*************************************************
In response to the statement made by Justice, the Hong Kong Section of the International Commission of Jurists, a Security Bureau spokesman reiterated today (May 9) that the house arrest operation undertaken by law enforcement officers yesterday was entirely lawful and did not conflict with the Basic Law and applicable international conventions.
According to Article 29 of the Basic Law, "the homes and other premises of Hong Kong residents shall be inviolable. Arbitrary or unlawful search of, or intrusion into, a resident's home or other premises shall be prohibited".
"The Immigration Department and the Police are empowered under the law to take enforcement action against those with no right to stay in Hong Kong. Lawful search of residential premises are clearly allowed under Article 29 of the Basic Law," the spokesman said.
The spokesman also reiterated that Hong Kong's laws and policies on right of abode and related implementation arrangements comply with all applicable international conventions.
Under section 56(1A)(b) of the Immigration Ordinance, an immigration officer or immigration assistant may arrest and detain any person if he has reason to suspect that such person has committed an offence under the Ordinance. Section 56(1A)(d)empowers such officers to enter and search any premises or place if he has reason to suspect that there is therein any person who may be arrested under the Ordinance.
"During yesterday's operation, law enforcement officers had reason to suspect there were right of abode claimants who had absconded inside the premises concerned. The operation led to the arrest of six immigration offenders," the spokesman said.
"According to section 56(2)(a) of the Immigration Ordinance, any public officer may break open any outer or inner door of or in any premises or place which he is empowered to enter and search. Of the 16 premises searched yesterday, forced entry was only necessary at one location. Forced entry was necessary as the occupants refused to cooperate despite repeated explanation and persuasion by the officers," he added.
In response to queries on whether it was necessary for the Government to conduct house arrests, the spokesman stressed that such actions would be taken as and when necessary in the removal exercise.
"While law enforcement officers will continue to intercept and repatriate claimants who have no right to stay, operations to arrest those hiding indoors will be mounted as and when necessary. The guiding principle for all removal operations is that only minimum force will be used in the event of resistance. It is clearly unacceptable to tolerate the prolonged stay of thousands of illegal immigrants and overstayers in Hong Kong, which may lead to social and other problems," he said.
The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government has a duty to take appropriate measures to repatriate persons with no right to stay in Hong Kong in accordance with the law, just like what immigration authorities elsewhere would do. Repatriation action had been suspended for some three months since the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) delivered its judgment on January 10, 2002 in order to allow claimants to leave voluntarily. Since April 1, 2002, the Government has been carrying out removal of those who refuse to leave in batches in a firm but restrained manner.
"Once again we urge those with no right to stay to accept the CFA judgment calmly and rationally, and to leave voluntarily as soon as possible," the spokesman said.
End/Thursday, May 9, 2002
NNNN
