Article 23 of Hong Kong's Basic Law: A Danger to the Civil Liberties and Fundamental Freedoms

Since early dynastic governments, China has monitored and controlled media to avoid the undermining of its authority. Some reasons for this censorship are well known by Westerners, others less so. In 221 B.C, Emperor Qin Shi Huang burned Confucian and Taoist books in order to rid the dynasty of different political perspectives. He did this not only to maintain order and unity, but also because he was impelled by other ancient Chinese values. Values that included a belief in state’s rights over human rights and the preservation of the dynasty at all costs. The more complex models of censorship used in China today were first used in the Soviet Union from 1922-1991 and are rooted in Marxist- Leninist thought. Westerners would be wise to consider China’s political history and deeply held social

Their system of filtering and censorship is acknowledged as the most advanced and effective in the world. The Chinese internet system includes about thirty-thousand censors, as well as having web browsers, such as Google and Yahoo, censor their results.10 For an average citizen to publish their opinions without either an elite free speech patron or a willing government publishing house, the safest method is to publicize their thoughts through an internet bulletin board system run by the Chinese government.11 However, these electronic bulletin boards are required by the law to be licensed, the posts monitored constantly, and any posts which are found to be “inappropriate” are removed. Any forums that are free from government censorship are forbidden, since the Chinese authorities refuse to recognize the rights of the citizens to publish their uncensored opinions. Furthermore, if debates over political or other issues begin to take a life of their own, they are commonly silenced by Chinese authorities.12 The Chinese authorities only permit these monitored bulletin boards both for their own benefit and because they recognize that there must be outlets for the average person to express their dissatisfaction with the government.13 Allowing the citizens to speak their mind functions to lessen the political tension, by acting as a release for their discontentment. These boards also serve as an excuse to deflect criticism by other countries, who complain that people in China do not enjoy freedom of expression. Additionally, they allow government authorities to monitor the mood of their people and to find weaknesses, both in the government and in their support. Finally, the bulletin boards allow government authorities to track those who express discontent, keeping their expressions visible, so the authorities can trace these

Imagine. Imagine having the continuous feeling of needing to act a certain way because that is what the government wants. Imagine having to worship in an underground church because of belonging to the "wrong" religion. Imagine being blind and not being able to learn because the government cannot accept a disability. Lastly, imagine being killed because of simply disagreeing. This is everyday life in China for many people because of what the Communist Chinese government has caused for decades. Human Rights Abuse in China has caused millions of deaths and permanent injuries. In 1979, the One Child Policy was created and ever since then the abuse has escalated into being a normal part of lives. On June 4 1989, the government took the abuse to a whole other level. This fateful day was called the Tiananmen Square crackdown. This was the day of millions of deaths. China's government truly takes human rights violations to an extreme and has caused fear among their people. The government has previously claimed

These laws restrict a citizens’ freedom and rights. In Forbidden City, Alex writes in his diary, “Everything is controlled… [s]pots.” (Bell 65). The Chinese government restricts the students from ruling their own lives and prevents them from gaining happiness.

Trigger Warnings In recent discussions of trigger warnings a controversial issue has been if whether American campuses should permit trigger warnings. Trigger warnings are admonishes that professors are expected to provide and imply that, certain contents in class may be upsetting or offensive to an individual. The objectives of trigger warnings are to prevent students from coming across “offensive” discussions, ideas, words, or anything that may cause students to feel an emotional affect. On the other hand, some argue that trigger warnings on course materials do a disservice to the intellectual development of students and interferes with an individual’s freedom of speech.

The First Amendment of The Constitution which supports freedom of speech and the Fifth Amendment of the constitution.

This law emphasizes that citizens will not be allowed to any type of searching or arresting without any specific reason by the government. But still if there is anything the government should do a search of individual’s houses or business or to seize any other documents in that case there should be a good reason and ample amount of evidences to proceed on this.

China is one of the most controlled countries in the world. The Chinese constitution states that the people of China have freedom of speech, of the press, and of demonstration. However, this article in the constitution also states that the Chinese government has the authority to censor anything in the country when freedom of speech or of press could potentially be harmful to the country. So, in China, you are free to speak, but only about what the government says is okay to talk about. Also, protesting in China is a very dangerous task, as shown in the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989. But, in August 2009, Chinese Internet users were able to “indefinitely postpone” the use of censorship software on all new computers in China, called the

Nonetheless, the popularization of the internet enables the Chinese to get in touch with the Western values. Thus, activism for human rights has appeared online. This essay will argue how online activism has influenced Chinese understandings of human rights; formed the attitude toward the authoritarian regime; and shaped the Chinese society. Two cases are selected namely 1) Shanxi black brick kiln slave scandal; 2) Lei Yang incident. At the same time, I will illustrate how the authority response to the two incidents which are positive and negative respectively. The positive is that the social welfare has been improved, while the negative is that the government tightened the cyber control.

The People’s Republic of China with a population 1.3 billion, is the third largest country in the world and has a land size of 960,000 square kilometres. It is a rapidly growing economy, with living standards being raised every year. However, human rights violations are still a part of daily life in some part of China and can still be seen in the present time. The most controversial issues include discrimination, right to live and not to be subject to torture, freedom of religion, opinion, to fair public hearing, rights to family and the right of movement. (The Consulate General of The People's Republic of China, 2003),(Infoplease, 2009)

The separation of powers is that the controlling mode of a political entity is separated between three powers (the legislature, the executive and the judiciary). Then，It is necessary to introduce and understand the meaning of these concepts and the relationship between them in conjunction with the Australian Constitution. The Australian Constitution and the Chinese Constitution are similar to the written constitution. The first three Chapters of the Constitution grant each of these three powers to three different bodies established by constitution. These three different bodies are the Parliament (in Chapter I), the Executive Government (in Chapter II), and the Judicature (in Chapter III) respectively. They call them the three arms of government

The first major right that is being violated is the freedom to say what you want. In the article, it says how Amos Yee was being harassed by the Singapore government for expressing his views on the religion and politics publicly. The article also says “the prosecution against him was illegitimate because it was based on laws that were meant to restrict his freedom of expression.”

Now, many Chinese citizens are attempting to access these applications and searches without censorship by “connect[ing] to virtual private networks that provide them with communications channels to servers outside the Chinese mainland” (Bradsher 4). Though, many citizens have found loopholes in order to post their messages to these websites. For example, on Weibo (the Chinese version of twitter), if a user were to post using a specific keyword, the post would automatically be deleted, if not manually by a superior on the site if it slipped through the system. However, because the use of “abbreviations, neologisms, homophones, and homographs” by users, many political satirists, revolutionists, or regular citizens find themselves sliding through the cracks thus escaping the censoring governments reach (Wang and Mark 5). In addition, because the government also changes from time to time, a man named Yu Jia, a government critic stated that “Today's China is very different from Chairman Mao's China. I think then, it used to be like an iron slab, and there was only really one idea. It was completely impermeable. But now, it's more like a fishnet, and there are holes” (Jia, Han and Fu 4). This further proves the argument that legislation in regard to behavior online is too varied in

In, 2001, the Internet censorship laws went to the ultimate extreme. If state secrets are exported from China, the government can impose harsh penalties such as imprisonment and confiscation all belongings, and in extreme cases, the death penalty. In 2002, China banned those under the age of 18 from using Internet cafes. Internet cafe users are banned from viewing websites pose threats to “state security” i.e. websites with violence, sexuality, or heretic messages.

Although by judging solely from the definition, political expression which covers the matters of public interest seems acceptable, it is undeniable that under the Act 10 of the Federal Constitution, clause 2 has stated that the parliament can impose law to restrict the freedom of speech. Such restrictions are said to protect the security of Malaysia, privileges of Parliament and the public order. Besides, Art 10 (4) also stated that the law can restrict the questioning of any matter, status, privilege and sovereignty. InterNations (2014) has also explained that there are also limitations of civil freedoms