HONG KONG (July 6): Hong Kong’s leader dismissed a warning from major digital companies such as Google, Facebook, and Twitter that they may leave the financial center if authorities push through a new privacy law. Authorities in the city have announced plans to establish a new legislation targeting “doxxing,” the act of posting someone’s personal information online so that they can be tormented by others.
However, the proposed legislation’s wide phrasing has alarmed large digital companies, who are concerned that they may be held liable and their personnel prosecuted for users’ material.
The Asia Internet Coalition, which comprises digital titans including Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Apple, issued a letter to Hong Kong’s government outlining their worries.
“Introducing sanctions targeting at individuals is inconsistent with global norms and trends,” the letter cautioned, dated June 25 but only just made public.
“The only way to escape these fines for technology companies would be to desist from investing and delivering their services in Hong Kong, so depriving Hong Kong enterprises and consumers and erecting additional trade barriers,” it continued.
READ: The censorship argument in Hong Kong is heating up, with an Internet firm claiming to be able to prohibit ‘illegal conduct.’
On Tuesday, when asked about the warning, Carrie Lam, the city’s chief executive, downplayed the concerns.
“We’re focusing on illegal doxxing and giving privacy commissioners the authority to investigate and carry out operations,” she told reporters.
Lam compared the new data privacy powers to a national security measure enacted by Beijing last year in Hong Kong to quell dissent following massive and frequently violent protests in 2019.
Security law has been “slandered and defamed,” according to Lam.
“The privacy law is the same case,” she concluded.
She also stated that the city’s privacy commission would be pleased to meet with representatives from the tech industry to address any concerns they may have.
She did, however, imply that her government was adamant about rushing through the new legislation.
“Of course, it would be great if we could alleviate this fear during the legislative process. However, it is occasionally necessary to illustrate it through action “she stated/n
