MACAU (MOSTLY) LIFTS TRAVEL BAN ON PAN-DEMOCRATS;

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 HONG KONG 000483

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EAP/CM; ALSO FOR DRL

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/16/2019
TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM MC HK CH
SUBJECT: MACAU (MOSTLY) LIFTS TRAVEL BAN ON PAN-DEMOCRATS;
SOME ACTIVISTS STILL BARRED

REF: (A) HONG KONG 354 (B) HONG KONG 11

Classified By: Consul General Joe Donovan for reasons 1.4(b) and (d)


1. (C) Summary and comment: Weeks of mounting pressure from
Hong Kong's pan-democrats, the media, the Hong Kong
government (reluctantly),and perhaps even Beijing have led
Macau to lift what appeared to be a blanket ban on Hong Kong
democratic activists' visiting Macau. Twenty eight
pan-democratic members of the Legislative Council, District
Councilors and activists were admitted to Macau March 15 for
an exchange with their counterparts in Macau's
proto-democratic New Macau Association. Two legislators --
League of Social Democrats firebrand "Long Hair" Leung
Kwok-hung and Confederation of Trade Unions' General
Secretary Lee Cheuk-yan -- were denied entry, along with
three democratic activists. Hong Kong and Macau democrats
have criticized these refusals in the media, and Hong Kong
democrats again called on Hong Kong Secretary for Security
Ambrose Leung to raise the issue with Macau counterparts. In
this escalating confrontation, cooler heads in Macau seem to
have prevailed -- to a point. Letting in the majority of the
democrats may help move Macau's recent passage of Article 23
legislation out of at least the international media (ref A).
However, the decision to continue the ban on Long Hair and
Lee will serve only to drag out an unnecessary irritant in
Hong Kong-Macau relations and continue to attract unfavorable
media attention to Macau. End summary and comment.

--------------
Background to the Ban
--------------


2. (C) Since late last year, and possibly spurred by the
participation of Hong Kong's pan-democratic legislators and
activists in protests against Macau's then-draft Article 23
legislation, Macau has largely banned known Hong Kong
democrats from entering Macau. The legal authority for the
ban is unrelated to Article 23, but rests rather on Macau's
2002 Internal Security Law. Under the rubric of
"Preventative Police Measures," Article XVII Section 1(4)
grants Macau police (who control immigration),the right:

"To prevent the entry into the Macau Special Administrative
Region of, or to deport, residents of foreign territories who
are regarded under the law as unwelcome, or who constitute a
threat to internal security and stability; or who are
regarded as suspects of transnational crimes, including
international terrorists."

Macau officials have cited this law in all the refusals,
without ever (at least to our knowledge) citing a specific
offense committed by someone refused. Macau has also
steadfastly denied that it has compiled a "black list" of
persons to be barred from entry, although one pan-democratic
party member who was recently denied entry told us the only
thing the otherwise-polite Macau officials would tell him was
that his name was on a list.


3. (C) While the largest single refusal was the December 20
decision to bar a group of over twenty Hong Kong democrats,
including nine Legislative Council (LegCo) members traveling
to take part in an anti-Article 23 activity (ref B),recent
weeks had seen refusals even of democrats traveling for
tourism. In at least one instance, a democrat was traveling
from Mainland China into Macau at the Zhuhai border crossing,
and thus ironically was returned to the PRC having been found
ineligible to enter Macau. The first of two straws which
broke the camel's back were Macau's refusal February 18 and
again February 27 of South China Morning Post (SCMP)
photojournalist Felix Wong, who was already accredited by the
Macau government. That action put the ban into the headlines
and put the full force of the prominent SCMP's editorial page
against the ban. The second was the March 3 refusal of
widely-respected University of Hong Kong Law School Dean
Johannes Chan, who was traveling to deliver an annual lecture
(unrelated to Article 23) at the University of Macau.

--------------
Hong Kong Mobilizes, Macau Hedges
--------------


4. (C) Up to the point of the SCMP's Wong's refusal, the Hong
Kong government held to its line that, while it was
monitoring the issue, Macau was within its rights to control
its border in accordance with its own laws. Wong's February
18 refusal was coincident with Macau Secretary for Economy
and Finance Francis Tam's visit to Hong Kong to attend a
conference on Pearl River Delta cooperation. Hong Kong Chief
Secretary Henry Tang chose to raise the issue with Tam at

HONG KONG 00000483 002 OF 002


that time, but downplayed the issue as a dispute to be worked
out among "brothers". After Professor Chan was refused March
3, however, the issue rose to a boiling point. Hong Kong's
pan-democratic legislators moved for a debate in LegCo on the
issue March 4, with even pro-government legislators like
Regina Ip calling on Secretary for Security Ambrose Leung to
raise the matter with the Chief Executive. Hong Kong Chief
Executive (CE) Donald Tsang did raise the issue with Macau CE
Edmund Ho on the margins of the National People's Congress
meetings in Beijing March 5, although Ho told the press he
was sure Macau police had acted appropriately. Hong Kong's
Central Government Liaison Office (CGLO) entered the fray
March 6, with CGLO Director Gao Siren telling reporters he
was "looking into the situation, and (would) raise the issue
with the relevant departments of the central government."


5. (C) Macau security officials held to their line that they
were acting in accordance with Macau law, stressed each case
was reviewed on its own merits, and denied the existence of a
black list. Doing any friends in the Macau government no
favors, casino mogul Stanley Ho loudly applauded the bans in
remarks to reporters, using a Cantonese vulgarity to brand
those barred as troublemakers. However, since early March,
the Macau government, from CE Edmund Ho down, also began
taking greater pains to stress the importance attached to
Hong Kong and Macau ties. In a March 12 meeting with the
Consul General, Secretary for Economy and Finance Francis Tam
told us with a laugh that "some people in the government are
too sensitive." He suggested the issue had been resolved,
noting that even the central government wanted to see some
"face" given to Hong Kong CE Tsang.

--------------
How the Entry Ban Played Out
--------------


6. (C) Hong Kong's pan-democratic camp held a press
conference outside LegCo March 11 announcing its intention to
travel en masse to Macau March 15, for an "exchange" hosted
by Macau's proto-democratic New Macau Association (NMA).
While the stated purpose of the trip was to discuss issues
among the two SAR's democrats, including the February 26
passage of Macau's Article 23 bill, the real goal was to test
whether the high-level discussion between the two CEs had
ended the travel ban. A preliminary test of CE Tsang's
diplomacy went well, with Hong Kong academic and Civic Party
Secretary-General Kenneth Chan admitted to attend a
non-political academic conference March 12. Chan's entry led
Hong Kong officials to urge the pan-democrats not to push the
Macau side too far with their March 15 trip, a plea the
pan-democrats ignored.


7. On Sunday March 15, 28 out of 33 democrats were admitted
to Macau. Thirteen pan-democratic LegCo members were
admitted: the Democratic Party's Albert Ho, Emily Lau, Kam
Nai-wai, Wong Sing-chi, Lee Wing-tat, James To, and Cheng
Man-kwong; the Civic Party's Audrey Eu, Margaret Ng, and
Tanya Chan; the Association for Democracy and the People's
Livelihood's Cheung Kwok-che, and independents Cyd Ho and
Joseph Lee. Two legislators -- League of Social Democrats
(LSD) firebrand "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung and Confederation
of Trade Unions (CTU) leader Lee Cheuk-yan, were refused,
along with three democratic activists. Press speculated that
the refusals had to do with both LSD and CTU's roles in
promoting worker activism, which made them seem too risky to
the government in the runup to now-annual May 1 marches by
Macau labor. Press coverage of the democrats' arrival was
heavy, giving a bright spotlight in which Leung and Lee could
protest their ban. The Hong Kong government issued a
carefully-worded statement that, while it would not discuss
specific cases, it would "continue to monitor development of
this situation."


8. (C) The other democrats, as well as the NMA, also
protested the refusals, but proceeded with their scheduled
program. The Hong Kong democrats staged a protest in front
of Macau's Government House, which Macau press reported the
NMA observed but did not join. Pan-democratic "box lunch
caucus" convener Cyd Ho presented a petition to a Macau
government representative protesting Macau's "selective"
travel bans and calling on Chief Executive Ho to allow free
travel to Macau by all Hong Kong residents. Macau media also
reported that protests by non-Macau residents are illegal
(the report claimed only Macau SAR citizens have this right
under law) and that protests by anyone directly in front of
government house are also illegal. However, police allowed
the protest to occur unobstructed.
DONOVAN