LegCo debacle shows opposition camp’s deceptive tactics

Let’s not forget that under Article 12 of the Basic Law, Hong Kong is a local administrative region of the People’s Republic of China. ... It means under the Basic Law, many local affairs are directly under the control of the central government; this incl

As they say, if you repeat a lie a thousand times, it can become the truth. A case in point is Civic Party legislator Dennis Kwok Wing-hang. He has been acting in concert with other “pandemocratic” members to filibuster since October to delay the election of a House Committee chairperson.

He even openly admitted that his intention is to stop the enactment of the National Anthem Bill — which will criminalize any insults made to the anthem.

The Legislative Council has a constitutional obligation to pass the anthem bill — as it has been added by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress to Annex III of the Basic Law.

When the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council and the Liaison Office of the Central People’s Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region criticized him for abusing his power and possibly committing misconduct in public office, he accused the two offices of breaching Article 22 of the Basic Law by interfering in Hong Kong’s affairs.

In fact, he and the opposition have been repeating their distorted interpretations of Article 22 with the sole intention of misleading the public.

Basic Law Article 22 states, “No department of the Central People’s Government and no province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the central government may interfere in the affairs which the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region administers on its own in accordance with this law.”

For the record, the Liaison Office is not a central government department as described in Article 22 and is, therefore, not bound by it. In fact, the two agencies are authorized to represent the central government — one in Beijing, and the other in Hong Kong.

The central government has full authority to maintain the city’s constitutional order; one of the ways of doing this is by having the HKMAO supervise the full implementation of the Basic Law. The Liaison Office is responsible for representing the central government to handle Hong Kong’s affairs.

Mandating a high degree of autonomy to the Hong Kong SAR does not mean surrendering the right to oversee local affairs to ensure proper implementation of the Basic Law and maintenance of the city’s constitutional order.

The two offices, as representatives of the central government, have the responsibility and the power to fulfill their supervisory roles on behalf of the central government.

Kwok’s delaying tactics — the longest filibustering ever witnessed in LegCo’s history — are designed to allow opposition lawmakers to speak at length for the purpose of delaying a selection vote for the chairperson.

As a result, Kwok is holding up 14 bills and 89 pieces of subsidiary legislation, and has led to serious paralysis. Some of the bills concern economic, welfare and livelihood issues, such as the extension of maternity leave from 10 to 14 weeks.

He and the entire opposition should be ashamed of themselves for harming the public interest for the sake of their own political agenda.

Kwok for procedural reasons has been presiding over the House Committee’s meetings. But after 15 sessions over six months, there is still no sign that he will stop the filibusters.

With or without the HKMAO and the Liaison Office speaking out, Kwok has obviously been abusing the LegCo Rules of Procedure. Kwok’s actions are a clear breach of his oath of office and potential misconduct in public office.

The Basic Law has been in effect since 1997, but many people have been misled to believe that full autonomy, instead of a high degree of autonomy, is the order of the day.

Some Hong Kong people try to reduce the central government’s jurisdiction over the city by ignoring the Basic Law. Without exception, all the powers of LegCo are derived from the Basic Law, which was promulgated by the National People’s Congress. LegCo can only lawfully act within the confines of this constitutional document.

Meanwhile, let’s not forget that under Article 12 of the Basic Law, Hong Kong is a local administrative region of the People’s Republic of China, which comes directly under the Central People’s Government.

It means under the Basic Law, many local affairs are directly under the control of the central government; this includes the election of the chief executive and top political appointments.

Moreover, the predecessor of the Liaison Office — Xinhua News Agency’s Hong Kong Branch — was set up in 1947, and this was long before the negotiations concerning the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the existence of the Basic Law. No one, including the British Hong Kong government before 1997, has ever questioned the representation of Xinhua.

Moreover, this is not the first time that the two agencies have spoken out about Hong Kong affairs. Last year, they condemned the violent protests in the city during the anti-extradition-bill movement. But at the time, the opposition did not refute the two agencies for “interfering” in the violent social unrest, which could also be categorized as an “internal security” matter.

It’s clear that those who are siding with Kwok are only twisting facts and misleading the public on the interpretation of the Basic Law in order to undermine the power of the central authorities. Their ulterior motive is to drive Hong Kong toward secession or independence.

It’s a shame that Johannes Chan Manmun, chair professor of law at the University of Hong Kong, has been quoting only the first half of Article 12 of the Basic Law, which grants Hong Kong a high degree of autonomy, omitting the second and last part, which states that Hong Kong “comes directly under the Central People’s Government”. Is he trying to mislead the public?

In truth, I am sorely disappointed with the Hong Kong government.

It’s disheartening to see that even some officials are confused over the matter; they have issued contradicting statements on the role and status of the Liaison Office, and consequently making it even more confusing.

This just goes to show that many local officials do not fully understand the Basic Law. Let’s hope Hong Kong people will eventually gain a clearer picture out of this debacle, and see the ugly truth of the opposition and its tactics of deception.