Another Dark Day in Hong Kong

Pan-democrat bloc says they will resign en masse tomorrow

 

Today marks the end of "one country, two systems" that paramount leader Deng Xiaoping had promised back in 1984. He said there would be no change for 50 years, which at the time seemed far off.

But only 23 years after 1997, Hong Kong's institutions are being destroyed to make the city into a Chinese one, and very quickly too.

Is this what Deng had in mind back in 1984?

The National People's Congress Standing Committee today endorsed a resolution (unanimously of course) to oust Hong Kong lawmakers immediately if they are deemed to have engaged in acts ranging from endangering national security to dishonouring their pledge of allegiance and refusing to support China's sovereignty over the city.

Then the Hong Kong government used this ruling to immediately disqualify four lawmakers: Civic Party's Alvin Yeung Ngok-kiu, Kwok Ka-ki, and Dennis Kwok, along with Kenneth Leung of the Professional Guild.

When that happened, the immediate thought was, now that the four had been ousted, would the pan-democrat bloc follow through with their threat yesterday to quit the Legislative Council?

Indeed they have.

Four ousted lawmakers walk out of Legco

On this tumultuous day that saw the announcement, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor made long-winded explanations on why these disqualifications had to happen, and that she did not initiate this, that she was only the messenger and so on; then the four lawmakers made statements in the Legco chamber and solemnly walked out, saying they were honoured to be forced out; and then the other 15 pan-democrats spoke one by one in another press conference encouraging Hongkongers to add oil and that the fight for democracy was not over.

They will resign en masse tomorrow. Beijing might even arrest them tomorrow.

For Hongkongers this means the opposition they had democratically voted four years ago in are now wiped out except for two independents. Beijing does not care to respect the Basic Law anymore -- instead it will rule the city how it wishes and expects Lam to execute these demands.

There is no legal recourse to fight Beijing on these changes. You are either deemed patriotic enough by Beijing or you can't serve Legco. This means bills the government wants to pass will be passed. Interestingly lawmakers in the pro-establishment camp say they will continue to hold the government accountable...

Lam claims she is only the messenger

Hongkongers are collectively wondering what happened to their city. Last year it was torn apart by clashes between protesters and the police, and now life appears to be going on normally but the city's institutions are being destroyed, the judiciary possibly next.

How much longer can people accept what is happening to their city? Everyday there is a new outrageous development they have no choice but to absorb and move on.

Last year's District Council elections may have been the last time people were able to have a voice that Beijing refuses to listen.

 

Pan-Democrats Play into Beijing's Hands

Pan-democrats are united, but are they doing the right thing?

 

The pan-democratic lawmakers in the Legislative Council are outnumbered by the pro-establishment politicians, so when bills need to be passed, the former use whatever tools they have to prevent or at least have a decent debate before it is basically rubber stamped.

One of the tools they use is filibustering, and every other democratic opposition uses this strategy at one time or another.

For the Hong Kong opposition, it's basically all they have left. They don't even have a chance of having a majority elected in Legco and Beijing wants to make sure it stays that way.

Baggio Leung crosses his fingers in swearing-in

In recent years the National People's Congress has decimated the opposition by disqualifying them. In 2016, six newly-elected pan-democrats, including Nathan Law Kwun-chung, Yau Wai-ching and Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hang were disqualified for displaying a banner that said "Hong Kong is not China" and not taking their oath seriously, mispronouncing "People's Republic of China" as "people's re-f***ing of Chee-na".

Now four more pan-democrat lawmakers may also be disqualified for... filibustering.

The NPC is meeting this week and has this issue on its agenda. 

The warning came from Tam Yiu-chung, Hong Kong's only delegate to the standing committee, saying the lawmakers' delaying tactics since the beginning of Legco's extended term made them unsuitable for office.

"As lawmakers, you must act in accordance with Article 104 of the Basic Law, [which states that lawmakers] need to swear allegiance to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and uphold the Basic Law," he said before flying to Beijing.

Tam says bills need to be passed, not filibustering

"It isn't good to use various means to disrupt Legco's normal operation. We need to face this problem."

The four at risk of being thrown out of Legco are: Civic Party's Alvin Yeung Ngok-kiu, Dennis Kwok and Kwok Ka-ki, and Kenneth Leung of the Professionals Guild.

This evening 19 pan-democrats decided to raise the stakes if the four are disqualified.

"We have decided that we will resign en masse without hesitation if the central government decides to push ahead with the disqualification," Democratic Party chairman Wu Chi-wai, co-convenor of the pan-democrat bloc said during a hastily arranged press conference.

"It is to demonstrate our extreme discontent and strong protest against the authorities' ruthless attempt to trample the legislature."

But isn't that exactly falling into Beijing's hands? If they all resign, there will be no opposition in Legco, and the people who elected them in are powerless to oppose this, as public protests are practically impossible now due to the pandemic.  

Beijing wants antics like this to end in Legco

Is this the right course of action for the pan-democrats to take? While filibustering is allowed in Legco, Beijing has had enough of it and wants bills to be passed.

Some don't deserve to be passed, such as the Lantau Tomorrow Vision, where Chief Executive Carrie Lam proposes to solve the housing crisis by building a massive 1,700-hectare manmade island through land reclamation costing HK$500 million (US$68.3 billion) off Lantau.

We will find out in the next day or so what Beijing has to say about the four lawmakers; it may force the hand of pan-democrats to resign en masse. 

Then what? 

Who will represent the interests of Hongkongers?

Sowing Seeds of Confusion

Lam says the public has the wrong understanding of the Basic Law

Hong Kong's alternative reality continues with the government pushing through its version of how the city should be governed versus what people have lived with since July 1, 1997.

Yesterday Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung Yun-hung explained that liberal studies textbooks removed references to Hong Kong having a separation of powers between the executive, legislature and judiciary, and that it would be wrong for textbooks to suggest that it does.

Yeung says textbooks weren't changed due to political pressure

He rejected suggestions that the changes were made due to political censorship, and that publishers were not instructed on what should and should not be included.

But he insisted the content be factually accurate, adding the SAR has never had a separation of powers, neither before nor since the handover.

"As a matter of fact, some of the concepts now included in the textbooks are much more accurate than before," he said.

That raised a lot of eyebrows because this totally goes against what Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma Tao-li said back in 2014:

"The Basic Law sets out clearly the principle of the separation of powers between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, and in quite specific terms, the different roles of the three institutions," he said in a speech.

However, today Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor defended and reiterated Yeung's statements in her weekly media briefing.

The new liberal studies textbooks have amended content

"There is no separation of powers in Hong Kong, so I fully support the remark made by Secretary for Education, and I fully support him in the textbook consultation services launched. In the process we'll be able to better explain the constitutional order in Hong Kong," she said.

"Every so often someone will make this a topic -- whether there is separation of powers in Hong Kong -- they will cite some well-known persons or judges but there is nothing clearer than the Basic Law," Lam said.

Huh???!!

She added people have the wrong understanding of the Basic Law.

"I have carefully looked at what people from the legal sector said; they are mainly talking about the division of labour, of course in terms of trials and the judicial system, they can act independently," Lam said.

Compare the changes to previous liberal studies textbooks

"This is about the division of labour in terms of their functions under the Basic Law; if you look at the relations amongst the three powers, of course they would perform their duties and carry out their functions, I do agree that there are checks and balances, I can give you a lot of examples."

Are we all talking about the same Basic Law?

Legal sector lawmaker Dennis Kwok Wing-hang remarked that if Lam's interpretation of the Basic Law is that there is no separation of powers, then the rulings by the top court are all wrong, and that the Court of Final Appeal should clearly explain this to everyone.

"The courts have always referred to and relied on the separation of powers as the fundamental principle when it comes to dealing with all kinds of cases, concerning the rights of Hong Kong residents, the constitutionality of legislation, and the legality of executive decisions," he said.

"So, for Carrie Lam as the Chief Executive to now come out and say that there's in fact no separation of powers in Hong Kong is a joke," Kwok said. "It's ludicrous, and it's an offense to the common sense of the Hong Kong people."

Kwok says people have not misunderstood the Basic Law

He dismissed Lam's comment that people misunderstood the Basic Law, and accused the government of changing its stance to please Beijing.

Kwok also cited an article written by Basic Law Committee member Albert Chen Hung-yee in 2018, which said the courts in Hong Kong have stated that the separation of powers is "an important and indispensable constitutional principle embedded in the Basic Law".

Lam and her administration are trying to sow seeds of confusion, perhaps in a bid to justify the need for the national security law? To make Hong Kong lawyers unnecessary? To undermine the Basic Law?

But her audience is highly skeptical of what she and her officials are doing. There has still been no authoritative explanation of how the national security law interfaces with the Basic Law, only that it exists and a separate judicial system is set up to deal with cases -- a small number -- we were constantly told.

Chow on the evening she was arrested under the NSL

One of them, Agnes Chow Ting, went to the Tai Po Police Station today about the extension of her bail. She was asked to give a new statement with regards to her arrest under the national security law, but did not disclose more details to the media three hours after she entered the police station.

Chow has not yet been charged with anything, but has to report back to the police station on December 2, a day before her 24th birthday.

She hopes to celebrate her birthday at home...

National Security Law Alarming by the Day

China says new security law will drive HK

Jitters surrounding news about the national security law continue. Everyday there's one bombshell after another and Hongkongers don't have time to even absorb what is going on and the implications, only knowing the situation is getting worse and worse.

Today we found out we will only see the full draft of the law AFTER it is passed by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, possibly this weekend, and just before the 23rd anniversary of the July 1 handover.

Opaque posters showing up in MTR stations

"Beijing is determined to endorse the law as soon as possible. It wants to slash the time for public discussion to reduce the dissenting voices regarding the law," said a source familiar with the central government's line of thinking.

Tam Yiu-chung is Hong Kong's only delegate to the standing committee and he admitted it was unusual not to disclose full details of the law before it was promulgated. Typically some national laws are subject to a 30-day consultation period.

"We had to return the draft after the meeting. I don't have the draft with me either," Tam said, revealing how Beijing was keeping a tight lid on the information.

Tam Yiu-chung won't reveal any details of new law

In the next few days senior government officials related to the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office will speak to some stakeholders, but probably not ones related to the legal profession; they have a lot of questions concerning how this national security law will be implemented and how it will interface with the existing Basic Law.

Pro-democracy lawmakers aren't invited to these meetings either, and even some moderate pro-Beijing politicians too. That's another worrying sign that those who want to defend Hong Kong cannot be at the table.

The new law covers crimes of secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign and external forces that threaten national security. As far as we know, Hong Kong will enforce the law, but a mainland commissioner's office will be set up to supervise and guide the local government.

So does this mean this new office will oversee the office of the chief executive? And we thought a small circle of 1,200 people voting for Hong Kong's leader was hardly democratic.

Dennis Kwok continues to question new law

There is still no information about the penalties involved with these serious charges and it is said that when it comes to cases involving national security, the chief executive will appoint judges to rule on the matter.

How is that even impartial?

Opposition lawmaker Dennis Kwok Wing-hang, who also represents the legal sector, says: "One important element of judicial independence is that the judiciary can decide on its own which judge should be assigned to handle a case," he said. "There is no law in Hong Kong that allows the chief executive to assign an individual judge to handle a specific case."

Hongkongers' fears are growing by the day -- it's like a frog put in water on a stove that's turned on. But it's not a slow boil, but instead it's been ratcheted up to high heat.

National Security Law Sparks Press Freedom Worries

Hong Kong's National Security Law closer to promulgation

The dreaded national security law has been drafted, but "collusion" has been added to the wording that created more fear for democracy activists and lawmakers.

According to Xinhua, the law outlines crimes of secession, subversion of state power, terrorist activities, and collusion with foreign and external forces to endanger national security, as well as lays out their penalties, but no details were given.

Originally collusion was not included in the resolution passed last month by the National People's Congress, but legal experts claim this brings the national security law in line with China's criminal laws.

Kwok worries lawmakers could be caught in law

However, pan-democrats and democracy activists are concerned how collusion will be applied in Hong Kong.

Civic Party lawmaker Dennis Kwok Wing-hang and legal sector representative says: "We frequently come across consuls general, foreign legislators, officials, academics, and journalists. We would talk to them about Hong Kong and they would talk to us about international affairs that are of interest to them. Are they saying that all those would be deemed as colluding with foreign forces, hence [it] would become a criminal activity going forward? That is ridiculous."

Joshua Wong Chi-fung of Demosisto says the collusion charge could force Hong Kong to further cut ties with the rest of the world and punish "all those who urge the government to uphold the city's freedoms and human rights to international standards."

It is not clear when the law will be passed, as it seems very early to pass it this weekend. The next convening of the Standing Committee is in August, but there is talk they may possibly hold a special meeting next month to pass it.

Wong (left) Hong Kong will cut ties with law

Meanwhile, journalists are extremely worried about the upcoming implementation of the law, with 98 percent of 150 surveyed are against the legislation, as they are concerned how the law will impact press freedom and their own welfare.

About 87 percent believed the new law would "seriously affect" press freedom in Hong Kong, and 92 percent were worried about their personal safety.

Chris Yeung, chairman of the Hong Kong Journalists Association warned that journalists could fall into the scope of the national security law.

"Reporters or editors could be liable to those crimes, so those threats to us are not just psychological, but substantive in the sense that they might face those charges," he said.

Yeung also said there were concerns journalists would be worried about covering sensitive topics, comparing it to stepping on landmines.

Yeung says journalists are very worried about law

Nevertheless, despite the pessimistic outlook, only 13 percent of those surveyed said they would leave the industry when the new law came into effect.

Many are probably waiting to see what the law actually says before making up their minds.

Any way you look at it, the national security law is not reassuring...

Another Dark Day in Hong Kong

Lam Cheuk-ting rips up the rules of procedure as lawmakers are ejected

When it comes to the procedures and rules in the Legislative Council, they don't mean anything anymore. It's not about electing people into office, it's about who exerts more brute force.

Presiding member of the House Committee Chan Kin-por was ensconced at the podium before the meeting to elect the chair of the committee began at 11am, and he was surrounded by several Legco security staff who were obviously doing Beijing's bidding to not only prevent pan-democrat lawmakers from getting at him, but also physically restraining them and forcefully ejecting them from the chambers.

Chan Kin-por sits securely behind a security cordon

One of them, Ted Hui Chi-fung tried to break through the cordon of guards surrounding Chan, but he was lifted up by four guards who then dragged him on the ground. Chan even said: "Do not struggle. You are hurting the security guards."

Later sitting on the ground in a corridor with a security guard watching over him, Hui says he felt someone kick him in the chest, which led him to have trouble breathing. He was later checked over in the hospital and diagnosed chest injuries.

Hui said he had never been treated so forcefully in Legco before and pan-democrats believe many of these security guards are former policemen, and that they have lost impartiality.

At one point Democratic Party lawmaker Lam Cheuk-ting stood on a bench as he ripped out pages of the rules of procedure in protest. But really what he was doing literally illustrated what was going on.

It was after 15 of the 20 pan-democrat lawmakers were physically removed from Legco (and not allowed back in) did the voting begin of who would chair the House Committee, and lo and behold, Starry Lee Wai-king "won" the "election" at 40 votes to zero! How about that! A unanimous decision!

Ted Hui being forcefully dragged out of Legco

Civic Party leader Dennis Kwok Wing-hang had presided over the previous meetings as incumbent Lee had to  step aside as she is up for re-election in September. But apparently that rule doesn't mean anything anymore.

So the pro-establishment literally fought for control of the election of who chairs the House Committee, and in this case won handily, if not illegally.

Tanya Chan Suk-chong, convenor of the pro-democracy bloc and the first to be removed from the chamber, said they would not endorse the election results.

"Hong Kong people will never forget what happened today and they will not allow these people to return to Legco," Kwok said, referring to the upcoming elections in September.

Starry Lee got 40 votes and unanimously "won"

The next expected raucous event will be on May 27, with the second reading of the National Anthem bill.

One of Hong Kong's legal institutions is being literally ripped apart before our eyes and we can only hope to right these wrongs in September... if there is still an election...

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?

Clash for Power in the Legislative Council

Eddie Chu Hoi-dick tries to climb the wall to take over Starry Lee's seat

Beijing's belief that it rules over Hong Kong continued today in a shameless attempt by pro-Beijing lawmakers in the Legislative Council to chair a committee by throwing out pan-democrats.

There hasn't been a chair elected, and Civic Party's Dennis Kwok Wing-hang had been presiding over the previous 17 meetings as vice chairman. The DAB's Starry Lee Wai-king is the incumbent House Committee Chairwoman, but will be up for re-election. So who should be in charge?

However, Beijing was displeased with Kwok's filibustering strategy (which is legal), that has delayed the passing of many bills, including the controversial national anthem bill, outlining how Hongkongers should behave when the March of the Volunteers is played.

Starry Lee (in yellow) is protected by Legco security

Even with a majority in Legco, Beijing couldn't understand why the pro-Beijing bloc could not control this committee until it gave its blessing for lawmakers to physically take control, not legally.

With the collusion of Legco security staff, Lee rushed to occupy the podium seat, beating opposition lawmakers to it; the security staff surrounded her and prevented pan-democrats from getting close to her at all.

Underneath her mask one could see she had a smirk on her face.

Then the rest of the afternoon was watching pan-democrats trying to physically unseat her. At one point Eddie Chu Hoi-dick tried to climb the wall to get at Lee, and then Raymond Chan Chi-chuen was dragged to the ground by Kwok Wai-keung for several metres until one of his colleagues stopped him.

Andrew Wan Siu-kin was expelled and injured his back so paramedics had to put him on a stretcher and wheel him out.

Barefooted Raymond Chan is physically removed from Legco

One by one the pan-democrats were removed, some carried out and shouting, "Starry Lee acting beyond her authority!"

Watching these scenes was surreal and sad to watch. What is happening to law and order in Hong Kong? The Legislative Council is one of the institutions where the Basic Law is supposed to be practiced and here all decorum was dumped in favour of power.

The shenanigans today make the pro-Beijing camp look like blind sheep doing Beijing's bidding. Is this how they want to be remembered especially in the upcoming Legislative Council election in September?

Even former Legco president Jasper Tsang Yok-sing says Beijing's tightening grip on Hong Kong will only make its people even more resistant of the central government.

Jasper Tsang says decorum must be followed in Legco

He was being interviewed by Emily Lau Wai-hing just as these scuffles were happening in Legco.

"If everybody still believes that we should try our best to put 'One Country, Two Systems' back on the right track, that we should resolve our differences by working out a way forward which can be acceptable to all stakeholders, then we have to find a way to try to break the vicious cycle," Tsang said. 

"It's so easy when we have arrived at this point for everybody to stick to their position. I can't see any good coming from that."

He also said it was crucial for democracy to be practiced in Legco.

"For the institution to function properly you need a consensus among all the different parties. You need a common purpose to allow the council to work. This is important," he said.

"So the majority always has to understand and respect the wishes of the minority. Of course, the minority should also abide by the rule that the decisions should be taken by the majority," he added.

Does Tsang want to mediate between the two sides?

He sounds like the only level-headed adult in the room at the moment...

Airing Dirty Laundry Without Masks

Police Chief Chris Tang (in black) with Eric Tsang, Alan Tam and Jackie Chan

Hong Kong opposition lawmakers are calling for the resignation of Police Commissioner Chris Tang Ping-keung after a video was leaked of him and other senior officers having a jovial time with a number of well known local celebrities like Alan Tam Wing-lun, Jackie Chan, and Eric Tsang Chi-wai.

The video was taken on Sunday February 16 after a friendly football match and Tang jokes he learned how to be a policeman from watching police movies.

Leaked - Commissioner of Police dining with group of #Hongkong artists inc. Jackie Chan, Alan Tam and Tsang Chi-Wai and soccer players. Some were known for triad links. pic.twitter.com/WbLRMTAAEy

— Galileo Cheng (@galileocheng) February 17, 2020

 

Later Tang chides Tam, saying, "I hate you very much Alan, because my wife loves you more than she loves me. Yet there's nothing I can do because I love you too."
 Many of the celebrities in the video, Chan, Tsang and Tam in particular, are known to be pro-establishment, as they have publicly supported the police at rallies while the anti-government protests were going on last year.

Tang jokes his wife loves Tam more than him

Also attending the banquet were police public relations chiefs Kwok Ka-chuen, Kelvin Kong Wing-cheung, and former spokesman John Tse Chung-chun. In addition, disgraced former police official Frankly Chu was also at the event. He was jailed for a baton attack on an unarmed man during the 2014 Occupy protests.

Guess jail time for a disgraced policeman doesn't mean anything to the top brass?

Opposition lawmakers pounced on the video, accusing police chief Tang of being unfit to lead the police force, and with the fear of the coronavirus in Hong Kong, he ignored government appeals to avoid large gatherings. On top of that he wasn't wearing a mask -- nor was anyone else in the room for that matter.

Democratic Party legislator James To Kun-sun criticized the police officials for defying a government appeal to limit social contact, and said Tang is a bad role model in preventing the coronavirus from spreading in the community.

Lawmaker James To calls for Tang's resignation

He noted that a number of people had been infected by the virus after a hot pot gathering, and if these police officials were infected, they could have passed it onto other government officials as they have been meeting frequently on how to deal with the crisis, thus possibly paralyzing the operations of the entire government.

In the video, Tang also says he learned from Jackie Chan and Alex Fong Chung-sun movies how to behave like a policeman.

Civic Party lawmaker Dennis Kwok Wing-hang who represents the legal sector, slammed Tang's "shoe-shining" remarks as inappropriate and that he's not fit to be the police chief. 

Frankly Chu (second left) was jailed for hitting an unarmed man

While a police spokesman says the dinner was private and did not involve public funds, for viewers of the video it's pretty damning evidence of how close the entertainment industry is with the police. And in light of the coronavirus crisis, to see so many people gathered and not concerned about possibly spreading the virus is just as shocking...

Back to the Sunday March

A fraction of the marchers who came out this afternoon in Wan Chai

This afternoon Hongkongers came out in droves to Victoria Park for a police-sanctioned march from Causeway Bay to Central. It seemed like a lot of people showed up, but organizers say it was 800,000.

To many this was disappointing, as they hoped a big number would make the Hong Kong government to take notice and finally get down from its ivory tower and engage with the protesters to resolve the now six-month long political crisis.

Nevertheless 800,000 is still an impressive number, but will Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor do anything?

A gaggle of Pepe the Frogs and LIHKG pigs hanging out

I had friends marching separately who were stuck in Causeway Bay for hours, unable to move. Meanwhile waiting for the marchers in Central were the police, armed with riot gear and rifles.

Oh by the way did you hear the police arrested 11 people and seized weapons, including a semi-automatic pistol with five ammunition magazines, three of which were loaded, along with three daggers, knives and 105 bullets.

The police claimed "radicals" planned to use the arms to "create chaos" during the anti-government march in the afternoon.

Senior superintendent Steve Li Kwai-wah said: "Intelligence showed that the radical group had taken part in an unlawful assembly on October 20, when they used a lot of petrol bombs to attack Mongkok Police Station.

"Their plan is to use the gun to create chaos during the march later today, including shooting at our officers or turning the blame on officers themselves by hurting the innocent passers-by," he said.

Li said the police had thwarted a crisis, but added the discovery of the weapon was evidence that people should stay alert during the march and rally, organized by the Civil Human Rights Front.

For the most part the protest march was peaceful

On Twitter, people criticized the timing of the news of the arrests and seizure of the weapons just before the march in a bid to scare people from turning up at 3pm in Victoria Park.

However that did not deter them at all and they came out, determined to show the government that they still want all five demands met even though only one, the extradition bill has been withdrawn.

Getting a lot of attention were people wearing large headgear featuring Pepe the frog and pigs from LIHKG. Everyone wanted to take pictures with them.

One marcher wore black, a yellow helmet and gloves and crawled on the ground, apparently to remember those protesters who had to crawl through the sewers at Hong Kong Polytechnic University to escape.

There was also a young boy who played Glory to Hong Kong on his violin over and over. Did he know he'd have to play it so many times?

Musical performance at Hong Kong protest today #GlorytoHK pic.twitter.com/n3ohNlZvp1

— Missy Lao (@missy_lao) December 8, 2019

 

By the time marchers reached Central near the Landmark,  organizers CHRF persuaded people to leave by bus, MTR, or ferry to avoid any confrontations with the police.

There were a few black-clad protesters armed with umbrellas who had a standoff with police near the Hang Seng Bank headquarters, but they decided in the end not to push their luck and slowly retreated. However, riot police seemed trigger happy using pepper spray at the bottom of D'Aguilar Street in Central to disperse people this evening.

A petrol bomb was thrown at the Court of Final Appeal

And the judicial system seems to have been the target of other protesters who threw a petrol bomb at the Court of Final Appeal and High Court. The government has already issued a statement condemning the attacks on Rule of Law.

Legal sector lawmaker Dennis Kwok Wing-hang expressed regret and whatever the motive, one should not commit such acts. But he also blamed the government as the "Number one culprit" by forcing the courts to rule on something essentially political.

So it continues, and while people have voted with their feet again since August, one wonders what the government will do next!