47 Hong Kong democrats were charged with “conspiracy to subvert state power” for participating in the primary election of the Legislative Council. This has become an incredible news to the international democratic community, and has made countries have a “new experience” of the Chinese government and the so-called “one country, two systems, Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong, a high degree of autonomy, and 50 years of no change” in Hong Kong in the past. And judging from the current reactions of various countries, this round of Hong Kong issues is bound to become a new obstacle for China’s foreign relations and even for the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics.
The charge is considered “unfounded” because the allegedly “subversive” primary election is not about overthrowing the government by violence or other radical means, but about participating in the mechanism provided by the government to become a member of the Legislative Council through a legal and democratic election; as for Once they become legislators, they can support or veto government motions according to the Basic Law, which is a power given to any elected legislature and a legitimate power guaranteed by the Basic Law in black and white.
What’s more, Article 50 of the Basic Law already gives the Chief Executive the power to dissolve the Legislative Council in the event that an important motion or budget is vetoed; Article 52(3) of the Basic Law even states clearly that the Chief Executive must resign on the condition that the Legislative Council is dissolved and the re-elected Legislative Council continues to refuse to pass the original motion in dispute. –In other words, as long as the Chief Executive withdraws, suspends or amends the controversial bill, the process can basically be unraveled on its own, so why should the Chief Executive “commit suicide” in the Legislative Council? “and then” forced to resign “said?
What’s more, the initiator that Dai Yaoting launched the primary election Time is January 2020, while his article accused of “breaking the law” was published in April of the same year, as for his alleged “Hong Kong version of the National Security Law” but late at the end of June of the same year to take effect; when this law came into effect, all walks of Life When the law came into effect, the Chinese and Hong Kong governments denied that the law was seriously suppressing human rights, freedom and democracy in Hong Kong; then the primary election for the democratic camp was held on July 11 and 12, and the then Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs, Mr. Tsang Kwok-wai, although he told the media that the primary election “might” violate the National Security Law, he could not explain how the “primary election” violated the law. “However, he could not explain how the primary election violated the National Security Law.
When the police arrested the pro-democracy camp in January this year under the National Security Law, in the face of questions from the outside world, democratic elections all over the world almost allow primary elections, even the royalists themselves have primary elections, so how can they violate the law, the Security Bureau and the police changed their words, saying that “the arrested people claimed that they would veto the motion regardless of its content” is the The “biggest problem” – if this is the case, why was it not explained at the beginning? Why was there no clear warning at all when the National Security Law was passed? If the government did not know at the time that the National Security Law had been violated because of “this part”, how could the candidates know?
When a new law is passed, of course the government has the responsibility to explain clearly what it will do to break the law under the new law; if the government has explained clearly that “vetoing the motion regardless of its content” will break the law, then many of those who are charged today will explain clearly and will not “fall into the net of the law by mistake. On the one hand, the Government claims that the “Hong Kong version of the National Security Law” will not affect the human rights and freedoms of Hong Kong people, but it is clear from this case that not only is there an impact, but the vast majority of elected members are affected, and the Government also uses this opportunity to unambiguously use the “new law” to settle the case after the fact. The government is also using this case to suppress the democratic camp by using the “new law” to settle the score after the fact.
At a time when even the most moderate democrats in Hong Kong are being driven out, even if the Chinese side claims that “one country, two systems” will remain unchanged, it will no longer be able to convince the outside world; if the Chinese side really does not care about international perceptions, then there is still some justification. However, from the continuous protests of the Chinese Foreign Ministry and the calls for foreign countries to “cooperate and win-win”, we can only see a more bizarre situation, that is, China is very concerned about the international Perception, but at the same time it keeps doing something to make more enemies in the international arena; the result of this approach is definitely not to improve foreign relations, but only to push the situation to the least desired result –the new Cold War.
Recent Comments