Beijing has imposed the “National Security Law” in Hong Kong to forcibly control Hong Kong, and has asked Hong Kong civil servants to take an oath or sign a declaration that they “uphold the Basic Law and pledge allegiance to the SAR Government”. Nearly 200 civil servants were forced to leave the civil service because they refused to sign the declaration of allegiance to the HKSAR.
On March 8, the Secretary for the Civil Service, Mr. Nip Tak-kuen, said that more than 100 to 200 civil servants have not signed the declaration of allegiance to the Basic Law and the HKSAR Government, and they may have to leave the civil service. The exact number of civil servants who have not signed the declaration and the departments they belong to are not yet available. However, if civil servants refuse to sign the declaration to accept and assume basic responsibilities, they will be followed up in accordance with the mechanism and arrangements will be made for them to leave the civil service.
The number of civil servants leaving the civil service in some government departments. (Epoch Times composite photo)
Forcing civil servants to pledge allegiance in an attempt to silence their voices
Nie Dequan claimed that the civil service team should clearly know and accept that “loving the country means loving the People’s Republic of China, and the ruling organ of the People’s Republic of China is the Communist Party.”
By forcing civil servants to pledge allegiance, the authorities are said to be attempting to eliminate dissenting voices within the civil service. Some analysts believe that this is in line with Beijing’s principle of “patriots ruling Hong Kong”, which keeps Hong Kong firmly in the palm of its hand to avoid any opposition to the central government.
According to the Civil Service Bureau, there are currently more than 177,000 civil servants in Hong Kong, not including judges and judicial officers, Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) officers and locally employed staff in Hong Kong’s economic and trade offices abroad.
From June 2019, an anti-Send-China movement erupted in Hong Kong, with many civil servants participating in marches and rallies, and civil servants’ anti-Send-China rallies were also organized. in late June 2020, Beijing forced the implementation of national security laws in Hong Kong, suppressing Hong Kong’s pro-democracy camp and liquidating those who played a major role in the protests.
At the end of 2020, the Hong Kong government began requiring civil servants to sign a declaration that they “uphold the Basic Law, pledge allegiance to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and be loyal and responsible to the Hong Kong government. Civil servants appointed to senior positions will also be required to take an oath.
In an interview, Mr. Nip said that it was a requirement for new civil servants to take an oath or sign a declaration, and that if they refused to do so, they would not be allowed to join. He also said that most colleagues have signed and clearly and accept the responsibilities involved, and if someone can not accept, they will leave the government, which is their own choice, which is not a bad thing for the civil service team. Senior civil servants need to take on greater responsibility, so it is even more important to accurately understand and implement the “one country, two systems” approach.
Some analysts believe that the Chinese Communist Party has skipped the executive and legislative branches of Hong Kong and implemented the national security law in Hong Kong, signaling that Beijing can bypass Hong Kong and enact Hong Kong laws according to political needs.
In addition, the Communist Party’s revision of Hong Kong’s electoral system to ensure that “patriots rule Hong Kong” has shocked the international community. The European Union and the United States have issued statements condemning the CCP for breaking its promises to Hong Kong people and the international community. It is likely that the West will impose further sanctions on Beijing and Hong Kong after the Communist Party’s National People’s Congress adopts the relevant resolutions.
Some of the resigned public officials. (Composite photo by The Epoch Times)
Refusing to sign an administrative letter to leave their jobs because they exceeded the bottom line of their values
A Xin (a pseudonym), who works in the media and whose husband is a senior contract engineer for a government project, said that at the end of his contract, Mr. Xin did not intend to renew his contract with the government because he was worried that his wife, who works in the media, might accidentally break the national security law and her future would be in jeopardy, and that the future of his children in Hong Kong was uncertain and unfavorable to their growth. The environment is unfamiliar, many things are unknown, but in any case is better than in Hong Kong to face brainwashing Education.”
Another Nicole (pseudonym), who works in a government department, said in an interview with this reporter that many people did not want to sign the “allegiance agreement” in the face of the executive branch, and revealed privately. After a colleague refused to sign, he received a letter from the executive branch, asking him to explain why he did not sign, making it clear that if he insisted on not signing, an investigation mechanism would be launched and a disciplinary hearing might be initiated.
“People have been afraid to take a stand in public, because there has long been no such space. Only a small number of blue silk in the department dare to express political views …… Since last year, it has been rumored that the government is internally reviewing the social media statements of civil servants and intends to dispose of the yellow silk civil servants.” To avoid being investigated, Nicole hastily signed the document.
Nicole refers to a colleague working in the same department, who also delayed signing the document until the last minute, “She has decided to emigrate to Australia or the UK.”
“Since last year, many more colleagues have left, retired, emigrated, for various reasons.” Nicole has seen many more departures from the bulletin board than in previous years.
Nicole says she is sure she wants to emigrate, mainly for the sake of her children’s future. No immediate action because to take care of their Parents, “In fact, even today we do not have children, Hong Kong has been completely changed, now Hong Kong is a big prison, in this case, anything ridiculous will happen.” “Our generation is educated to accept this kind of practice without a bottom line.”
Nicole said there is still a group of more neutral supervisors in the civil service, “but after they retire, the government is expected to review the background and remarks of the new supervisor before she is allowed to take up her post.”
She mentioned the earlier criticism of the deputy director of the FEHD by the Chinese Communist Party’s mouthpiece, which led some civil servants to act more and more leftist and lose their professional judgment in order to gain a firm foothold.
“Now not only these people, this left-leaning phenomenon is getting more and more serious in the whole government department, as if the high speed rail that single, ‘Ah Master’ speaks whatever he wants. There is no mastery, automatic dedication. There was no such phenomenon before.”
The oath of office is not the same as peace, and the Chinese Communist Party has set off a Cultural Revolution-style struggle within the Hong Kong government.
(Epoch Times, Hong Kong) The oath of allegiance is by no means the end of the matter, and it is not the same as being able to go to work without worry.
Those who have a conscience in mind, choose to withdraw or stay, is also an extremely difficult decision. Many Hong Kong people have joined government departments because they really want to do something for Hong Kong, to contribute something, but now they can no longer contribute to this homeland because “different paths do not work together”.
Those who stay behind face the evil persecution of the Chinese Communist Party every day, and it is not easy to live under the sniping of “Ta Kung Pao” and “Wen Hui” one after another. Dagong” and “Wenhui” only have politics in their eyes, they only follow the party, they can’t talk about patriotism at all, the least patriotic is the CCP, it is only interested in the regime.
After the Director of Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office Xia Baolong reiterated the so-called “patriots ruling Hong Kong” on February 22, Ta Kung and Wen Hui immediately dug up the Permanent Secretary for Food and health Liu Liqun to bombard her, fearing that it would be too late to claim credit, “accusing” her of not doing her best in 2019 when she served as the Director of Food and Environmental Hygiene. The Food and Environmental Hygiene Department is not fully committed to demolishing the Lennon wall, so that anyone (including blue silk) in the future may violate the national security law for something they “did not do”.
There is no Lennon Wall on the mainland, but has the regime stopped there? Of course not, it will continue to find the next target inside and outside the party, using political persecution as a tool to maintain stability.
In early March, the official media used Liu Yan’s “51” mask as a hype, saying she was only “independent”. The official media in early March used the “51” mask as a hype, saying that she was the only one who was “unique”, and that no matter whether Yan Liu was yellow or blue, she would be trapped if she wore the mask that was engraved with the suspected “51” but was actually the trademark “SW”. The brand company that produced the mask, Savewo Salvation, denounced the criticism as “unfounded”, and the official media that jumped to criticize it was, of course, Wenhui again.
The tree wants to be quiet, but the wind does not stop, “Da Gong” and “Wen Hui” again joined forces to bombard officials within the system, and approached the door of the Administrative Officer system (AO).
The AO controversy is directed at the Secretary for the Civil Service, Mr. Nip Tak-kuen, and the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Mr. Edward Yau. The “Leung Fan” Fung Wai-kwong even posted an article describing the “AO Party” as the largest “anti-China” political party in Hong Kong with evil intentions, and even implied that AO-born Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor had the intention of “not finding trouble with her own people. Even the AO drafted the first draft of the response to the Legislative Council question in English, are considered to have hidden ulterior motives, that the mainland will simply not export and sell goods to Europe and the United States, because this will provide the West with a “convenience of Life” and step on the red line.
The company is not willing to be complicit with the Chinese Communist Party, no matter where they are, where they are, remember to stay in a bright and high wind.
Recent Comments