'Public interest defence only for clear, urgent cases'
The government on Saturday said it's looking at the possibility of including a "public interest" defence to new laws to protect state secrets in national security legislation under Article 23 of the Basic Law.   Speaking on an RTHK programme, justice minister Paul Lam said the defence would only apply in circumstances that are urgent and overriding, for example when public safety is at stake.   "Maintaining national security is an important matter of public interest. If you want to leak state secrets, you must have a reason that is more significant than keeping this confidentiality. It should be something overriding, very clear, and very urgent, with no other way to inform the public that they may face threats to their lives," he said. Ronny Tong, a member of the Executive Council and a senior counsel, said such a defence can be considered as a way to allay concerns about the legislation, but any such provision must be clear. "But it is important to give proper consideration to the fact that national security is of paramount public interest,"  he told reporters after attending a Commercial Radio programme.  "And therefore, for anything to override that public interest, there must be very clear provisions. There must be very clear guidelines to the courts to enable them to come to a balanced review of the competing public interests that one is talking about." Meanwhile, officials said a new offence targeting external interference won't affect exchanges between academics in Hong Kong and colleagues elsewhere.  Some legal scholars had expressed concern that conducting research with universities overseas or publishing reports that the authorities deem to be untrue may put academics in breach of the new security law. Security minister Chris Tang told the same RTHK programme that the law's definition of "foreign forces" covered governments and political parties, not universities.   "We also need to determine whether you are knowingly using incorrect information. If you are, it constitutes knowingly making a material misrepresentation, not just a simple mistake," he said. "Another question is whether it has brought about an interference effect... To violate the law, you have to actually influence government policies, such as the city's election or legislature." The government launched its consultation on the new security legislation on Tuesday. People have until February 28 to give their views.