Hong Kong oath-tak­ing farce vi­o­lates law

... by ad­vo­cat­ing “Hong Kong in­de­pen­dence” the leg­is­la­tors-elect not only vi­o­lated the ba­sic po­lit­i­cal and le­gal prin­ci­ple, but also threat­ened na­tional unity.

China Daily (USA) - - VIEWS -

Peo­ple gen­er­ally agree democ­racy is a good but not a per­fect po­lit­i­cal sys­tem. When ap­plied in ac­cor­dance with the so­cial con­di­tions, it is con­ducive to so­cial devel­op­ment. Oth­er­wise, it could im­pede and even un­der­mine so­cial devel­op­ment. That’s why there is “good democ­racy” and “bad democ­racy”, as is ev­i­dent from the his­tory of po­lit­i­cal devel­op­ment across the world.

On Oct 12, two elected mem­bers of theHong Kong Leg­isla­tive Coun­cil— Six­tus Le­ung Chung­hang and YauWai-ching— de­lib­er­ately vi­o­lated the oath-tak­ing pro­ce­dure and con­tent re­quire­ments of the oath. They even in­sulted the coun­try and the Chi­nese peo­ple in words and deeds while tak­ing the oath of of­fice. Worse, they ad­vo­cated “Hong Kong in­de­pen­dence”.

How­ever, the pur­suit of “in­de­pen­dence” has noth­ing to do with democ­racy in theHongKong Spe­cial Ad­min­is­tra­tive Re­gion. In fact, it vi­o­lates the ba­sic po­lit­i­cal prin­ci­ple of “One Coun­try, Two Sys­tems”.

The Stand­ing Com­mit­tee of the Na­tional Peo­ple’s Congress, as the top leg­is­la­ture of the coun­try, has the full right to in­ter­pret the Ba­sic Law, by which the SAR is gov­erned, when the ba­sic po­lit­i­cal prin­ci­ple is se­verely chal­lenged.

TheHong Kong SAR is the fruit of the Peo­ple’s Re­pub­lic of China’s “One Coun­try, Two Sys­tems” prin­ci­ple aimed at re­solv­ing the re­uni­fi­ca­tion is­sue. The cen­tral au­thor­i­ties have charted out the path of democ­racy forHong Kong, es­pe­cially be­cause the re­gion’s econ­omy is rooted in cap­i­tal­ism. The ob­jec­tive of “One Coun­try, Two Sys­tems” prin­ci­ple is to en­sure the SAR en­joys lon­glast­ing pros­per­ity and sta­bil­ity un­der the premise of na­tional unity. And ac­cord­ing to the “One Coun­try, Two Sys­tems” prin­ci­ple, demo­cratic po­lit­i­cal devel­op­ment in­Hong Kong started af­ter the re­gion’s re­uni­fi­ca­tion with the moth­er­land.

More­over, Hong Kong’s demo­cratic po­lit­i­cal devel­op­ment should be in ac­cor­dance with its ac­tual sit­u­a­tion. And democ­racy in the SAR should de­velop step by step.

These prin­ci­ples will help Hong Kong achieve qual­ity democ­racy, which is the aim of the “One Coun­try, Two Sys­tems” prin­ci­ple.

The cen­tral au­thor­i­ties’ stance takes into con­sid­er­a­tion the fun­da­men­tal in­ter­ests ofHongKong peo­ple as well as those of their com­pa­tri­ots in the rest of the coun­try. How­ever, HongKong’s pan-democ­racy camp has dif­fer­ent views on democ­racy.

In the le­gal realm, po­lit­i­cal dif­fer­ences should be re­solved through talks. But the pan-democ­racy camp be­gan op­pos­ing the cen­tral au­thor­i­ties’ ar­range­ment even be­fore po­lit­i­cal re­form was launched and has re­sorted to po­lit­i­cal con­fronta­tions through ag­i­ta­tions, such as the “Oc­cupy Cen­tral” move­ment in 2014.

OnJune18,2015, the pan-democ­ra­cy­cam­pre­jected the uni­ver­sal suf­frage plan of theHongKong chief ex­ec­u­tive, re­sult­ing in the sus­pen­sion of the SAR’s po­lit­i­cal re­form. Andthe lat­est pro-“in­de­pen­dence” farce of the two leg­is­la­tors-elect while tak­ing oath has cre­ated a rift in­HongKong. What they­have­done­goes against the in­ter­est ofHongKon­gres­i­dents.

The po­lit­i­cal bot­tom line in Hong Kong is the “One Coun­try, Two Sys­tems” prin­ci­ple, so by ad­vo­cat­ing “Hong Kong in­de­pen­dence” the leg­is­la­tors-elect not only vi­o­lated the ba­sic po­lit­i­cal and le­gal prin­ci­ple, but also threat­ened na­tional unity.

Some at­tribute the re­cent chaos in the SAR to peo­ple’s frus­tra­tion with­HongKong’s po­lit­i­cal re­form. But that should not be a rea­son for dis­rupt­ing the SAR’s nor­mal po­lit­i­cal or­der. All po­lit­i­cal moves of the cen­tral au­thor­i­ties, the pan-democ­racy camp re­jected the uni­ver­sal suf­frage plan of the HongKong chief ex­ec­u­tive, the SAR govern­ment and the pan-democ­racy camp should be within the frame­work of the law. This makes the pan-democ­racy camp’s ac­tions il­le­gal and harm­ful to the SAR’s po­lit­i­cal or­der.

The Ba­sicLa­wofHongKong makes the di­rec­tion of the SAR’s po­lit­i­cal devel­op­ment clear. Andthe cen­tral au­thor­i­tieswant­democ­racy to de­velop in the re­gion— which is also the goal of the“OneCoun­try, Two Sys­tems” prin­ci­ple. Whether or not it will be a “good” democ­racy de­pend­son­whether it is con­ducive to na­tional unityand­long-term pros­per­ity ofHongKong. Andthe lat­est­wave of­movesby the pro-“in­de­pen­dence” forcesshow howur­gent for theHongKon­gleg­is­la­tion to ac­cel­er­ate the law­mak­ing process to im­ple­ment Ar­ti­cle 23 of the Ba­sicLaw, which bans trea­son and­sep­a­ratism. The au­thor is a pro­fes­sor at Shen­zhen Univer­sity and a mem­ber of the Chi­nese As­so­ci­a­tion of Hong Kong andMa­cao Stud­ies.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from China

© PressReader. All rights reserved.