ¢23æ¢ç«‹æ³•ï¼Œ
澳門人也是人，澳門人站起來，
齊來ä¿éšœè‡ªå·±çš„人權!!!!!
讓國際傳媒知é“，澳門市民是ä¸æ”¯æŒé€™æ¢æƒ¡æ³•!!
Human rights and freedom is the basic rights of people,
The isolation practice of communist party is over,
Please organize rally, my Macau fellows,
Macau people are also human being, Macau people have to stand up,
Let's protect our human rights!
Let the international media knows about this, that Macau people don't support this evil law!
Netizen survey: more than 70% opposes legislation
While the Macau government said that 65% of the citizens supported the legislation, grhvonkqyk
from cyberctm forum invites internet users to vote on the bill, and more than 74% (3pm
21 of Nov) has voted against the bill.
In the discussion thread, SIOCF pointed out that
如果這是一個真æ£é–‹æ”¾ge國家我無所謂
但是我們所身處的是一個å‡é–‹æ”¾åœ‹å®¶å‡æ°‘主ge社會
事å•è²å¦‚果我們ä¸åå°çš„話
å¯æƒ³è€ŒçŸ¥,我們沒有未來å¯è¨€
If this is a real open country, I am ok with it
But we are in a fake open and fake democratic society,
If I don't oppose,
I won't have a future.
Tang Nan zeng said that:
我认为，目å‰ä¸ºæŸæ¡ç«‹æ³•çš„时机未到，实现普选之åŽå†ç«‹æœªè¿Ÿã€‚
In my opinion, this is not the time for legislation, let's wait until we have universal
suffrage.
1 shot 2 kills worried about the execution of the law:
23æ¢ç«‹æ³•å””ä¿‚å•é¡Œ
點樣去執法先係å•é¡Œ…
甚麼煽動ã€é¡›è¦†ã€åœ‹å®¶æ©Ÿå¯†
(...)
Recommandations
)
and reject those that you are not interested in
(
)
