Massive Overhaul of HK's Electoral System

Read all about the new electoral reforms all printed up

 

The rules for the next phase of Hong Kong's "democracy" keep changing, but today it has been finalized.

Beijing unanimously passed (167-0) the electoral reforms for Hong Kong this morning in Beijing and in the afternoon Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor had to explain the changes, of which there are many to ensure once and for all the pro-establishment will win a majority regardless.

First, there will be no summer break -- president of the Legislative Council Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen, announced there were too many bills to pass and so Legco will continue working until December, the new date of the elections that were supposed to be held in September 2019.

Leung says Legco election to be held in December

As promised, the Legco make-up will include another 20 seats to 90 in total, all of which need to be vetted by the Election Committee, which has also been enlarged by 300 members to 1,500, and headed by someone who "holds an office of state leadership".  

That means it could be Tung Chee-hwa or Leung Chun-ying...

The number of directly voted seats in Legco will be drastically cut from about 50 percent to 20 percent.

Those hoping to run for office and the Election Committee must first be approved by the "candidate eligibility review committee", and that group will be made up of Lam and "principal officials" in her administration.

But even before that, the police will vet people's backgrounds and that information passed to the Committee for Safeguarding National Security, which Lam will also chair.

So the police are really stretched -- not only do they fight crime and ensure social distancing and mask-wearing, but also have to judge whether art is subversive and now do background checks on people running for public office.

Tam says HK has achieved "patriots running HK"

Oh and those 117 seats for district councillors in the Election Committee? 

Gone.

Despite all these hurdles, Lam says pan-democrats are welcome to run. 

"One should not take it for granted that all pan-democrats are unpatriotic. That would be very unfair to them," she said. "There are pan-democrats who were patriotic in the past, now and in the future. They would not be unpatriotic simply because they call for democracy."

How... diplomatic of you, Carrie. 

When fielding questions from the media, Lam was asked if there was conflict of interest with her sitting on the vetting committee.

"The public can judge whether the decision has been made rightly or wrongly," she replied.

Lam even said Beijing was sincere about giving Hong Kong universal suffrage, but opposition politicians had vetoed previous reform attempts. With riots and social unrest over the past few years, Lam said, Beijing had no choice but to overhaul the electoral system.

Blaming the protests on opposition lawmakers doesn't persuade the public. And yes, overhauling the electoral system makes it even further from any semblance of a democracy...

Lo says HKers have lost hope in Legco

So now the race to see who will be in the Election Committee will be held in September so that Legco elections can be held in December. The election for the next chief executive remains unchanged for next March.

Tam Yiu-chung, Hong Kong's sole representative in the standing committee says this overhaul has a "solid" mandate which would implement the principle of "patriots administering Hong Kong".   

What is the pan-democratic side going to do? Lo Kin-hei, chairman of the Democratic Party says they need to absorb the new rules first.

"It is also too early at this stage to discuss whether we can get the nominations, the bigger question we have to decide is whether or not we would want to participate in elections," he says admitting it's a "huge hurdle".

Lo says the overhaul has effectively brought the political system to a pre-1997 stage, adding that the ultimate goal of universal suffrage was now further away. "The changes drastically reduce wider representation of different voices in the system... I think for many Hong Kong people, they have lost hope in Legco."

Sadly, yes.

Undemocratic Ways to Solicit Opinions

Behind Lam it says "Preserve One Country Two Systems"

Tomorrow Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor will head to Beijing to convey her views and public opinions about the national security law that is being drafted.

However, whose opinions will she communicate to the Standing Committee?

Today Lam got Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen, President of the Legislative Council, to ban Democratic Party chairman Wu Chi-wai from asking about the new law, saying it was national-level legislation and therefore not the work of the city government.

This is the first time since the handover that Legco has forbidden a lawmaker from raising a question with proper notice given.

Wu Chi-wai unable to ask a question on the bill

Wu wanted officials to explain what measures would be taken to protect people's rights and freedoms under the Basic Law after the national security law is implemented.

Leung claimed the matter is "not part of the Hong Kong government's work" because it involves defense and foreign affairs which is under the central government's purview.

Wu said the ban of his question was a "formal rejection" by the Hong Kong government of consultations with lawmakers and the public over legislation.

Which seems opposite to what Tam Yiu-chung said a few days ago. He claimed the public could send their concerns and opinions to the National People's Congress website. So to reject a lawmaker's concern on behalf of Hongkongers is very concerning.

But Tam, the sole Hong Kong member of the Standing Committee of the NPC has also changed his tune.

Tam (left) shows over 2.9 million signed petition

In the past few days there have been posters and tables on street corners, asking people to sign petitions in support of the national security law, an the pro-establishment side claims 2.93 million Hongkongers have signed it, and added Tam would present these to the liaison office.

He is obviously fishing for brownie points with Beijing, because a recent survey conducted by the Hong Kong Public Opinion Program revealed 96 percent of respondents opposed the upcoming national security law, and of those who were pro-government, 29 percent rejected the legislation, while 62 percent supported it.

Both Tam and Lam can only say so much about the national security law because they have no idea what exactly is in it. It is a complete farce for them, along with the security and justice chiefs to promote the law when they are not even privy to know what's in it.

Apparently lots of people support the new law

It is akin to a car salesman trying to sell you a vehicle without knowing any of its specific features, only saying that it's a car that you must have. Now.

No wonder people are rushing to the exits. Today a colleague who has a British passport, endorsed several others co-workers' applications for BNO passports. I joked that my colleague should charge a "processing fee", as this person has signed over 10 applications for co-workers and their family members.

But really it's not a laughing matter when a law that you don't know anything about is going to be foisted on you whether you like it or not...

An Orwellian Day in Hong Kong

A dramatic backdrop for Carrie Lam commenting the IPCC report today

 

Today there was so much news going on besides the pandemic that as one local person on Twitter remarked: "Sometimes one gets the feeling Hong Kong is crumbling before one's eyes."

He was referring to a question on the DSE or the Diploma of Secondary Education exam, only one of the outrageous fiascos that happened today in another sign that Beijing is further inserting itself into Hong Kong.

The fall of Hong Kong to the Japanese in December 1941

The other day it was found one of the questions on the exam for students to be eligible for university had upset Beijing. Nay, it had "seriously hurt the feelings of the Chinese people" -- a line from the mainland Chinese playbook to demand sympathy.

That's because the history question asked students if they agreed Japan did more good than harm to China between 1900 and 1945. 

There were accusations from pro-establishment lawmakers that the question played down the impact of the Japanese occupation of China, and that it led exam candidates to come to a biased conclusion that "seriously hurt the feelings and dignity of the Chinese people who suffered great pain during the Japanese invasion of China".

Maybe it was a trick question to see if students were paying attention or not, but it is up to them to be in favour of or against the statement by supporting the argument with facts and analysis.

Education minister Kevin Yeung criticized an exam question

However it got too controversial to the point where Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung Yun-hung held a press conference today, saying the Education Bureau would ask the Examinations and Assessment Authority to void the question and make appropriate adjustments to ensure the credibility of the exam.

Yeung said given Japan's invasion of China, the answer to the exam question must be "doing more harm than good to China". "There is no room for discussion."

His curt comment probably came after Beijing was riled up about the question. The foreign ministry publicly criticized the authority over the question, warning that education could not be allowed to run out of control, like a "chicken coop without a flap".

Education in Hong Kong is becoming more politicized. Surely the teachers setting the exam questions knew they were going to be verging into hot-water territory with the Sino-Japanese war?

Sin Ka-ho, 22, was jailed for four years today for rioting

The next fiasco that happened today was the sentencing of 22-year-old Sin Ka-ho, who was jailed for four years for his part in the anti-government protests last year. The lifeguard pleaded guilty to ramming police barricades and hurling helmets and umbrellas at the police outside the Legislative Council on June 12.

Sin was a first-time offender and while his defense counsel said the young man did not regret his actions, he admitted setting a bad example to young people and would urge them not to resort to violence.

Many HongKongers were outraged by the sentence because he is being used as an example to others, being the first to plead guilty -- because he was clearly captured on video for his actions.

But compare this heavy sentence to a pro-Beijing tour guide who had attacked pro-democracy activists with knives at a Lennon Wall in Taipo last August, and was only sentenced to 45 months in jail last month. Three people were wounded in the attack, one seriously.

How is this justice?

Then the third event today was the release of the report on police violence by the IPCC, or Independent Police Complaints Council. The 1,000-page report details main events during the anti-government protests last year, including June 12 (where Sin was caught throwing umbrellas and helmets at police), July 1, July 21 and August 31.

How can there be no collusion from this photo taken July 21?

When it comes to July 21, when white-shirted men, apparently triad-related, were armed with sticks and attacked people, mostly protesters returning to Yuen Long at the MTR station, the IPCC report glosses over the violence and claims there was no collusion between the police and the white-shirted men.

How could there be no collusion when there are numerous videos of police officers patting the backs of some white shirted men? How can there still be so few arrests to this day?

One of the former independent advisors to the IPCC, Clifford Stott, a professor of social psychology at Keele University in the UK, has advised government around the world around policing. He says the section on July 21 was a result of "misinformation".

"It would seem the release of the IPCC report is part of a wider set of coordinated announcements designed to deliver the new 'truth'," he tweeted, attaching a quote by George Orwell.

Indeed.

At the 6pm press conference today, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor stood in front of a backdrop that featured a collage of photos from violent protests with the slogan: "The Truth About Hong Kong".

The IPCC report was released today, but soft on police actions

She said now was not the time to have an independent inquiry because the city is too busy fighting against the pandemic, and besides, people who volunteered to join the independent review panel were busy and dropped out.

Lam described the report as "comprehensive and objective", and that she would take into consideration "areas of improvement" where police clashed with protesters. She spent 10 hours reading the report and implement some of the 52 recommendations, which include drafting guidelines for journalists reporting at protest scenes, reviewing internal police command structures, and improving the identification of police officers with clear numbers.

If that didn't get more Orwellian, how about removing a pan-democratic lawmaker who heads a committee because he has been filibustering for months, but that is his legal right to do so?

After weeks of complaints from Beijing, Legislative Council President Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen removed Dennis Kwok Wing-hang from the House Committee and replaced him with pro-Beijing councillor Chan Kin-por.

Legco President Andrew Leung removed Dennis Kwok today

Leung claimed he was invoking his power under article 92 of the council's rules of procedure to deal with the current impasse after seeking legal advice. He defended the unprecedented move, saying: "This is a hard decision, and I think it's incumbent upon me to take a decision to make sure that we can, as the legislature -- on the whole -- to fulfill our responsibility under the Basic Law."

He added that he chose Chan for his experience in chairing the Finance Committee. 

For all these four things to happen in one day, it's too much to digest and understand what is going on in Hong Kong. If anything, it is the increased "mainlandization" of the city, made possible to a pliant local government.

How can everyone, from opposition lawmakers to ordinary people stop more of this from happening before 2047?

West Kowloon Rail Checkpoint is a Slippery Slope

The West Kowloon Rail station will be ready by the third quarter this year

After numerous discussions, debates and filibusters, the controversial border check point at the new West Kowloon rail terminal was passed last night at the Legislative Council. The so-called co-location bill went through following a 40-20 vote.

This means mainland Chinese immigration officials will have the authority to assert mainland laws on a part of Hong Kong soil.

While some believe this is the best way to solve the problem of having border checks in one location, this is technically a violation of the Basic Law according to lawyers at the Hong Kong Bar Association.

Debates about the issue were overturned by pro-establishment

That's because the Basic Law states no mainland law shall apply in Hong Kong except those relating to defence, foreign affairs and "other matters outside the limits" of the city's autonomy.

Any exceptions must be listed in Annexe III of the Basic Law before they can be applied.

However, the National People's Congress Standing Committee ignored this important procedure and endorsed the legal foundation for the checkpoint plan late last year, which resulted in pan-democratic Hong Kong lawmakers opposing the bill.

More than 70 amendments were submitted to Legco in a bid to delay Thursday's vote.

To counter the filibustering by the pan-democrats, Legco President Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen capped debate time for the bill at 36 hours to ensure it would be passed before the legislature's summer break in mid-July. He also only allowed 24 of the amendments to be debated.

Legco President Andrew Leung limited debate on the issue

Now that this major hurdle has been cleared, the station can be completed and apparently will be in operation by the third quarter this year.

Civic Party lawmaker Alvin Yeung Ngok-kiu said the vote had opened a Pandora's box to further unconstitutional arrangements being imposed on Hong Kong.

"Its passage comes not only at the cost of our core value of the rule of law, but it also shows people the legislature is only a rubber stamp," said unionist lawmaker Leung Yiu-chung.

This was a contentious issue because it is about a lack of trust of China and what it will do next. It really does signal the start of a slippery slope that none of us knows will go next... except maybe Beijing.

We can only continue to safeguard whatever rights and freedoms we have left...

Tsang's Embarrassing U-Turn

John Tsang told Legco he would not answer questions from four pan-dems

Following the total takedown of two localist lawmakers, Yau Wai-ching and Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hang, the Hong Kong government is gunning for four more pan-democrats, but the lack of support has led to the Leung Chung-ying administration having to back down.

Yesterday Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah refused to take questions in the legislature from "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung, Nathan Law Kwun-chung, Edward Yiu Chung-yim and Lau Siu-lai, citing advice from lawyers to doubt their status as legislators.

Edward Yiu, Nathan Law, Leung Kwok-hung and Lau Siu-lai

The announcement stunned the Legislative Council panel meeting yesterday morning, drawing objections and concerns from all sides, as the High Court hasn't even started hearing the government's case for having the four kicked out of Legco.

Some pan-democrats accused Tsang of overstepping his bounds to impress Beijing following his earlier hint he may run for the top job next year.

But then by the afternoon, the government did a U-turn, when even the pro-establishment parties questioned the justification for shunning the four.

"The administration will address inquiries from all lawmakers without changing its legal stance over the four lawmakers," said Legco's House Committee chairwoman Starry Lee Wai-king, quoting Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor after a meeting with her.

Carrie Lam reversed the government's stance by the afternoon

Even Legco President Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen expressed surprise at Tsang's stance, saying the four should still be regarded as lawmakers until the court ruling. He said the government should stick to a letter he received from Lam that said public officers would only respond to questions from members who have "duly taken the Legco oath in accordance with the law".

It is understood that even Leung Chun-ying didn't know Tsang's position in the morning, though the finance minister said it was based on a collective decision of the government after legal advice was received on Sunday night.

Tsang later said he agreed with the reversed decision made by Lam and Lee.

What is going on? Is there no communication between officials on their position on things? And where are they getting their legal advice from? Sounds childish not to respond to any lawmakers' inquiries, even if you plan to launch a suit against them. Did no one bring up this point during the meeting on Sunday evening?

Many critics are saying Leung Chun-ying is pushing his luck in trying to unseat four more legislators -- what have they legally done wrong? They seem completely mild mannered compared to two young people who swore and promoted independence while taking their oaths...

In any case, perhaps the cracks are even more prevalent in the Leung administration, where at least one, maybe two officials are gunning for their boss' job in 2017...

Limited Options

Yau Wai-ching and Sixtus Leung don't have many legal options left to pursue

It's almost game over for Youngspiration localists Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hang and Yau Wai-ching.

The Court of Appeal this morning upheld the previous ruling that disqualified them from office for saying derogatory terms for China when they said their oaths, along with having banners that read "Hong Kong is not China".

Will they go to the Court of Final Appeal?

The three judges unanimously confirmed Beijing's interpretation of the Basic Law earlier this month.

"There can be no innocent explanation for what they uttered and did," the ruling said. "What has been done was done deliberately and intentionally."

Originally the pair were prepared to present their case to the Court of Final Appeal, but Leung is now concerned that the case might bring up further interpretations of the Basic Law that could further damage the system.

"It boils down to whether [seeking] the rule of law and justice or the stability of a system is more important," he said.

He said they were also concerned about the cost of mounting such a case, estimating it would be in the seven-figure range.

The ruling is a political win for both Hong Kong and China governments, who have stepped up rhetoric against independence in the city even though the numbers are actually quite small.

And now the Hong Kong government is looking to legally unseat another localist Lau Siu-lai, who paused six seconds between each word when she took her oath, and later explained on Facebook that the pauses were meant to negate it.

Lawmaker Lau Siu-lai is the next target of the government

The government is obviously taking out its big guns to not only intimidate, but also clamp down on any kind of dissent -- which is very unlike Hong Kong. It has always had its critics, but differences were respected.

However, that doesn't seem to be happening anymore, particularly when some lawmakers do not seem to be taking their jobs seriously.

Lau's case will be interesting, as she was allowed to retake her oath successfully by Legislative Council President Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen, though he too is named in the suit.

Does the man not have any powers at all?

High Court Rules Localist Pair Disqualified

Yau Wai-ching holds up a copy of the High Court's ruling in front of the media

Hong Kong's High Court has decided that two localists who were democratically elected in September are disqualified from becoming legislators because of the way they took their oaths of office last month.

Yau Wai-ching and Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hang of Youngspiration have vowed to appeal the ruling.

Mr Justice Thomas Au Hing-cheung said the pair's conduct during the October 12 ceremony meant they declined to take their oaths and must therefore vacate their seats.

The Youngspiration pair have been disqualified from Legco

During the oath-taking ceremony, they had carried banners that read "Hong Kong is not China" and said "Sheena" instead of "China", which many consider to be a derogatory term the Japanese used during World War II.

The judge also ruled Legco President Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen had no right to allow Yau and Leung to retake their oaths, adding that he came to this conclusion before the National People's Congress Standing Committee made its ruling last week.

Justice Au said according to the Oaths and Declarations Ordinance, the oath must be taken solemnly and sincerely and that oath takers are "bound in conscience to perform an act faithfully and truthfully", which he believed Yau and Leung did not do, nor did they recognize "one country, two systems".

The judge says Andrew Leung cannot decide on retaking oaths

The pair's lawyers had argued that the courts had no right to intervene in the affairs of the Legislative Council, citing the UK, where the parliamentary supremacy reigns and no constitution exists.

But the judge said in Hong Kong's case, the Basic Law is "supreme" instead of the legislature.

It sounds like Justice Au was at pains to clarify he arrived at this conclusion independently of the NPC Standing Committee, but one will never know since Beijing made its decision before the High Court.

Either way it's a sad state of affairs for democratically-elected legislators in Hong Kong. There have been previous cases of the Legco President allowing people to retake their oaths.

Now suddenly it's been decided this is not possible.

We understand Beijing is clamping down on anyone suggesting independence. We also have to stress this is a very small minority of people.

But this also indicates that many people here find it hard to accept that Hong Kong is a part of China, but at the same time, it is NOT China.

There's a big difference...

Protesting the Mess at Legco

Crowds starting to gather at Tamar with police watching across the street

There were more antics at the Legislative Council again today which prompted an ad hoc protest march this evening.

It was a protest against Legco President Andrew Leung for not allowing localist lawmakers Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hang and Yau Wai-ching to be sworn in, for caving into his pro-establishment colleagues' demands and defer swearing them in until after the judicial review (which is tomorrow), and for Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying for not only personally applying for the judicial review, but also appealing to Beijing to give its interpretation of the Basic Law regarding the pair taking their oaths the first time.

Previously missing bookseller Lam Wing-kee marches too

The call was to gather at the chief executive's office at 7pm and when YTSL and I arrived, the crowd was very small, about 200 people at most. We were despondent, but after a while it grew to several hundred.

Claudia Mo Man-ching was there, Nathan Law Kwun-chung, Joshua Wong Chi-fung, Avery Ng Man-yuen, and even missing bookseller Lam Wing-kee, wearing his trademark cap.

The organizers explained that they didn't submit a protest march application to the police so the gathering was considered illegal. And so they advised that if you get into trouble with the police, to send an SMS with your name and ID number to a certain mobile number, and presumably some legal representation was on standby.

Things finally got started about 40 minutes later, walking back up through Tamar Park, looping down towards Citic Tower, then across a long walkway through Queensway. Walking through Pacific Place to get to the other side was particularly amusing -- a protest march through the mall? How Hong Kong!

As we walked by carrying placards and shouting slogans for CY Leung to step down, there were lots of people staring or taking pictures. Was this amusing to them?

Sixtus Leung talks to several reporters in Admiralty

When we were approaching Central, the police had no choice but to give us a lane to walk in, and the march went very smoothly. At Admiralty we saw Sixtus Leung giving TV interviews, and then by the time we hit Sheung Wan, he had caught up with us, Yau next to him.

We turned around and chatted with him, pointing out that he wasn't in trouble participating in an illegal protest, but was thrown out of the Legislative Council where he had been democratically voted in. He smiled at the irony. And his glasses? There are no lenses in them.

There was one incident at the end of Sheung Wan where someone in a building above may have poured some liquid down at the protest marchers, but we weren't sure where it came from and what it was. Another situation happened in Sai Ying Pun where we marched across a street and an impatient motorcyclist (in a gray suit) charged through the crowd which was pretty dangerous.

Probably most amusing was seeing bewildered gweilo or Caucasians staring at us in Central, completely oblivious to what was the protest was about. Many expats who live in Hong Kong don't seem to care or know about the political stalemate in the Legislative Council and how that impacts them.

Nathan Law addressing the crowd at the Liaison Office

However, you have to admit it was unusual to have a protest in the evening -- and the perfect weather for it too -- low 20s and a bit of a breeze.

In any event almost two hours later we made it to the Liaison Office in Western, where organizers told us the turnout was about 1,600. We thought it was more, but perhaps they were trying to be conservative, but it was a decent turnout considering it was hastily organized.

People like Claudia Mo, Nathan Law, Eddie Chu Hoi-dick and Leung Kwok-hung "Long Hair" fired up the crowd, but repeated the same messages over and over -- how we cannot let Beijing trample on our rule of law, how we cannot have a dysfunctional Legislative Council, how CY Leung has to step down...

Long Hair has suggested we come out again on Sunday... how many protest marches will it take to make those in power realize we are not happy what what's going on?

The Paralysis in Legco Continues

Shielded by pan-democrats, Yau Wai-ching and Sixtus Leung enter Legco

There was more drama at the Legislative Council this morning. It's so strange how things can change so much within two years.

To start, surrounding Legco were thousands of protestors, pro-Beijing ones who denounced Youngspiration localist lawmakers Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hang and Yau Wai-ching for saying their oaths wrong two weeks ago.

Pro-Beijing protesters demand Leung and Yau resign

They chanted slogans, waved Chinese flags and had placards saying Leung and Yau should resign.

When they were first sworn in on October 12, Leung and Yau had said "the People's Republic of Chee-na" instead of "China" which the pro-establishment says is a variation of the derogatory term "Shina" used by Japan during World War II.

Legco President Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen voided their oaths and so they were going to try to take them again last week, but the pro-establishment walked out of the Legislative Council chamber so there wasn't enough quorum.

Then last night Andrew Leung made a U-turn and decided to wait until the court decides on the judicial review of his decision on allowing Sixtus Leung and Yau to re-take their oaths.

Andrew Leung abruptly adjourned the meeting again this week

He seems to have caved into his pro-Beijing colleagues' and Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying's demands, but Andrew Leung claims he is following protocol. However at this moment, the way things are headed in Legco, there is no precedence.

This morning there was even a notice on the door to the chamber saying Sixtus Leung and Yau should not be allowed into the chamber.

However, in a dramatic fashion, some pan-democrats shielded the pair, escorting them in, surrounded by the media, who spilled into the chamber. Sixtus Leung and Yau had hoped that by entering the chamber they would have a chance of being sworn in.

But Andrew Leung immediately told the pair to leave, but they refused, and so he adjourned the meeting.

Excuse me -- as a taxpayer and voter, I'd like to know when will this insane fiasco ever end?

The pair already acknowledge their mistake and all of us would like the people we elected to get on with business.

How long do we have to wait for this pair to be sworn in?

The political grandstanding, particularly from the pro-establishment side is ridiculous. At the same time the pan-democrats are in uncomfortable territory -- they want to support the process of Sixtus Leung and Yau getting sworn in, but not necessarily what they stand for.

But they all called for Andrew Leung to step down, claiming he was incompetent as Legco President, and besides, his paperwork seems dodgy too.

No doubt Sixtus Leung and Yau were childish about what they did two weeks ago, but they have probably grown up intensely in that time and realize that they did go too far, and that Legco really means business.

But at the same time they see people more than twice their age throwing tantrums in Legco which makes you wonder -- who's taking the high road here?

Legco's Outrageous Circus

Paul Tse (centre) instigated the pro-establishment walkout of Legco

Today was a descent into chaos in the Legislative Council.

The High Court ruled late last night that the two Youngspiration lawmakers, Yau Wai-ching and Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hang could retake their oaths, and Legislative Council President Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen allowed them to do that too.

So everyone expected to watch how the young politicians would recite the oath this time.

However the spotlight was hijacked by the pro-Beijing side, when Paul Tse Wai-chun spoke before the meeting, suggesting lawmakers should walk out of Legco if the pair do not apologize and genuinely swear the oath.

Sixtus Leung and Yau Wai-ching must wait another week

After 11am, two other lawmakers were sworn in before pro-establishment members started walking out of the chamber, so the president had to ring the quorum bell.

Then outside the chamber, the pro-establishment formed a human wall, and Leung Kwok-hung or "Long Hair" stood in front of them in protest, hurling luncheon meat at them before there was a shouting match for 10 minutes.

Andrew Leung had to adjourn the meeting 19 minutes after it started because of the lack of quorum and Yau, Sixtus Leung and another localist have yet to be sworn in.

It's ironic to see the pro-Beijing camp stopping all proceedings and paralyzing Legco over the oath-taking, insisting the pair apologize and that they must acknowledge that Hong Kong is China.

Meanwhile the president has won big points by observers for trying to stick to the rules and give the localists -- who had opposed his run for the job -- to take the oath again, though he too is now at odds with his colleagues.

It's lonely at the top for Legco President Andrew Leung

It's all a downright mess really. Can we just get the formalities over with? The Younspiration folks have learned their lesson and promise to take the oath properly. But now they have to wait yet ANOTHER week to do that.

Meanwhile the judicial review filed last night with the High Court to look at Andrew Leung's decision to allow the Youngspiration lawmakers to retake their oaths was revealed to be lodged by Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying and Secretary for Security Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung.

Seems like CY doesn't mind his popularity sinking even lower...

Gov't Seeks to Stop Democratically Elected Lawmakers

Sixtus Baggio Leung and Yau Wai-ching are in court this evening

BREAKING -- Just before midnight Tuesday, the court rejected the injunction application to stop Youngspiration's Yau Wai-ching and Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hung from retaking their oaths, but the judicial review of Legco President Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen's decision to allow the pair to retake their oaths has been allowed.

Right now a High Court judge is deciding whether to stop two lawmakers from taking their oaths again tomorrow after the Hong Kong government filed a last-minute court order.

The action was filed against Youngspiration's Yau Wai-ching and Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hang as defendants and interestingly controversially newly minted Legislative Council President Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen was named co-defendant.

The young lawmakers arrived at court at 8.30pm and slammed the government for not giving them enough time to get proper legal advice.

Andrew Leung is also named as a co-defendant in the case

"They have not even supplied us with the documents [before the hearing]... This goes to show the government is willing to strip us of our qualifications at any cost," said Yau.

Sixtus Leung said they would do their best to defend themselves as well as the city's dignity and interest.

Meanwhile Legco president Leung instructed his lawyer to object to the government's application for a judicial review of his decision to allow Yau and Leung to re-take their oaths on Wednesday.

This is the first time the government has sought to invalidate the status of democratically elected lawmakers.

What is going on?

Yau and Sixtus Leung had already announced they would not create anymore antics and retake the oath properly after getting a landslide of criticism for saying "the People's Republic of Chee-na" instead of "China", and Leung claiming the pronunciation was due to his "Ap Lei Chau" accent.

The court decides if the lawmakers should retake the oath

While there are questions of Andrew Leung's exact citizenship situation, what has he done wrong? Where does it say that lawmakers are not allowed to retake their oaths? Is the government claiming the pro-Beijing president is not doing his job?

Our political system is showing cracks with things that could have been resolved through discussion and compromise, now are being resolved through the courts.

Judges should not have to decide on every single matter.

How can the government decide to invalidate the votes of Hong Kong people who voted for Yau and Sixtus Leung?

This will only further galvanize the already fractious situation, creating more tension in the city and its residents wonder if anything will ever get done politically.

Can we all please move on? We've only just started this new session of the legislature and already it's a mess.

Tumultuous Start in Legco

Yau Wai-ching displays a banner before taking her oath -- but was rejected

If today's swearing-in of the legislators is a sign of Hong Kong in the next four years, it's going to be a rocky one to say the least.

As promised, some of the localists, Youngspiration's Sixtus "Baggio" Leung Chung-hang and Yau Wai-ching were rejected when they each had a blue banner with an outline map of the city that said "Hong Kong is not China".

Legco secretary general Kenneth Chen Wei-on pointed out what was written on the banner went against the oath the lawmakers had to take and also criticized the way both Leung and Yau pronounced China as "Cheena". Yau was asked to retake the oath two more times and even said "the people's re-f***ing of cheena"...

Sixtus "Baggio" Leung wears the banner and is rejected too

Another localist, Lau Siu-lai added a mini speech before taking her oath:

"I will walk with Hong Kong people, link up the inside and the outside of the legislature, and resist the autocratic regime," she said. "We must live in truth and integrity, and break the coldness and timidity of our society. We must also seek hope in the dark, and open the path of democratic self-determination. We must topple the high wall, and determine for ourselves and strengthen ourselves."

It took her eight minutes to read out her oath, pausing five to eight seconds between each word. Pro-Beijing lawmaker Junius Ho Kwan-yiu called out, saying her approach was "stupid".

Then when Nathan Law Kwun-chung had to take the oath, he demanded Chen explain why the three localists before him were rejected and had to take the oath again, but Chen refused to answer, saying it was time to take a break.

All the localists will have to retake their oaths again next week, but they were also trying to delay the vote of Lego president, but to no avail.

Andrew Leung was voted in as Legco president, but not by all

The front runner was pro-Beijing lawmaker Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen, but there were questions days before about his nationality because he was carrying a British passport.

Today he announced that the paperwork to rescind his citizenship was underway, but had no physical proof that he was not British anymore, and thus the tactics to try to delay the vote for Legco president.

However through political manoeuvering, Leung was voted in 38 to 0, with the localists ineligible to vote and pan-democrats ripping up their ballots in protest because they felt Leung's citizenship status was not clarified.

Many lawmakers also feel that when Leung was acting president, he operated more like a dictator. But it seems like the matter is done and now we have a Legco that is even more divided than before.

But this is what the people wanted in the election...

Which is probably why in other news, one in four people are looking to emigrate from Hong Kong, with one in 10 already moving towards that goal.

Can we not find some kind of middle ground and get things done for the best interests of Hong Kong? Or will today be an indication of what every Wednesday will be like in Legco for the next four years?