Showing posts with label HKCT review 2020. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HKCT review 2020. Show all posts

20210122

HKCT Review 2020: October to December 2020

HKCT Review 2020: October to December 2020



With the 79th Chinese National Day coming on 1 October 2020, almost nobody in Hong Kong under 30 identifies themselves as “Chinese”. According to HKPORI’s final tracking survey results on Hong Kong people’s ethnic identity, rift widens between Chinese and Hong Kong identities and national pride plunges to one in four. All these indicators are at their record lows since the handover and the reasons are nothing more than open secrets. Pieces over pieces of news have been breaking Hongkongers’ hearts.  

19yo Tony Chung - Second Person Charged under Hong Kong's National Security Law

On 29 Oct, Tony Chung, a former leader of pro-independence group Studentlocalism, was denied bail after appearing in West Kowloon Magistrates' Court charged with secession, money laundering and conspiracy to publish seditious material. The teenager is accused of organising, planning, committing or participating in acts with other people with a view to committing secession between 1 July 2020 and 27 October 2020 – the day of his arrest. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2790388994511815)

See also:

External Voting/Out-of-Hong Kong voting

The pro-Beijing camp has always wanted Hongkongers on the Mainland to cast votes because they are sure these voters will all be their supporters. By doing so they can effectively win pan-democrats by lengths. The issue of external voting was mentioned on in the Electoral Affairs Commission's (EAC) Report on the 2020 LegCo General Election released on 12 Oct. In response to the concerns from the members of the public (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2789876991229682), CE responded that the idea of external voting was put forward by the Hong Kong SAR Government based on the aspirations of Hong Kong people living and working on the Mainland conveyed over the years.

See also:

Cathay Pacific’s Massive Lay-off; Cathay Dragon Slayed

COVID-19 means people are grounded and countries are not going to have that many flights everywhere. Unlike SARS, which lasted for less than half a year, COVID-19 is still affecting us as you read. The aviation industry, among others, bears the brunt in suffering losses, and redundancy is inevitable. Cathay Pacific on 21 October announced the lay-off of 5,900 actual positions across the entire Group, which accounts for around 17% of its established headcount. This means some 5,300 Hong Kong-based employees will be fired and about 600 employees based outside of Hong Kong also possibly being affected subject to local regulatory requirements. In view of the devastating news, Eaton HK published a statement to support staff members being affected. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2785570278327020)

All Civil Servants to Take Oath / Sign Declaration

The Civil Service Bureau (CSB) issued a circular to all departments on 12 Oct requiring all civil servants joining the HKSAR Government on or after 1 July 2020 to take an oath or make a declaration that they will uphold the Basic Law, bear allegiance to the HKSAR and be responsible to the HKSAR Government, as one of the conditions for appointment. From July to October 2020, there were a total of about 2 980 civil servants who joined the HKSAR Government and duly made the declaration. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2820848721465842) They come from around 140 grades. Around 180,000 civil servants will soon be required to take an oath of allegiance to the Basic Law and the SAR (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2830912547126126), and they will be given a month to do so. 

See also:

Mass Resignation of Pan-dem Lawmakers to Respond Four Disqualifications

The controversy of letting some lawmakers deem ineligible to run in the original LegCo election 2020 stay in the extended LegCo term dragged on and perplexed some. Beijing wanted to give these pan-dem lawmakers the benefit of doubt but it turns out they remain "disobedient" in LegCo. In November, the four disqualifications were confirmed after the National People's Congress Standing Committee announced a list of reasons why a lawmaker should be stripped of their seats, including asking external forces to interfere in Hong Kong's affairs or refusing to accept China's sovereignty over the territory. One of the 4 disqualified lawmaker Dennis Kwok said he had no regrets. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2802739149943466) In response to the disqualifications, 15 pan-democratic lawmakers submitted to LegCo Secretariat their resignation letters. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2804070693143645)

See also:

Death of 22yo HKUST student Alex Chow Tsz-lok #AlexChowInquest

22yo HKUST student Alex Chow Tsz-lok who fell into a coma after falling from a height at a parking lot during a clash in Tseung Kwan O succumbed to his injuries and died on 8 Nov 2019. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2799868830230498)

In the early hours of 4 Nov, protesters had blocked roads and thrown objects at the police in Tseung Kwan O. The police launched tear gas to disperse the crowd, and Chow had fallen from a height at Sheung Tak Car Park during the clash. The police subsequently admitted that when Chow fell from a height, the riot police had launched tear gas outside the carpark, but whether that was related to the fall, the police didn’t exclude any possibilities. The death inquest of Alex has been carried out for over 20 days and the giving of testimony was expected to be completed on 4 Jan 2021. After that, case would start to be summed up in two days. For more details exposed during the inquest, please read this.

CUHK Reported Students' Protest in Campus to Police

Over 100 graduating students rallied, chanted slogans and raised flags at the campus of the Chinese University on 19 Nov, the day of graduation ceremony. They displayed flags that read “Hong Kong independence, the only way out” and “Reclaim Hong Kong, the revolution of our times,” sprayed graffiti of the slogans and sang the protest anthem Glory to Hong Kong. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2810560219161359) The CUHK filed reports to Police. Around a dozen police officers entered Chinese University's campus on the next day. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2811488772401837) Several student unions in CUHK condemned the university reporting it to the police (xxx).

See also:

CFA: Requiring Male Inmates to Cut Hair Breaches Sex Discrimination Ordinance

While some may think being jailed means one should be deprived of all freedom and dignity, some may not think so. Leung Kwok-hung, former lawmaker known as Long Hair, won the final appeal. Court of Final Appeal rules that requiring male inmates to cut hair breaches Sex Discrimination Ordinance. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2816692275214820) After losing the court battle to ‘Long Hair’, Hong Kong’s prisons considered shearing locks of female inmates in name of equality, SCMP said. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2820775728139808)

Joshua Wong and Fellow Activists Plead Guilty 

Pro-democracy activists Joshua Wong, Agnes Chow and Ivan Lam were remanded in custody on 23 Nov after pleading guilty to charges related to a major protest outside police headquarters last year. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2813527595531288) On 2 Dec, the prison sentences handed down to the trio. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2821155381435176) Agnes Chow received her first prison sentence of a 10-month term and spent her 24th birthday behind bars. Japanese politicians and government expressed concerns over jailing Agnes Chow (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2827542904129757; https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2822355764648471). On the last day of the year, Agnes Chow was reported re-classified as a Category A inmate, same level with murderers, and moved to a top security prison (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2842421919308522).

See also:

12 detainees in Shenzhen

The group of 12 was captured by Chinese coastguards on 23 Aug while trying to flee to Taiwan on a speedboat. Most of them were facing criminal charges in Hong Kong for offences linked to last year’s anti-extradition bill protests. After being detained for over three months, 10 of the 12 were brought up to Yantian District People's Court in Shenzhen for trial. Consulate staff from the US, the UK, Canada, Portugal and the Netherlands waited for about 2 hours but they were not allowed to enter, and so they left. The Yantian Court later on the same day uploaded that the court has listened to the procuratorate's opinion and the defence side's views. The court will choose a date to announce the verdict. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2840392502844797) On 30 Dec, after the verdict was made, the state-run media soon commented the case showed Mainland Judiciary's prudence and professionalism. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2841787936038587) Yet, the transparency of the case was clearly “open”. The response of 12 Hongkongers’ Families to “Judgment” is here: (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2841809446036436

Exodus of Hongkongers 

Being hunted by Hong Kong law enforcer using various tools including National Security Law and facing lots of other charges, some Hong Kongers opted to flee their home. To name a few, Ted Hui (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2822059874678060), Nathan Law (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2813922315491816) and Baggio Leung (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2837524823131565), 3 ex-lawmakers left for different places for their safety. Hui arranged his family to leave too, while the 2 other politicians have declared "severing ties with their families" in hope not to burden their loved ones.

A lot of Hongkongers could have a choice to choose to emigrate elsewhere while some were forced to exile themselves. Aurora, Tsang Chi-kin's girlfriend, was one of them.  (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2829790727238308) Tsang Chi-kin, the first protester shot by police said he would skip court and went on the run. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2835816096635771

Top Court Rules in Favour of the Administration over the Anti-mask Law

The administration invoked emergency law and announced a ban on masks at all protests including authorized ones on 4 Oct last year. Last Nov, the anti-mask regulation was ruled unconstitutional. The ruling was partially overturned this year in April following an appeal from the HKSAR government. On 21 Dec, a 5-judge panel (including Lord Hoffmann) at the Court of Final Appeal ruled that the ban on face masks at unauthorised protests and rallies was proportionate and no more than reasonably necessary to prevent violence. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2834989970051717)

US’ Sanctions on Chinese and Hong Kong Officials

After 11 Hong Kong officials were sanctioned (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2718529815031067), the US on 7 Dec imposed sanctions on 14 senior Chinese officials as it vowed there would be a price to pay for Beijing’s growing clampdown in Hong Kong. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2825294347687946

Bishop Hill Service Reservoir


Some residents who often go to Bishop Hill discovered that the spectacular waterworks project was about to be destroyed by Water Supplies Department. Not until some stopping the bulldozers with their bodies, the construction workers did not stop their work. Photos of the inside of the service reservoir made some glad as the city, under waves of crackdown, has lacked some positive news, while some remain pessimistic as the government often ignores voices of the public. With inspections, WSD decided to stop the work and let Antiquities Advisory Board decide its grade. 


20210114

HKCT Review 2020: July to September 2020

HKCT Review 2020: July to September 2020


1 July 2020 marks the first day of a new era - Hong Kong under the effect of the national security law for Hong Kong (HK NSL). From July to September 2020, many events considered unthinkable by many happened in Hong Kong; the ban of the annual pro-democracy protest, people arrested for what they said or what banner they carried, the raid of a newsroom, Hong Kong political activists fleeing Hong Kong for safety, and some caught by Chinese Coast Guards… When protests did not seem a possible means to express one’s stance, the Legislative Council general election 2020 was something many Hongkongers looked forward to. Yet, it was faced with unprecedented states of affairs.

1-July protest

On the first day HK NSL took effect, the annual democracy protest held on Hong Kong Island was banned for the first time in 23 years (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687733508110698). Despite the ban and the newly enacted national security law, many took to the street. Clashes with the police happened in the afternoon. The police also showcased a new purple banner which warned people of their possible violation of the new law (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2688343724716343/). Over 300 were arrested that day.

First arrests related to the national security law were also made on the first day HKNSL took effect. The police said on that day 6 males and 4 females were arrested for offences related to HKNSL that day (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2688759524674763), although some arrested on that day were released on bail (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2689573047926744), not all of them were. 

One of those denied bail was Tong Ying-kit, 23yo. He was seen riding a motorbike on 1 July, flying a banner with the slogan that “connotes ‘Hong Kong Independence’, according to a government statement the next day (2 Jul) (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2689555551261827/). The police said Tong “rammed into police officers who were on duty nearby” (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2688602724690443 ). Tong was charged with terrorism and inciting secession; he was the first person charged with an offence related to HKNSL (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1489251731292221/2690117731205609/).

HKNSL’s effects shortly after 1-July


Besides the arrests made on 1 July and that Metropark Hotel Causeway Bay was transformed into the temporary base for Office for Safeguarding National Security of the CPG in the HKSAR (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2693752037508845), books suspected to violate the new law were no longer available from public libraries within days after the law took effect. The books removed included those penned by former Demosisto secretary-general Joshua Wong, former lawmaker Tanya Chan and scholar Chin Wan (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2690842541133128). 

Political activists flee HK; 6 wanted by police for HKNSL offences

Following the enactment of HK NSL, political activists announced their flee out of Hong Kong. Those who fled included Nathan Law, who announced leaving Hong Kong on the 2nd day after HKNSL took effect (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2689550007929048). He later confirmed having arrived in London, United Kingdom (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2698329507051098). Honcques Laus, 18yo, chairman of Hongkonger Utilitarian Party, said in late July that he went to the UK at the end of June to seek political asylum. He said when he was in secondary school, he raised “independence” slogans from his tablet when taking a photo with Carrie Lam in 2017, and published a book supporting independence last year. He also formed Hongkonger Utilitarian Party in late June 2019. He expected himself to be persecuted under the National Security Law so he was determined to leave Hong Kong (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2711647725719276). 

In late July, the government announced that Law and Law were among the 6 wanted by the Hong Kong police on suspicion of secession or colluding with foreign forces under the HKNSL. The other 4 wanted are Wayne Chan Ka-kui, Samuel M. Chu, Simon Cheng and Ray Wong Toi-yeung (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2712764038940978/). Law declared his severing of ties with his family after being listed on the wanted list (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2712944442256271/)

BN(O)

On 1 July, UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab announced the plan for granting British National (Overseas) passport holders 5 years limited leave to remain, with the right to work or study, and after 5 years, the ability to apply for settled status. (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2688655628018486)

Following the enactment of HKNSL, Britain announced details of the BNO immigration scheme on 22 July (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2705471556336893). The Hong Kong government expressed dissatisfaction at the policy (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1489251731292221/2706826686201380/). Beijing reacted strongly against this new policy, saying that they might consider not recognising BNO as a valid travel document (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2706032309614151). Pro-Beijing politicians in Hong Kong speculated the consequences of China’s retaliation on this policy of Britain: lawmaker Regina Ip said BNO owners might be unable to return to Hong Kong or travel to China if China stopped recognising it as a valid travel document (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2708388456045203), and Hong Kong’s sole NPCSC delegate Tam Yiu-chung, said BNO holders may lose their identity as a permanent resident of Hong kong and as a Chinese national (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2711856912365024). 

(See also:
Australia announced new visa arrangements for Hong Kong passport holders on 21 Aug:

US’s Sanction of Hong Kong officials (7 Aug)

The US Treasury announced in early August, the sanctioning of 11 individuals: Chief Executive Carrie Lam, Commissioner of Police Chris Tang, Former Commissioner of Police Stephen Lo, Secretary for Security John Lee, Chief Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng, Secretary for Constitution and Mainland Affairs, Erick Tsang, HKMAO director Xia Baolong, HKMAO deputy director Zhang Xiaoming, director of Liaison Office Luo Huining and director of Office for Safeguarding National Security in Hong Kong. 

They said in their statement that “the recent imposition of of draconian national security legislation on Hong Kong has not only undermined Hong Kong’s autonomy, it has also infringed on the rights of people in Hong Kong, allowing mainland China’s security services to operate with impunity in the region, mandating “national security education” in Hong Kong schools, undermining the rule of law, and setting the groundwork for censorship of any individuals or outlets that are deemed unfriendly to China.”

See also: 
20:04 15 Aug: Carrie Lam's Honorary Fellowship in Cambridge REMOVED
22:17 15 Aug: Carrie Lam Retorts: She “Returns” Cambridge Honorary Fellowship

Jimmy Lai’s arrest & raid of Apple Daily (10 Aug)


In the early morning on 10 Aug, Jimmy Lai, founder of Next Digital which owns Apple Daily. Lai’s 2 sons, Timothy Lai and Ian Lai, and 4 management staff of the company, Wong Wai-keung (translit., executive controller), Ng Tat-kwong (animation general manager), and Cheung Kim-hung (CEO) and Holston Chow (CFO and COO) were arrested. Jimmy Lai, his sons and Chow were charged with collusion and conspiracy to defraud, while Wong, Ng and Cheung were charged with a count of conspiracy to defraud.(https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.2720805748136807/2720686818148700/)

Later in the morning, more than 200 police entered Apple Daily’s headquarters and brought Jimmy Lai, who had his hands cuffed at the back, back to his office in the building. Apple Daily’s staff were required to register with the police before entering their offices, and only a few media companies were allowed to come close to the building for reporting.

Live videos filmed by Apple Daily’s staff show the police walking through cubicles, flipping through documents, plucking a paper here and there. The police searched Apple Daily for 4.5 hours, cordoned off some executive offices, including Lai’s, and took away about 30 boxes of evidence from the building. Apple Daily launched legal action against the police after the raid for the return of journalistic material, information professional privilege, and all other material not covered by the search warrant.

Our collection of reports on that day: 
Snapshots of the search of Apple Daily:
13:27 Asked Whether Arrest "Political", Jimmy Lai: You Better Ask Police
13:58 Police took away hard drive
13:57 Cheung Kim-hung (Next Digital Executive) brought away

Report by Reuters on the search of Apple Daily: 

Agnes Chow’s arrest; Nikkei’s HK office searched (10 Aug)

On the same day (10 Aug), the police arrested political activist, Agnes Chow, 23yo, at her doorstep at night under HK NSL (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2721560671394648). She was released bail the following night (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2721948041355911/). Chow, who is fluent in Cantonese, English and Japanese, has visited Japan and often post in Japanese on social media. Netizens created a hashtag #FreeAgnes during her arrest. The hashtag trended on Twitter in Japan with more than 290,000 messages under it. 

Chow later told reporters that the police investigators showed her an advertisement published on Nikkei about Hong Kong’s democracy movement in 2019 as one piece of evidence leading to her arrest (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2740759536141428). 3 police officers also went to the Japanese media company, Nikkei’s office in Hong Kong for an investigation, although the police told Stand News that it was related to “dealing with property known or believed to represent proceeds of indictable offence” and was not related to the national security law. 

Police arrest pro-democracy lawmakers for Yuen Long Incident last year (26 Aug)

More than 1 year after the 21-July Yuen Long incident, the police made arrests related to the incident on 26 Aug. Yet, the people they arrested were Lam Cheuk-ting, a Democratic Party lawmaker then, who was attacked on that night and was seen bleeding from his head (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2734607876756594). A fellow member of the party and lawmaker then, Ted Hui, was also arrested in relation to an event in Tuen Mun Park on 6 July 2019 (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2734575540093161). The police arrested 14 other people on the same day (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2734737200076995/). 

That night, the police met with the press and called the incident on 21 Jul 2019 “a conflict between both sides”. They claimed that the situation deteriorated after the arrival of a lawmaker and the live broadcast of the incident online. The police officer also criticised a reporter, who he said filmed the incident from one side only, together with some narration, misled others to believe the incident was an “indiscriminate attack”. 

Gwyneth Ho, a former reporter of Stand News, who filmed the 21-July Incident live and was assaulted on that day, spoke out against the police’s remarks. She questioned how a person being attacked could film themselves and whether it was an attack targeting reporters if it was not an indiscriminate attack (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2734789453405103). Ho also said she walked from the east side of the ticketed area to the west side, and to every exit, she captured the white-clad, black-clad and everyone present, the only people she did not film were the police, who were not in the scene.” (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2735112923372756) Critics slammed the police of re-writing history for the 21-July Yuen Long incident (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2735126010038114). 

12 Hongkongers


With the situation deteriorating day by day, some people with charges attempted to flee for Taiwan. It is learnt that some have departed earlier and successfully made it to Taiwan. On 27 Aug, a Weibo post by China Coast Guard said they intercepted a speedboat suspected of illegal border crossing in waters under China’s jurisdiction southeast of Guangdong at around 09:00 on 23 Aug (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2735578756659506). Sources said then said there were 12 on the boat. Later, it was learned that the people on the boat were Andy Li Yu-hin (29yo), Quinn Moon (33yo), Tang Kai-yin (30yo), Li Tsz-yin (29yo), Wong Wai-yin (29yo), Cheung Chun-fu (22yo), Yim Man-him (21yo), Cheung Ming-yu (20yo), Kok Tsz-lun (18yo), Liu Tsz-man (18yo), Cheng Tsz-ho (17yo), Hoang Lam-phuc (16yo). The 12 have been detained in Yantian District Detention Centre.

Andy Li, a member of “Hong Kong Story” was accused of involvement the “Fight for Freedom. Stand with Hong Kong” group, which was involved in international lobbying efforts, he was arrested under HKNSL on 10 Aug and was released on bail. The other 11 were also previously arrested by the Hong Kong police, including 4, who were members of the “Dragon Slaying Brigade” group, which targeted the police and was allegedly involved in cases involving explosives. (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2737318739818841)

As of today, neither the 12’s families nor lawyers appointed by them have been able to get in touch with them in person as of today. Many have been concerned about the situation of the 12 in detention. Families reported that medicines were not allowed to be brought to them. Some lawyers appointed by families have been rejected from have been pressured from taking the case. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2746453965571985). A lawyer rejected from seeing the 12 said the authorities told him that the 12 had already commissioned other lawyers, whom he believed were appointed by the officials. (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2747072825510099).

(Also: 
11 Sep: Lawyer Warned by Internal Security: Don't Take Up Case or Your Career to Be Ruined

In mid-Sep, the families of the 12 met with the press, and stated their 4 demands, namely: let family-appointed lawyers meet with the detainees, provide appropriate medications to the detainees as necessary, allow the detainees to call their families and that the Hong Kong government ensure that the rights of the Hongkongers are protected and to take them back to Hong Kong. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2749486088602106/

The families also went to the Police Headquarters later in the month to report the case and demanded the Hong Kong police to account for the process of the 12’s arrest, Marine Department to submit radar record of vessels that day as well as the patrol routes and locations of the Hong Kong marine police. (https://www.facebook.com/save12hkyouths/posts/131097235397374)

The Hong Kong government has been blasted for their passiveness in assisting the 12 they were even accused of their involvement in the arrest. Shortly after the news of the 12’s arrest, Commissioner of Police, Chris Tang, denied cooperating with Chinese Coast Guards and said they did not know of the incident. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2735700859980629) In early Sep, Chief Executive Carrie Lam said the suspects had violated Mainland laws and would be dealt with according to them (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1489251731292221/2746105335606848/). That the case is out of the jurisdiction of Hong Kong, the Hong Kong government had no role to play and they would provide assistance whenever possible were the recurring themes in their subsequent responses to the incident.

With the 12’s case gaining attention from international society and US politicians, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo expressing concern of the 12 detainees in mid-Sep (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-hong-kong-idUSKBN262327), China demanded them to stop the “interference” and China’s MFA Hua Chunying tweeted that the 12 were not democratic activists but “elements attempting to separate Hong Kong from China.” (https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1304989967509151744)

Clash on 31-Aug; Pregnant woman dragged to ground

Clashes with the police happened in the area near Mong Kok and Prince Edward on 31 Aug, as people gathered to commemorate the 1st year anniversary of the Prince Edward station incident. On 31 August 2019, riot police entered Prince Edward station and were seen using force on passengers on the train. People were barred from entering the station, MTR refused to release footages to the public and there were rumours of deaths in the station. The police insist no deaths, but without letting the press enter the scene, it takes lots of efforts for the government to clarify (and it seems such efforts remain futile).

During the clash with the police on 31 Aug 2020, a pregnant woman was reported to have been pushed to the ground by the police. Her husband was also arrested for assaulting a police officer and the charge was later changed to disorderly conduct in a public place (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2739695966247785). 

Clash on 6 Sep; 12yo girl pinned to ground; Bus driver arrested

On Sunday (6 Sep), the day when LegCo election was supposed to be held, hundreds of protesters took to the streets in Kowloon. Not only did the police fired pepper pellets and arrested almost 300 people, but their action against a 12yo girl and their arrest of a bus driver also sparked an outcry. 

Pamela (12yo) and her brother (20yo) were buying art supplies when the police cordoned off the area where the shop was in. Pamela ran in fright as she was faced with riot police, and the police then pinned her to the ground. Both Pamela and her brother were issued penalty tickets for violating the gathering ban as they said the police pulled a passer-by in and said the three were gathering.
(https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2744792789071436) 
(Video showing Pamela pinned to the ground - may be distressing to some readers).

A bus driver of NWFB route 970 was one of the arrested that day. The police said he was driving in a high speed on Nathan Road and was honking in an "unreasonable" manner. He was later charged with dangerous driving, as well as possession of offensive weapons. NWFB Staff Union expressed dissatisfaction at the arrest, saying drivers would not normally speed up when they saw many people on the road, that honking was to warn people to stay out of danger in chaotic situation and that the “weapons”, which were a spanner and screwdriver were normally carried by bus drivers to adjust rear mirrors.

Tam Tak-chi arrested

On 6 Sep, People Power vice-chairman Tam Tak-chi, known as "Fast Beat" was arrested from his home on suspicion of uttering seditious words. He was later charged with holding or convening an unauthorised public meeting, disorderly conduct in public place and refusing to obey a police order. (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2744379672446081/) Besides the 3 offences, he was additionally charged with another count of "uttering seditious words” on 14 Sep. The charge said Tam Tak-chi had uttered seditious words at the junction of East Point Road and Great George Street in Causeway Bay on 24 May, i.e. words intended to bring into hatred or contempt, or to excite disaffection against the Hong Kong government, raise discontent or disaffection among Hong Kong people, rebel or to counsel disobedience to law or to any lawful order. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2751198988430816)

Hong Kong has separation of powers?

On 31 Aug, Secretary for Education, Kevin Yeung, made a remark that separation of powers did not exist now or before the Handover in 1997 (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2739408296276552). On the next day, Carrie Lam backed Yeung in her meeting with the media before the Executive Council meeting. She said the Basic Law provided that Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy was not full autonomy, and that Hong Kong is an executive-led system with the Chief Executive as chief over them; although administration, legislature and judiciary, play their own role and have checks and balances each other, eventually it was the Chief Executive who was responsible for the 3 branches and was held accountable to Beijing (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2740051899545525). 

Although the remark was backed by HKMAO, Liaison Office, Secretary for Justice, some government officials and pro-Beijing politicians, separation of powers in Hong Kong was in fact first mentioned in 1984 by Maria Tam (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2740343392849709/). Lawyers, groups and scholars have expressed concerns over the remark. 

Supporting Carrie Lam’s remark: 

Night, 7 Sep: HKMAO: Separation of Powers Never Exist in HK

Night, 7 Sep: Liaison Office: Cannot Override Executive-led System by Expanding Right of Judiciary under “Judicial Independence”; Using Separation of Powers to Deny Executive-led “Aims to Reject Beijing’s Overall Jurisdiction”

09:06 2 Sep: Ronny Tong: "Separation of Powers" Debate Pointless

10:07 2 Sep: Andrew Leung: 3 Branches Play Respective Roles

Morning, 2 Sep: Junius Ho: CE's Remark Invigorating

Morning, 5 Sep: Justice Sec: Shouldn't Focus on Labelling of Whether It's Separation of Powers

10:26 6 Sep: Law Chi-kwong: Term "Separation of Powers" Leads to Unnecessary Associations; "Checks & Balances" Is Better

06:30 22 Sep: Hong Kong’s separation of powers is subordinate to China, says Beijing legal scholar

Criticisms of the remark:
13:02 1 Sep: Dennis Kwok Slams Comments Dismissing Separation of Power as Ludicrous; Court of Final Appeal to Give Final Decision
21:15 1 Sep: Experts fear Beijing interference after Carrie Lam rejects separation of powers
Morning 2 Sep: Helena Wong: Separation of Powers to Be Murdered
2 Sep: Bar Association Concerned About CE & SED’s Remarks of “No Separation of Powers in HK”, Remarks Unfounded & Inconsistent w/ Provisions of BL
06:00 5 Sep: Former Hong Kong civil service chief slams Carrie Lam for ‘no separation of powers’ comment
14:05 5 Sep: Progressive Lawyers Group: Separation of powers is a longstanding common law principle and is enshrined in the Basic Law
7 Sep: Prof. David Law, Faculty of Law at HKU: It does sound like Carrie Lam is deeply confused or deeply mistaken.

Commentary:
Morning, 2 Sep: Carrie Lam Demonstrates ‘Rectification from Root of Problem”, No More Ambiguous Stance on Political System & Constitution

Made-in-Hong Kong?

On 11 August, the US published a notice that states the requirements that all goods made in Hong Kong will have to be labelled with “Made in China”. Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Edward Yau, in a press conference, condemned the requirement, and said it was “calling white black” (literal translation of Chinese idiom), inconsistent with the fact, and does not conform with the WTO’s regulation on product origin. He said the US’s unilateral, barbaric act ignores the fact, breaches the international convention, and warrants HKSARG’s strong condemnation and staunch opposition. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2723348817882500/)

The Hong Kong government pursued this incident further in mid-Sep and said they wrote a letter to US trade representative Robert Lighthizer, saying Washington is infringing WTO rules and rights of Hong Kong as a separate customs entity by enforcing 'Made in China' tags for goods produced here. (https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/en/component/k2/1549933-20200916.htm)

US and UK ending transfer of fugitives 

Following Britain’s announcement of the suspension of extradition treaty with Hong Kong on 20 July (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2703771529840229/), the Hong Kong government received a notice from the Consulate General of USA on 18 Aug on the suspension or termination of three bilateral agreements, namely the agreement for the surrender of fugitive offenders (SFO), the agreement for the transfer of sentenced persons and the agreement concerning tax exemptions from the income derived from the international operation of ships. The government condemned the US on this. (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2729289463955102/

Primary election (11-12 Jul)

When expressing demands by means of a peaceful protest seemed to be a thing in the past, many put hope in the Legislative Council general election, which was supposed to be held in Sep 2020, for a chance to turn things around. With the aim of securing 35+ (more than half of) seats at LegCo, the pro-democracy camp hoped to seek consensus and coordinate for a name list for each election constituency to trump the proportional representation voting system. To do so, the pro-democracy camp decided to hold a primary election in July. 

Before the primary election was held, a government official warned that the primary was unlawful, including violating Articles 20, 22 and 29 of HK NSL (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2694664644084251). The pro-democracy camp also struggled with the logistics of holding the primaries, including finding venues to be polling stations, concerns of being disturbed by pro-Beijing people and violating the COVID-19 gathering ban. Despite the warnings and challenges, with offices of District Councillors turned into polling stations, the primaries were successfully held on 11-12 July. Over 600,000 voted: the unexpectedly high turnout rate surprised many. 

The government expressed a headline stance on the primary election afterwards, alleging that it caused unfairness to the upcoming election and suspected it breached the gathering ban and privacy (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2116-13-jul-cmab-hardline-stance-on-primaries-ce-simply-calls-2-days-of-activiti/2698218133728902/). A Chinese scholar from Beijing’s think tank also alleged that the primaries were illegal (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2700393830177999).  The results were announced on Monday following the primary election, with many younger “protest camp” candidates obtaining high number of votes (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2698208137063235/).

Pro-democracy LegCo Hopefuls Disqualified

After the LegCo hopefuls submitted their nominations, 12 pro-democracy LegCo election candidates consecutively received a letter from Returning Officer in late July. The letter quoted the candidates' past words and actions, and demanded that they explain their stance on various issues, including seeking sanctions on Hong Kong by foreign governments, the National Security Law, and Hong Kong independence. Also, there was the question of whether one could uphold the Basic Law while he/she forces the government to fulfil the Five Demands. The hopefuls who received the letter were: Civic Party’s Alvin Yeung, Cheng Tat-hung, Kwok Ka-ki, Dennis Kwok, Kenneth Leung of the Professional Guild, Southern District Councillor Tiffany Yuen, Central and Western District Councillor Fergus Leung, former Stand News reporter Gwyneth Ho, spokesperson for Civil Assembly Team Ventus Lau, then spokesperson for Hong Kong Higher Institutions International Affairs Delegation Sunny Cheung,  former Demosisto secretary-general Joshua Wong, ADPL’s Ho Kai-ming and LSD’s Jimmy Sham, Civic Passion’s Cheng Chung-tai and Tommy Cheung Sau-yin and Civic Passion’s Cheng Kam-mun. 

On 30 July, Returning Officers invalidated the nominations of 12 candidates, i.e. they were disqualified from the election. Those disqualified were Joshua Wong, Tiffany Yuen, Lester Shum, Kenneth Leung, Gwyneth Ho, Ventus Lau, Fergus Leung, Cheng Kam-mun and Alvin Yeung, Kwok Ka-ki, Dennis Kwok and Cheng Tat-hung. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2711699309047451/)

LegCo Election Postponed 

The 6th term of LegCo "ended" in July 2020 - why did we put quotation marks here is now clear. On top of the Returning Officers’ action, there were voices calling for postponing LegCo election (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2704252959792086). There were discussions from the pro-Beijing camp of the potential problems related to postponing the election in the week (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2706593682891347), and after news sources revealing the government’s intention to delay LegCo election (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2710869942463721 ; https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2710024145881634), Carrie Lam announced on 31 Jul to postpone the LegCo general election for a year on the grounds of public safety, people's health and ensuring a fair and open election. She invoked the Emergency Regulations Ordinance (emergency law) for the postpone of the election. Lam reiterated that the postponement had nothing to do with politics, although she admitted that she did not consult the Election Affairs Commission and the 4 coronavirus experts. The Hong Kong government also intended to bring it to NPCSC for their endorsement to strengthen the legal basis of the decision. (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1446445815572813/2712728355611213/)

What follows the postponement of LegCo election was the problem of how to deal with the 1-year period of vacuum at LegCo. One proposal was to extend the 2016-2020 term for 1 more year, but there were problems - The Basic Law states that a LegCo term shall be 4 years, how should the legal issues be dealt with? Should the lawmakers disqualified by Returning Officers to run in the election remain in LegCo? 

The Hong Kong government decided to leave them to NPCSC. NPCSC decided on 11 August to extend the LegCo term of 2016-2020 for at least 1 year. Although this conflicts with the duration requirement a LegCo term stated in Basic Law, NPCSC’s decision was not subjected to legal action in Hong Kong. Critics thus deem LegCo after Sep 2020 illegitimate. How should the pro-democracy camp react to the extended year of LegCo term? Whether the pan-democrats should stay in LegCo from Sep 2020 onward became a heated debate. 

Pan-Dems To Stay or Not To Stay?

Although the pan-democrats were inclined to stay at LegCo, many from the “protest camp” called for a boycott of the extended year at LegCo. With voices saying this decision from NPCSC had the agenda to cause a divide within the pro-democracy camp, the pan-democrats decided to use a public opinion poll to decide their fate. Subsequently, the Democratic Party announced that they commissioned Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute to conduct the survey (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2740054486211933).

3rd wave coronavirus

The number of COVID-19 cases saw a surge in mid-July and daily cases past 100 for many days between late July and early August. Genetic sequencing of the virus showed the third wave of the pandemic in Hong Kong came from people exempted from quarantine. Ship and flight crew were among those exempted from quarantine that time. 

Facing the 3rd wave of outbreak, the government announced tighter measures on 27 July. The measures included compulsory closing of sports venues and other premises, a stricter gathering ban (from 4 people to 2 people), a compulsory mask-wearing order, and most notably, a dine-in ban for 24/7 from 29 July. 

On the first day the dine-in ban took effect, photos of people sitting on streets eating went viral on the Internet. Churches, community centres and other civil organisations advertised online that they welcomed people without a place to eat to have meals at their premises. The government announced that night the opening of heat shelters for people to lunch there as well (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2711019929115389). Succumbed to the backlash, the government lifted the full-day dine-in ban on 31 Jul (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2711638742386841).
 
(See more: 11:47 30 Jul: Ho Pak-leung Sorry for Raising Whole-day Dine-in Ban; Also Urges to Stop FDHs from Coming

The government announced the Universal Community Testing Programme to allow residents to get tested for free in early August in an attempt to control the outbreak. The programme started in the beginning of September. The government worked with a support team from China and hired 3 private companies: BGI (via Sunrise Diagnostic Centre in Hong Kong), Kingmed Diagnostics (Hong Kong) and Hybribio (via Hong Kong Molecular Pathology Diagnostic Centre in Hong Kong) to run the programme. (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2718294781721237)

Some worried that the government might use this as an opportunity to collect their DNA for surveillance purposes. Critics questioned the efficacy of a universal testing scheme and whether it was a good use of resources; the qualifications and the reasons why the government selected the 3 companies also sparked controversies. In mid-September, as the programme came to an end, a team member said in an interview that some in the team wore diapers to save time [from answering natural calls], so that they could work in the laboratory for 12 hours non-stopped. Yet, the turnout was way less than 5 million, as hoped by Sophia Chan, Secretary for Food and Health (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2721159308101451) and it has so been reported that the testing capacity was lower than claimed (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2741820442702004). 

Civil servants required to pledge allegiance 

In early July, Secretary for the Civil Service Patrick Nip revealed the plan to have new civil servants pledge their allegiance to HKSAR. This been suggested to be related to civil servants’ involvement in anti-ELAB. (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2694515680765814). Nip invited people to express views on this in mid-July (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/photos/a.1489251731292221/2699699763580739/). In late September, this plan became official, as Nip announced that civil servants joining from 1 July are required to sign a document to indicate their support for the Basic Law and allegiance to HKSAR and those who do not sign the document will not be employed. 

Civil servants have also been warned to watch their tongues, as Nip said comments made in private or on social media platforms, which were originally set up as private, can be made public suddenly, and the impact of those comments is something everyone should be concerned about, even though it might not have been the original intention. (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2760781847472530). 

Not only are new civil servants required to pledge their allegiance, but they may also face termination in their participation in “public order events”. In mid-August, it was reported that internal notices were sent to multiple department heads stating that newly joined civil servants should not be allowed to pass probation if they were found to have participated unlawful public events aimed at the government administration and was arrested and charged (https://facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2727266337490748). 

After the internal notices were disclosed, Carrie Lam, when she met with the press before her usual Executive Council meeting, expressed that allegiance to HKSAR and upholding the Basic Law were expectations of civil servants; and since the probation period is for the employer to observe work performance and conduct of employees, if the civil servant creates a bad impression of the government, including online remarks, acts and deeds, the government has every reason to dismiss them. She said it is not a question of presumption of guilt, but that of employer-employee relations.

Patrick Nip, in a subsequent TV interview, also publicly backed this plan to end the probation period of new recruits who are suspected of joining unlawful public events, arrested and prosecuted will be deemed inappropriate in terms of conduct. He added that if a civil servant on probation is arrested but not prosecuted, the government will look at the case and determine whether it is appropriate for the civil servant to finish his/her probation period. When asked if it is unfair that civil servants on probation face termination even when they are not yet convicted, Nip said this has always been the principle of the civil service and they will follow the established procedure, which means presumption of innocence does not apply to arrested civil servants on probation.

See also:
12:36 30 Sep: 46 Civil Servants Interdicted for Suspected Participation in Public Order Events after Being Arrested/Charged


Christy Chan’s Death Inquest

Christy Chan Yin-lam, a student of VTC Youth College - Hong Kong Design Institute and a good swimmer who participated the anti-ELAB movement, was found dead and naked in the sea near Devil's Peak in September 2019. The Coroner's Court held a death inquest from 24 Aug to 11 Sep, 32 witnesses and 35 pieces of documentary evidence, including CCTV footages were summoned.

Those who testified included Christy’s mother, grandfather, social worker, juvenile home’s staff, classmates, psychiatrists; the policewoman who tended for Christy when she cried outside Tung Chung station during anti-ELAB last year, a former student of HKDI who spotted a woman who resembled Christy and the taxi driver who drove Christy the night she disappeared, as well as marine police and government chemists who handled Christy’s dead body. The Coroner’s Court also called upon veteran psychiatrist - Dr Ho Mei-yee and forensic pathologist Dr Philip Beh Swan-lip to be expert witnesses. 

The 11-day inquest revealed Christy’s difficult life. Yet, events leading to Chan’s death remained unknown. In the end of the inquest, the jury decided unanimously that Christy’s death was an open verdict, meaning the evidence did not fully or further disclose the means whereby the cause of death arose. The jury agreed that Chan died between the night of 19 Sep 2019 and 20 Sep at an unknown place, and the cause of death was unknown due to decomposition.

Our Reports on Christy Chan’s Death Inquest

14:30 24 Aug: Christy Chan's Mother Reveals Chan's Several Suicidal Attempts; Didn't Bail Christy nor Follow Up

12:25 25 Aug: Chan Yin-lam's Coroner's Inquest - Juvenile Home Director: Chan is "Smart", Not Suicidal

03:42 26 Aug: 2 Psychiatrists Diagnose Christy Chan with Oppositional Defiant Disorder; Denies Suicidal Intention in Consultation

11:18 27 Aug: Court Shows Footage of Christy Chan Bawling outside Tung Chung Station; Cop: She Reacts Emotionally when Hears Going to Hospital

11:31 31 Aug: Christy Chan’s Death Inquest – Marine Cop Believes Body Found Naked Suspicious; No Clothing in Waters Nearby

13:43 31 Aug: Christy Chan’s Death Inquest – Inspector: No Apparent Injuries on Chan's Body; Wound on Calf Not Fatal

15:23 31 Aug: HKDI Alumnus Testifies Seeing Christy Chan Loitering w/o Shoes & Dazed at Tiu Keng Leng MTR Station; Marine Police Claims Didn’t Find Significant Injuries on Chan's Body

18:36 31 Aug: [Death Inquest of Christy Chan] Paramedic Claims Rigour Mortis & Livor Mortis upon Discovery of Body; Gov’t Chemist: Toxicology Test Didn’t Find any Drugs in Body

Morning, 2 Sep: Forensic Pathologist: Christy Chan’s Cause of Death Unknown

11:06 2 Sep: Veteran Forensic Pathologist: Cannot Be Sure Died of Drowning; Bit Odd Not Finding Water in Stomach

11:23 3 Sep: Christy Chan’s Death Inquest – Father Suffers Mental Illness; Situation Worsens after Daughter’s Funeral; Hospitalized till Today

10:43 11 Sep: Christy Chan's Inquest Enters Final Stage; Coroner: This Court No Right to Decide Criminal Liability

17:10 11 Sep: 15yo Christy Chan's Death "Open Verdict”

See also: 
25 Aug: 1M, 1F Arrested for Nuisance to Christy Chan's Mum, Granddad



20210111

HKCT Review 2020: April to June 2020

HKCT Review 2020: April to June 2020




As a city that has survived the SARS epidemic of 2003, when COVID-19 first hit the city, there was widespread panic. Following the implementation of social distancing measures and a gradual resumption of facial mask supply in town, citizens somewhat adjusted to the “new normal”. However, things in the political arena continued to heat up as the score-settling from the anti-ELAB movement continued, this time targeting the outspoken activists, teachers, and civil servants. Moreover, the National People’s Congress began its deliberation of a draconian National Security Law for Hong Kong, which weighed heavily on the hearts of not only the Hong Kong people, but also sent shockwaves abroad, prompting even the G7 to voice out its concerns, and the US imposed visa restrictions on CCP officials who are believed to be responsible for, or complicit in, undermining Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy. Despite the objections of the local people and foreign politicians and governments, the NSL was signed into law on 30 June and came into effect immediately.

Arrest of pro-democracy activists

Besides a draconian law that could quash unrest even before it happened, the scores against protesters was settled by high-profile arrests of pro-democracy activists and leaders on 18 Apr on allegations of unlawful assemblies on 18 Aug, 1 Oct, and 20 Oct 2019 (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2628376230713093). The arrestees included former lawmaker Au Nok-hin, Martin Lee, NextMedia founder Jimmy Lai, and LSD members Leung Kwok-hung and Raphael Wong, and the pro-democracy camp slammed the arrest as part of a “script written to suppress”, and expressed concern what the actions would be from one day to the day, and how many lawmakers would be arrested after leaving the Legislative Council Chamber (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2628313624052687). Little did they know at the time that things would take a drastic turn for the worst in less than 6 months from the arrests.

The arrests sent shockwave beyond the borders of the city, as international politicians such as former Hong Kong Governor Chris Patten, rose up to criticise the erosion of the fundamental freedoms and rights enshrined in One Country, Two Systems, and the assault on the values underpinning Hong Kong’s way of life for years (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2628558117361571). Politicians from the US also voiced their concerns, including US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2629039563980093), US Attorney General William Barr, US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi just to name a few (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2629044587312924). Besides voicing concerns over the stripping away of freedoms and rights of the Hong Kong people, US politicians also took the opportunity to push forth for the US’s administration to implement the HK Human Rights & Democracy Act.

Moreover, even the UN had paid close attention to the high-profile arrests via its office of the human rights commissioner (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2633983096819073), and reminded the HK government on 24 April of its obligations to international law. Political and social instability was certainly also on the minds of the business sector, and Fitch ratings took the lead on 20 April in downgrading Hong Kong’s credit rating from AA to AA- with a stable outlook (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2630209863863063), which the Hong Kong government of course responded to with a statement saying that the city still had a solid foundation built on the local economy and financial market. Then on 1 May, the Hong Kong government issued a strongly-worded rebuttal against accusations of foreign politicians and parliaments (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2638938286323554).

The encroachment of CPG units in Hong Kong

Various representatives and extensions of the Central People’s Government (CPG) have setup bureaus in Hong Kong, and their roles and authority in Hong Kong was brought under the spotlight in April when the Liaison Office of the CPG (LOCPG) and the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office (HKMAO) seemed to have become too outspoken. Controversy erupted on 13 April when the HKMAO issued an opinion slamming members of the opposition as reaping political capital for themselves at the expense of citizens, and using various methods to try to bring the legislature to a grinding halt (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2624671567750226). Civic Party’s Dennis Kwok came under the spotlight this time as the CPG offices targeted him as the chair of the Legislative Council House Committee election. 

Despite drawing ire from politicians and citizens alike, the CPG units in Hong Kong did not stand by, the CPG units deny accusations of “interference” in Hong Kong matters, and the HKMAO vehemently voiced its denial with 3 statements targeting the pan-democratic camp (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2631071490443567). The Hong Kong government chimes in and explains that the LOCPG is an office setup in Hong Kong in accordance with Article 22(2) of the Basic Law, and is therefore authorised by the CPG to have special responsibility to handle issues relating to Hong Kong (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2628705410680175). However, the LOCPG did seem to enjoy some special status besides that written into the Basic Law. As now-disbanded Demosistō unveiled at a press conference that the LOCPG had at least 757 properties in Hong Kong over the past 4 decades, and stamp duty had been waived for the LOCPG (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2629995360551180).

However, it would take more than 3 successive statements from the Hong Kong government to convince everyone. The Hong Kong Bar Association (HKBA) for one, slammed the remarks of the LOCPG and the government for lack of consistency, and thus tarnishing One Country, Two Systems on 20 April (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2630201607197222). Foreign press on 24 April went so far as to remark that the overbearing presence of the CPG units in Hong Kong in fact heralded the beginning of One Country, One System (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2634693173414732). On 5 June, Secretary for Constitutional and  Mainland Affairs (SCMA) Erick Tsang refuted HKBA’s accusations that the LOCPG and HKMAO were overbearing, but that the 2 CPG units indeed had supervisory powers over Hong Kong (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2667344550149594).

Securing the nation with a new law

Seeing that the Anti-ELAB movement managed to go on for months and only happened to quiet down with the outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic, a long-term solution to unrest and possible threats to the integrity of national sovereignty was needed. To achieve just that, Beijing officials held meetings with Hong Kong delegates to the NPC and Hong Kong CPPCC members frequently in the month before the enactment of the newly proposed legislation of the National Security Law for Hong Kong (NSL) (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2655673741316675). The chief of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, Xia Baolong, briefed Hong Kong delegates to the NPC for the first time on 21 May, and he affirmed later that the law would not undermine the freedom of speech. The wording of the legislation was expected to take a harder line than Basic Law’s Article 23, and to be “very broad”, according to political commentator Bruce Lui. In other words, it would allow room for interpretation by the courts. Nevertheless, sensing growing public concern over NSL, the HK government under CE Carrie Lam’s lead held a press conference on 22 May to reiterate that even after the NSL was put in place, Hong Kong would “remain a free society” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2656057451278304).

Han Zheng, China’s Vice Premier, received 36 Hong Kong delegates to the National People's Congress (NPC) in Beijing on 24 May to reiterate the importance of national security and Hong Kong’s role in the country’s development. Han also hoped that through the Hong Kong delegates, messages of hope and confidence could be spread to the Hong Kong people that the NPC would support the Chief Executive and the SAR Government would resolve deep-rooted conflicts in the city. Moreover, Han was quoted saying that there was no conflict between the legislation of the NSL and that of Article 23 of the Basic Law (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2657301511153898). 

During the drafting stage, the NSL had drawn much speculation and attention not only locally, but also abroad. The US State Department issued a statement on 22 May, condemning the PRC’s “disastrous proposal” to unilaterally and arbitrarily impose national security legislation on Hong Kong, while reiterating that the US would continue to monitor Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy, democratic institutions, and civil liberties to determine whether Hong Kong could retain its special status under US law (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2656300527920663). On 23 May, a joint statement by the foreign ministers of the UK, Canada, and Australian expressed concern that the devising of the NSL without consultation with the local people, legislature, or judiciary “would clearly undermine the principle of ‘One Country, Two Systems’” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2656132794604103). Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen wrote on 24 May that the NSL seriously threatened the future of Hong Kong (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2657579051126144). Christians both local and abroad also voiced concerns on 24 May that the passing of the NSL could impair freedom of speech, and maintaining ties between local and foreign churches could be construed as colluding with foreign forces (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2657820551101994). The Hong Kong Bar Association also issued a statement to voice its concerns over the proposed legislation on 25 May (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2658231401060909). Legal academic Johannes Chan on 25 May published his opinion that enactment of the NSL will be “followed by a series of prosecutions, suppressions, and restraints, with a view to turning Hong Kong into a submissive society where no one thinks and dares to question authorities” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2673352889548760).


Scholars also weighed in on the situation, and Brian Fong, a comparative political scientist, wrote on 25 May that Hong Kong was becoming ground zero for a new cold war. The proposed legislation, Fong argued, would mean that Beijing was no longer satisfied by indirect rule over the territory (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2658947734322609). Meanwhile, the Hong Kong government stressed on the same day that the NPC was paramount, and that the issue of national security laid outside the limits of the HKSAR’s autonomy (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2658416307709085). Various Hong Kong government units chimed in to show their support of the draft Decision of the NPC on 25 May (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2657860704431312, https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2658290584388324). STH Frank Chan, went so far on the same day as to invoke the Bible story "The Judgment of Solomon", describing the foreign powers as “Fake Mother” and Beijing as “True Mother" respectively, in support of the NSL draft (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2658154881068561). Even 5 heads of universities expressed their understanding that the NSL was needed, and that they fully supported One Country, Two Systems on 1 June (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2663702110513838). However, on 12 June, academics shared their concerns about the NSL, for matters such as foreign research grants or international collaborations could be interpreted as colluding with foreign forces, and more profoundly, there was a heightened worry over the law to the extent of possible self-censorship, thus stifling academic freedom (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2672855516265164).

In June, more voices from the legal sector offered their warnings against the NSL after the NPC’s decision on 28 May. Chief Justice Andrew Li expressed his understanding why the NSL is proposed, but he shared his comments on being careful on the details of the law, which he penned in an article on 2 June (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2664459750438074). On the following day, the Hong Kong Bar Association wrote to the NPC saying that once the NSL was enacted, it would yield far-reaching impact to Hong Kong citizens, and both local and foreign businesses (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2665359477014768). Non-permanent judge of the Court of Final Appeal, Kemal Bohkary said in an interview on 3 June that the rule-of-law storm was in full swing (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2665522193665163). On 11 June, Law Society of Hong Kong issued its preliminary observations on the NSL, stating that of course the NPC had the right to legislate on national security, but the Society urged the NPC to exercise restraint, and to maintain confidence in the One Country, Two Systems policy and the rule of law in Hong Kong (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2672215936329122). Following that, the HKBA issued a new statement on 12 June, which mentions that "if the national security law is to be made and to apply here, it should fully reflect the unique circumstances and the constitutional context of its promulgation" and mentions details of what the national security law should include "in light of the unique circumstances and the constitutional context and in order to protect the integrity of the constitutional design of One Country, Two Systems". Moreover, should national security units of the CPG be setup in Hong Kong, they “should only be done pursuant to Article 22 of the Basic Law. The office and its personnel need to abide by the laws of the HKSAR. They should not have any law enforcement powers, including the power to conduct surveillance, save in accordance with the laws of the HKSAR. They should not be entitled to any civil and criminal immunity under the laws of the HKSAR” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2673622609521788). 

Perhaps not quite surprising, UK put an escape in the works at this time, seeing that the CCP was ready to betray what it had promised to the people of the former British colony under the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the subsequently drafted Basic Law. On 24 May, media reported that UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson had a secret plan to allow Hong Kong citizens holding the British Nationals (Overseas) (BNO) passport to move to Britain in the case of further restrictions on rights and freedoms as a result of the impending NSL for Hong Kong (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2657559891128060). On 12 June, UK Home Secretary asked the Prime Minister to grant Hong Kong BNO passport holders and their family dependents in Hong Kong “leave to enter the UK outside of the Immigration Rules” until a pathway to citizenship is enacted (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2676358199248229). Taiwan also stepped up to support Hong Kong people seeking to flee uncertainties and dangers, when on 18 June, it announced that an office would be set up to “practically handle humanitarian relief and care” for Hong Kong citizens, though under the precondition of safeguarding Taiwan’s national security (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2678515159032533).

Although some citizens seemed concerned and even angered at the impending legislation, others took to giving their signatures in support of the NSL. This move made supposedly by 2.9m people struck a chord with Luo Huining, Director of the Liaison Office on 1 June (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2664048183812564).

Besides finding escape routes in person for those who weren’t so optimistic about the NSL, some in Hong Kong took more immediate steps to avert risk to their capital. On 22 May, Hong Kong bankers noted that their clients who had contemplated or set up in place an escape route for their capital since the Anti-ELAB movement shook the city in 2019 finally put those plans into work upon news of the imminent NSL for Hong Kong (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2655847274632655). However, after the NPC’s decision on 28 May, major banks including HSBC (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2665974673619915) and Standard Chartered (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2665592890324760) threw themselves behind the NSL on 3 Jun, making known their support of the draconian law.

On 15 June, with 2 weeks’ time remaining before the NSL would be enacted, Secretary for Security John Lee stated on a televised interview that there would be 3 requirements on police officers enforcing the NSL (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2675226576028058). On the same day, legal scholar Johannes Chan worried that if national security organs of the CPG could supervise Hong Kong, then that would be “nationalizing” Hong Kong’s autonomy (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2675538329330216). On the other hand, Tsinghua University Law professor Wang Zhenmin said that the NPC had exercised restraint in penning the NSL in that there could have been other laws drafted to also been included in Annex 3 to the Basic Law, while Chinese Renmin University's law professor and Basic Law Committee member Han Dayuan said that the NSL guaranteed that everyone would lead a happy, dignified, decent, and free life (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2675447386005977). On 16 June, however, Philip Dykes, chairman of HKBA, believed Beijing's intention of imposing the NSL on Hong Kong was to take control of the most serious national security cases in Hong Kong in a "reverse engineering" of the failed extradition bill, “Rather than you going to the mainland, the mainland comes to you” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2676460459238003). The G7 issued its first joint statement on 17 June on Hong Kong, calling on China to reconsider the NSL (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2677627515787964). The HKBA issued a new statement on 19 June warning that the enactment of the NSL would “create a parallel law enforcement system where one part - the office of the Mainland security agency - may not be subject to the usual legal scrutiny and accountability that is in place for the law enforcement agencies in the HKSAR” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2679344392282943).

In the week leading to the passing of the NSL, those for and against the legislation were eager to make their stances known. On 21 June, media reported that the HKBA, Progressive Lawyers Group and senior lawyers told Reuters their concerns and questions towards the NSL (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2680461402171242). At night the same day, the Secretary for Justice, Secretary for Security as well as the heads of 6 disciplined forces expressed their staunch support for the safeguarding of national security in HK (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2680601468823902). However, on the following day, the EU “reiterated its grave concerns at steps taken by China to impose national security legislation from Beijing and considers those steps not in conformity with the Hong Kong Basic Law and China’s international commitments” in advance of a meeting between the EU and China (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2681472422070140). Also on 23 June, First Chief Justice of Hong Kong Andrew Li published an article citing his concerns over the NSL and its impact to the judiciary, that Beijing’s retention of jurisdiction “on few cases” to be worrying, and that the CE’s possible conflict of interest in selecting NSL designated judges (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2681789545371761), the last point of which was also echoed by the HKBA (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2681903715360344, https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2682223968661652).

Having faced criticism of the lack of consultation, especially with the Hong Kong people, who would be most directly affected by the NSL, Beijing arranged some “consultation” with the locals leading up to the passing of the law. On 22 June, it was reported that 7 religious leaders met with the LOCPG, who expressed their understanding and support towards the new law (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2681967135354002). State mouthpiece People’s Daily reported that Central Government official(s) hosted a number of symposiums in Hong Kong on 23 Jun to continue to collect views and suggestions widely from various sectors of Hong Kong on the NSL (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2681953058688743). Later, on 25 June, former deputy director of the Basic Law Committee Elsie Leung told the media that there was no problem with not releasing details of the NSL in advance, and that the CE was more suited to designate judges to handle NSL since the CE would have access to confidential information; moreover, Leung remarked that Beijing officials had consulted different people, which the LOCPG website had described as 120 people from various sectors (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2683571661860216), and it was reported on CCTV on 28 June that views from HK had been fully heard and studied prior to submitting 2nd draft of NSL for deliberation (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2686356718248377). On 27 June, SCMA Erick Tsang told CCTV in an exclusive interview that he had been “longing for NSL for a long time” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2685251545025561), while SCS Patrick Nip told CCTV on the same day that the NSL was the “country’s love and care for HK” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2685947114956004).

More reactions arose before the enactment of the NSL. The Foreign Correspondents’ Club in Hong Kong issued an open letter on 24 June seeking CE’s clarification on the NSL and its implications on press freedom (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2684545348429514). On 25 June, 13 Canadian senators called on Canada to impose sanctions on Chinese and Hong Kong officials for "gross violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2683961355154580). In the US on the same day, the Senate unanimously passed a sanctions bill on China over its legislating of the NSL, which the US saw as a threat to the city’s autonomy (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2684291665121549), and on 26 June, the HKSARG strongly opposed the bill’s passing (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2684738058410243), which the foreign ministry office in HK “resolutely opposes” on 27 June (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2685430481674334). HKU legal scholar Eric Cheung on 26 June expressed his worries that the NSL would leave human rights & existing systems unprotected (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2684520171765365).

The countering measures from abroad came on 27 June when US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced visa restrictions on current and former CCP officials who are believed to be responsible for, or complicit in, undermining Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy, as guaranteed in the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, or undermining human rights and fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2684772581740124). On 29 June, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said that it would reciprocate the US’s visa restrictions (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2686963191521063).

On 29 June, the day before the passing of the NSL, state mouthpieces Wen Wei Po and Ta Kung Pao dedicated their headlines to discuss the NSL and to slam the “Liberate HK” slogan and “Glory to HK” song as advocating “HK Independence” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687161491501233). On the same day, the New York Times reported that Japan calls China’s new NSL for Hong Kong “regrettable” and undermined the credibility of One Country, Two Systems (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687601521457230).

Convenor of Hong Kong Independence Union Wayne Chan announced on 29 June that he had jumped bail, citing the looming “NSL was the main trigger for my departure” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2686639444886771). In mere hours before the voting and passing of the NSL in Beijing, political groups Studentlocalism, and Demosistō announced that they would dissolve immediately, while the Hong Kong National Front said that it would move their members and operations abroad (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687694901447892, https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687679384782777, https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687599118124137).

Lobbying to the last minute, CE Carrie Lam spoke on 30 June at the UN Human Rights Council that the NSL was necessary for the sake of both the 7.5m HK people and also the 1.4b people in China, that “such a gaping hole in national security” needed to be fixed (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687748994775816). In the evening that day, Xinhua News reported that Xi Jinping had signed the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Safeguarding of National Security of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region into law (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687778704772845), followed by statements from CE, Secretary for Justice, Secretary for Security, and 6 heads of disciplined forces welcoming the passage of NSL (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687816648102384). Shortly after the signing by Xi Jinping, the LOCPG issued a statement urging people to not underestimate Beijing’s determination to ensure national security, and that the new law would help Hong Kong start afresh (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687952381422144). At 23:00 the same night, the NSL was signed by the CE, gazetted, and became effective immediately (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687961811421201).

Citizens’ Protests against NSL

On 10 May, it was Mother’s Day, when many families went out to celebrate the occasion, but it was also the same day as the “Sing with You” and “Shop with You on Mother’s Day” protests, which put the police on high alert. With families out and about in celebration, scary scenes both indoor and outdoor were seen that day (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2646524488898267). Cable News reported that in total, more than 100 had been arrested, and more than 2 dozen people were demanded to face the wall, forming a line waiting to be arrested for unlawful assembly (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2646664558884260).

It was also a tough day for journalists covering the news, as one of them faced a credible threat of violence from a police officer who aimed their weapon at the journalist (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2646683358882380). Another journalist, this time from TMHK, was detained by the police for an hour, had his head pressed into pepper spray and left there in extreme pain (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2647007772183272). On 11 May, the chairman of the Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA), Chris Yeung Kin-hing, said that it was “very humiliating” for the police to ask reporters to kneel down, read out their names and organisations to the camera before leaving, describing the situation as "extremely bad" and questioning whether the PDPO had been breached (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2647167525500630).

Hong Kong citizens on 24 May showed their dismay at the NSL with a march on Hong Kong island around Causeway Bay and Wan Chai. At the same time, CE Carrie Lam seemed to remain in her parallel universe, posting on social media that many users left messages on her account saying how they supported her and the government, asking to enact legislation of Article 23 of the Basic Law ASAP, while she would continue to stand on guard against smearing and attacks of those opposing the NSL (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2657548454462537). Taking to the streets to protest against the NSL seemed to fall on deaf ears, as the government issued a statement that night saying, ‘The violent acts in Causeway Bay and Wan Chai today show that advocates of "Hong Kong independence" and rioters remain rampant, reinforcing the need and urgency of the legislation on national security’ (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2657553007795415). 

On 28 June merely days before the NSL would officially be enacted, netizens called for a silent march in Kowloon between Jordan and Mong Kok, which resulted in 53 arrests (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2686307364919979, https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2686242231593159).

The annual 1 July rally received the police’s notice of objection, but on 30 June, CHRF convenor Figo Chan announced that despite possibility of unsuccessful appeal against the objection, the march would go on even if only he attended (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687733508110698).

Protecting the country’s dignity by law

More than a year and a half in the making, the National Anthem Ordinance (NAO) was finally voted into law in June. Designed to regulate the playing of the Chinese national anthem and how the national flag can be used, the legislation entered its 2nd reading after a long hiatus on 28 May, same day as the NPC’s decision was handed down on the NSL, and was passed into law on 4 June after its 3rd reading (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2666884236862292).

On 11 June, CE Carrie Lam was photographed signing the NAO making it officially part of Hong Kong law. A photo of Lam with Xi Jinping could be seen in the background in her office (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2672414356309280). Then on 13 June, Ming Pao published the police’s internal guidelines on enforcement of the NAO (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2673824119501637).

Prelude to mass disqualification of democratic lawmakers

The targeting of Civic Party’s Dennis Kwok by CPG units over his role in hosting the LegCo House Committee election was severe to the point of questioning whether his behaviours were constitutional and legal. However, Kwok was resolute in continuing to serve his role as chair of the House Committee chairman election as stipulated by the regulations as deputy chair of the House Committee, going so far as to say on 23 Apr that “it is an honour to be disqualified for democracy” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2633139870236729). As an opinion published in Sing Tao showed, disqualification of Dennis Kwok was certainly on the table as the continued filibustering would cause a huge obstruction to the passing of critical legislation, such as the national anthem law (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2635986049952111).

Besides procedural and administrative means, there was also a legal attempt to oust Dennis Kwok to pave the way to the election of a pro-Beijing camp member as chair of the House Committee. On 27 May, a businessman filed a private prosecution against Kwok for his alleged stalling of the House Committee chairperson election (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2660264034190979).

New front to conquer: civil servants

During the Anti-ELAB movement, the government had repeatedly called for civil servants to refrain from taking a political stance and to maintain neutrality. On 20 April, the government decided to table a new requirement for civil servants by introducing an oath of office that would ensure all newly recruited civil servants would swear to support the Basic Law (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2629954337221949). Then on an interview that aired on 8 May, CS Matthew Cheung told Shenzhen TV that he hoped the civil servant college to be completed in 4-5 years’ time would become Hong Kong’s version of the Chinese Academy of Governance (aka Party School, as the Chinese equivalent currently teaches Xi Jinping Thought and various ideological theories of the CCP) (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2645358302348219).

On 7 June, SCS Patrick Nip said that it was a matter of course that Hong Kong civil servants not only serve Hong Kong, but under One Country, Two Systems, they would also serve China. Moreover, civil servants are to be dedicated and loyal to the Chief Executive and the Government, regardless of their personal beliefs and political convictions (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2668752020008847). Several civil servants’ unions expressed concerns over SCS’s assertions (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2668925136658202).

In June, a civil servants’ union organised a referendum on the NSL, and Patrick Nip issued a letter slamming for the union’s call to civil servants to participate in a so-called "referendum on strike" for opposing the legislation; Nip said that as civil servants, they have the responsibility to implement properly the work concerning the legislation of the NSL under the leadership of the CE, and should not oppose the legislation (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2678583995692316).

Patrick Nip provided new details on 13 June on the oath-taking arrangements, saying that civil servants would be consulted on the new policy, and again reminded civil servants that they should be careful when expressing their views on social media (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2673724479511601). On 27 June, at the annual general meeting of the Hong Kong Public Doctors' Association and the Government Doctors' Association, chairpersons of both associations said that it would not be acceptable to require doctors to swear an oath of allegiance to the HKSAR and uphold the Basic Law, per draft of the NSL for Hong Kong (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2685327975017918).

IPCC report on select incidents of the Anti-ELAB movement in 2019

On 15 May, the long-awaited Independent Police Complaints Council (IPCC) on select incidents of the anti-ELAB movement was published (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650288585188524, https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650394251844624). In the conclusion of the report, much time was spent reflecting on how the incidents of violence and protests not only shook and shocked the city, but also hurt the city’s economy and international reputation, while the true causes of the unrest of course remained unspoken (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650398531844196). The Security Bureau responded to the report saying that a task force on the recommendations would be set up to follow-up on the advice (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650416978509018).

However, one of the former foreign experts commissioned to conduct the review, Clifford Stott, said on social media that the report would not suffice to allay Hongkongers’ concerns on police’s law enforcement, that “It would seem the release of the IPCC report is part of a wider set of coordinated announcements designed to deliver the new 'truth'.” Stott supported for a truly independent investigation into the incidents so that the public could really be reassured (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650437215173661).

Mimi Lau, an SCMP reporter, also refuted the IPCC report on the same day due to its depiction of the

shooting of fellow reporter Veby Indah (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650449991839050). Nevertheless, CS Matthew Cheung shook off doubts and dismay towards the IPCC report on 17 May when he openly asserted that critics of the IPCC report to have “bad intentions” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2651703355047047). On 11 June, Clifford Stott announced that he would issue his own report on police’s role in the anti-ELAB protests, and blasted the inadequacy in IPCC’s powers (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2672108196339896).

Education the scapegoat for failures in governance and lack of national identity among youngsters

On 14 May, for the first time ever, the Education Bureau (EDB) blasts a history DSE exam question, stating that the question was biased and highly inappropriate (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2649703251913724). Soon after, the HKEAA issued a statement saying that it deeply regret possibly harming the sentiments and dignity of nationals who had suffered from Japanese aggression in the past (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650062095211173). Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (FMCO) promptly accused Hong Kong education on 14 May of being a “doorless chicken coop” (meaning uncontrolled and chaotic), and requested for the EDB and HKEAA for follow-up on the matter seriously (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650109455206437).

In response, the EDB demanded on 15 May that the HKEAA cancel the controversial question from the examination (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650222985195084). Meanwhile, state mouthpiece Xinhua News Agency published an article calling for a new education system that would be fitted to One Country, Two Systems, and to eradicate the “hidden dirt” from the current system (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650537605163622). People’s Daily, meanwhile, followed suit on 17 May by publishing an article stating that the Hong Kong education was “deeply poisoned” and called for a reform to “remove poison” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2651789445038438).

Former education sector legislator Ip Kin-yuen, responded on 15 May to the controversy by saying that cancelling the exam question would harm the reputation and professionalism of the examination and assessment system of Hong Kong (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650780578472658).

On 16 May, former Secretary-General of HKEAA, Choi Chee-cheong, pointed out that cancelling the controversial history exam question would have to be based on science, supplemented by professional opinions of subject experts, and that cancelling the question would have big impact (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2651742235043159). Meanwhile, Curriculum Development Council (CDC)-HKEAA Committee on History chairman Lau Chi-pang said on 18 May that he supported the cancellation of the poorly designed question, since the sources provided were very suggestive and one-sided (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2652684111615638).

Interesting, on 16 May, Apple Daily reported exclusively that the controversial history exam question drafter now works at the EDB; his name is Kelvin Ip Kai-yiu. The drafter had been a frontline teacher previously, and was invited to participate in question drafting as outside practice (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2651223691761680). On the same day, media reported that both Hans Yeung (History Subject Officer) and Keith Lo, senior manager of liberal studies, as well as a subordinate manager in Liberal Studies, tendered their resignation from HKEAA (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2651037021780347).

The controversy did not stop with the cancelling of the history exam question, and on 10 June, SE Kevin Yeung issued a letter to schools asking schools to ensure that students don’t bring politics to the schools (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2671319699752079). On the same day, Ip Kin-yuen, then education sector legislator, promptly responded to Yeung’s letter saying that the very act of saying “don’t bring politics to the schools” is political in itself, and that Yeung's wordings gave people the perception that schools can only support the national security law without any questions or doubts, which was contrary to the aims of civic education. On 11 June, Kevin Yeung was grilled on an RTHK programme on what constituted political songs and which songs would not be appropriate to be sung in schools, among other things, and things did not turn out well for Yeung, who had clearly not thought through things before opening his mouth (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2672014373015945).

On 25 June, CE Carrie Lam announced that Liberal Studies would remain a compulsory subject, though its court contents would be reduced or streamlined (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2684319725118743).

It was reported on 29 June that a pro-Beijing group collected more than 20 cases of teachers supposedly making inappropriate remarks during lessons spreading hatred and using biased teaching materials. The Education Bureau said that it would seriously follow-up on such cases (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2687235268160522).

Breaking tradition of 4 June (Tian'anmen) vigil due to gathering ban

Each year, thousands flock to Victoria Park to participate in a candlelight vigil commemorating the Tian’anmen Massacre on 4 June, hosted by The Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China (HKASPDMC). At least that was the case for the past 30 years, but that streak was broken in 2020 as the anti-epidemic measure of group gathering ban (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2653715888179127).

On 1 June, the police issued a letter of objection to the Alliance’s proposed vigil (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2663754930508556). However, tens of thousands of people in support of the event defied the ban and continued to gather for the annual event (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2666737830210266).

Kick-off Legislative Council elections

The government announced on 10 June that the LegCo election would be held on 6 September, and nominations would be accepted between 18-31 July (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2671166759767373). On 18 June, guidelines for the election were released (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2677785225772193).

The pan-democratic camp was eager to seize the opportunity of the LegCo election to secure more seats so that they could have more say when it came to voting on various bills. To achieve this end, the pan-democratic camp united to organise a primary election, and on 21 June, a list of candidates who had announced or who were expected to announce that they would run in the Pan-democratic Primary (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2679752178908831). On 24 June, Power for Democracy announced a total of 52 lists in 5 Geographical Constituencies and 2 Functional Constituencies. It was held in 11-12 July and over 600,000 have voted. On 31 Jul, the LegCo Election 2020 has been called off due to COVID-19.

Stifling RTHK

On 20 May, complaints against RTHK's satirical show Headliner were ruled substantiated, RTHK indicated today that they would have a review after the end of this season (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2654127591471290). The show officially bid farewell to its viewers on 19 June (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2678867765663939). Since then, the show indeed had not returned to air on RTHK, and the duo who used to host the show had moved to host a political commentary broadcast on Youtube.

As a publicly-funded broadcaster, RTHK had often been criticised as being biased and not supportive enough of the government. On 10 June, members of the RTHK Programme Advisory Panel urged the Board of Advisors to back off from intervening in programme editorial decisions (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2671856029698446). Merely 2 days later, news broke out that Deputy Director (Programmes) Kirindi Chan Man-kuen would be stepping down, that together with soon-to-retire Director of Broadcasting Leung Ka-wing, there would be a total of 3 out of 5 management departing from RTHK over the next year (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2672678749616174).

Police conduct in question

During the 2nd quarter of 2020, the police made some notable headlines, albeit for all the wrong reasons. Rupert Dover, Assistant Commissioner of the force, was suspected on 29 April of violating the Government Land License by exceeding the permitted 2-storey building not exceeding 5.18 metres in height and 37.2 square metres in area per storey. Many residents had previously asked from assistance from the Lands Department and ICAC and reported to police. However, after multiple dealings with people from the Squatter Control Office, they always got the response that investigations were underway, with no conclusion. Obviously reporting to the police would not help since the resident in the property belongs to the HKPF. After the anti-ELAB movement and Dover’s name became more well known, residents finally understood why nothing ever came of the complaints they filed (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2637472333136816).

Dover later clarified that the licensed structure had been given to his wife to reside in by a relative who had given them permission to renovate and live in the licensed house years ago (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2637571233126926). As for allegations there being a conflict of interest in Dover’s ownership of shares in an air-conditioning parts company, the police force declined to comment on his case citing that it would not comment on individual cases, but that if the conduct of an officer was in question, the force would conduct fair and impartial investigations and take active follow-up actions in accordance with the established mechanism and will not be biased (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2637564069794309).

Besides senior force management making the headlines for days, other members of the force drew attention as well. On 20 April, news spread like wildfire on social media of a raid by the police at a flat in Oak House, Kwong Yuen Estate in Sha Tin in a case of a man suspected of possession of firearms. The arrest happened in the late afternoon, and local residents reported sounds of fighting to the district councillor at 17:00. A dozen or so police officers arrived at the scene at around 17:40, and between then and 20:36, a lawyer commissioned by a man arrested and held in the flat by the police was refused to see the man despite repeated requests, with the police saying that it was “unnecessary” for the lawyer to assist in the search of the man’s flat. In total, 8 requests to see the man by the lawyer had been rejected by the police (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2630358273848222). 

Later, both Principal of the Police Tactical Unit, David John Jordan, and Senior Superintendent of Police, New Territories North Region, Vasco Gareth Llewellyn Williams, were found to have suspected unlawful building structures (UBWs) (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2659871544230228), and the Lands Department responded on 27 May saying that after inspection, since the UBWs did not pose any immediate danger, immediate demolition would not be ordered.

On 22 April, the UK Parliament received a report on the human rights violations by the Hong Kong Police Force drafted by Civil Rights Observer (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2631601307057252). The 14-page report detailed blatant abuse of power and violations of protected rights and freedoms of protesters, social workers, first-aiders, and even human rights observers. For example, officers had attempted to instil fear in protesters by asking them, “Do you want to become another ‘floating corpse’?”, delaying access to legal counsel to human rights observers, preventing first-aiders from treating injured persons, and forcing arrestees to choose between meeting a lawyer and getting medical help.

On 28 April, in response to an enquiry by then-legislator Lam Cheuk-ting, the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) said that as at the end of February this year, it was handling 28 suspected corruption cases involving civil servants in the cases related to anti-ELAB movement, of which 26 involved police officers (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2636490186568364).

Come May, former legislator Eddie Chu said on social media on 11 May that 2 properties owned by Police Commissioner Chris Tang were suspected of illegal structures. On the following day while attending a Yuen Long District Council meeting, Tang said that he would fully cooperate with any department’s investigation (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2647866598764056).

Blind lawyer Luk Yiu-fai told Sha Tin District Council on 14 May that she was mocked and insulted by an officer on 1 May when she was monitoring a “Sing with You” event at Sha Tin New Town Plaza in case of police brutality (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650825361801513).

On 7 May, the police made the headlines again, also for the wrong reason, in that a police sergeant from the Anti-Triad Unit was arrested for possession of meth, coke, and other drugs at a hotel (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2643732412510808).

During the anti-ELAB movement in 2019, police were accused of sexually abusing protesters. On 24 June, Elmer Yuan Gongyi posted a video “To the World: The Raping of Hong Kong” in which 5 alleged victims shared their sexual assault trauma conducted by the HKPF (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2683480505202665).

On 26 June, the police again made it on the news when the court heard in a judicial review of the police not displaying their serial numbers while on duty and thus affected the media’s ability to conduct public monitoring, the government lawyer argued that if there was a complaint, the established mechanism should be used to “give the system a chance” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2684815685069147).

Notable court cases

On 24 April, District Court judge Kwok Wai-kin handed down his verdict in a case of a 50yo man who attacked 3 people in a pedestrian tunnel in Tseung Kwan O, sending one of the victims to the ICU. The defendant admitted 3 counts of wounding with intent, but Kwok spent a third of his verdict condemning protesters and the Anti-ELAB movement of 2019, blaming that the case would not have happened if the protests didn’t happen, and so the defendant’s sentence was reduced by a third to serve 45 months in jail. Moreover, more than a few eyebrows were raised when Kwok described the defendant as having “noble sentiments” and acted in a way "rarely seen in other highly educated intellectuals and professionals" (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2633481996869183).

The first protester of the Anti-ELAB movement who admitted to rioting was sentenced on 15 May to serve 48 months in jail, 3 months longer than the 50yo man who attacked and injured 3 people in a pedestrian tunnel in Tseung Kwan O (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2650889568461759). The defendant, a 21yo lifeguard, was slammed for waging a “direct attack on the rule of law.”

On 18 June, former legislator now in exile Ted Hui told the press that the Eastern Magistrates’ Courts notified him that the court has granted a hearing in his private prosecution of a police officer who shot a young man in Sai Wan Ho on 11 November 2019 (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2677883629095686). 

Remembering milestones and anniversaries

8 months after the 31-Aug Incident in Prince Edward, citizens commemorated the event on 30 April not only at the iconic landmark of Exit B1, but at various places in the city. Outside the station, people offered flowers to commemorate the event, while riot police were on high alert, watching from the sidelines and often clearing the flower offerings (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2638171413066908). In Tin Shui Wai, netizens gathered for a Sing With You in Fortune Malls, which prompted the police to rush in and warn those who gathered that they could be slapped with fines for violating the group gathering ban (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2638327003051349).

HKUST Student Union on 8 May setup a makeshift altar on 8 May to mark the 6-month anniversary of HKUST student Alex Chow’s death. HKUST sent an email to all its staff and students that day warning that they would report to law enforcement and take disciplinary action for violating the group gathering ban (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2644814769069239). On 8 June, dozens of citizens mourned the 7-month mark of Chow’s death outside Sheung Tak Car Park, and the police were on hand to warn and disperse the crowd for violating anti-epidemic controls (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2669983326552383).

On 21 May, the 10-month anniversary of the Yuen Long 21-Jul Incident was commemorated in the atrium of YOHO Mall, Yuen Long (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2655236504693732). Citizens who gathered had been cordoned off by the police, who demanded them to unlock their phones, and those who had Telegram installed and following anti-ELAB channels were threatened that they would be fined for violating the group gathering ban.

On 9 June, the one-year anniversary of the anti-ELAB protests,  media looked back at how things had changed in Hong Kong since the 1m people march on 9 June 2019 (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2670761193141263, https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2670449656505750, https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2671000659783983). 

The police asked the Civil Human Rights Front (CHRF) on 9 June not to commemorate the one-year anniversary of the death of protester Marco Leung Ling-kit, whose image wearing a yellow raincoat became an icon in the early stage of the anti-ELAB protests (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2671312093086173). Then CHRF convenor Jimmy Sham refused to heed the police’s demand not to mourn in public. On 15 June, hundreds gathered outside Pacific Place, where Leung died one year ago, to commemorate him (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2675559819328067, https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2675586505992065).

On the one-year anniversary of the 12-Jun march, many Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China (HKASPDMC) members were prosecuted for attending a candlelight vigil at Victoria on 4 June, and many worried that the looming NSL to be enacted in Hong Kong would further restrict civic expressions of dissent (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2673270276223688). The anniversary was marked by protesters across Hong Kong (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2673229932894389, https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2673358596214856).

Probably one of the last times to commemorate the anniversary of the 21-Jul Yuen Long Attack this way, citizens gathered in MOKO on 21 June to remember 11 months had passed since the attack, and one black-clad person was seen displaying a flag which read “Liberate Hong Kong, Revolution of Our Times” (https://www.facebook.com/hkcolumn/posts/2680249015525814).