Convicted Protester Defiant at Sentencing

In November 2019 students clashed with police at CUHK

Yesterday five former Chinese University students were jailed for up to 59 months each for rioting and flouting a ban on wearing masks at public gatherings during clashes with police on the university campus in November 2019.

When handing down the sentences to the five at West Kowloon Court, Deputy Judge Kathie Cheung Kit-yee said the defendants must have chosen to remain at the scene either to take part in the violence or abet the criminal acts of their comrades.

She said the lack of evidence over the defendants' level of involvement was no reason to reduce their jail sentences, because all participants in a riot shared the same culpability regardless of their roles in it.

5 were arrested at the bridge near CUHK entrance

"Hong Kong is a place which upholds the rule of law, and a peaceful and tranquil community which shows no tolerance aimless acts that seriously disturb the peace, especially those targeting law enforcement officers," Cheung said.

Three men aged 23 and one aged 20 were all sentenced to 57 months in jail, while one female defendant, Foo Hoi-ching, 23, was handed a 59-month sentence.

The five were arrested near the bridge near CUHK's entrance where protesters hurled objects at police. At the time protesters had just thrown 23 Molotov cocktails and other hard objects at police.   

Foo, a nursing student, remained defiant during mitigation, saying she was not sorry for what she had done and found Cheung's ruling unreasonable.

She wrote a letter to the court that was quickly translated on Twitter by Tsui Lok-man, a former assistant professor at CUHK's School of Journalism and Communication:

Foo says authorities free to interpret the law

"First of all, this letter of plea is not intended to gain the mercy of the judge.

"In asking for the background report, I honestly have no regrets for my actions, and I also have nothing to say to the judge in my plea, because I do not agree with the law itself, nor do I feel I have done anything wrong.

"Simply put, I do not think this is a reasonable sentence. In the eyes of some people, 'the law is the law, and if you break the law, you need to bear responsibility'.

"Others may also believe that the court's ruling proves that the protesters' behaviour is wrong, and their actions in vain. But I believe that authority does not equal correctness.

"First of all, the laws of Hong Kong today are not recognized by its people, nor does society have any space to discuss whether the law is reasonable or not. Second, the Public Order Ordinance is vague by design, to enable the authorities to freely interpret and control it.

She says the law controls people, not for justice

"After 2019, riot cases have increased rapidly, and the courts have given a new interpretation to the definition of a riot, such that increasingly more behaviour is now classified as "illegal behaviour", enabling more and more people to get convicted, and allowing the authorities to further repress dissidents.

"Under a totalitarian regime, the law is only a bloodless but violent tool of the authorities to control the people, and the court is not a place of justice.

"In such a place, only attention is being paid to social order on a surface level, but the root cause of what is tearing the society apart is ignored.

"When the penalties for political cases gets heavier, some defendants will please guilty or appeal to the judge, in order to reduce their sentence, but this does not necessarily mean they agree that the current law is moral or just.

Foo no longer believes in the HK judicial system

"The judge may point out that if you are not satisfied with the ruling, you can appeal. However, I no longer believe in Hong Kong's judicial system, and even the highest courts may not listen to the voices of dissidents.

"I just want to take this opportunity to express my dissatisfaction. If the court hears what I have said, and believes that it is justified in giving me a heavy sentence to make me regret and reflect, then it will be just as it is."

 

法官閣下：

首先表明，我無意以這封求情信來博取法官閣下的憐憫。

我索取背景報告時，我坦言對於自己的行為並無後悔，亦沒有說話要向法官閣下求情，因為我並不認同法例本身，亦不覺得自己有做錯的地方。簡單而言，我不認為這是合理的判決。

在某部分人眼中，示威者「犯法就係犯法，就係要負責」，有些人亦可能認為法庭的裁決證明了示威者的行為是錯誤，是徒勞無功的。但我認為，權威並不代表正確。

首先，香港現時的法律，並非由人民共同認可，社會並沒有空間討論現行法律合理與否。其次，暴動條例的定義本來就模糊不清，以便政權靈活解釋和操控。2019年後暴動案件急升，法庭時而重新詮譯暴動定義，令更多行為被列為「法律不認可的行為」，從而令更多人入罪，令政權得以打壓異見者。

極權下的法律只是政權用以規範人民行為的不流血暴力手段，而法庭也不是一個彰顯公義的地方。這裏只會流於表面地關注社會秩序，並不會著眼社會撕裂的根本原因。

當政治案件的刑罰日益加重，有些被告會選擇認罪或向法官求情，以減輕刑期，但或許並不代表他們認同現行法律具有道德正當性。法官閣下可能會指出，若不滿閣下裁決，大可以申請上訴。然而，本人已不再相信香港的司法制度，再高級的法庭亦不見得會聆聽異見者的聲音。

我只是希望藉此機會表達我的不滿。如果法庭聽畢本人以上的言論，認為可以用重判形式令本人從而後悔及反省，那便悉隨尊便。

 

HK's Press Freedom Under Threat

How much longer can the media report freely in Hong Kong?

Press freedom continues to be eroding at a fast clip in Hong Kong.

On Tuesday it was revealed in a proposal to the Legislative Council it was up to the individuals who own the companies to decide how much information to make available on the Companies Registry, which in turn will be harder for journalists to find information of owners and shareholders to do investigative work.

Lam says journalists shouldn't have privileges

When asked about this new change at a press conference that day, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor seemed to reveal her contempt for the media.

"Personal information should be protected... It should not be disclosed unless there is a crucial need for it to be made public," Lam said.

"I cannot see the reason for journalists to have that privilege. Why should information that is not available to others be accessible to journalists? None of the people in Hong Kong should enjoy such privilege."

And now Hong Kong courts have stopped providing personal details of people standing trial as well as the police officers handling the cases. Information on the defendant's ID card number, name, addresses and date of birth has now been redacted since March 30.

Previously all this information, including the defendant's age, gender, nationality and occupation were readily available on a charge document.

Yeung says judiciary should release info to media

Chris Yeung Kin-hing of the Hong Kong Journalists Association said the decision was not in line "with the principle of open justice the judiciary has promised".

He added: "We are disappointed that the judiciary, which should function independently, seems to have followed the moves by the executive authorities to impose tighter restrictions on access to court information.

"Journalists have used that information for reporting. There have been no cases of misuse of abuses. We urge the judiciary to reconsider their decision and remove the curbs on the press."

And if that wasn't enough, the new director of broadcasting at RTHK is withdrawing all of the broadcaster's entries for various awards.

Government appointed career bureaucrat Patrick Li Pak-chuen assumed the post on March 1 and since then has been reviewing every single program and pulling them off the air if he deems them "one-sided" or have "inaccuracies".

Lam praised him on Tuesday for doing exactly what she asked of him.

Li wants withdrawal of all RTHK award entries

The submissions for these awards were made earlier, and RTHK has been praised locally and internationally for its quality documentaries and shows.

The Human Rights Press Awards revealed that Li asked to withdraw RTHK's entries "in totality", but said it was unable to comply with his request.

"Because the judging process for the Human Rights Press Awards is already underway, and because entries can only be withdrawn by the individual who submitted them, HRPA has not withdrawn RTHK's entries," a post on social media said.

One wonders how Li feels about not being able to have his way, and if RTHK wins, will he prevent its journalists from collecting the award?

Press freedom in Hong Kong is under serious threat -- how can journalists stop its erosion any further?

 

Hong Kong's New Chief Justice

Chief Justice Andrew Cheung making his inaugural address

Hong Kong has a new chief justice, Andrew Cheung Kui-nung, and with the official start of the legal year, he gave an inaugural address stating that the judiciary would continue to follow the rule of law that is enshrined in the Basic Law.

The 59-year-old Cheung succeeded Geoffrey Ma Tao-li who retired last week. Cheung seems to continue in the same vein has his predecessor, as he urged judges to be steadfast in maintaining the rights and freedoms of residents.

Cheung (right) with predecessor Geoffrey Ma

He repeated a few times that the principles of judicial independence and impartiality would remain unchanged during his tenure.

"An independent judiciary is essential to the rule of law in Hong Kong and the due administration of justice," he said.

"It is equally crucial to the public's and business [community's] confidence -- whether local or overseas -- in our judicial system, as well as to the international reputation of Hong Kong as a society governed by the rule of law under the 'one country, two systems' arrangement."

Cheung noted he was coming in at a sensitive time, with the slew of prosecutions related to the anti-government protests in 2019 and the implementation of the national security law last summer.

He said it was inevitable that cases with political undertones would come before him and his colleagues, which would inevitably draw "extreme and harsh" partisan criticism.

Cheung was sworn in today as chief justice

"Whilst the freedom of speech of everyone in society must be fully respected, there must not be any attempt to exert improper pressure on judges in the discharge of their judicial functions," Cheung said. "It has to be stressed that attempts to exert undue pressure on our judges by means such as threats of violence or doxxing are as futile as they are reprehensible."

In addition Cheung advised judges to put aside their personal opinions when they returned to the bench, as the public expected impartial judgments.

While it is reassuring to hear the new chief justice say the judiciary will continue on as it has, how much pressure will it have to try to fend off from stakeholders on all sides as Hong Kong becomes more politicized and divisive?

 

Another Acquittal in Protest Prosecutions

Social worker Hui talks to the media after being acquitted

 

The prosecutions against people charged with various offenses during last year's protests continue, and yet not all of them lead to successful convictions. If anything a number of them are acquitted because of lack of evidence, or in this latest case, police officers are unreliable witnesses.

Yesterday a social worker was acquitted of obstructing police when officers were arresting protesters in September last year. In fact the magistrate found Hui Lai-ming to be "very cooperative" and ordered prosecutors to pay for her legal costs.

The trial was heard at West Kowloon Court

On September 29, 2019, Hui observed police apprehending more than 100 protesters in Admiralty. However, the 52-year-old director of the Hong Kong Social Workers' General Union was accused of pushing Constable Chong Tik-long twice that evening.

Before Hui's trial began last Thursday, her lawyer asked prosecutors to drop the charge of assaulting a police officer, due to new video evidence that showed the social worker did not attack the policeman.

Then prosecutors changed the charge, accusing Hui of wilfully obstructing the officer, which carries a maximum sentence of two years.

But Magistrate May Chung Ming-sun found Chong to be an unreliable witness, citing "major differences" between his evidence and the defence's footage of the incident.

Chong testified Hui appeared very emotional and kept pushing a police cordon in an attempt to get closer to the arrested protesters.

Hui was accused of obstructing a police officer

However, the magistrate found that account unsubstantiated, pointing to footage that showed a peaceful Hui moving away from the scene. Chung said the footage in fact showed the defendant being pushed to the roadside by a group of officers, including Chong.

In addition, the officer fell on the ground later, not because the defendant shoved him, but because he lost his balance during the confusion. He fell a second time when another officer grabbed the defendant's hand and swung it at him accidentally.

"[Chong] fell on both occasions by accident. The defendant had no intention to assault [him]," Chung said. "The defendant had been very cooperative. She had no intention to resist police."

Hui said her acquittal was thanks to friends who put in a lot of effort to find the video evidence to prove her innocence. 

"It was through everybody's effort that we obtained the footage so that I could have a fair trial." she said, adding when the verdict was read out, she started crying, tears of joy.

Many protest-related prosecutions are acquitted

Even after Hui's lawyer told prosecutors it had fresh evidence, they still went ahead with the court case which obviously led to an acquittal and wasted taxpayer money. 

Perhaps what is worse is that these officers who give unreliable testimony are not punished for this; in other jurisdictions this would be perjury.

Is that because going down that route would be tedious? Or with so many cases going through the courts that there isn't time to do more than a slap on the wrist of the officers involved?

In any event the number of acquittals continues to rise, making the Department of Justice look less credible day after day...

Beijing Draws Red Line on Judiciary

Beijing plans reforms in judiciary, will it sustain the pressure?

 

In the past few months, Beijing has targeted the legislature, now with only two opposition lawmakers, and the media has been under pressure, with the likes of Apple Daily raided, its founder under investigation, and RTHK under pressure to conform to become the communications branch of the government.

Now the central government is focusing the judiciary, that reforms need to be made. This was outlined by Zhang Xiaoming, deputy director of the State Council's Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, during the Basic Law 30th Anniversary Legal Summit.

Zhang says patriotism will be added to reforms

"People who love the country and Hong Kong will govern Hong Kong, and people who are anti-China and cause trouble in Hong Kong are out," he said. "This is a political rule under 'one country, two systems', and has become a legal requirement now."

Although Zhang called for the "one country, two systems" governing formula, under which Hong Kong is allowed a high degree of autonomy, to be implemented comprehensively and accurately, he also said the city's constitutional systems must be upgraded, and misconceptions replaced with the correct principles, such as patriotism.

"Hong Kong treasures core values such as democracy, freedom and human rights. But before that, we need to add the term 'patriotism'," he said. "While we must talk of seeking common ground and setting aside differences, we must also insist on bottom lines. The firmer we are on the bottom line, the bigger the room for political tolerance."

This means "Basic Law-related work" needed to be done, such as "oath optimization" and "qualification screening" for civil servants, national education, and judicial reform. He didn't elaborate, though one is curious what "oath optimization" means.

The Basic Law is being changed by Beijing

Under the new security law, civil servants must pledge allegiance to Hong Kong and the Basic Law. Zhang said these moves were aimed to correct "wrongful activities" and cover loopholes.

"Right now is the time to sort out what is true and what is false," Zhang said, adding that people who do not recognize the "motherland" or threaten the country's national security, do not fall in line with the Basic Law.

"Only those who are patriotic should be in place, otherwise they should be removed from the system," Zhang said.

Patriotism will extend to "all walks of life" eventually. It is similar to then US president George Bush's post 9/11 speech, "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."

Teresa Cheng and Carrie Lam at today's event

Is this something Hongkongers are prepared for, young and old, men, women, children, no matter what job you have, from a street cleaner to a tycoon?

If not, you will be removed from the system unless you remove yourself first.

Seven More Acquitted of Rioting

Protesters set spectator stands on fire in Wan Chai last year

 

Seven people were acquitted of rioting during an anti-government protest on August 31 last year because the prosecution did not have enough evidence to prove without a reasonable doubt.

District Judge Sham Siu-man concluded on Saturday there was no evidence showing what the defendants did before their arrests in Wan Chai, and ruled their presence alone was not enough to justify a conviction, even if they were dressed in black and equipped with protective gear.

A boyfriend and girlfriend acquitted of rioting

"Undoubtedly, the situation of the night in question was not something that one would often see in Hong Kong," Sham said. "To some people, it was perhaps a rare and special historical moment. The court does not rule out the possibility that, among those present, there were indeed some who went there hoping to witness everything that was happening."

The judge also sided with the defence in ruling there could be innocent reasons for some of the defendants to try to flee from the scene, as they may have left due to police warnings, a spontaneous reaction to swarms of people, or "out of fear of the police" at the time.

"Their being participants of the riot is not the only reasonable inference," Sham concluded. "The court is of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove the offences beyond reasonable doubt and therefore the court finds all the defendants not guilty."

Police responded with tear gas and water cannon

As soon as the judge announced the acquittals, a round of applause erupted in the courtroom. Supporters outside the courtroom thanked the lawyers and chanted, "There are no rioters."

 On August 31, 2019, there were violent clashes between protesters and police at the intersection of Hennessy Road and Luard Road. Protesters hurled Molotov cocktails at police and set up roadblocks. They even dragged benches from the spectator stands at Southern Playground to the middle of the street and set them on fire.

Police responded with tear gas and water cannon, arresting 142 people that day.

In late September the same court dismissed a charge of rioting against a social worker, Jackie Chen Hung-sau who was also there that night in Wan Chai. She had been accused of rioting when in fact Chen was trying to calm the police down.

Jackie Chen was also acquitted in September

So far the number of acquittals in riot charges is 11. Only one protester to date has been convicted of rioting.

As of October 15, more than 10,100 people have been arrested in relation to the anti-government protests, with 2,285 charged, of which 691 were accused of rioting.

Now that another seven defendants have been acquitted, the Department of Justice should look at its scorecard and see it's not doing that well in terms of convictions. If their evidence is not solid, why are prosecutors wasting everyone's time (and taxpayer dollars) in pushing these cases through the judicial system, only to have them dismissed?

But perhaps these rulings are good -- they are for the record and proof the judiciary, which is under a lot of pressure, is still holding up the rule of law.

 

The Harsh Reality of China's Judicial System

Family members hold hands during this afternoon's press conference

This afternoon a press conference was held by the families of the 12 arrested by mainland authorities on August 23 for illegally entering China when they were trying to flee to Taiwan.

All the family members were hooded, wearing hats, sunglasses and masks, keeping their identities as hidden as possible though speaking out in public.

They did not reveal their own names, but said are desperate to know the whereabouts of their loved ones and if they are OK or not.

The families are appealing for help from both governments

One woman, the mother of Tang Kai-ying, 30, is very worried about her son, as he needs daily doses of drugs to treat his asthma and skin conditions.

"Every night now I can't sleep. I worry that he has no medicine to cope with his condition," she sobbed. "Please let me know whether he is alive or not."

Sadly for these families, this is their harsh introduction to how mainlanders face the legal system in China.

Chinese relatives never get to see their loved ones before trial, they don't necessarily get to hire a lawyer for them -- one is usually appointed to them, and the chances of conviction are very high.

However in Hong Kong, we are used to legal procedures that are followed, such as having access to a lawyer, the right to remain silent, and the right to appeal for bail.

Which is why these families have hired mainland lawyers for their partners or children -- one as young as 16-years-old -- but the Chinese authorities refuse to give them access to their clients.

China's coast guard arrested the 12 for illegal entry August 23

In the case of Li Tze-yin, 29, his mother said the lawyer she appointed was not allowed to meet her son in a detention cente in Shenzhen's Yantian district on Thursday even though they had prepared notarized documents as previously requested.

Officers said Li had already appointed two defense lawyers.

"I'm sure my son won't do this. We have no relatives on the mainland and don't know anyone there," she said.

The families, including the wife of 29-year-old Wong Wai-yin, said efforts in getting help from both the mainland and local governments were met with dead ends.

"I felt we were being treated like balls, kicked between different departments. No concrete help has been given so far," she said, urging Lam's administration to help them in getting the 12 back to the city for trial.

However, the cold reality is that this was not a boating or fishing expedition where they mistakenly drifted into Chinese waters -- they were attempting to flee from Hong Kong to Taiwan and were caught.

Appealing to Carrie Lam won't help the 12 detained in China

As a result, they were arrested by mainland authorities, and according to Chinese law, can be held in detention there for a year.

Their arrest was not reported immediately, but several days later, which one could speculate officials higher up were notified to discuss what to do with the 12 Hongkongers.

It is shocking and sad this has happened to them and their families, being unable to know how they are and to get them the legal representation they think they need.

But they must face a crime on Chinese soil and the judicial system there is very opaque.

Appealing to Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor won't help either -- especially since some of them were try to escape facing trial in Hong Kong. No mercy there.

The families of the 12 can only pray that their loved ones have a strong enough will to survive in isolation, and possibly physical torture.

We have seen cases like this over and over in China, mortified at how those accused and later convicted are treated, violating their human rights. This is a brutal wake-up call that this is happening now to 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.

The Chorus Grows Louder

A sign that not all is well with Hong Kong, visitors please take heed!

The Hong Kong government has practically lost its mandate to govern the city now that there are even louder calls for it to do something, the very least set up an independent inquiry into how the police have handled protesters in the past several weeks, and yet it is silent.

And today even senior civil servants have added their voice in the growing chorus. About 100 administrative officers (AO) have written an open letter to the government, calling for an independent inquiry as this is "the only way that Hong Kong will have the opportunity to reconcile, recover from the trauma and move forward again".

Civil servants call on government for an independent inquiry

There are also 200 executive officers (EO) that include the Department of Justice and the Judiciary are calling for the government to meet the protesters' demands and tonight there is also word that 20 government lawyers in the Department of Justice have also said that top officials' views "absolutely do not represent the political views of civil servants" and that they vowed to protect people's rights.

A few hours ago Chief Secretary Matthew Cheung Kin-chung apologized on behalf of the government for what happened in Yuen Long last Sunday, describing the men dressed in white as "rioters", and urged protesters to demonstrate "peacefully and rationally".

This completely angered the Chief of Police Stephen Lo Wai-chung, who was completely in the dark about Cheung's intention to apologize. He and the police unions feel the government have thrown them under the bus after all they have gone through.

Matthew Cheung apologizes -- without the police knowing

"The government gave us up, after we defended them for nearly two months. we took bullets for the administration," said an inspector who had been working since the first extradition bill protest broke out in early June.

Oops. Cheung was probably only trying to help the situation but didn't think out too clearly how this would have a knock-on effect on how the police would react. The Hong Kong government probably feels even more vulnerable and isolated than ever...

Meanwhile a sit-in at Hong Kong Airport has just ended after 11 hours, where mostly airline staff but also people dressed in black gathered at the arrivals area, occupying both Halls A and B.

Tear gas fired on protesters in Sheung Wan on Sunday night

For a visitor arriving, it must have been a scary sight seeing so many people in black and waving placards like "Welcome to Hong Kong a city run by police and gangsters" or shouting "free Hong Kong", and "Hongkongers add oil!" A Cathay Pacific flight attendant waved to the crowd and everyone erupted in cheers and applause. Other locals coming back from trips immediately sat down to join the massive crowd.

However some mainlanders were completely confused by what they saw, and there was at least one shouting match between one mainlander and a local woman. But overall it seems that the sit-in was peaceful, and this evening hundreds of medical staff also staged a sit-in outside Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Kowloon.

Tomorrow though things will definitely be tense in Yuen Long. The police have banned the protest march, and yet people feel compelled to go there to demonstrate their anger about what happened last weekend.

Thousands sit in at the arrivals hall in the airport today

So to skirt around the issue, many will be "shopping" in Yuen Long, or holding a commemorative rally to remember the late former premier Li Peng -- wouldn't Beijing be pleased to see that?

These protesters will be prepared. They have raided shops to buy goggles, masks and even walking sticks for self defense.

We can only hope people will be safe tomorrow...

Hong Kong's Judiciary Shows up in Force

Some 3,000 lawyers marched to government headquarters at Tamar today

Following the June 4 candlelight vigil that was part memorial and part peaceful protest against the Hong Kong's government to pass the extradition bill, today, some 3,000 lawyers showed up for a silent march to also protest the controversial bill.

They marched from the Court of Final Appeal to the government headquarters in Tamar, Admiralty. Aside from the large numbers of people from the judiciary, there were several notable people who came out and don't usually show up for public protests, such as former High Court deputy judge Ambrose Ho Pui-him, Joseph Tse Wah-yuen, and Nicholas Cooney.

The usual suspects were there -- Martin Lee Chu-ming, Albert Ho Chun-yan, Dennis Kwok Wing-hang, and Alan Leong Kah-kit.

The lawyers are protesting pushing through the extradition bill

Also in the march were some middle and junior level public prosecutors from the Department of Justice. Typically prosecutors of directorial grade are barred from joining events of political nature. Other marchers included legal academics and law students.

Some of the lawyers expressed concerns over the lack of an independent judiciary across the border and argued that under the proposal, local courts only had a limited role to protect the human rights of suspects to be extradited.

Ambrose Ho said there was no guarantee of fair trials on the mainland, urging the government to shelve the bill. "Authorities have a duty to gather general consensus," he said.

Several senior counsel, like former Bar Association chairman Ronny Wong and top criminal lawyer Lawrence Lok Ying-kam, said they may join the large protest of the extradition bill on Sunday afternoon.

When the lawyers arrived in Admiralty, they did not bow their heads like they did in the previous four silent marches they have held since 1997.

Civic Party lawmaker Dennis Kwok explained, "The legal sector will not bow to the government."

He added: "We call on this government to withdraw the extradition bill. This is the clear and almost unanimous belief of the legal profession."

Chris Patten warns the bill would "strike a terrible blow"

Former deputy director of public prosecutions John Reading pointed out that even though the Hong Kong government is rushing to pass the bill so that local resident Chan Tong-kai who murdered his girlfriend in Taiwan can be extradited there to face charges, Taiwan doesn't even want to request his extradition.

"Therefore, what is the rush at this stage?" he said, adding more time was needed to deliberate the bill in order to resolve the polarized views.

Also today former governor Chris Patten chimed in on the extradition bill, issuing a six-minute video message saying: "It doesn't have to happen, it shouldn't happen, and Hong Kong should carry on as a free society under the rule of law."

He said the extradition bill would "strike a terrible blow" to Hong Kong's rule of law, stability, security and its position as a great international trading hub.

However, the Hong Kong government will probably dismiss him as being an outsider interfering in the city's affairs.

Which is why it means a lot to see some 3,000 lawyers come out today to protest the extradition bill with the hopes that maybe the judiciary can talk some sense into the government... rushing it makes it even more suspect...

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...