Details Vital For New Security Law: Johannes Chan

University of Hong Kong legal scholar Johannes Chan says the new national security legislation that Beijing is implementing for the SAR must set out in detail what is prohibited so it can't be used to arbitrarily stifle dissent.

Chan said the law should define precisely what constitutes an act of subversion or sedition, including making clear that such acts must involve violence and have an actual, substantial effect.

He said activities such as waving flags and chanting slogans could never have an effect on the nation's security and should therefore not be prohibited under the law.

"I don't see why people should be penalised simply because of what they have said in the absence of any action," Chan said. "China is the second largest economic entity in the world. It is not so fragile that it could collapse just because a few say 'down with certain things' etc.

"These are important virtues and core values in Hong Kong: that people are free to speak, whether those opinions are for or against the government, whether those opinions are acceptable to the government."

The National People's Congress voted for the introduction of the law last month, but the NPC Standing Committee has yet to draft the actual legislation.

Chan says it's unthinkable that the Hong Kong public will not be able to study the details of such an important piece of legislation before it takes effect.

"People need to know what conduct is allowed and what conduct is not allowed," he said. "This is not a constitution which sets out only the general principles.

"And here lies the distance between the two systems: In China, they tend to have the law drafted in a rather vague and general manner so that the government can fill in the content as they wish.

"This is highly undesirable, and the rule of law means we need to obey the law, but we need to know what the law is before we can obey; The law enforcement agents need to know what is forbidden by the law before they can enforce the law."

Chan, who served as dean of HKU's law faculty for 12 years, stressed that the law should not be designed in a way that would stifle free speech.