Joshua Wong: Speaking Notes for the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the House of Commons of Canada

Joshua Wong: Speaking Notes for the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the House of Commons of Canada

Honourable Chair and honourable members of the Standing Committee,

I am Joshua Wong, Convenor of Scholarism, a 18-year-old University Student now. Thanks for the Canadian Parliament’s invitation, giving me the opportunity to be one of the Hong Kong representatives to share here.

Today, from a student’s perspective, I hope that I can share my experience and exposure in these social movements since my age of 14, illustrating how the Central Government of China oppress the future of the next generation in the aspects of political systems and education. I hope my sharing will help to enhance the international concern about Hong Kong’s democratic progress.

On July 1st 2003, there were 500 thousand Hong Kong people walking out on the street to protest against the Article 23 of Basic Law which oppressed freedom of speech. In addition, the People also strive for the realization of the Universal Suffrage. The huge participation in that incident did not only cause the stepping down of Tung Chee Hwa who was then the Chief Executive, but also the withdraw of Article 23 on Basic Law.

Since then, we can observe that the Central Government began to have a strong feel about a need to strengthen the Hong Kong people’s identity recognition to China or the Chinese Communist Party. As a result, focusing at the identity issue of the young people and students, in 2011, the Education Department announced that all Primary and Secondary schools in Hong Kong must launch the subject of National Education in their curriculum.

In that National Education subject, there were quite many parts emphasizing the student’s need to establish the obedience as well as the pride towards the Chinese Communist Government, with the standards such as students were expected to feel touched with tears in front of the National Flag during the ceremony. That means, the National Education subject was in fact more than education subject, but a brain washing tool!

If the nature of the Education was to develop the young people’s independent thinking capability, this National Education subject definitely violated this education principle. It illustrated that the Central Government just viewed Hong Kong as a ruled obedient, without any respect towards the youth and students’ right to attain a proper citizenship, including the right to criticize the government.

Since then, I had a strong awareness that not only political parties and teacher’s unions protest against the National Education Subject, therefore, 4 years ago, at the age of 14, I established a student organization, Scholarism, gathering a few hundreds secondary students who supported the core values of democracy and freedom. We walked onto the street, protesting, promoting our values and expressing our requests, gaining a lot of supports from the Hong Kong People in a very short time.

Later, with the exposure of the Government’ brain-washing education material to the public, called “The China Mode”, which described the Chinese Communist Party as an “advanced, selfless and united ruling organization”. With that exposure, the whole city’s protest temperature against the National Education was raised rapidly. With the hungers strike of students and 120 thousands people’s occupation at the Central Government Office, the Government was forced to put a side the National Education Subject. At that time, I was only 15.

Previously, people thought that political movement can only be lead by political parties and worker’s unions. No one could imagine that secondary school students could plan a social movement. After the success of the Anti-National-Education Movement, more people showed their concerns and give support about the social actions from the student organizations.

Many people began to discover that it was the students’ energy, persistence, determination and courage which had enabled them to stand upon the stage of History for a more equal political system. This was why after the Anti-National-Education Movement, Scholarism continued to strive for the Universal Suffrage.

Last year, there were various joint activities with Federation of Student, expressing our dissatisfaction against the 31,August decision, including student strike jointed by more than one thousand students and ten thousand university students and the Septermber 26’s action of re-entering of Civil Plaza which triggered the Umbrella Movement.

In the nearly 80 days’ Umbrella movement, there is not yet any achievement, regardless of the participation of 200 thousand Hong Kong People. But through my experience in the participation of social movement, I want to tell every honorable congressman here and all the Chinese in Canada, after going though the days from Anti-National-Education Movement and the days of the Umbrella Movement, the lives of students in Hong Kong is no longer the same.

The generation of extensive political awareness has already begun. This is the reason why I still have hope even though there is none of achievement from the Umbrella Movement, even though those pro-China people are continuously oppress academic freedom, even though there are continuous political legal prosecutions against the protesters.

All the honorable congressman here, you may think that in a democratic country, maybe politics should be the professional participations of political parties and politicians. Social movement in the street should only be organized by a minority group of idealistic university students. But from 4 years ago till now, the age of social movement participants are declining in Hong Kong.

The phenomenon in the Umbrella Movement is that: Some 13-year-old children would participate in student strike on the street, and some 14 year-old girls would stand firm against tear gas equipped with googles and masks , while some other 15 year-old students would be arrested due to civil disobedience. Junior Form student become activist.

I understand that there are many calculations related to international politics, every day you may attend to this kind of hearings as routine and perhaps there won’t be much impact on your next election no matter you care about issues in Hong Kong or not.

But please think in different position, the children participating in the Umbrella Movement, actually are similar in age with your sons and daughters in your houses.

Maybe you have difficulty in understand why these students, living in an international financial centre, would rather risk their future to push the social reform, regardless of the risk of being blacklisted from entry into China or leaving offense record which may affect their career.

Although the young people understand that the participation of social movement may affect their future career, yet when they also discover that they can’t see any future in the current system, changing the current social system should be the only way out!

I hope that Canada Congress can continue to concern about Hong Kong’s situation, and exert the influence and pressure to the China Government since maintaining international oversight and engagement is an effective way for supporting democratic freedoms and human rights in Hong Kong.

This is the end of my sharing.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/posts/834264353332741

———————————————

我是學民思潮召集人黃之鋒,現時是一個十八歲的大學一年級生,在此感謝加拿大國會的邀請,讓我能夠成為其中一個香港代表,有機會在此與各位國會議員作出分享,過往因著參與反國教運動和雨傘運動,促使我成為一個學生運動領袖,盼望今天能夠以學生角度,向大家分享我從14歲參與社會運動至今的所見所聞,述說中央政府怎樣在政制和教育層面壓制香港下一代的未來,盼望增加國際間對香港民主進程的關注。

自從2003年7月1日50萬名香港人走上街頭,反對壓制言論自由的《基本法》23條立法,並要求落實普選,促使當時的特首董建華下台,以及《基本法》23條無限期擱置,引致中史政府一直認為香港必須加強港人對中國的身份認同,特別針對是年輕人和學生人心未回歸的身分認同問題,結果促使教育局在2011年宣佈翌年必須在全港中小學推行國民教育科,固然香港現時作為中國的一部份,推行國民教育在本質上不是問題,但當課程內容多番強調學生必須建立對中共政權的順服和自豪感,甚至誇張得表示學生看到國旗流淚才是符合標淮,只反映這個科目不單是國民教育,更是洗腦國民教育。若然教育的本質應是培訓年輕人擁有獨立思考,但國民教育科卻是違反原意,政府這種強行灌輸愛黨情懷的做法,可見政權只視香港為被統治順民,從不尊重學生和年輕人擁有公民意識和權利去批判政府。

從那個時後開始,我深信不只是政黨和教師工會方可以反對洗腦國民教育科,便在四年前創立學生組織學民思潮,與數百個支持民主、自由等核心價值的中學生走上街頭,透過遊行、示威和街頭宣傳表達訴求並爭取市民支持,最後因著政府的《中國模式》洗腦教材曝光,描述中國共產黨是「進步、無私和團結的執政集團」引致全城反對聲音越演越烈,終學民思潮的中學生絕食以及12萬人佔領政府總部的情況下,迫使政府擱置國民教育科,而那個時候的黃之鋒只有15歲。

過往港人認為政治運動只能夠由政黨和工會帶領,無人想象高中生也有能力策劃社會運動,學生在媒體曝光策劃行動完全是難以想象,但自從反國教運動成功以後,便有更多人關注學生組織的動向,發現學生的年輕、堅持、決心和勇氣也同樣能夠讓他們站在歷史的舞台上,為著香港未來爭取更平等的政制而發聲,這也促使了學民思潮在反國教後繼續爭取普選,並在2014年與學聯一起組織各種行動表達對「人大八三一」決定的不滿,包括是過千名中學生和以萬計的大學生罷課,以及9月26日的重奪公民廣場行動促使雨傘運動的出現。

在雨傘運動近八十天的佔領裡,即使有著二十萬港人參與其中,也尚未能爭取甚麼成果,但我想透過我參與社會運動的歷程,告訴各位加拿大的國會議員以及華人,從反國教走到雨傘運動,香港的學界以已經活得不再一樣,全面政治化的年代已經開始,這也是在運動未能取得成果後,縱使親中人士打斷打壓學術自由,透過政治檢控打壓抗爭者,我還抱有盼望的主要原因。

各位身處民主國家的國會議員們,在民主化的國家,政治也許是政黨和政客們的專利,即使是街頭運動也只是由部份抱著理想主義的大學生策動,但從2011年走到2015年,香港參與社運的年齡不斷下調,雨傘運動呈現的狀況是13歲剛升上中學的孩子便會參與街頭罷課、14歲的小女孩帶著眼罩、口罩及安全帽抵禦催淚彈,以及15歲學生參與公民抗命繼而被捕。

即使我明白國際政治充滿著數之不盡的利益和計算,每天參與這些聽證會也只是你們的例行公事,可能關注香港事務與否跟你們的選票也沒有太大影響,但請你們切身處地思考一下,在香港曾參與雨傘運動的孩子,其實和你們家中兒女年紀也差不多,也許你們不太明白這群居於國際金融中心、經濟發達城市裡的學生,為何不惜被列入黑名單不能前往中國大陸、留有案底難以找到工作,也要奉上自已的前途去促成社會改革,但當中共政權從承諾2007年落實普選,待至2017年也只是給一個假普選香港人,只因即使年輕人能明白自已參與社會運動會影響前途,但當年輕人根本見不到這個社會體制給予他們甚麼前途,改革這個社會體制便是唯一的出路,盼望你們能夠繼續關注香港的狀況,透過製造國際輿論向中央政府斯壓。

Audrey Eu: Speaking Notes for the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the House of Commons of Canada

Audrey Eu: Speaking Notes for the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development Of the House of Commons of Canada

Audrey Eu: Speaking Notes for the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the House of Commons of Canada

The continued prosperity and stability of Hong Kong as one of Asia’s international city under the “One Country Two Systems” concept with a genuine respect for the Hong Kong systems and core values, such as freedom of the press, rule of law, clean and efficient government is beneficial to the whole world including Canada. However this is currently under threat with the lack of progress towards genuine constitutional reform and universal suffrage.

For many years, Hong Kong has been waiting for universal suffrage. It was promised for 2007 and 2008, ten years after the handover from Britain to China. This was denied by the decision of the National Peoples’ Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) in 2004. We waited for 2012. This was again denied by the NPCSC decision of 2007 which promised universal suffrage of the CE in 2017.

When the government first began the consultation for the method of CE election in 2017, the paper was headed “let’s talk”. So Hong Kong people talked about the methods we would like. Yet our hopes were dashed by the Decision of the National Peoples’ Congress Standing Committee made on 31 August 2014 (the 8-31 Decision). It came up with a method that no Hong Konger, not even the most conservative, has dared talked about.

Based on the 8-31 Decision, the Hong Kong government has recently announced the proposal which will be put to a vote by our Legislature towards the end of June.

There will be no more than two to three candidates and they must be endorsed by the Nominating Committee (NC). The NC is what we call a “small circle” made up of 1200 people (only 0.01% of HK total population). Its composition is the same as the Selection Committee (SC) which used to elect the CE. From past experience, the great majority of its members are heavily influenced and controlled by Beijing. For example, in 2002, despite the overwhelming public dissatisfaction with the incumbent CE, Mr. Tung, almost 90% of the members of the SC endorsed Mr. Tung as the only candidate and he was declared elected by the SC as the only viable candidate.

Nomination will be a two step process. First you need to be endorsed by 10% of the NC, so theoretically there can be as many as ten candidates. Then there is a second step pre-election by secret ballot where only the top 2 to 3 who get the majority support of the NC can become a candidate for the CE election. This means a prescreening of candidates by Beijing to ensure only those accepted by them can go through. This method of election has been compared to North Korea and Iran.

The 27 democrats in the Hong Kong Legislature have sufficient votes to block this proposal and they have already vowed to do so as it fails to meet international standards for universal suffrage guaranteed by our Basic Law. The Government told the public not to have illusion of any last minute changes. They would not even propose changes which are open under the local law, for example changing the corporate votes to directors votes, adjusting the distribution of seats so some sector like agriculture and fisheries would not have a disproportionate 60 out of 1200 seats in the NC, allowing two rounds of votes to ensure the pre-screened candidate would have majority public support or allowing protest votes to be counted etc.

Not only is the long cherished hopes of democracy dashed, the lack of mandate makes governance extremely difficult, if not possible. The proposal, whether it can be passed or not, will only cause even greater rift in the society and does nothing to alleviate the “deep rooted divide” which is acknowledged to exist in Hong Kong.

Instead of tackling the real problem, the government blames the media, youths, and foreign influence. It believes that the solutions lie in interference with the media, manipulation of university appointments, the introduction of braining washing national education or Mainland exchange experience and high handed arrests and prosecutions.

Many students and ordinary citizens have been arrested, and later prosecuted arising from their participation in the Umbrella Movement or related protests. Not surprisingly, hasty prosecutions led to acquittals and the judges criticized the police for giving testimony proven false by the videos taken by members of the public. However this led some pro-establishment legislators to criticize judges with the remark “Police catch people but judges release people”. The former Deputy Commissioner of ICAC who was one of CY Leung’s campaign team even said that judges should be required to declare their political stance.

In contrast to the many arrests and prosecutions, the Commissioner of Police has refused to disclose the names of 7 police officers involved in the brutal attack of one peaceful protester (for completeness I declare he is a member of my party). His hands were tied behind his back and carried facedown to a dark corner where one officer stood guard and the others took turns to kick and punch him for some 4 minutes whilst he was lying motionless on the ground. Although the event took place more than 6 months ago on 15 October 2014, no prosecution has yet been brought. The 4 minutes attack was captured by a television crew and the footage was aired on their station in the early hours of that morning. When the senior management woke up that morning and saw the clip, instead of commending the scoop, they chastised the news team. It led to removing the person responsible to a different post and other repercussions for the news team. That also tells you something about the state of our press. In their 2014 report, the Hong Kong Journalist Association said “The year under review has been the darkest for press freedom for several decades, with the media coming under relentless assault from several directions. There have been attacks on journalists, sackings and personnel changes affecting critical personalities and the withdrawal of advertising, which places pressure on the editorial integrity of publications.”

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce described Hong Kong as “the most Canadian City in Asia” as well as “Canada’s gateway to China”. They emphasize their belief in “free enterprise, rule of law, ethical business practices, entrepreneurship, social responsibility and environmental responsibility”. I believe we share common goals. The current impasse on universal suffrage poses a serious threat to Hong Kong as we know it.

We hope Canada will join hands with the International community for stronger engagement with Hong Kong at both government and civil society levels in ensuring that the Sino-British Joint Declaration with respect to “One Country Two Systems, Hong Kong People ruling Hong Kong with a High Degree of Autonomy” is honoured and respected, and that Hong Kong has the constitutional reform that meets with international standards and that will ensure that we continue to be a vibrant city.

Audrey Eu
2nd May 2015

Source: https://www.facebook.com/audrey.euyuetmee/photos/a.480482554434.260991.197345194434/10153218767224435/

Occupy Prince Edward – Buildings Department Eviction Protest

16114_1131989060161357_504953483258328111_n

Occupy Prince Edward just started outside Pioneer Centre in protest at the Building Department’s eviction of Tsuen Wan families from a sub-divided industrial unit two days ago.

There’s lots of people showing up in support outside the Pioneer Centre Mall, passing sleeping mats and supplies through the cracks of locked doors to the protestors camped out on the ground floor.

The building management have blocked the lift from stopping at the Buildings Department on the 18/F essentially trapping those protesting the evictions there, and also turned off the a/c to that floor.

For some background on the same issue of sub-divided industrial units ‘converted’ into flats, see this 2012 Varsity article http://varsity.com.cuhk.edu.hk/index.php/2012/05/industrial-buildings-subdivided-units/

Occupy Prince Edward

11188173_1603789519838030_5702279352937680235_n11169866_1048514165176407_2048499882634251021_n

https://www.facebook.com/socrec/videos/vb.160696287290644/1132024046824525/

Photos and video courtesy of SocRec and LostDutch

Hong Kong Heroes

A retired couple’s mission to prove 17-year-old student Ho Pak-hei innocent of assaulting a police officer during the Occupy protests…

10409595_625250517576268_5812774095412812928_n

 

11059425_625250560909597_6699069197851540279_n

11174775_625250610909592_407992753033313704_n

10155860_625250680909585_3534441274197739810_n

11182173_625250724242914_5193971638088779926_n

Helbert Lau believed the happy ending was only part of the story – the case proved the truth in the allegations of abuse of power by police and he called for a review of the issue.

His wife, who is in her fifties, voiced concerns about some of the negative comments made on social media following her testimony. “Does that mean there aren’t enough people who are willing to do the same thing?” Yeung asked.

The couple hoped they will inspire more people to come forward “to tell the truth”.

Smuggling: The Process and Who’s Behind the Trade

Screen Shot 2015-04-08 at 15.42.03

i-Cable News video report 追縱水貨集團背後運作

This is Real Hong Kong News‘ full transcript of an exclusive story on ‪#‎smuggling‬ activities in ‪#‎HongKong ‬by 有線新聞 i-Cable News.

NOTE: Parallel good traders engage in the illegal activity of bringing goods from Hong Kong to China that are subjected to heavy tax. The correct term to address them, hence, should be smugglers. The transcript below will be using the words “smugglers” and “smuggling” despite the media based in Hong Kong, China and the Western world who have been using the term “parallel traders” and “parallel goods trade”.

From Smugglers to Organised Smuggling Group

FULI. TRANSCRIPT

Retail goods are laid out in front of this money exchange shop in Sheung Shui. The signs detailed the retail price and commission amount of each product.

Woman handling out money (HK$500): “This is your first time (to smuggle), bring more with you. It’s a good first opportunity!”

Smugglers would first pay for the products they “purchase”. Then they would bring the products and the receipt to find the “contacts” across the border in China, as listed on the receipt following address written on the receipt, to complete the transaction. After crossing the border, our undercover reporter arrived at the “collection point” near Lo Wu Station:

Undercover reporter: “Is this the “collection point?”
Smuggler ‘contact’: “Yes.”

As soon as our reporter handed over the products she brought from Hong Kong to China, the ‘contact’ immediately paid her back the total amount of the products plus ‘commission’. By bringing two tins of formula milk powder (legal limit) to China, a smuggler can make between HK$50 and HK$70. On top of this, there are many other products one can bring:

Screen Shot 2015-04-08 at 15.42.412 tins of baby formula powder: HK$50-70
12 boxes of Ferrero Rocher: HKS55
1 shampoo: HK$8
2 boxes of glucose powder: HK$15

CableTV reporter: An average smuggler crosses the border twice a day. If one brings the maximum each trip, one can make a few hundred HK dollars commission per day. But how do the organisations behind the trade make money? Let us first see where do all these products go.

The collection point of this smuggling organisation is located in Shenzhen. At least 5-6 vans travel to and from this collection point every day non-stop from early morning to late at night to transport goods. Each of these vans goes to different destinations: some go straight to logistic companies whilst some go to nearby warehouses.

CableTV reporter: We pretended to be the owner of a shop that sells Hong Kong products in China and approached the owner of the money exchange shop in Sheung Shui. We told him that we wanted to buy I-long Kong products from them, and successfully arranged to meet with him.

When we arrived at his shop in Liantang (near HK/China border), he told us that he is one of the largest smuggling groups in Sheung Shui and can provide us Hong Kong products in large scale.

Smuggling group representative: “We are open about our profession. We specialise in ‘parallel trade’. We are one of the largest four at the moment, but should be set to be the largest by the end of this year. 1500tins of formula milk powder a day, not a problem! The problem is if you buy them all.”

Smuggling groups hire individual smugglers to transport products from Hong Kong to China via land transportation bit by bit, the method is called ‘Ants moving home’. These groups will then transport these Hong Kong products to wholesalers and retailers in China. The smuggling group representative we met told us that after deducting the ‘commission’, transportation cost and warehouse rental, the net profit of a tin of formula milk powder is around HK$3. This may seem like a small margin, but…

Smuggling group representative: “We do not only focus on one type of product! We make HK$5 for each pack of Yakult (5 bottles) we sell, and we make HKS3 for each box of coffee we sell. But formula powder is a must have item! We do not receive a lot of formula powder (from the individual smugglers), but we can get tens of thousands of coffee powder every day! You do the maths about how much we make.”

Recently, a large number of ‘Hong Kong products’ shops are emerging in China. Smuggling Hong Kong products to China means custom duty is completely evaded. Therefore, the business of smuggling groups becomes bigger and bigger.

The smuggling group representative we spoke to said that they have warehouses in Sheung Shui, Tuen Mun and Shenzhen. Some of the smuggled products are supplied to the ‘Hong Kong products’ shops in Dongmen, whilst the rest are distributed across China.

Undercover reporter: “You distribute across China?”
Smuggling group representative: “Yes, Peking (Beijing), Sichuan, Shanghai…”
Undercover reporter: “You have retail centres in all these places?”
Smuggling group representative: “Not retail centres, we only supply (Hong Kong) products to the local operators. We are the terminal, we don’t do retail.”

What is the background of this smuggling group? We found out the shop where we met with this representative, is a retail shop of MBL Wine Group in Shenzhen. However, this shop does not open for business on any day.

This wine group is headquartered in Hong Kong with shops in Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. The representative told us that he is a shareholder of MBL Wine Group.

Smuggling group representative: “MBL is the parent company, and we open our own company to ‘do business’ in China. The parent company has its own operation, we have our own. MBL sells alcohol only!”

We contacted Candy Law, former Miss Asia, celebrity and one of the Board of Directors of MBL Wine Group, to ask her about a shareholder of MBL Wine Group who operates a smuggling business under the name of MBL Wine Group.Screen Shot 2015-04-08 at 15.43.30

Candy Law: “Ha? No. This must be a joke.”

And we interviewed MBLWine Group’s spokesperson, who said:
Huang Yong (Chairman of MBL Wine Group): “He is our franchisee. His relationship with our company is contractual on wine sales.”
CableTV reporter: “Do you know about it (the smuggling operation)?”
Huang Yong: “Our company does not know about it. He owes our company some money, and we are still trying to recover the debt.”

After the interview, we wanted to seek comments from the smuggling group representative at the money exchange shop in Sheung Shui. However, his phone was not answered. The products displayed outside of his money exchange shop in Sheung Shui had all disappeared.

This transcript of the i-Cable TV report was created by Real Hong Kong News

25th Anniversary of the Basic Law – CY Leung Attempts to Rewrite History

basic law

At the ceremony for the 25th Anniversary of the Basic Law, CY Leung claims that the authors of the Basic Law never intended candidates for the city’s leadership elections to be put forward by the Hong Kong public. Martin Lee Chu-ming, one of the drafting committee members and founding chairman of the Democratic Party, said Leung was “factually wrong”.

Chief Executive, CY Leung, has since retracted part of a statement in which he said that civic nomination was never mentioned during the drafting of the Basic Law.

Mr Leung originally issued a statement on Sunday afternoon again accusing pan-democratic lawmakers of wrongly suggesting that the Basic Law allows for civic nomination for electing chief executives.

Just three hours later, Mr Leung reissued his statement, but this time paragraph two said only that two of five proposals for selecting the chief executive did not mention civic nomination, rather than all five proposals as stated in the earlier version.

On Saturday, veteran democrat Martin Lee, a member of the Basic Law drafting committee, presented documents which he said showed that the idea of civil nomination had in fact been proposed.

Mr Lee said among the five proposals raised during the drafting, proposal three stated that someone could be a chief executive candidate if they were nominated by 50 hong kong permanent residents. He said this showed that the spirit of civic nomination had been suggested.

It’s sad to see the man ‘elected’ to represent Hong Kong doing his best to destroy it, all for his personal gain.

Chief Executive’s Revised Statement on “Civic Nomination”

In response to recent allegation that the concept of “civic nomination” had been raised during the drafting of the Basic Law, the Chief Executive, Mr Leung Chun-ying, issued the following statement:

Yesterday (April 4) when I addressed the “Seminar for the 25th Anniversary of the Promulgation of the Basic Law”, I pointed out that “during the drafting of the Basic Law, the ‘consultation document’ released in 1988 has listed five proposals on methods for selecting the Chief Executive. The two proposals of selecting the Chief Executive by universal suffrage have not mentioned ‘civic nomination’.”

When the Basic Law was endorsed and promulgated on April 4, 1990, Article 45 reads: “The method for selecting the Chief Executive shall be specified in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress. The ultimate aim is the selection of the Chief Executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures.”

If someone said the concept of “civic nomination” had been raised during the drafting of the Basic Law, this exactly illustrates that “civic nomination” and “nomination by a nominating committee” are totally different concepts. After comprehensive consultation by the Basic Law Drafting Committee, “nomination by a nominating committee” was eventually stated in the Basic Law. Hence for those who recently said that “nomination by a nominating committee” could be interpreted as “civic nomination”, they are just “guessing and taking advantage of the literal meaning of words” and contravening the Basic Law.

Last year, some members of the Legislative Council insisted that “civic nomination” was indispensable in selecting the Chief Executive by universal suffrage. If today these members insist on such saying, they know full well that they are contravening the Basic Law and are just creating problems. The result is they would take away the rights of Hong Kong people to select the Chief Executive by “one person, one vote” in 2017.

Ends/Sunday, April 5, 2015 Issued at HKT 19:38

Read the official release here  (It should be noted that this is the revised version of CY Leung original statement)

Hong Kong’s Basic Law is available in English and Chinese here

 

Support Your Local Shops

https://youtu.be/EC1gFKJYQYc

It’s too late to support your local shops and restaurants when they are about to close. To survive they need your long term support or before you realise it your neighbourhood will be full of 24-7 convenience stores, pharmacies and jewellery outlets. Light-hearted video about a old store that is about to close – made by 一字馬

Police Ramp Up Scare/Intimidation Tactics!

Where are HK Police getting their strategy plans from? Could it be the People's Armed Police and their Tibetan strategy?
Where are HK Police getting their strategy plans from? Could it be the People’s Armed Police and their Tibetan strategy?

The Hong Kong Police really are showing that they come from the Tibet/Xinjiang school of policing now rather than any sensible rational approach. The top brass at HKPF have met and are now sending out what they think is a ‘scary’ message that groups of just three people could be arrested for public disorder offences. Plus, if that doesn’t scare people enough, they’ll bring out the big-bad, anti-terrorist PTU teams again.

YAWN!

This new draconian approach will change nothing in Hong Kong politically other than to highlight more of the contradictions and fractures within society.

The police neither have the ability or the judgement to discern fairly who represents a public order nuisance and who doesn’t. Gangs of violent, Blue Ribbons, will still roam free while the police target people based on the assumption that they oppose the government politically. This will be their only mandate for implementing these new measures or,

Are you a young person, that sympathises with the new wave of political protest in Hong Kong? If yes, proceed to intimidation, arrest and physical violence if required.

Religious festival in Amdo, Tibet. If Andy Tsang and CY get their way, is this what protests in Hong Kong will look like?
Religious festival in Amdo, Tibet. If Andy Tsang and CY get their way, is this what protests in Hong Kong will look like?

This is political persecution at its finest. Young HongKongers are now on the same par as Tibetans or Uighurs within the Great, Chinese Motherland; unable to raise their voice without facing overwhelming intimidation from the security forces.

After all, the police don’t need this new law to stop people from kicking over carts or acting violently. They can arrest people for this type of action whenever they see it. We do have extensive criminal laws and fairly impartial Courts in Hong Kong! But alas, these really don’t function too well when you’re in the business of political persecution.

Instead, just like during Occupy, Andy Tsang is formulating police strategy based on quelling a popular, political message that is in opposition to a malign government. It never works Andy, stop masturbating over all the weapons and gear you think you need and read some real history for once. What kind of path are you walking on when you now choose the same style of policing as Lhasa or Urumqi?

The sad fact is that these types of measures are only ever enacted by the most embattled of illegitimate governments protected by deranged and out of touch police forces in order to scare people off the streets. Or, screw the lid down tighter, allow no form of dissent and let’s carry on as though everything is ok. More popular outrage can only be met with more oppression.

The reality is that Hong Kong has a goon police force that has doubled down on a goon government and the people are not scared any more. The more force the goon government orders, the more powerful Hong Kong people get.

So, bring your draconian laws and your elite PTU, it only makes the people stronger and the government weaker!

As Albert Camus said, “The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”