The Civil Human Rights Front (CHRF), which has been established for nearly 20 years, received a document from the police on Monday, questioning its suspected violation of the Societies Ordinance and requesting it to hand over six items of information, including its “sources of income” since its establishment on or before Wednesday.
On Tuesday, the convenor of PFDJ, Chan Ho-hwan, met with the media and said that the police and many government departments have been cooperating with PFDJ for many years and have never asked PFDJ to apply for registration as a society. Some university students said that they felt sorry and regretful if the FDF was banned by the authorities, and the academia would also think about how to transform the protest movement.
Founded in September 2002, the Civil Human Rights Front (FHRF), which has been in existence for nearly 20 years, is the largest united platform for democrats in Hong Kong, with almost all political parties and organizations of the democratic camp participating in it.
Police questioned the FDF’s violation of the Societies Ordinance requiring the submission of information
Since 2003, the FDF has repeatedly launched the 7-1 march on the anniversary of the handover of Hong Kong’s sovereignty, and in 2019, it has also repeatedly launched a million-person anti-sending rally.
On Monday (April 26), PFDJ revealed to the media that the convener, Chan Ho-hwan, had received a letter from the police’s director of community affairs, questioning PFDJ’s alleged violation of the Societies Ordinance, and requesting it to provide six items of information on or before Wednesday (May 5), including the time and place of the march held from September 2006 to the present, as well as PFDJ’s “establishment since “The source of income, expenses and the bank account number used to receive any funds or money.
PFDJ stated that it would not respond to the police’s questions one by one
On Tuesday (May 4), on the eve of the “dead line” for the police to provide information, DFL convenor Chan Ho-hwan met with the media outside the Wanchai District Court and said that the police only gave him 9 days to find all the information about DFL in the past 15 years, and he found it difficult to respond to the police’s questions within the deadline.
Chan Ho-hwan stressed that according to Article 27 of the Basic Law, Hong Kong residents enjoy the freedom of association, and the PFDJ does not agree with the Societies Ordinance introduced by the Provisional Legislative Council back then, not to mention that the PFDJ is an illegal association, therefore, the PFDJ will not respond to the police Registrar of Societies’ questions one by one.
Chen Haohuan said: “We have to look at the Societies Ordinance, the police cited the Societies Ordinance, as long as you submit information is not complete, incorrect, or false, you are in violation of the relevant legislation, of course, do not respond is also in violation of the law, and what we see is that it is difficult to give a complete response to the police, or the Registrar of Societies, the reason The second thing is, according to the freedom of association, this our principle, that is, we do not think we are an illegal association, I do not agree with its (police) questioning, so we do not pay attention to the Registrar of Societies, asking us to hand in information. “
Chen Haohuan said that even if the information about the payment of taxes, is to stay 7 to 8 years, he questioned how to stay to 15 years ago records, he also stressed that no matter whether the Civil Front has the relevant information, will not be given to the police.
Chen Haohuan was surprised by the police’s questioning of PFDJ’s violation of the Societies Ordinance, and stated that he would not respond to the police’s questions one by one. (Voice of America / Tang Hui Yun)
I really think this is a very difficult thing to do. The second thing is that even if there is, there is no good, we are not going to hand over (to the police), this is our principle to come.”
PFDJ questioned why the authorities have been cooperating with illegal organizations for a long time
Chen Haohuan said that the Civil Front was established in 2002 to date, is a communication platform for political parties, religious, trade unions, gay organizations in Hong Kong, through the organization of activities to promote the realization of democracy and fair society in Hong Kong. 19 years, the Civil Front adhere to the principles of lawful, peaceful, rational and non-violent many times a year to the police for a notice of no objection, and with the police and many government departments to meet and communicate, hold marches and rallies, so that the public The government has also met and communicated with the police and many government departments to hold marches and rallies to give voice to the public.
He also said that over the past years, the police and other government departments have been cooperating with the FDD and have never asked the FDD to apply for registration as an association, nor have they ever warned or questioned the FDD as an illegal organization, and the FDD has even been publicly praised by the police.
The police representatives even praised the PFDJ as ‘a big brand’ in the hearing of the Appeal Board on Public Meetings and Processions, and that it had ‘cooperated well’ with the police in processions and rallies. This was confirmed in a recent court case, namely the 8-18 case, by a Chief Inspector during his testimony in court. In 2013, after the July 1 demonstration, the then Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying even called the pro-democracy camp a friend. If the pro-democracy camp is an illegal association, why have the police and many government departments been cooperating with the pro-democracy camp? Why did the Vice Chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), Mr. Leung Chun-ying, call the ‘illegal association’ a friend in his capacity as the Chief Executive?”
It is hard to imagine the impact on the society if the FSD is banned
As to whether he is worried about the prohibition of the pro-democracy camp by the police, Chan Ho-hwan said it is the choice of the regime and he can hardly imagine the impact on Hong Kong society if the peaceful and non-violent pro-democracy camp is banned.
What I can’t imagine is the impact on society in the future when you destroy the freedom of association and prevent Hong Kong organizations or groups from establishing a platform, our freedom of speech, freedom of the press, or even the freedom to hold demonstrations and rallies will be slowly lost, I hope I hope the government can respect the basic freedom of Hong Kong people, including the freedom of association, not to destroy our most basic, the most basic rights, otherwise it will only lead to a greater backlash, otherwise it will only make us other freedoms will be lost.”
Chen Hao-huan said that he is the only one in the DFL secretariat, he said that all the political parties or groups that want to withdraw from the DFL have already withdrawn, he will insist to go on with other political parties and groups that have not withdrawn.
Chen Haohuan said, “I alone will certainly continue to go on, because I have said last time, regardless of the prohibition of the (Democratic Front), regardless of anything, I want to adhere to the principle of freedom of association, I want to adhere to the bottom line of the Democratic Front, so in fact, I am not alone, I have a lot of groups will be with me, including the public out of the staff league, the Labour Party, the Alliance, the League of Social Democrats We will not easily give up the basic human rights and freedom in Hong Kong.”
Whether to hold a 7-1 march before paying attention to the June 4 memorial
When asked by the reporter whether the pro-democracy camp will hold the July 1 march this year, Chan Ho-hwan responded that he should pay attention to the June 4 candlelight rally before the July 1 march, and called on all sectors to pay attention to the June 4 memorial activities first.
He also said that the future direction of the FDD is the same as that of Hong Kong people, and he believes that the future of Hong Kong people also needs to be considered by Beijing and the Hong Kong government.
When we are not able to hold marches, demonstrations and rallies, how can Hong Kong people go on? When the Democratic Front is banned, how can Hong Kong people go on? I hope that this is a question that we all think about together, and I hope that the SAR Government and the Central Government (in Beijing) will think about it together, that is, how can Hong Kong go on?
Students’ Union says it is regrettable and pity if the FSD is banned
The Secretary of the Student Union Council of Hong Kong Baptist University, Mr. Katherine Wu, said in an interview with the Voice of America that he regretted and regretted if the pro-democracy movement was banned by the authorities, because the pro-democracy movement has a long history and has witnessed the progress of the democratic movement in Hong Kong, but he believed that civil society must have “successors” to continue to build the democratic process in Hong Kong.
It would be a great pity if the pro-democracy movement is banned, because it has a long history of witnessing and building the democratic movement in Hong Kong. However, even though we may think that student groups or spontaneous organizations seem to be very ‘weak’ and have little power to fight against the current regime, we think we can’t worry so much and should continue to do what we think is right. I believe that even if we are called sacrificed, there will always be a ‘successor’ to this civil society, and there will be new blood to take up our efforts and keep building the democratic process.”
The academic community to organize “open station division” to overcome fear through action
Hu Kairen frankly said that after the implementation of the “Hong Kong National Security Law”, the academic freedom and institutional autonomy of Hong Kong’s tertiary institutions have been greatly affected, and even students running for student government will be threatened by personal safety, but Hu Kairen stressed that the academic sector will also think about how to transform the protest movement, many tertiary institutions have taken the initiative to organize “open station division The “Open Station Division”, with street stations all over Hong Kong, distributes leaflets against the satirical regime, avoiding the red line of the National Security Law, continuing the concept of the protest movement, and overcoming fear through action.
He also believes that civil society will have “a successor” to continue to build the democratic process in Hong Kong (Voice of America/Tong Wai Wan)
Keren said: “The so-called ‘open station division’ is some spontaneous people come out together to open the street station, our way is that we (handed out) the leaflet, is just we said, citing some data to state some objective facts out, and not to directly attack the regime, or even sing a counter-key, that is to say, ‘the National Security Law’. But because I think this era has experienced 19 years, 20 years of social movement, in fact, to understand some political ideas, to understand a long time ago already understood, do not need to be so bluntly expressed, that is, the people who received the leaflet will understand what we are doing now, that is, at least can make him understand what we are doing. That is, at least the minimum can let him understand that this civil society inside there are still people willing to stand up in these matters, continue to do the right thing, the most want to tell everyone is that through action to overcome fear, at this moment.”
Students call on Hong Kong people to think together about the future direction of resistance
The former spokesperson of the student organization Sage Civic and a member of the “Lion’s Oath” who ran for the Baptist University Student Union this year, Chu Wai-ying, said in an interview with the Voice of America that she felt sorry if the FSD was banned because it had been involved in important actions of the social movement in Hong Kong in the past, and its support for the protesters was also very important. She believes that Hong Kong people should think about the future direction of the struggle under the red line of the National Security Law.
Chu Wai-ying said, “Because of the history of the FSD for so many years, and every time there is a social movement or a protest in Hong Kong, we can see a lot of traces of the FSD. I believe the space that we can achieve is getting narrower and narrower, so how do we continue to do it when the red line of the National Security Law is wavering but tightening? I believe this is a question that we in the social movement or the school movement have to think about.”
Zhu Huiying said that Hong Kong people should think together about the future direction of resistance under the red line of the National Security Law (Voice of America/Tang Hui Yun)
Singapore newspapers cite news that the Democratic Front may be banned
At the end of June last year, Beijing directly implemented the National Security Law in Hong Kong through Annex III of the Basic Law, and a number of local and self-determination organizations, including the Hong Kong Alliance for Democracy and People’s Livelihood, the Hong Kong National Front and the Student Movement, announced their dissolution.
Singapore’s United Morning Post quoted unnamed sources as saying on March 5 this year that the FSD had received funding from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to organize anti-China activities, and that the Hong Kong authorities were investigating. The report also quotes unnamed sources.
The report also quoted unnamed sources as saying that the FDD has not registered as an association with the Hong Kong government and may have violated the Societies Ordinance. The report also quoted unnamed sources as saying that PFDJ has not registered with the government and may have violated the Societies Ordinance.
When the news of the possible banning of the FSD came out, the largest political parties of the democratic camp, including the Democratic Party, the Civic Party, the New Alliance, the Neighborhood and Worker’s Alliance and the largest teachers’ union in Hong Kong, announced their withdrawal from the FSD.
Recent Comments