During last year’s anti-sentinel campaign, some civil servants organized labor unions and rallies to oppose the amendment of the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance. The Hong Kong Civil Service Bureau recently announced that all civil servants joining the civil service on or after July 1 this year will be required to take an oath or make a declaration to uphold the Basic Law and pledge allegiance to the Hong Kong SAR Government.
A number of pro-democracy legislators and representatives of civic organizations recently issued a joint civil society statement opposing the oath of allegiance imposed on civil servants, criticizing the government of Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor for pandering to Beijing, turning the “Hong Kong version of the National Security Law” into a “knife” over the heads of nearly 200,000 civil servants, and even attempting to introduce a Chinese style “cadre culture” in which civil servants can only blindly obey the instructions of their superiors and worrying about the “slavery” of civil servants.
In response to last year’s anti-submission campaign, some civil servants organized new unions and repeatedly initiated or participated in anti-submission rallies, the Secretary for the Civil Service, Mr. Nip Teck Kuen, said in a recent media interview that the Hong Kong government is studying the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law, which requires civil servants to take an oath to uphold the Basic Law and pledge allegiance to the Hong Kong SAR government, and not to “confront” the government.
Hong Kong Government Requires Civil Servants to Take Oath on or After 7-1
He stressed that violating the oath is a serious matter, and that it extends to not supporting “one country, two systems”, not recognizing Hong Kong as part of China, and having the intention of overthrowing the current government, implying that a civil servant who violates the oath may not only be dismissed, but may also be charged with violating the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law.
The Hong Kong Civil Service Bureau recently announced that all civil servants joining the civil service on or after July 1 this year must take an oath or make a declaration to uphold the Basic Law and pledge allegiance to the Hong Kong SAR Government.
The pro-democracy camp issued a statement against forcing civil servants to take an oath of allegiance.
The government’s decision to force civil servants to take an oath of allegiance to the United States has been criticized as creating white terror.
Mao Meng Jing civil servant head a knife to strengthen the white terror
The government’s decision to make the decision is to require all civil servants to pledge allegiance to power, which she described as a boss taking the liberty of unilaterally modifying the terms of the employment contract.
She believes that this approach is strengthening white terror and fears that it will affect the editorial independence of the public broadcaster, Radio Television Hong Kong.
We are more worried about some government departments, especially Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK), which is full of civil servants, whether they will be obedient and absolutely obedient to the power above them, so what kind of editorial independence is there? Frankly, because this government is now doing what it thinks it has to do, because there were once civil servants who were ‘flying the right flag’, not only for rallies, but also for public statements and so on, they (the government) feel that it is really ‘no big deal’, ‘no big deal’, and ‘no big deal’, they must ban such Hong Kong civil servants! This is the performance of a civilized society.”
Mao also criticized the government of Chief Executive Carrie Lam for pandering to Beijing and turning the “Hong Kong version of the National Security Law” into a “knife” over the heads of nearly 200,000 civil servants.
Mao said: “It is this suppression of civil servants, by Nip Tak-kuen on behalf of the entire government of Lin Zheng, not only is it perceived that he is trying to guess the upper hand, want to ‘shoe shine’, ‘flattery’, ‘curry favor’, ‘friendship’ and so on, he This is a knife in the head of nearly 200,000 of our public servants, and it is very outrageous.”
Statement alleges violation of civil servants’ freedom of speech and expression
“He said that in recent weeks, the Hong Kong government has been “making a lot of moves” to deal with the dissatisfaction of various sectors with its governance, and has exhausted all means to eliminate dissidents, such as dismissing teachers, filing complaints against judges, and redefining the term “media representatives,” etc. He believes that this time, Nip Teck Kuen has abused the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law to control civil servants, and even discussing dissatisfaction with the government in private is not allowed, which is a violation of civil servants’ freedom of speech and expression.
O’Zannian said, “When we looked up the comments made by Nip during the interview, we found that even the discussion of dissatisfaction with the government in private chat and social media may cause problems. What he said was: ‘No matter if it’s in social media or instant messaging, what we (the Hong Kong government) thought we were saying in private, there is a chance that it will be made public. The most important thing is still ‘whether it touches the requirement of support and allegiance’. This sentence is obviously creating a sense of white terror, depriving civil servants of the freedom to express their opinions, and threatening them with a job is actually a totalitarian act, in the whole world.
Turning Civil Servants into Answering Worms and “Slavery”
Ou Zannian said that since the implementation of the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law for more than three months, there have been many controversies that violate human rights and freedoms, and in terms of anti-epidemic measures, the Hong Kong government introduced testing companies from mainland China and the construction of temporary hospitals without bidding; the police and the Information Services Department of the Government define who is the media and who has the right to interview; restrict the academic and freedom of speech of teachers and students for political reasons, and even revoke teachers’ licenses; in terms of the electoral system, the intention to introduce remote voting in the elections in Hong Kong and allow voting in the Greater Bay Area, etc., all of which have a serious impact on the system, society, people’s livelihood, freedom, human rights and the rule of law in Hong Kong.
Ouzhanian said that it is normal for Hong Kong people to have the right to express their views and oppose individual policies. As a member of Hong Kong people, civil servants can also express their views and participate in rallies and marches. He is worried that the introduction of the oath of allegiance by the Hong Kong government will turn civil servants into responding insects and “slaves”.
Ou Zannian said, “The Pledge of Allegiance has become a disguised ‘disobedience is against the law’, which means that it is against the law for us to disagree with anything, and it is also against the law to express our views, which will turn civil servants into ‘slaves’ who support the SAR government regardless of right and wrong. Happy to do so.”
O’Zannian read out a statement demanding that the Hong Kong government withdraw its decision to force civil servants to take the oath of allegiance and stop trampling on the freedom and right of public officials to express their own opinions. The statement argued that a Hong Kong government that does not allow dissenting views will only lead to poorer governance, and that single-mindedness will only deepen public discontent.
District Councilors Criticize Introduction of Chinese “Cadre Culture”
He said the Home Affairs Department’s staff is making things difficult for the district council members because they are guessing the government’s intentions. He is worried that the government has set a red line for civil servants to take the oath, and even tried to introduce a Chinese “cadre culture” so that civil servants can only blindly obey instructions from their superiors.
The civil servant’s oath is another clear indication that civil servants in Hong Kong have to ‘follow the Party’s words, obey the Party, and walk with the Party’ when performing their official duties,” Pan said. However, with the Communist Party and the political manipulation of the Lam Cheng regime, they have entered the civil service system far and wide, making it impossible for them to operate in an efficient, predictable civil service system and a predictable bureaucratic system. It is very obvious that it is impossible to predict what they (the regime) are going to do and what kind of governance logic they are going to follow.
Liang Guoxiong said civil servants should not be required to take an oath.
In response to a reporter’s question, former legislator Liang Guoxiong said that civil servants should not be required to take an oath, and he used the example of civil servants in the United States, from the federal government to state governments, will not be dismissed for opposing President Trump. The government now requires civil servants to sign an oath, and any civil servant who expresses opposition to the government’s policies will be considered unwilling to pledge allegiance, which he considers a violation of civil servants’ freedom of speech and expression.
The government is now asking civil servants to sign an affidavit, and any civil servant who expresses opposition to the government’s policies will be considered as disloyal, he said. In the anti-sending regulations, some civil servants openly came out in support of the anti-sending campaign, and some launched a trade union movement to use strikes to support it, but now this is all gone, so I said that all the rights in Article 27 of the Basic Law, including speech, strikes, demonstrations, marches, all gone, this is the whole problem, in fact, this is very clear Nie Dequan, you (civil servants) are not allowed to openly oppose the government. Trump may not be president in December, but Carrie Lam and the Communist Party will always rule Hong Kong, and this is the clear truth.”
Mao Mengjing said the civil service system worked well during the British-Hong Kong era.
She said that the civil service system in Hong Kong during the British colonial era did not have to take the oath of allegiance to the Queen of England, and she believes that the civil service system during the British Hong Kong era has been working well, and that Mrs. Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor’s government wants to change it just to comply with the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law.
She said: “The biggest difference that we should pay attention to is the civil service system that has been inherited from the British colonial period. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, right’, and the government has always emphasized that many things have worked well, obviously things that have worked well, why do you suddenly want to touch it? The largest group they can move to is called civil servants.”
District councillors say Lam Cheng is completely mainlandizing Hong Kong.
He believes that the Hong Kong government is increasingly operating in line with China, introducing a culture of oath of allegiance and further turning Hong Kong’s civil servants into Chinese officials or cadres, completely loyal to the regime.
Liu Zhixiong said: “To go and become a lackey, completely obedient, like the mainland, to obey the party, to obey the regime, but not to have their own independent thinking, politically must follow the line of the regime, so that is to turn Hong Kong into the mainland.”
The newest member of the team, Mrs. Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, is a former member of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Liu Zhixiong said: “They (Hong Kong government officials) went to Shenzhen to listen to Xi Jinping’s speech, and all of them had to ‘pretend’ to copy notes, and they didn’t even need notebooks anymore. This culture of allegiance she (Mrs. Lam) is going to push in Hong Kong, first of all in the civil service team to push, in short, to push civil servants are not allowed to have independent thinking, the political top must follow the government closely, in fact, is to turn Hong Kong completely into mainland China.”
Hong Kong government denies undermining civil servants’ freedom of speech
However, the spokesperson said that freedom of speech is not absolute and reiterated that civil servants must adhere to “political neutrality” and express their opinions in a way that does not “give the impression” that they are undermining the important principles of impartiality and political neutrality of civil servants.
Civil Service Unions Concerned About Illegal Opposition to Pay Freezes
The Civil Service Bureau (CSB) has hastily issued a circular announcing that civil servants who join the service on or after July 1 this year will be required to take an oath or sign a declaration stating that they uphold the Basic Law, pledge allegiance to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), and are responsible to the HKSAR Government, and that they will be required to take an oath if they hold senior positions such as department heads.
A preview of the circular was only sent to the staff side of the senate on Oct. 5, and the staff side had to submit its comments on Oct. 8.
She questioned whether the staff side’s opinion had been taken into consideration, as she thought the civil servants had doubts and concerns. She said that most civil servants do not violate the Basic Law and the Civil Service Code intentionally, but only a small number of them do. She also said that an earlier survey conducted by the Federation of Civil Service Unions (FCSU) showed that the vast majority of civil servants want a clear and transparent disciplinary mechanism for them to follow.
Leung Chou-ting, Director General of the Civil Service Employees’ Federation, said that the document on the Pledge of Allegiance issued by the Civil Service Bureau is too simple, and he worries that because the document is so simple, the rules and regulations are vague, making it easy for civil servants to fall into the trap of the law. For example, if civil servants protest against the government’s pay freeze in the future, he asked the government to clarify whether this constitutes a violation of government policy or even a violation of the law.
Recent Comments