Hong Kong Sends Warning Shot to WSJ

Tsang threatened to take "necessary action" against WSJ

The Hong Kong government continues to be on the offensive against anyone who may seem to be appear to be directing people on how to vote in the upcoming Legislative Council elections on December 19.

Its latest salvo was against the Wall Street Journal which published an editorial last Tuesday that said because the city's electoral system has been completely overhauled so that only "patriots" hold political power, so that "boycotts and blank votes are one of the last ways for Hongkongers to express their political views".

A screenshot of Tsang's letter headline

Secretary for Constitutional Affairs Erick Tsang Kwok-wai took offence to the editorial and threatened "to take necessary action".

He wrote a letter to the WSJ dated December 1, but in it he mentions the election "next month". Nevertheless, the letter was printed in full with the headline: "Hong Kong Issues a Threat to the WSJ", hinting that freedom of the press was also being intimidated.

Tsang claimed there were "factual inaccuracies and baseless assumptions" in the WSJ editorial.

In his letter, Tsang claimed to be "shocked" that Hongkongers could only either cast a blank vote or boycott the election.

"Please be advised that inciting another person not to vote, or to cast invalid vote, by activity in public during election period is an offence under... the Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Conduct) Ordinance, irrespective whether the incitement is made in Hong Kong or abroad," he wrote. "We reserve the right to take necessary action."

Chan says WSJ made a statement, not opinion

Last month Tsang also wrote to Bloomberg about its article about the upcoming election, claiming it was "sensationalist and biased reporting" that was "extremely deplorable".

However, Hong Kong Journalists Association chairman Ronson Chan Ron-sing expressed doubts over the need for Tsang to issue such warnings to a media outlet.

"The WSJ only made a statement that boycotts and blank votes are one of the ways voters can choose to express their political views. You can disagree with the WSJ and put forward your arguments." he said.

"Warning that it is against the law serves no purpose, and only makes you look like you are losing your bearings."

Ouch, but true.

The Chorus against Extradition Bill Gets Louder

Carrie Lam says she's willing to take the political criticism for extradition bill

The protest against pushing through the extradition bill in Hong Kong is growing, with the legal sector weighing in and planning a silent protest march next Thursday, June 6.

This will be the fifth such march since Hong Kong's handover to China, and this bill puts the judiciary in a difficult position. Critics are concerned about unfair trials and lack of human rights protection in the mainland, but the government insists the city's courts would have the final say on granting the arrest and eventual transfer of any fugitive.

Dennis Kwok is organizing a silent march for judiciary June 6

Legal sector lawmaker Dennis Kwok, who is organizing the upcoming march, accuses the government of being "deeply shameful and dishonest" about misleading the public when it said the courts would be an effective gatekeeper.

"There is nothing the courts can do [to ensure] the defendants would receive a fair trial and due process once he or she is extradited to that jurisdiction," he said.

Another critic is former Bar Association chairman Edward Chan King-sang. He criticized the government's legislative effort for already undermining the city's reputation for rule of law and the principle of "one country, two systems".

"The government has created an impression in the outside world that the central government could directly intervene in the city's internal affairs," Chan said, adding there is widespread concern by business chambers and foreign diplomats.

He said the government was obliged to ensure the place requesting extradition could provide a comparable standard of justice, and should spell out the safeguards in the law.

Another critic is former Bar Association's chair Edward Chan

But it is well known China has an constitution that looks good on paper, but it doesn't follow it to the letter, the same could be said about its legal system.

Meanwhile in the Legislative Council, pro-establishment lawmaker Michael Tien Puk-sun, who does not support the extradition bill, says Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor and her administration are responsible for the controversy surrounding the bill.

"A solution was only proposed one year after the case [of the Hong Kong man murdering his girlfriend in Taiwan] had happened," Tien said. "It was bundled with a problem that has not be solved for the past 20 years."

He was referring to the lack of an extradition agreement between Hong Kong and the mainland since the city returned to Chinese rule. And his observation is correct.

Lawmaker Micheal Tien does not support the extradition bill

In the meantime, the Lam administration is trying to propose some amendments to the bill to make it more palatable, such as allowing local criminal suspects convicted in mainland courts to serve their prison sentences in Hong Kong, and raise the threshold for extradition to seven years instead of the current three. This would mean bribery and forgery would still be extraditable offenses under Hong Kong law, but offenses like assault causing bodily harm would not count.

With Lam having to pass this extradition bill whether we like it or not, it is better to have it watered down as much as possible for our sakes, but how much change Beijing will tolerate is hard to know since it has been wanting to do this for years.

The chief executive is trying to make it seem like a chore she has to complete and has said, "No matter how much political criticism I'm getting personally, I still think this is worth doing." 

How is this "worth doing"? Lam is choosing to treat this extradition bill as something to cross off her "to-do list". But this bill has profound implications for 7 million people...

Written Loyalty to the Party?

A newlywed couple began their new life together copying the constitution...

The Communist Party of China is demanding its 88 million members show their loyalty by copying out the 15,000-character constitution -- by hand.

In an article published by PLA Daily, it warned members against just mindlessly copying the text, that they should use the opportunity to fully understand the meaning before they published their final product on social media.

"If copying out is just about moving the pen and is not done wholeheartedly... if it fails to touch the thoughts and the soul, the well-intended campaign will lose its meaning and be reduced to a form of delicate formalism," said the PLA Daily article.

Did they spark a trend endorsed by Beijing or was it staged?

"The purpose of transcribing is to study and to be awakened, to remind yourself of your original intention [of joining the party] by engaging full-heartedly," it added.

The campaign first got attention after a newlywed couple was photographed writing paragraphs on their wedding night.

Didn't they have more important things to do on their wedding night than copy of several hundred words of the constitution? Many thought the photos were staged.

Chen Daoyin, an associate professor at Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, said the campaign was eerily similar to people studying quotations from Mao Zedong during the Cultural Revolution.

"This reflects a societal turn to the left since Xi rose to power," Chen said. "But society is progressing, and the new generation is under an age of rapid development of the media and information, is no longer the same. These campaigns nowadays often end up as a target for sarcasm by society, as the propaganda apparatus is always falling behind social development."

He added the campaign had already been abused, saying there were 20 migrant workers in Jiangxi province who were hired by a company to hand copy out the constitution in front of a high court to protest the court's handling of a case involving the company.

Some sections of the constitution copied by others

It does seem kind of Cultural Revolutionary to have to copy out the constitution -- does that prove one is "more red" than the next person?

Or is it evidence the person is more of an obedient sheep?

Does anyone in the United States have to write out the Declaration of Independence to prove their patriotism to the country?

Are China's leaders doing it too? Or just laobaixing (ordinary folk)?

Surely there are other ways to prove one's love for their homeland -- unless they really want to practice writing Chinese characters by hand...