Experts of the Human Rights Committee Commend Macao Special Administrative Region of China on Reducing Backlog of Court Cases, Ask about Status of Refugees and Alleged Restrictions on Entry of Journalists
The Human Rights Committee this morning concluded its consideration of the second periodic report of Macao Special Administrative Region of China on how it implements the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Committee Experts commended Macao Special Administrative Region of China on the reduction of the backlog of court cases, while asking questions about the status of refugees and the alleged restrictions on entry of journalists into the region.
A Committee Expert welcomed the reduction in the backlog of cases in the courts of Macao Special Administrative Region of China, asking for updated data to be provided.
Another Expert asked the delegation for clarification on the status of two pending applications for refugee status which had been awaiting a decision for over a decade? What caused such excessive delays and what was being done to avoid this in the future? What kind of humanitarian support services were provided to these families?
One Expert noted that there had been reports that journalists known to be critical of the Government had been denied entry into Macao Special Administrative Region of China. Could the delegation provide precise information on the number of journalists who had been refused entry into the region for “security reasons” over the past five years? What was the precise nature of the security threat posed by journalists to warrant their exclusion?
In the ensuing discussion, the delegation said that the two refugees in question had received support, including financial assistance that was enough to meet basic life needs. Accommodation had also been provided, with every person enjoying around 200 square feet of space. They could also receive free medical care and full medical support. The two refugees could live in and move around Macao Special Administrative Region of China freely.
The delegation also said that the Government had never restricted any foreign journalists from entering Macao Special Administrative Region of China, and they had complete freedom to enter and conduct interviews. Only a few foreign journalists were refused entry which had nothing to do with freedom; this was border control in accordance with the law. Police could stop persona non-grata or those who posed a threat to the order involving international terrorist activities from entering Macao, or expel them. Every person who entered the region was examined to determine whether they would be allowed to enter.
André Cheong Weng Chon, Secretary for Administration and Justice of Macao Special Administrative Region of China and head of the delegation, said that the Commission against Corruption played an important role in human rights monitoring. Several bodies had also been restructured with their scopes expanded and were provided with sufficient powers to fulfil the Paris Principles. After the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government of Macao Special Administrative Region of China had adopted strict prevention measures, which had achieved remarkable results, and the number of COVID-19 deaths in the country remained at very low levels.
In concluding remarks, Mr. Weng Chon thanked the Committee, saying it was with the joint efforts of all parties that the consideration could be successfully concluded. The Government of Macao Special Administrative Region of China attached great importance to the active role of the Committee in the promotion of the implementation of the Covenant, and would seriously study the comments and recommendations put forward.
Photini Pazartzis, Committee Chairperson, thanked the delegation for their detailed report, written replies and for the constructive dialogue. The Committee was reassured by the delegation’s responses, especially its expression of continued commitment to the Covenant. However, concern was held around the lack of a specific human right’s national institution, and the Chair expressed hope that Macao Special Administrative Region of China would reconsider its position. A useful exchange had been had on freedom of speech, including journalists and academics.
The delegation of Macao Special Administrative Region of China was made up of representatives of the Secretary for Administration and Justice; the Secretary for Security; the Government Information Bureau; the Legal Affairs Bureau; the Health Bureau; the Social Welfare Bureau; the Labour Affairs Bureau; the Correctional Services Bureau; the Judiciary Police; the Public Security Police Force; and the Permanent Mission of China to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Human Rights Committee’s one hundred and thirty-fifth session is being held from 27 June to 27 July. All the documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, can be found on the session’s webpage. Meeting summary releases can be found here. The webcast of the Committee’s public meetings can be accessed via the UN Web TV webpage.
The Committee is next scheduled to meet in public at 3 p.m. on Monday, 18 July for an informal meeting with State parties.
Report
The Committee has before it the second periodic report of Macao Special Administrative Region of China (CCPR/C/CHN-MAC/2).
Presentation of Report
ANDRÉ CHEONG WENG CHON, Secretary for Administration and Justice of Macao Special Administrative Region of China and head of the delegation, said that in December 1999, the People’s Republic of China resumed the exercise of sovereignty over Macao Special Administrative Region of China and since then, the Region had been exercising a high degree of autonomy and had developed in all aspects. The GDP per capita in Macao Special Administrative Region of China had increased by 192 per cent in 2021 compared to 1999, and the average life expectancy of residents had also increased to 84.2 years in 2021. In 2016, Macao Special Administrative Region of China enacted the law on domestic violence, which had designated domestic violence as an independent offence and established preventive measures, while providing for assistance measures for victims. The Criminal Code had also been amended to make child pornography an independent offence, and the labour relations law was amended to increase the number of days for maternity leave and establish paternity leave. To improve judicial efficiency, Macao Special Administrative Region of China had revised its procedural laws, simplifying relevant litigation procedures and shortening the trial time of cases.
Mr. Weng Chong said the number of seats in the Legislative Assembly of Macao Special Administrative Region of China had increased from 29 to 33 since 2013. The Government of Macao Special Administrative Region of China had strengthened its protection for older persons, persons with disabilities and other groups through the grant of disability subsidies, pensions and various assistance funds. The Government also strove to provide basic living conditions for residents who had difficulty in purchasing properties through the construction of social and economic housing. The Commission against Corruption played an important role in human rights monitoring. Several bodies had also been restructured with their scopes expanded and were provided with sufficient powers to fulfil the Paris Principles. In 2020 and 2021, lectures were organised on human rights conventions for students in universities and in secondary and primary schools. Several rounds of financial assistance had been launched in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as psychological support services. The Government was committed to providing non-resident workers with equal protection of basic rights and interests, and actively promoted the legislation of the trade union law.
After the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government of Macao Special Administrative Region of China adopted strict prevention measures, including restrictions on crowd gathering activities, adjustment of immigration policies, and suspension of the operation of designated venues. The pandemic prevention measures had achieved remarkable results and the number of COVID-19 deaths in the country remained at very low levels. Issues concerning the protection of rights of minority groups, such as the legal recognition of transgender persons and whether domestic violence was applicable to cohabitants of the same sex, were controversial in deeply traditional East Asian societies, and Macao Special Administrative Region of China was no exception. It was necessary to actively carry out inclusive dialogues, taking the existing legal system and social values into account, to gradually promote the protection of rights of minority groups. Mr. Weng Chong said that with the effective control of the pandemic, the economy of Macao Special Administrative Region of China would achieve a rapid recovery and would provide the necessary economic and social conditions for further strengthening the protection of human rights and for promoting the implementation of the Covenant.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert said the slew of reforms in Macao Special Administrative Region of China was encouraging, asking for examples of how the Covenant had been applied and the outcomes of the cases. Of the 32 cases mentioned in the replies, how many violations of the Covenant were found to have occurred? The Expert gave examples of cases where the Covenant was misinterpreted, including commentary on past events, asking how information on the Covenant was disseminated within society? How were training programmes organised? How were they conducted and by whom? What feedback had been received? Was the interpretation given by the Standing Committee subject to judicial review?
Another Committee Expert said that while corruption was recognised as one of the main challenges for human rights, the Paris Principles envisaged a system which was much broader than the issue of corruption. Could the delegation explain whether any plans were underway to establish an independent human rights institution fully compliant with human rights principles? Would the Commission of Corruption’s mandate be further extended? How many enquiries were initiated by the Commission, and what were the outcomes of these? When would the Commission’s annual report of activities be released? Could the delegation inform about the Working Group created in 2016 and its activities to follow up on the implementation of the Covenant?
A Committee Expert noted that Macao Special Administrative Region of China had been making considerable efforts to improve gender equality, however, inequality still existed due to cultural practices. What was the Government doing to combat this? Could updated information on the number of female deputies be provided? What measures had the Government taken to improve the gender balance in the Assembly? The Committee had received allegations stating that migrant workers and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons experienced discrimination. Why was it difficult to adopt a comprehensive anti-discrimination law? What obstacles did the Government face in this regard? What was being done to guarantee the rights of transgender people? What was the number of perpetrators of same sex domestic violence cases perpetrated and investigated under the Criminal Code? What measures was the Government taking to promote the social inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons and raise awareness of their rights?
One Committee Expert said that the list of possible classifications of conduct involving the exercise of physical or psychological violence against women was a concern. Could the delegation inform the Committee whether legislation contained a gender aggravating circumstance, which would be based on the greater criminal reproach towards the perpetrator committing the acts because he felt superior to the woman? The Committee was concerned that few complaints of harassment of women in the workplace were registered. Could the delegation offer any explanation to this? The Committee was aware that in 2015, the police of Macao Special Administrative Region of China handed over to mainland China a former Chinese official accused of corruption who had a Macao residence permit. What were the circumstances of this case? Was there any prospect of an extradition agreement?
The Expert said that the Committee welcomed the fact that in 2019 the Government of Macao Special Administrative Region of China had improved the functioning of the Commission for Disciplinary Control of the Security Forces and Services, increasing its staff and expanding its functions. Was there any kind of judicial review of the Commission's performance? How many cases had been initiated, and how many had been prosecuted? To prevent people from being detained indefinitely in a psychiatric centre, had Macao Special Administrative Region of China considered the possibility of establishing a judicial review of their situation to be carried out periodically?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said that the Macao Special Administrative Region of China paid high attention to the training of judges and law enforcement personnel. Sixteen lectures and workshops with more than 500 participants had been organised. The specific rights contained in the Covenant were implemented within local laws. If citizens found their rights violated, they could invoke local laws for redress.
The Basic Law of Macao Special Administrative Region of China and of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China were similar regarding the power of interpretation. Before adopting the Basic Law, the Committee had consulted on the interpretation power, and a rational comprise had been reached, guaranteeing the continuity of the constitution of power. The power of interpretation was vested in the Standing Committee; however, those provisions were interpreted by the Macao Special Administrative Region of China. Since 2002, the Standing Committee had carried out just one interpretation regarding the decision of the courts in Macao Special Administrative Region of China. However, the interpretation by the Supreme Agency would not influence the independence of the courts in Macao Special Administrative Region of China.
The current Government had already implemented the requirements of the Paris Principles concerning a national human rights institution and the current system in the Macao Special Administrative Region of China met these requirements. The Commission against Corruption was autonomous, operated independently, and enjoyed authority in terms of its finances and resources. The Commission had an extensive responsibility, also handling administrative complaints. In these instances, its purpose was to protect the rights, freedoms and just interests of people. It also needed to ensure the effectiveness of the public administration. It had full legislative means and the right to conduct independent investigations into cases of corruption, without needing to inform any government agency. This highlighted that the Commission against Corruption was honouring the responsibilities and duties provided by the Paris Principals.
If protesters used public places for their assemblies, the organisers must apply for permission. Since a decision had been made by the law, no suspects had been handed over to mainland China. From 2011 to 2022, there had been no reports of prisoners being tortured or maltreated. Regarding prisoners with psychological diseases, several measures had been adopted. These included preventing these people from harming themselves and monitoring whether they suffered. Judges and prosecutors inspected the prisons each month and learned more about appeals and complaints by the prisoners.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert said what was lacking in Macao Special Administrative Region of China was one national human rights institution with a comprehensive mandate to substantively deal with all issues covered in the Covenant. Were there plans underway to establish an institution with a comprehensive substantive mandate in human rights, and to engage in awareness raising activities? The Expert repeated the question on how many enquires by the Commission against Corruption had been conducted, and the outcome of the enquiries? What were the instances where human rights had been found to be violated? What concrete activities did the Working Group undertake to follow up on the implementation of recommendations by the Committee?
Another Committee Expert said the delegation did not provide any substantial replies to his questions. Information had been received that the society of Macao Special Administrative Region of China was conservative in terms of sexual orientation and gender equality. The Expert repeated his previous question, asking for concrete measures the Government had taken to promote lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons and raise awareness of their rights?
One Committee Expert repeated the question about the categorisation of violence in the Criminal Code. Were there plans to introduce the gender-aggravating circumstance? Was there an agreement between Macao Special Administrative Region of China and mainland China to regulate extraditions? It was commendable that there had not been a single case of mistreatment in prisons. The Expert asked for further information, including how many people in the Macao Special Administrative Region of China were currently in prison?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said that the principle of equality was a basic principle in the legal system of Macao Special Administrative Region of China and was reflected in all laws throughout the system. Therefore, the Macao Special Administrative Region of China thought it was not necessary to propagate a general law on this issue. Regarding transgender persons, this was a sensitive issue. The society was influenced by East Asian values. It was hoped that a method could be found to accommodate all members of society and balance all issues. The delegation said that same sex marriage was not reflected in the domestic violence law. It was hoped that this would be resolved in future legislation. However, this did not mean that same sex couples were not protected under general law. Domestic violence was defined as continuous maltreatment acts, including physical and mental violence.
The delegation said that as of 31 March this year, there were 1,520 prisoners in the Macao Special Administrative Region of China.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert appreciated the information on the provision of assistance measures to refugee status applicants and their families. Could the delegation clarify the status of two pending applications for refugee status which had been awaiting a decision for over a decade? What caused such excessive delays and what was being done to avoid this in the future? What kind of humanitarian support services were provided to these families? Of the eight applications received for refugee status which had not been granted, what were the reasons for their denial? Would Macao Special Administrative Region of China be willing to take steps to decriminalise defamation, particularly relating to public officials and the flag, or to repeal the prison punishment? What were the current penalties for those found guilty of this crime? What necessitated the arrest of two elderly persons in 2017, who shared a social media rumour about the Government? Did any legislation in Macao, China provide for the protection of whistle blowers?
A Committee Expert asked for updated information on the number of complaints received by the Government in the last five years in relation to labour disputes. How did the Government receive complaints from migrant workers regarding unlawful employment and recruitment practices? How was new legislation working to improve the situation of migrant workers? The Expert said that the Committee appreciated the detailed explanation in the report concerning efforts made by the Government of Macao Special Administrative Region of China to address and combat trafficking in persons. However, concern had been expressed about the low number of prosecutions. Could updated data on the number of investigations, prosecutions and convictions of traffickers be provided? Could the delegation elaborate on the definition of trafficking under the law? Could information be provided on measures taken by the Government to receive complaints from victims of trafficking?
A Committee Expert welcomed the reduction in the backlog of cases in the courts of Macao Special Administrative Region of China, asking for updated data to be provided. Could the delegation provide an explanation as to why a large number of cases were conducted in Portuguese, despite the majority of the population being Chinese speaking? The Expert noted a legal amendment, which provided for sensitive crimes to be adjudicated to judges who met certain requirements, which Macao Special Administrative Region of China said did not constitute a special jurisdiction. Could the delegation explain how this legal amendment was in line with Basic Law? What were the number of judges appointed under this amendment, and the number of cases prosecuted under these provisions?
A Committee Expert noted that Macao Special Administrative Region of China had a law on data protection which had been in effect since 2005. Could the delegation provide updated information in this area, including the number of complaints, privacy violations, and remedies provided? What were the legal safeguards on the joint use of “Sky Eye” and facial recognition technology? Was there any mechanism which could verify the compliance of police mass surveillance practice with the law and international human rights standards? The Committee had received information that leaked emails revealed that the judicial police expressed interest in monitoring software which should not be used. Could the delegation provide information on the law which sought to expand the means of secret surveillance, allowing the police to intercept text messages and photos? Had this software been acquired?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the two refugees in question had received support, including financial assistance that was enough to meet basic life needs. Accommodation had also been provided, with every person enjoying around 200 square feet of space. They could also receive free medical care and had received full medical support. The two refugees could live in and move around Macao Special Administrative Region of China freely.
It was illegal for employers to deduct money from an employee’s salary under the guise of an agency fee. To ensure that domestic helpers were looked after, each employer who applied for domestic help was analysed, and would not be approved unless the rights of their domestic worker would be ensured.
Regarding defamation, the delegation said that the definition was clearly provided in the Criminal Code of Macao Special Administrative Region of China. Freedom of speech had its limit; while protecting this right for citizens, the right for privacy also needed to be taken into consideration. Regarding insult to the national flag, there were conditions and requirements, including that the person in question must be subjectively intending to insult the sovereignty of the State. This was a clear definition, and if such actions were taken, this would be considered a crime of insult to the national flag, emblem and anthem. There was no plan to decriminalise defamation.
Further regarding defamation, Macao Special Administrative Region of China’s civil protection law had its provisions, and people could be sentenced to up to two years for the crime. The contents of the law were clearly defined. Since the Civil Protection Code entered into force, only one case had been prosecuted, and the court had sentenced the person involved to up to six months in prison earlier this year.
In 2019, the judicial organization law had been amended and the system for lawyers had been reformed, increasing the workload of judges in order to simplify court proceedings. The training of human resources staff had been enhanced to increase the efficiency of case handling by the courts. During the cases handled by Portuguese-speaking judges, Portuguese was used in these instances. An interpreter would be provided if necessary.
The delegation said facial recognition had nothing to do with Sky Eye and was not part of the Sky Eye mechanism. Since 2015, the facial recognition technology was used strictly following external supervision as well as internal procedures. Eavesdropping could only be done with the approval of a judge. If conditions were met, suggestions would be made to the judge to stop such actions. On the protection of personal data, from 2011 to 2022, there were over 1,700 cases, with more than 200 of these prosecuted. There were many measures in place to increase public awareness regarding the protection of privacy.
On the concerns about the number of cases of human trafficking which had been prosecuted, the delegation said that, according to evidence collected, other cases did not constitute the crime of trafficking in accordance with the law. These were instead filed under the crime of prostitution. The Judicial Agency and Labour Bureau had a 24-hour hotline, available, with potential victims to be transferred to the police for follow-up. The delegation said that according to the situation of the cases, victims of trafficking were provided with financial support, including fees for repatriation.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert repeated a question on the status of the two pending refugee applications, and what was causing such excessive delays. Were there measures to avoid such occurrences in the future? What was the reason for the denial of all applications of refugee status in Macao Special Administrative Region of China? Since there was no willingness to consider the decriminalisation of defamation, was there flexibility to consider the sanctions of prison sentences for such cases? How many individuals had been criminally prosecuted for defamation, and what were the penalties imposed? Were there any laws in place to protect whistle blowers, particularly in relation to the elderly people arrested in 2017?
Another Committee Expert asked about the reduction in the backlog of cases; could data be provided on the last two years to see whether the trend had been maintained over time? According to information received, citizens may use either Chinese or Portuguese in civil proceedings. Was Portuguese used more than Chinese in civil proceedings or vice-versa? Could the delegation describe what system was in place for the appointment of judges in general? How were judges appointed, particularly if they had to hear cases relating to the law on security?
One Committee Expert noted that there was no desire for an independent mechanism to supervise the way surveillance data was maintained. However, information had been received that Macao Special Administrative Region of China did not have the capacity to supervise whether this was legal or not. Would the Government consider setting up a mechanism that could supervise and monitor police surveillance?
A Committee Expert noted the different treatment of migrant domestic helpers and workers, asking for clarification on the legal framework around the protection of non-resident migrant workers in line with the Covenant? What were the number of victims of trafficking who had been granted a residence permit?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said there were 45 judges, with 42 able to speak Chinese, meaning court proceedings were primarily conducted in Chinese. Simultaneous interpretation was maintained with Chinese and Portuguese, as many protagonists would be Chinese speaking. However, as there were a few judges who were Portuguese speaking, interpretation in this language was maintained. In over 10,700 court cases, 92 per cent were ruled in Chinese, 0.4 percent in both Chinese and Portuguese, and the rest in Portuguese. The Refugee Affairs Bureau was pushing for the application of the two cases. The two cases were different in nature, with the reasons for seeking refugee status being different. During the time the cases were pending, the asylum seekers had been able to obtain support from the Government and were guaranteed their dignity.
Regarding judges hearing the cases of national security law, the delegation said that pre-appointment was made on cases which affected unity and national security. In the Macao Special Administrative Region of China, the relevant laws were clear in their provisions on the protection of privacy. When video was captured on Sky Eye, the video would be automatically deleted after 60 days in accordance with the law. The mechanisms in place were in line with the Covenant’s provisions under the protection of privacy. There was currently no single case involving illegal eavesdropping.
On the rights of non-resident workers, everyone should abide by the law concerning the employment of workers. On contractual relations, all provisions were contained under the protection of labour relations, with non-resident workers enjoying the same rights as resident workers. When the contract ended, employees should provide funds for non-residents to return to their country. Same pay for same work was guaranteed for resident and non-resident workers. During the pandemic, non-resident workers were provided with free masks, vaccinations, and PCR tests.
Issues concerning same sex partners and transgender persons were complex, societal issues. The protection of minorities would be reconciled with mainstream views. The rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, intersex, transgender and other people were protected. In school education, students were guided to respect the choice of minorities regarding their gender identity. A person needed to appear before a court before they could change their sex, and this would depend on the ruling of the judge.
The Commission against Corruption had the capacity to execute its duties independently, and played the role of a national human rights institute; there were no plans to establish a separate human rights institute. The pandemic had resulted in the delay of the report, including on the technical issues such as translation, and the report would be issued soon. The makeup of the legislative assembly was based on the electoral decisions made by the public. Women represented 41 per cent of top leadership among the courts and prosecuting offices. Among the 45 judges, 22 were female, which represented roughly half of judges.
Domestic violence was a broad concept, with violent actions amongst family members all regarded as domestic violence. If a member of the family killed another member, or seriously hurt the other one, this fell under the crime of domestic violence.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert asked if the draft law relating to extradition was public? Could the Committee gain access to this draft law, which had been withdrawn? Was there a possibility for an aggravating circumstance to be applied in regard to gender; for example, when a man committed violence against a woman because he felt superior to her?
Another Committee Expert asked for clarification regarding gender balance in the legislative assembly, noting that this was a function of the electoral system. Was there any fundamental requirement in the law regarding the candidacy; should there be a minimum requirement for the number of female candidates? Could the delegation explain what they meant by gender identity being a choice?
A Committee Expert noted that there had been reports that journalists known to be critical of the Government had been denied entry into Macao Special Administrative Region of China. Could the delegation provide precise information on the number of journalists who had been refused entry into the region for “security reasons” over the past five years? What was the precise nature of the security threat posed by journalists to warrant their exclusion? The Expert said that restrictions on freedom of expression were only admitted when they were narrowly tailored, and did not cover political expression. How was the restriction of journalists compatible with free expression under the Covenant?
Could the delegation clarify how a referendum would restrict the legal rights of Macao Special Administrative Region of China? What was the rationale for the Government’s suppression of the referendum in 2014? How could the Government improve the existing climate to ensure that ideas and information could flourish? The Expert raised the issue that political opinions could not be displayed in public, asking how the repression of such activities by children was compatible with the obligations of Macao Special Administrative Region of China under the Covenant? What was the threat posed by such activities?
Another Committee Expert asked about criteria used by the Municipal Affairs Institution to grant organisers authorisation for the use of public spaces. Where could this criteria be found? The Expert discussed a case in 2019, where an activist wished to hold an assembly regarding prohibition against torture; however, this was banned by the police. Could the delegation explain how a rally could be organised in the region to promote the prohibition of torture? How could this be illegal? Did migrant workers enjoy the right to peaceful assembly? Could more clarification be given around the definition of assembly? Could data be provided on ongoing criminal investigations and assemblies considered to be unlawful? Could information on applications which were permitted and denied be provided? The Expert said there was no legislation which permitted workers to unionise, asking if the Government planned to introduce a trade union law to protect these rights?
One Committee Expert noted there had been concern around the Criminal Code, which stipulated that a person could be punished if they sought to destroy or alter the pollical, social or economic system in Macao Special Administrative Region of China. Could updated data on the application of these provisions, investigations and prosecutions be provided? What measures had the Government taken to protect the right to peaceful assembly? What measures were being taken to protect the right to privacy in the use of pictures of demonstrations as recorded by the police?
A Committee Expert asked whether there had been any discussion on the removal of reservations on article 25 to the Covenant, and if there had been any measures taken to abolish or reduce the ratio of indirectly appointed seats in the Assembly? Were there any discussions in Macao Special Administrative Region of China to reinstate elections of municipal organs? What guarantees were in place to prevent the arbitrariness of the authorities? Could the Committee receive information about cases of suspension from office, or termination of office of members of the legislative Assembly?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the Government had never restricted any foreign journalists from entering Macao Special Administrative Region of China, and they had complete freedom to enter and conduct interviews. Only a few foreign journalists were refused entry which had nothing to do with freedoms; this was border control in accordance with the law. Police could stop persona non-grata or those who posed a threat to the order involving international terrorist activities from entering Macao, or expel them. Every person who entered the region was examined to determine whether they would be allowed to enter. The right to assembly and demonstration had its guarantees and its restrictions. In the past, numerous assemblies critical of the Government had been held, including 41 assemblies focused on medical accidents, demanding civil servants to execute their duties properly. Five assemblies had been held criticising government officials.
Legal assembly and demonstrations in the Macao Special Administrative Region of China were guaranteed by law. Regarding the exhibition on 4 July which was stopped, this was primarily due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Residents of Macao Special Administrative Region of China enjoyed the freedom of assembly as did migrant residents. However, the purpose of assembly could be restricted for appropriate reasons; if the organisers of the assembly could not ensure the event would be in line with public order, health and sanitation, restrictions could be applied, regardless of whether the organiser was a resident or not. Assemblies may be restricted due to the pandemic to ensure the health of the population.
Residents of Macao Special Administrative Region of China enjoyed freedom of expression and academic freedom. Universities had dismissed two academics autonomously. Article 25 of the Covenant provided for the right of election, and permanent residents had the same rights. Those who wanted to be a candidate needed to comply with the criteria to be eligible. The election commission had the right to screen candidates, and if potential candidates were found to have not been loyal to the Macao Special Administrative Region, the commission could declare these candidates to be ineligible. The candidates could challenge this decision.
Referendums were regulated by the Constitution, and there were no laws providing for referendums. It had been ruled that a referendum could infringe on the rights of other residents. In recent years, there had been many cases of using public spaces, which was frequent. Under the new regulations, the use of a public space needed to be aligned with public interest. The municipal organ now had the function of providing services and advice.
To further implement the freedom of assembly, association and trade union freedom, the Government had started a public consultation on a trade union law to regulate the participation of trade unions. To guarantee that no illegal activities were undertaken, it was necessary to have a monitoring mechanism. Work would continue to be advanced in this regard.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert asked whether the existing anti-discrimination law guaranteed equality for private companies and institutions? The Committee was aware that the Macao Special Administrative Region of China had been placed under a one-week lock down due to the pandemic, starting Monday this week. The delegation had explained that the restrictions were in line with the Covenant; however, the Expert was concerned about whether the very severe restrictions could inhibit the rights under the Covenant. What steps were being taken by the Government to prevent disproportionate restrictions?
Another Committee Expert asked for concrete cases in situations where candidates wishing to run for election were deemed not to be loyal to Macao Special Administrative Region of China, and what kind of criteria had been used to deem them ineligible?
A Committee Expert asked if the draft law on wiretapping activities would be reviewed and assessed?
One Committee Expert said that concerning the draft law on wiretapping activities, was there legal authorisation that was foreseen for these activities?
A Committee Expert noted that there had been information that journalists were refused entry into the region. Since this refusal was done by agents of the State, what evidence was used to deem journalists a security threat? What was the reason for shutting down the referendum on a simple political issue? Could the delegation explain how an opinion poll, as descried by the court, would impact on the rights of others? Why did the Government take a hands-off approach with regard to the professors fired by the universities, given it was a public institution involved? What was the legal environment for supporting rights and freedoms under the Covenant? Why did the case take so long?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said that Macao Special Administrative Region of China did not have a standalone discrimination law. According to legal tradition, basic guidelines and principles were installed in different laws. Since the pandemic, very effective preventative control measures had been taken, resulting in a low infection rate. Since June, the new variants had spread quickly, posing a threat to public security and order. Various measures had been taken, including the lockdown from Monday. This was not a total lockdown; people could leave home for necessary reasons, including visiting the doctor or shopping for food. The measures were effective and had resulted in a decline in cases. These measures would pose inconveniences to peoples’ lives. The Government agreed that the right to life was the most fundamental right. The majority of punishments for breaking restrictions was fines.
The Government had implemented article 25 of the Covenant, and there were only three reservations. The delegation said that non-residents entering into Macao Special Administrative Region of China could not belong to a criminal gang or triads, or be involved in crimes relating to terrorism. If these people applied for entry into the region, they would be rejected.
The law on assembly and demonstrations stated that the purpose of the assembly should not be contrary to the law. For public interest, police officers were allowed to take measures to ensure the public demonstration was undertaken in an orderly fashion so as to avoid impact on public order and on health and sanitation. Law enforcement agents examined the notification of assemblies and demonstrations on a case-by-case basis. Those concerned by eavesdropping could ask to review the content. Telecommunication operators were only permitted to provide assistance to law enforcement agencies upon a court order. The judge could rule to provide aid to the people concerned.
The delegation said that no one had been prosecuted for actions regarding the Macao national flag and emblem.
Closing Remarks
ANDRÉ CHEONG WENG CHON, Secretary for Administration and Justice of Macao Special Administrative Region of China and head of the delegation thanked the Committee, saying it was with the joint efforts of all parties that the consideration could be successfully concluded. Mr. Weng Chon said that through a sincere and candid dialogue, the members had gained a relatively full understanding of the determination of the Macao Special Administrative Region of China to implement the Covenant. The Government attached great importance to the active role of the Committee in the promotion of the implementation of the Covenant, and would seriously study the comments and recommendations put forward. The Macao Special Administrative Region of China would continue to improve the relevant legal systems and optimise policies and specific measures.
PHOTINI PAZARTZIS, Committee Chairperson, thanked the delegation for their detailed report, written replies and for the constructive dialogue. During this time, the delegation provided the Committee with valuable information on many issues. The Committee had noted the legal framework within which the Covenant was incorporated within the system of Macao Special Administrative Region of China. The Committee was reassured by the delegation’s responses, especially its expression of continued commitment to the Covenant. However, concern was held around the lack of a specific human right’s national institution, and the Chair expressed hope that the region would reconsider its position. A useful exchange had been had on freedom of speech, including journalists and academics. Ms. Pazartzis said that a lot of insight and information had been gained, and the dialogue had been conducted in a constructive manner.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the information media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CCPR22.019E