> While fears of this law muddying the waters are justified, I think it is purposely misrepresented in Western media. That is very much is the case. Western me

> While fears of this law muddying the waters are justified, I think it is purposely misrepresented in Western media. That is very much is the case. Western media gives a lot of time, space, and prominence to the fears that China could extradict anyone they wanted for any crime they wanted in HK. Meanwhile, it's not that hard to figure that the amendment only allows 37 out of the existing 46 offences listed in Schedule 1 the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance; upping the minimum sentences to 7 years before the extradition is considered; retaining the clauses for double criminality, no political extradition (which is determined by HK, first by the CE, then could be challenged by the courts), etc etc... I compared the proposed amendment (the earlier one that had a minimum 3 year sentence) against the existing FOO, and the amendment isn't that drastic as a change. What would be concerning is still some of the existence of white-collar offences that applies, and removing the requirement for the CE to first notify the LegCo and require their approval. The latter, as I understood it, does not happen in other countries, and interesting in HK politics because the pro-democratic camp has most of its sway in LegCo. What this CE had bungled badly was the lack of consultation and attempted to ram this whole thing through, believing that she had enough votes to do so anyways.