Apple Daily: Former Marine Police Arrested for Unlawful Assembly on 4 Aug

https://telegra.ph/10-Aug-Former-Marine-Police-Arrested-for-Unlawful-Assembly-on-4-Aug-08-10

Apple Daily (Translated by Hong Kong Columns - Translated) August 10, 2019

Jan Bochenski, a former marine police inspector and a retired Cathay Pacific pilot, wanted to have a walk in Sai Wan after dinner on 4 August as he lives nearby, but was subdued by the police later on. He was told that he was arrested for unlawful assembly when he was brought to the police van. He was detained for 28 hours before released.

Bochenski said around 21:00 on 4 Aug, he went to Ka On Street and found that about 30 to 40 onlookers were on the pavement, looking at the police. Some police afar were guarding the Liaison Office. Bochenski heard some disputes but did not think that to be important, so he continued to walk along Des Voeux Road West.

Suddenly, some PTU holding batons and shields approached from the other side of Ka On Street and subdued everyone, including residents in their pyjamas and South Asian delivery boy. Bochenski was asked whether he is a tourist but he said he lived nearby and just are having a walk. His reply was ignored and the police asked him to turn his phone off. He was later brought to Cheung Sha Wan Police Station. For some 40 arrestees in the same detention room, none of them is students nor wearing in black with helmets. A decoration worker, a teacher and two Indian chefs were later arranged to be detained with Bochenski.

Bochenski said the most impressive scene is there were no senior officers in the station, but all junior PCs and sergeants. Bochenski recollected that whenever there is a crisis, at least one chief inspector will be in the police station to manoeuvre, but that apparently was not the case on 4 Aug. He demanded to go to the toilet many times but was unheeded, until he said he will pee at the corner of the wall. He also demanded to call his next of kin but was also disregarded. Until rounds of complaints, he was allowed to call his wife, who is outside of Hong Kong. It was not until 5 Aug afternoon that the officers learnt Bochenski's identity as a former police officer.

After listening to the advice of the lawyer, Bochenski decided to remain silent. He said, "to be honest this makes their work easier because they know these detentions are all unnecessary; frontline officers are used for dirty work". Until around 01:00 on 6 Aug he was released but he must report presence again later this month.

Growing up in Vanuatu, Bochenski lived in Australia and the UK. His first job is to join the police force in Hong Kong and become an inspector for four years. His upbringing let him know that being a policeman in a colony must not upset the residents there.

He also mentioned that during the detention, some young officers knew that he was a policeman and had a chat with him. Bochenski was asked about his views on the current situation and he stressed the importance of trust between the police and the people - this was also the biggest challenge before 1997. Bochenski said the Royal Hong Kong Police Force spent years to build a mutual trust with the people, but now the trust has been completely eroded, and the government does not find it problematic.

Bochenski said if the government is willing to set up a commission of inquiry (COI), the mutual trust between the police and the people may be rebuilt, but the key is that both parties are willing to contribute. It has been 4 decades since Bochenski joined the force, and he still felt quite proud of being a policeman. He kept contact with his former colleagues and this year they will fly to Hong Kong to celebrate the 40th anniversary since being policemen. Although being arrested arbitrarily, his pride remains. During the interview, Bochenski repeated that the police should do their job right and cannot make arbitrary arrests.

"Whenever you are in a uniform, you should do things right and proper, otherwise you are not doing your job right, isn't it?" said Bochenski.

Chinese version (Original):

https://hk.news.appledaily.com/local/realtime/article/20190809/59916041

Bullets aimed at heads, fire first & then disperse - Review of Police's new strategy on 12 June

Bullets aimed at heads, fire first & then disperse - Review of Police's new strategy on 12 June

Translated by HKCT, written by Kwan Chun-hoi
Original: Kwan Chun-hoi's Medium 

"What a pleasure to see that! I thought we only fired during training. That’s real! There it is! (laughs) And I would not allow a “2.0” version to happen." In a video recorded within the police force as obtained by Apple Daily, a police officer seemed to be proud of firing, who "will not allow Umbrella Movement 2.0 to happen", talked with a sense of mission. 

Police and members of the public hold opposite views on firing. I stayed at the scene for 8 hours (10 am-6 pm) on 12 June and could give an analysis on the tactics employed by the Police in dealing with mass movement which was conspicuously different from the recent years. But the first question to be asked, both from the Hongkongers and Police, why firing came first? 

Police were facing the same situation as in the umbrella movement that 5,000 police officers were way less than tens of thousands of Hongkongers. From 3:30pm to 4pm, the force employed a baiting tactic. Front line police officers purposely did not wear gas masks, which projected an illusion of them being slack. Two inspectors in white uniform were assigned in each spot. The message of "no clearance today" was also disseminated to the lawmakers, which further soothed the tension. When protesters were lured into the LegCo Complex, tons of tear gas were fired. Flooded rapidly were special tactical squads hidden inside the Complex, as well as masked police officers with waving batons. 

To fire first and then disperse was the deployment of police and the main direction used to clear the scene on 12 June. What's more, firing (such as rubber bullets and bean bag rounds) was aimed at heads, while tear gas canisters were hurled on bodies. 

Fire first and then disperse -- The followings were my observation near the LegCo public protest area from 3pm to 4pm: 

Protest at midday on 12 June was peaceful. Police had once said that there was no plan to "clear the scene for the time being". Some secondary school students in uniform, office ladies and white-collar workers from Central arrived at the scene to show support to the protest. There were church members lined up in front of the police officers singing hymns incessantly. No violence was foreseen. 

The calm ambience at 3pm in the public protest area became tense at near 4pm, when it was learnt that clashes started on Tim Mei Avenue. Police received news at 4pm that protesters were planning to occupy the LegCo. 

Protesters charged the Police cordon line. Without any warning and under the instruction from an inspector, the police fired bean bag rounds at protesters by an officer holding a Remington shotgun. During the clashes, there were protesters hurling a few pieces of bricks, around two to three. The inspector picked up the bricks and roared at the protesters, "Are you hurling bricks? Are you hurling bricks?" From what I saw at the scene, there were not many bricks. The shout of "Are you hurling bricks?" from police was more an order to their colleagues for the sake of recording rather than a warning to the protesters. Would it be an indication of "shoot once hurled"? 

Another angle at the public protest area: Police officers rushed out to strike protesters

Police fired the first tear gas when officers without gas masks were forced to back off to the corner. Then the riot squads lurked inside the Legco Building flocked in to disperse the crowd by batons. Former Commissioner of Police TSANG Wai-hung had once explained that the use of tear gas was for dispersing the crowd, but the operation this time was obviously to fire first and disperse afterwards. This is completely different from either the operation conducted during the Umbrella Movement in 2014 that "Disperse the crowd first" or the common ways used internationally. 

Back to 1989 Govt prevents treachery 

I believed that "This is an ORDER" to take a group photo of the police officers next to the patrol car before the operation. The photo could be sent within police WhatsApp groups for showing their loyalty, recognising their faces and implementing stringently the accountability system, in case "treacherous" officers refused to shoot at the scene. With the headshot taken, any uncooperative officers can be tried publicly within Police. I witnessed the first shot at the public protest area. 

The inspector made an order to the police officer, who was holding a gun and without a mask, next to his ear. Once the first shot was fired, other police officers would be relieved of a burden and become obedient soldiers who can forget the criminal responsibility of shooting at people's heads. That was why police officers were boasting that they would not allow a second umbrella movement as they have obviously been brain-washed. I believe that even Commissioner Stephen LO Wai-chung was well aware that once there were over 30,000 to 50,000 people around the LegCo, and the Police could only resort to weapons and tear gas for clearance. 

In 1989, Xu Qinxian, the army commander of the Beijing 38th Group Army, applied for leave. Sympathizing the citizens, the troops could not clear the scene when they entered the city. DENG Xiaoping worried the morale of the troops and therefore cut off their communications. Soldiers could only wait for instructions at the camps. In 2019, rumours saying that there are opposing voices to the "Fugitive Extradition Bill" at the senior level within the Government. The Government Headquarters was closed for two days. Police officers successively quit from friend WhatsApp groups and fired feverishly in the city. The police force is now out of control. Pro-Beijing camp went against the will of a million of people by keeping silent and trying their very best to attend the meeting. ExCo member Bernard Chan even implied the deployment of the People's Liberation Army, which was however ultimately denied by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Protesters were clad in white and then black, finally turned into red. Say hello to 1989. 

The Fishball, the Favoured Belief, the Fool

The Fishball, the Favoured Belief, the Fool

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, written by Tsang Fan-yam Philip
Original: https://www.facebook.com/VanVan417/posts/10153609247323096 
[Translator's note: Deep Chinese history knowledge required; will try to explain but cannot explain that much]

(Drawn by DamnkidYK)

The current unrest is similar to Peking back in late Ming Dynasty.

As a Ming general, Yuan Chonghuan was fighting in the Battle of Ningyuan against the Manchus, later known as the ruler of Qing Dynasty. The Manchus and its troops suffered. Nurhaci, the chieftain of Manchu, read and inspired by the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, so he started to spread rumours of Yuan conspriring a revolt as he held lots of soldiers. And people believed it.

Chongzhen Emperor of Ming fell into this trap, so he grabbed Yuan to jail, and sliced him slowly. Peking residents believed that he was conspiring a revolt, so they ate his flesh after slicing.

Yuan was not a flawless general, but he was competent and the pride for Cantonese people. A few bright man came out through the unreasonably difficult imperial examination, including Sun Chengzong, Xiong Tingbi and Yuan Chonghuan, and became generals on the frontier against the Manchus' aggression.

Ming's administration was highly centralized. The emperor worried real generals would be dangerous threats as they held lots of troops. So with imperial exam, only literary officials can lead the troops, but most of them cannot lead a troop.

But there are always exceptions in history. Sun Chengzong went through all key frontier checkpoints and learnt all the details about the frontier; Xiong Tingbi was familiar with the troops, and good at archery with both hands. It was rare to see a literary man to be so good at martial arts.

As for Yuan, he loved military things but did not know martial arts. His qualities were "not peaceful, irrational, violent ans swearing".

Within 5 years, he took Liaodong peninsula back -- not peaceful; he directly asked for funding for troops from the emperor directly instead of departments -- irrational; on his own idea, he killed Mao Wenlong, another general -- violent; his Cantonese maritime troops often chanted "Diu La Ma, Ding Ngang Soeng" (Screw his mom, carry on!) -- swearing.

Ring a bell of localists or valorous protesters?

I heard many people's remarks, like "policemen are men too", "localists are messing around" or "both sides have faults too".

Ring a bell of the rumours in Peking?

Much worse actually, at least Peking residents would not say "Manchus troops are men too", given their brutal records. 

These people do not read news, and bark around when something happened. They do not know what is "unrestricted warfare", editor-in-chief being chopped on streets nor booksellers being kidnapped, not to mention the confrontation between the police and the public.

Is this much alike the fool in Peking?

Pan-democrats are not reliable at all, they are just like the secretaries of Defense Department, who do not know about the actual situation nor allow new blooms to show their talents.

The localists now have their channels for promotion, and the government has their mouthpieces too. On the same battlefield, we are the master of the keyboard, and we have to choose our stance.

To be honest, those who remain silent and neutral are selfish. As Dante said, "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

We have to keep it short and simple and screw the government persistently. We have to stand firm on our posts, and we shall have our future.

===

魚蛋、輿論、愚民

現今的亂象，與明末的北京城很相似。

袁崇煥在寧遠前線間關百戰，對抗滿清，清兵焦頭爛額。清主皇太極看了《三國演義》，從「群英會蔣幹中計」一回得到啟示，派人四出造謠，於是北京城謠言四起，群眾認為袁崇煥手握重兵，要反了。

崇禎果然中計，抓了袁崇煥下獄，將他凌遲處死。北京市民也相信袁崇煥造反，一人一口生啖其肉。

袁崇煥是有相當瑕疵的將領，但也相當能打，難得一見的大將，是廣東人的榮耀。明末曾經有幾顆奪目的新星，孫承宗、熊廷弼、袁崇煥，他們經過極不合理的考試選拔制度，通過一連串文考，終於成為邊防將領，抵禦滿清南侵。

明朝高度中央集權，皇帝害怕武將握兵權，構成威脅，於是通過考試制度，讓文官才能帶兵，能爬到高層的都是不會帶兵的文官。

但是也有例外，孫承宗「伏劍游塞下」，萬曆三十二年進士；熊廷弼「有膽知兵，善左右射」，萬曆二十六年進士，讀書人中左右手也能開弓，絕無僅有。

袁崇煥熱愛軍事，不懂武藝，萬曆四十七年進士。他的特點是：不和平、不理性、暴力、粗口。

他反守為攻，五年平遼，是不和平；他無視兵部戶部，直接向皇帝要錢作餉，是不理性；他擅殺皮島守將毛文龍，是暴力；他的廣東水師，陣上總是「丟那媽，頂硬上」的呼喊，是為粗口。

很像今天本土派、勇武派的風格。

今天早上聽到很多指摘，「警察都係人」、「本土派搞事」、「兩邊都有錯」。

這很像北京城裡的謠言。

其實是更不堪，北京愚民再謊謬，不會說「清兵亦人也」。

平時不看新聞，有事百犬吠聲。沒有「超限戰」的概念，不知道報紙編輯當街俾人斬，不覺得賣書賣到被綁架是很嚴重，扑爆頭也不相信警民之間已經是「敵我矛盾」。

有沒有覺得自己就像北京城的愚民？

泛民也完全不可信賴，他們就像明末的兵部尚書一樣：王在晉，將不知兵；梁廷棟，挾數行私；張鳳翼，怯不敢戰；楊嗣昌，扼殺新晉。

現今本土派有一個優勢，就是有自己的平台，有渠道作文宣。然而政府也有牠的喉舌。在這一個戰場上，你我也身處最前線。我們手握鍵盤，要幫雞蛋，要幫高牆，全由我們選擇。

沉默與中立的，在這個時勢而言，老實講，很自私，如但丁所言："The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

我們必須用易懂、簡潔、清晰的文字去diu7政府，並且堅持到底，在抗爭的每個崗位克盡己任，我們才有明天。

Your Neutrality Is the Largest Protection for Govt's Suppression

Your Neutrality Is the Largest Protection for Govt's Suppression

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, written by Ken Yung
Original: http://polymerhk.com/articles/2016/02/10/27813/ 

(Blindfolded and non-blindfolded Lady Justice. What is neutral and just, indeed?)

In Hong Kong, there are lots of people obsessed with neutrality, they like saying:

"After all, you are illegal and wrong. / Both parties are wrong! / Police shooting was wrong, but protesters throwing bricks were wrong too!"

Basically, what lies beneath their subterfuge is: "you cannot blame the cops shooting."

These might sound just, but actually are idiotic.

Since the Umbrella Revolution, there are lots of such speech,

seems that "comprehensive thinking" or neutrality means to "blame both sides indiscriminately".

But: Are both sides' "fault" equivalent or proportional? Are both sides' authorities or force equivalent or proportional?

If one is removing all the backgrounds and reasons, things are certainly "right"!

Beating people is wrong.

"Right"! If you are turning a blind eye to the fact of the person is being kidnapped and his son being pointed by a knife.

Occupying is wrong.

That doesn't make Franklin Chu beating pedestrians with his baton right.

Making kids crying is wrong.

"Right"! If you are turning a blind eye to the milk formula rush from Chinese smugglers.

Kicking suitcases is wrong.

If you are turning a blind eye to the influx of suitcases in Sheung Shui, or you can stand above suitcases sea like Moses did.

Swearing is wrong.

So surrounding university campus with Blue Ribbons is right?

Removing all the background and having a discussion is not neutral, but silly.

Is the public's force and the police's guns proportional?

Are the consequences of protesters using force and policemen using gun proportional?

The seven cops still remain at large. Franklin Chu is still at large.

But protesters are arrested and sent into jails.

Oh that is justice and neutrality?

When an adult is beating a kid, and the kid hits back, will you "blame both sides indiscriminately"? Or say "beating people is not right"?

A normal person should help the kid and condemn the adult. But those who are obsessed with neutrality will say something like what I have just written.

Who are they to be neutral? A judge. Hongkongers are one of the stakeholders. Why are those neutrality lovers discussing Hong Kong, our home, as if it is one of the poor countries?

People usually have to two kinds of reactions, one is to react valiantly, another one is to remove himself from the reality and make himself a film audience, so as to reduce the impact on him.

Those neutrality lovers are the latter ones, who are actually protecting the regime and allow it to continue such suppression to the people.

Atsuna: I'm Yellow Ribbon, But Disagree w/ Throwing Bricks?

I'm Yellow Ribbon, But Disagree With Throwing Bricks?

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, written by Atsuna
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/02-10-2016/28665/ 

Dirty cops want to ruin your lives, by shooting on the first day of Lunar New Year. In Umbrella Revolution protesters defended themselves with umbrellas from pepperspray, and this time in Mong Kok, they used bricks to fight back. When the Umbrella Revolution ended, the social movement entered into moments of silence, but this time, there are new momentums. But from what we have seen on Facebook, quite many repeated this: "I dislike the cops, but blah blah blah..."

Hongkongers love Taiwan, and envy they have Ko Wen-je as their Taipei mayor, or the right to vote for the president, but few Hongkongers remember how these achievements came. Hongkongers are much worse than the Taiwanese, who has decades of protests history. In the face of China's invasion, Hong Kong cannot afford to waste a single second. Perhaps "genetic mutation" is needed. So within few years, protesters have evolved -- from the ceremonial procedures in July 1st Demonstration and Tian'anmen Massacre Vigil, to wearing helmets, eye masks and surgical masks in Umbrella Revolution, to hurling bottles and bricks in 2016. The change might be too fast, and some people might not be able to follow.

The fact is, China has no taboo [or, doesn't give a damn - translator's note] for Hong Kong. High Speed Rail (XRL), Internet Article 23 (Copyright Amendment Bill) and many other cases showed that the government wants to force the passing of each and every project they want. Some people know that Hong Kong sinks much faster than they would have imagined, but when they see bricks and fire, they got  "eyesore" because of their pacifist thoughts -- or "PRNN" (being peaceful, rational, non-violent and non-swearing). They wanted to cut ties and condemn such acts much severe than the Blue Ribbons.

I am in a Whatsapp group, and those members are mostly mild pan-democrats. One day they talked about why the government is so shameless, and I said, "The Umbrella Revolution is the Pandora's Box. Amid such a big unrest, the bottomline of pan-democrats are "condemning breaking glasses"? Seriously if I were 689, I will be as wilful as I can, as there will be no consequences."

Xu Zhiyuan, a Chinese writer, in the prelude of his book The Totalitarian Temptation, said: "The struggle against the totalitarianism needs sufficient intellectual and mental preparation. Shallow resistance can hardly be effective."

Some Hongkongers have not realised that China is not another British colonial government. Even if so, the social reform including education and medical issues were because of the 1967 riot conspired by Chinese communists. We are now facing a shameless regime without regard to people's lives. Is it innocent to think one can have "sweets" without any costs?

The colonial government was spoiling, in a sense that they gave people good lives and democracy, and fed them with love and peace.  Martin Luther King once said, "True peace is not merely the absence of tension. it's the presence of justice".

Afraid of conflicts, body contact or so is but normal. Under China's "colonial rule", dirty cops can hit your head at the back without notice and charge you "assaulting police officer". With TVB's sided reporting and high costs of resistance, it is understandable not to go to the front line. But justice and democracy are hard fought, and youngsters of Hong Kong sacrifice their tear and sweat, career and reputation to fight for the interests of Hong Kong, but is it reasonable to point fingers at them by saying "crossed the line", "too violent" or "ruining the rule of law in Hong Kong"?

Lu Xun, a contemporary Chinese writer, once said "Demanding harshly the gentlemen (junzi) and conniving petty people (xiaoren) might be seen as a 'smart move', but actually helps the petty people to do evil." If you said "I am not speaking for the cops", but "nagged about the weaker side", you are but an "accomplice of the killer", in Lu Xun's words.

Some people in the hindsight said CY Leung went abroad every Lunar New Year, but not this year, so this must be his honey trap. If you are there in Mong Kok, when you see the cops have gone wild by pepperspraying people and beating the head of a protester, or even putting fingers on the gun trigger to scare off people, you would react. Even if CY is to light up this fire, he will continue such suppression if there is no reaction. What would you do then? I know history is about random occurrence. Who knows Qing would crack that way in 1911? Who knew the Berlin Wall would fall that way in 1989? Some people might think "everything is under control", but to be honest, who knows the ending?

Lam Song-man: Forgiving the Authority-abuse Police is Out of the Question!

Forgiving the Authority-abuse Police is Out of the Question!

Translated by Karen L., Written by Lam Song-man  (林爽文)
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/05-17-2015/23011/ 

In 1978 Soviet Union, a nine-year-old girl was murdered. Kravchenko had been arrested, convicted, and put to death in 1983, though he had an alibi. As a matter of fact, the man was extorted confession under police's torture. 24 years later, he was proved innocent － It turned out to be a serial killer Chikatilo who ended the young girl's life. The case says, the arbitrariness of the police is accounted for Kravchenko's death.

With empowered authority, police forces are able to stop people, question them, interrogate them or hold them in detention within a specific period of time. During the course exercising these authorities, pepper sprays, guns, and so on － use of force － are allowed to be adopted. That is to say, a single imprudent mistake could lead to far-reaching drawbacks. In time of Soviet Union, there was Kravchenko killed being falsely accused; in the U.S., there were black youngsters executed in the street; in Malaysia, political figures from the opposition party were pushed from building; in mainland China, numerous housing clearance duties ended with violence.

In Hong Kong, a mentally handicapped person was forced to make a confession of a wrongly accused murder on the police statement. The case was dropped as the police officer fails to carry on his duty by the book. With higher authority than anybody else, upholding morality and strict manner are required in a police officer. Ordinary people lose clients, increase business cost, or harm their companies' reputation as a result of making mistakes, whereas one's freedom will be gratuitously restricted, will be racked from bodily harm or death, will be put in the wrong if a police officer makes mistakes.

A journalist suffered from rough treatment by seven police officers during the Umbrella Revolution, while the matter is still unsettled; a friend of mine was crookedly charged of drug possession (insufficient evidence before the court set my friend free, but it left a rather huge expense.); some activists were searched naked; some activists were beaten on the black maria; sex workers were made acquiesced to police's demands for sex without payment; some protesters were threatened as such "I will take you back to the police station and rape you"... Cases of abuse of authority are simply too many to count.

Originally, citizens empower police officers the authority to serve the society and maintain public order so that one's freedom is being protected. Their neglect of duty damages citizens' rights while they refuse to apologise for their own fault and exhibit arrogance on the public statement. To understand and forgive them for all this? This might be the best situation to quote the former Commissioner of the Hong Kong Police Force Andy Tsang Wai-hung's catchphrase "Out of the question!".

Cheng Lap: HK is a dangerous time bomb in case China has not yet found out

HK is a dangerous time bomb in case China has not yet found out

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, edited by Karen L., Written by Cheng Lap (鄭立)
Original: http://chenglap-blog.logdown.com/posts/258649-causes-of-conflict-in-sino-hong-kong/ 

Recently, in Hong Kong, several anti-smugglers protests broke out. For the Hong Kong-China conflict, one will naturally see its inevitableness due to the tug-of-war-like political structure when one observes at the scene here in Hong Kong.

To start with the incomplete authority of the Government of the HKSAR is far and away the cause. Precisely, HKSARG has no approval authority on whom and how many Chinese can travel in and immigrate to Hong Kong, and neither is the amount of Individual Visit Scheme (IVS) cities controlled by the HKSARG. "The problem of Hong Kong is an external one," some of my friends from the police force who involved in the Umbrella Revolution once said so. It can be seen that to most of the people, they wrongly assume the HKSARG has such authority, but as a matter of fact it hasn't.

In addition, half of the Legislative Council (LegCo) comprises members of the functional constituency group, who walk into the seat with zero votes. That is, the case in Hong Kong is an oligarchy, and above such government, there is the "comprador bourgeoisie" (includes landlords, merchants and civil servants) back in the colonial era. The Chinese Communist Party attempts to take charge of Hong Kong by controlling the "comprador bourgeoisie" as Brits did. And this time, given their worship over the nabobism and unlimited power among the corrupt Chinese bureaucrats, it only takes a slight effort to do so. Why? The existence of functional constituency leads to the forevermore-below-half elected seats of the membership. By a no-brainer deduction, interests will side with the oligarchs.

By controlling the functional constituency group, executive has more or less managed to control the legislature. One of the separation of powers has merely gone. Social problems like over-population and the everlasting unfavourable results afterwards are not likely to be solved given the imbalanced power of the LegCo. Translation: bills avoiding those problems that are supposed to be passed have been opposed since they do not earn benefits for the vested interests. It has been seen enough vested interests strengthening their self-interests this way.

In 1998, HKSARG dismantled its original LegCo. And the then provisional LegCo, which its bigwig members were basically appointed by the CCP, aimed to abolish the vital policies by the colonial government which had maintained the social stability:

- Rent control. The main policy that limits rent increase. It comes as a wonder to many people why there are less dissatisfaction living under the colonial regime than the CCP. Rent control is one of the many answers as the colonial government restricted both the growth of rent and property price. This policy has fallen apart since 1997 when the oligarchy started to take charge. After that, the property price and rent have been skyrocketed, and those landlords and property owners are laughing their way to the bank. To foreigners, Hong Kong is a place about pricey and tiny flats. And to locals, this is daily life suffering endlessly -- everyone is being exploited and is made to paying rent of some HKD$10,000.

- Public Order Ordinance. Police's authority enhanced and the freedom of assembly and demonstration denied as well, they turn protests against the government from a right to some dangerous thing  -- one might get arrested and detained exercising one's right of protesting peacefully, be searched of one's house out of coming-from-nowhere speculations or get a difficult time. A deterioration of police-civilian relationship is what is leading ahead of Hong Kong. The city has long been famous for peaceful demonstrations, whereas the government decide to neglect their views. Worse still, police force are implemented to stop them from protesting and to file prosecutions against them. All these will only lead Hong Kong to form a ideology as "If a peaceful protest does not bear fruit, why bother?". As I mentioned before, the harder the government blackens and suppresses the peaceful protesters, the more hardcore protesters come to the front of protests.

The change before and after 1997 is lifting the restrictions on the vested interests, as well as allowing the police to attack the public, to which CCP is to blame. It is simply too naive for them to belittle the establishment of a colony and to assume a little effort will do. The communist party think they can rule the place with compradors without knowing that a sound separation of powers behind is more than necessary. Although Hong Kong was removed from the colony list in 1972 (Link 1, Link 2), the CCP still treat Hong Kong as one of them. The CCP has taught their students "Colony is a political entity where the invader controls the compradors" and when the students become the leader of the country, they mistakenly expect applying what the colonisers do is going to guarantee a stable regime as UK back in the colonial era.

The Communist Party itself do not have the separation of powers. Thus there is no any sort of rightful checks and balances to monitor over the compradors. Such regime will inevitably lead to an old-style colonialisation -- all about exploitation, suppression, confrontation and independence.

The election is by no means fair in Hong Kong. In the LegCo, a member might be from over 100,000 votes in geographical constituencies , or 0 votes from functional constituencies. The latter ones are the vested interests and most of them have invested shops and have benefited from IVS and smuggling (Imagine the rent of 1,000-feet shop is worth HKD$1,000,000/USD$129,000 per month -- impossible in the rest of the world). And how did the government deal with the side effect? Suppress.

Letitia Lee, one of the leader from the Blue Ribbon thugs.

Yet, the political infighting involved in Hong Kong at the same time. Some thugs sponsored by Chinese funds and the Falun Gong are putting their Communist-style confrontation in Hong Kong. At first Hongkongers felt "it doesn't matter to me anyway", but gradually they found out that when it comes to things related to the CCP, peaceful tactics are futile, or basically laughing stock.

The government neglects every protest of Hongkongers. They even set up a 3-metre barrier to ban citizens from going inside. In other words, they damage channels and spaces for the government-public communication and protests. Applying police force against protesters, they think that if legal protesting becomes harder and inefficient, the public will give up someday.

Yet the government has miscalculated the situation. The Umbrella Revolution first started with a class boycott with few dozens of people, then tens of thousands of protesters for two to three months of street confrontation -- the root is the miscalculation of the public response. Every riot starts with the thought of "once the authority suppresses, protesters disperse", while the new generation of Hongkongers is now possessing the thought of "more suppression, more confrontation" -- the police ended up using more weapons like tear gas and batons which is a further deterioration to the situation. The more participants in the issue, the more unconventional and guerilla-style confrontational tactics appear -- from a peaceful protest to wearing masks; from willing to cooperate to grabbing fellow protesters from the police force; from protesting to the government to starting anti-smugglers movements.

When the suppression escalates, the tactics of participants escalate causing a vicious cycle. The next bottleneck might be on the "boundary". From the viewpoint of historians, this is a repetition of the period during the end of a colonial era, like Boston Tea Party or the Netherlands' Eighty Years War. The confrontation will take place outside of Hong Kong, maybe in China or overseas. Whatever the government attempts to escalate the suppression against the protesters, it can do nothing outside the jurisdiction of Hong Kong.

Since 1997, the education of Hong Kong has been infiltrated with elements from CCP, such as giving salute to the Five-Star Flag, singing March of the Volunteers (PRC's national anthem) and indoctrinating about the CCP. This "Umbrella generation" is grown under such pro-CCP education. But as a teacher, I found that students never for a day like such indoctrination -- the students hate CCP even more after being sent to the military training camp in there. Students found these coercive behaviour strangle which causes a more anti-CCP generation than ever.

Although most of the Hongkongers assert new immigrants are "diluting" the population of Hong Kong, quite a few of the "Umbrella Generation" are the offspring of new immigrants, and some may even receive their primary education in mainland China. Lives have not been easy for them since the moment coming to Hong Kong. Caught between two stools, a strong sense of anti-CCP awareness appears to them -- there is no way can they go back in China and live happily ever after. It is the sole road for them to strengthen their own Hongkonger identity, so as to be more "Hongkonger" than a "Hongkonger".

This reasoning may sound off, but it makes every sense of it. Historically speaking, Napoleon was the French emperor, but he was from Corsica; Adolf Hitler was the Führer of Germany, but he was from Austria; Joseph Stalin was the leader of USSR, but he was from Georgia. These "foreigners" have nothing in the first place. Hong Kong received almost a million new immigrants alike, and this very thought has grown more than prevalent among such generation.

Also, Renminbi (Chinese Yuan) is not a freely convertible currency, whereas HKD has pegged to USD through Linked Exchange Rate system. Hong Kong is the only Common Law jurisdiction in the Greater China region. Our legal system is similar to the UK and the US. Our currency, passport and legal system are internationally acknowledged. Any cities in PRC, including Shanghai, cannot attain that, even their property price skyrockets or they have a record-high GDP.

(Source: Pixabay)

This is one of the blind spots when people look into HK-China relationship -- there is a vital and inseparable interest behind. The biggest wealth of Hong Kong is the system independent from the CCP, and the compradors know this. They know the CCP will not act rashly in Hong Kong, and so they try all means to gain interests in Hong Kong with the support of CCP. The HKSAR passport and those related companies have become springboards for many important CCP figures in leaving CCP. The compradors do not care to aggravate conflicts or the other way round. They can leave Hong Kong whenever they want even if anything bad appears. High-ranked officials in Hong Kong, including CY Leung's family, are basically abroad. Imagine any major unfavourable issue happens in Hong Kong, these officials could land at some overseas countries safely leaving behind a RMB economy bomb with the citizens.

Many people have a thought that empowering elites the full authorities is what makes things work, and makes things work well, however, in the case of Hong Kong, it reveals the absolute power has every ability to turn people corrupt. It is because the one could use the absolute power in hand to serve one's self-interests and to get away with the responsibilities. A friend of mine from the CCP, who is rather open-minded, says that many people undermines the complexity of the Hong Kong society. China has taken a dangerous time bomb. After the 70s, Hong Kong can no longer be seen as a colony, but few people are aware of that.

Tin Sum: The Battle Between Enlightened Hongkongers and the Authoritarian CCP Regime

The Battle Between Enlightened Hongkongers and the Authoritarian CCP Regime

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Edited by Billy Clarke, written by Tin Sum (田心)

Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/03-26-2015/21990 

Despite his daughter still being in ill health, CY Leung has been spending a lot of effort and time in public forums recently. He directly asked voters to "vote them [pan-dems] out" – and he intimidated the public and anybody who might have differing views from his, stating that he is ready to tackle the next possible occupy movement.

And ready he is indeed: The police force has bought three water cannon trucks (worth $27 million HKD in total), three armoured cars (worth $14 million HKD in total) and they’ve employed 600 more officers, with new ‘guidelines’ issued (any suspected unlawful assembly involving three people or more can end in the participants being arrested). It also appears a blue ribbon police force has been formed. Under this regime, rule-breaking officers are above the law, capable of getting away with murder. The current order of the day in this Special Administrative Region is despotic establishment – as far from democracy as you can get.

As of yet, the police haven’t killed any protesters (though we’re not far off), and Hong Kong is still an international city. We can still draw attention internationally if there is any rough restraint or fatalities (like that which takes place across the border). The international eye is our last, and fading, confrontational tool.

For now, we can still retaliate against the crooked authorities in power, and we can still continue this war against these seeping forces that are iniquitously taking over. But if those politicians that we see in the news everyday continue their bickering and keep on with their minor quarrels focusing only on the rare occurrences of ‘violence’, then this will distract from the crux of the problem – and this could leave many in the city uninformed and distracted from the main issues facing society. Focusing on these few isolated incidents of real violence (which all occurred under suspicious exceptional situations) will give the government and police a reason to step up and become despotic. CY himself even boastfully stated this week that he handled the protests well as the PLA were not called in (which is in fact a hidden threat hinting at what could occur in future which also shows where his heart, and his pay check lies).  

The fight for real democracy is in a current mess and it needs to be sorted out, but there are still chances. If someone cheats in a game it won’t be long before justice will prevail, and right not Hong Kong is being dominated by cheaters. Hongkongers is in the midst of a crisis and people need to stop looking the other way and acting like it is not their problem. One day a big portion of the middle-class will flee (it is already happening) and their input to the city will disappear. Regardless of class, we need to all protect our interests and stand up together now.

Atsuna: Hongkongers, are you ready for the first death?

Hongkongers, are you ready for the first death?

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Atsuna
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/12-09-2014/19969 

Umbrella revolution is a Pandora's box - you can see who is bastard, who is not. When we are witnessing HK Police turning into ruffians, and CCP nullifying the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and you are still talking about "unchanged for fifty years"? You must be kidding. Right, we are about to enter 2015, the eighteenth year since the change of sovereignty. China is no longer China after PRC, Hong Kong is no longer Hong Kong after this revolution. Bastards are getting more important, ruffianly police are "maintaining the law and order", the authorities are continuously weakened - Hong Kong has reached a point of no return. Yet, some people are persuading for withdrawal, but their eyes are blindfolded - if we lose this time, the dark ages will fall upon us, and the evil forces will ring the death knell for our original Hong Kong.

Police abusing violence has become the sign of collapse of the civilised Hong Kong. It does not only represent the authorities have become a tool for political suppression, it also declares "2+2-5", as in George Orwell's 1984. If you are on the "right" side, you have the right to rape "rule of law". Ruffianly policemen beat protesters' heads with their batons, and surround you with their fists if you dare to "walk slowly", and even dare to say "say one more word and I will rape you in the police station" to female protesters. Although there are a lot condemnation on Facebook, these ruffians are not punished even they violated the Police General Orders (PGO) - not a legally binding document, and in other words, it is not illegal if they violated it, at most violation will be subjected to disciplinary actions. Wait, security chief Lai Tung-kwok still comes out from time to time on TV to support the police force ... Disciplinary action? Stop dreaming.

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 is an act in UK in restricting the authorities of the police, and is completely shown to the public. In Hong Kong, PGO is not a legally binding document, and is not completely shown to the public, especially the part related to violence and use of arms - the police has continuously denied the public's access. It will be harder to lodge a complaint if the public does not know the line on using violence.

After all, police are part of the public. Even they are enforcing the law, they are still under the constraints of law. Even PGO is a paper tiger, beating and charging are criminal offences, but why these ruffians are still safe? Because criminal offences need to be investigated by police, after collecting the evidence(s), the Department of Justice will then decide whether to prosecute or not. In normal circumstance, if policemen did not get their job done (searching for evidence(s) and find out the perp(s)), their seniors will condemn them. But we have now entered the "era of new Hong Kong". Ruffians beating people - no prosecution; female CPPCC deputies beating policeman - not attacking police. We have no more rules, but "undermined rules" - see if you are on the "right" side.

We might be astonished when we see so many bastards in the police force, not because police had good characters before this, but because the revolution has opened a "broken window". Broken windows theory suggests that if some bad behaviours are not dealt with, then there will be more people following, or even aggravate the situation - example: not fixing a broken window will cause more people to break the window, or even an arson case. Although "Seven ruffianly policemen" beat Ken Tsang (the protester from Civic Party) are immediately suspended from their duties, the formal arrest procrastinated for a month. Pro-China brown-noses like Ann Chiang swiftly helped "raising funds" for them. We are not fixing the broken windows, and encouraged people to break more windows, so ruffian acts can often be seen on YouTube.

Ruffianly policemen themselves are also a broken window. Although it is no longer news when they enforce act selectively, they now become free security for pro-China groups and its hirelings. They escorted Blue Ribbons thugs to go away despite they are red-handed, now they helped Chiu Luen (Chiuchow Associated Minibus Company, the pro-China minibus company which applied for an injunction in the court) to "look after" their terminus. Will it be possible if they bully Hongkongers for Chinese? Hard to tell! "New Hongkongers" and those across the border know where to exploit loopholes. There are more barbaric tourists since Tourism Board forced travel agencies to "kneel down". Police is legal to exercise violence. If they are sided, they encourage people to violate the law. In "New Hong Kong", dare you think about stability and prosperity.

Thomas Jefferson once said, "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of constitution so the second one will not become the legalized version of the first." Ruffianly policemen are criminals under the protection of law. They mercilessly attack protesters' heads with batons. It is their luck we haven't had a person dead yet. But luck might be used up. Xu Zhiyuan, a Beijing writer, wrote a book called The Totalitarian Temptation, which, in the preface, reads: "In struggles with totalitarianism, one has to be intellectually and psychologically ready. Slight confrontation will not be effective." Because a totalitarian government cannot allow common sense. Actions like protest, hunger strike or peaceful occupation cannot force it to make concessions. If you are not daring enough, you will be counter-attacked severely. Although you might not be the one, the situation might not be controllable in the future. Hongkongers, are you ready for the first death?

Wing Wing: Abuser of Power Got Abused

Abuser of Power Got Abused

Translated by NA, J. Wong, Vivian L., Edited by Vivian L., Written by 翼雙飛 (Wing Wing)
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/09-29-2014/19033

(Photo credit: Passiontimes)

Under British rule, one of the greatest benefits Hong Kong had gained is the culture of working in accordance with rules and regulations. The British understood that men are weak and selfish in nature. Once they are empowered with authorities without restriction by rules, they will corrupt. It is impractical to expect men to exercise restraint and act on conscience and moral conduct without a comprehensive system for regulations. Readers can look no farther than China, a country with practically no working social system to restrict its people. The Chinese corrupt, abuse power and walk in by the back door. Had Hong Kong not been a British colony, our society might just suffer a similar fate.

To ensure police can execute their duties, policemen are authorised with more power than ordinary citizens. For one thing, they have the authority to check the identities of passers-by.  To avoid abuse of power abuse, the discipline and behaviour of policemen both on- and off-duty are monitored by the Law of Hong Kong and the Police General Orders set up by the Hong Kong Police Force. Offenders are liable to disciplinary actions.

As far as the legal regulations on the use of police power and on the execution of police duties are strictly followed, not only could police officers protect themselves amidst turmoil in the political environment, no one could question their authority. 否則，警隊就會把自己置於危牆之下。

According to information circling around the internet, "The Use of Force" stipulated under Chapter 29 of Police General Orders (PGOs)According to information circling around the internet, "The Use of Force" stipulated under Chapter 29 of Police General Orders (PGOs) [Translator's note: Some PGOs are inaccessible to the public, Chapter 29 is one of them] are as follows:

1. Police officers (POs) should exercise self-discipline and restraint when in contact with citizens.  Force should not be used unless there is an absolute need or when there is no any other alternative to complete the task legally.

2. Before using any force, a PO shall make clear to the subject of said force his identity and, whenever the circumstances allow, give a warning, and indicate the kind and level of force to be used.  Within the scope of practicality, it should be made possible for the subject to comply with the order of the police before any force is used.

3. The use of force must not be more than what is necessary for its aim(s); such force must no longer be used after achieving the aim(s); any force used must be reasonable in the circumstances.

Footages on the internet and the news show numerous occasions where police used force against protesters. Viewers will also take note of the types and uses of weapons employed by the police (batons, shields, pepper spray and tear gas), and decide for themselves whether or not such "force" is in accordance with Chapter 29 of the PGO above.

In light of loud outcries from the public condemning police brutality, Executive Councillor Fanny Law went with the flow and pointed her finger at the police. "The way the officers have dealt with the situation is the source of public anger. The police owe an explanation to the Executive Council," Law said in a radio interview, effectively clearing the government of any responsibility.

Speaking on behalf of the police, Assistant Commissioner of Police (Operations) Cheung Tak-keung denied responsibility on the part of the government and the senior officials. Cheung stressed to reporters that under any circumstances, use of force by the police is on direct orders of the commanding officers at the scene. I wonder what those officers say to that. I wonder if they will be able to quote a relevant law for every single order they have ever given to excuse themselves from responsibility.

A famous Chinese proverb goes like this, "When the crafty hares are exterminated, the hunting dogs will be cooked; When the partridges are gone, the fine bows will be put away."  In the bid to hunt down the crafty hares in the protesters, the police are at the disposal of Leung's government as hunting dogs. Now that the crafty hares are still out and about, isn't it a bit soon to dispose of the loyal hunting dogs?