HK Delegates Told Not to Come to Beijing

Tam was told Friday not to come to Beijing next week

To illustrate how paranoid Beijing is about Covid-19 coming into the Chinese capital, Hong Kong's only delegate to the National People's Congress Standing Committee Tam Yiu-chung has been strongly advised not to come following one untraceable Covid-19 case.

It is that of a 48-year-old cargo handler who was infected on October 8 and the source of the infection is still unknown.

Tam's chances of coming into contact with this person is so small and yet Beijing has told him not to bother coming on Monday for the session from Tuesday to Saturday.

A cargo handler was infected on October 8

Three other NPC delegates from Hong Kong won't be going either: Choy So-yuk, Nicholas Chan Hiu-fung, and Wong Kwan-yu.

"I got a notification from the country's epidemic control office informing me that I would not be allowed to attend the NPC Standing Committee meeting," Tam said in a video clip posted by his party, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong. 

"Recently there was one unknown case in Hong Kong. The mainland attaches great attention to unknown cases," Tam said, adding that no Hong Kong-related items were on the agenda anyway.

Nevertheless, it signals Beijing is not ready to open its borders with the city anytime soon.

"Beijing's prevention and control measures are very stringent. When there are changes to the pandemic situation in Hong Kong, especially when there are cases with untraceable origins, they will be even stricter," Tam said.

Hui says Beijing concerned of untraceable cases

While Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor was able to go to Guangzhou for the opening of the Canton Fair a few days ago, Beijing is even more stringent when it comes to Covid-19. 

Government pandemic adviser David Hui Shu-cheong says measures for meeting top officials is even stricter, as they are worried of untraceable infections coming in.

"I am not too optimistic about the progress of reopening the border between the two sides, given what has happened," Tam said.

Neither are we.

Professional Teachers' Union Under Attack

Teachers protested against the extradition bill in August 2019

 

This morning Chinese state media like Xinhua and People's Daily launched a blistering attack on the Professional Teachers' Union, describing the pro-democracy group as a tumour that must be rooted out.

They blamed the union for events during the 2019 anti-government protests, saying some teachers and students participated in violent and illegal activities, and that it didn't play its part to educate and stop them.

The PTU advocates for better quality education

Xinhua also said in its commentary that the union had participated in filibustering in the Legislative Council, encouraged class boycotts and supported what they called rioters and teachers who are poisoning students' minds.

The articles were published after the PTU dropped its association with the Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements in China, which used to organize the annual June 4 candlelight vigils, and has been accused by pro-Beijing figures of violating the national security law.

However, Xinhua said union's exit was merely a "trick to evade accountability" and added the PTU was "long-hidden dirt in the education system", having engaged in anti-China and anti-Hong Kong activities.

Xinhua said the Hong Kong government "should get rid of the union", calling the task "an unshirkable responsibility".

People's Daily added the PTU had nothing to do with education or professionalism and that it was a malignant tumour that needed to be eradicated.

PTU was founded by Szeto Wah in 1973

The union was founded in 1973 by the late pro-democracy politician Szeto Wah. Its mission is to be politically liberal, socially activist, and defend the legal rights of teachers. It focuses on improving education quality by promoting teachers' professionalism and advocating education policies.

Soon after, the PTU issued a statement to respond to the state media attacks, saying it had always opposed Hong Kong independence and had cared about the country's development ever since the union's establishment. It also refused the outlets' accusations that it was "inciting kids to break the law", during the 2019 protests, saying it cared about students' safety and never invited them to participate in any demonstration.

The union added it would continue to listen and communicate with different sectors, and keep up its education work.

But that defense argument wasn't enough and the Hong Kong Education Bureau severed its ties with the union, and stripped it of its status as a professional group. 

The PTU, which has 95,000 members, expressed disappointment and regret over the decision on Saturday, saying it would be a loss to the whole education sector.

Days ago PTU withdrew from the alliance

A government source hinted the move to cut ties with the union was in the works and believed the PTU withdrawing from the alliance was a bid to relieve some pressure, but it was obviously not enough.

As a result of cutting its ties with the PTU, the bureau will no longer regard the union as a professional body, and will neither engage in any formal or informal meetings with it, nor take its opinions on matters pertaining to the sector. 

In addition, the bureau will temporarily stop looking into any cases referred by the union, and will review its advisory bodies and other groups with an eye to removing members who represented the PTU.

The union said it handled over 3,000 complaints and inquiries from members every year, and that the bureau's decision failed to take into account teachers' interests and welfare.

"The union has a positive impact on safeguarding workers' rights and bettering policies. Even though we have different views, if the bureau decides to cut ties with the union, it will be a loss to the whole industry," it said.

Education Bureau cut ties with the union today

Tam Yiu-chung, Hong Kong's sole delegate to China's National People's Congress, said the central government had disliked the union for some time for its participation in political affairs. 

"Instead of serving as an educational professional body, it's been more like a political group throughout the years," Tam said. "It does not matter whether the union is historical, it's more of whether it's an opposition force."

This should be a warning to other professional bodies in Hong Kong -- dissenting voices will not be tolerated.

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.

Hong Kong's Vaccine Guinea Pig

Tam Yiu-chung speaking with Starry Lee today on Facebook

Possibly the first Hongkonger to get a vaccine is Tam Yiu-chung, the sole local delegate to the National People's Congress Standing Committee. He is currently in Beijing for NPCSC meetings and got the Sinopharm jab there, which so far has 79 percent efficacy.

In a Facebook live broadcast, Tam told Starry Lee Wai-king, chairperson of the pro-Beijing DAB party that he will take the second dose in about two to four weeks' time and he can get it either in the Chinese capital or Shenzhen.

Sinopharm's vaccine has 79 percent effectiveness

Interesting he was able to access Facebook since it's banned on the mainland. 

Nevertheless, Tam reported he felt find so far and didn't have any side effects.

In Beijing he asked the central government to quickly distribute mainland vaccines to Hongkongers. The Hong Kong government has procured vaccines from another Chinese manufacturer, Sinovac (that has only 50 percent effectiveness), BioNTech, and AstraZeneca.

What is the point of rushing vaccines to Hong Kong when a recent survey found only about 37 percent of residents were keen to get the jab?  

A lot of it has to do with distrust in the government, not in the speed at which the vaccines will arrive in Hong Kong. We're in no hurry to get the vaccine yet and would rather wait for more data to come out and be analyzed.

The Sinovac vaccine is only 50 percent effective

So how about Tam passing this word along to the NPC standing committee?

In the meantime we will watch him carefully for any side effects from the vaccine he hasn't reported yet...

Remembering Li Wenliang, the 12 Hongkongers and Jimmy Lai

Tributes pour out for Li who warned about the coronavirus

 

Today is the one year anniversary of Wuhan ophthalmologist Li Wenliang sending a text message in a group chat with his former classmates about a mysterious virus that seemed to be life threatening.

At first he was silenced by the police, and then later he himself contracted the virus and died on February 7. 

Zhang sentenced to four years for her reports

One year later, citizen journalist and lawyer Zhang Zhan was sentenced to four years in prison for "picking quarrels and provoking trouble" when she shot videos of what she saw in Wuhan. She knew she was going into sensitive territory as police and security guards threatened to destroy her phone if she continued filming. Zhang did, revealing how much the government wanted to prevent the truth from coming out.

She is not the only person to give first-hand reports in Wuhan, but also Chen Mei, Cai Wei, Li Zehua, Chen Qiushi, and Fang Bin. They have either been arrested or detained, but we have yet to have any update on their situations.

And look where we are today, with over 82 million cases, almost 1.8 million deaths worldwide.

Meanwhile this morning in Shenzhen, the verdict came down on the 12 Hongkongers who tried to flee to Taiwan by speedboat but ended up being intercepted by the Guangdong coast guard.

The Chinese authorities claimed the trial was open, and yet none of the relatives of the 12 were in the courtroom, nor were diplomats allowed in either. 

Two under aged Hongkongers freed from China

First, two were underage and after pleading guilty, they were handed over to Hong Kong police this morning after spending four months in detention. The pair, Liu Tsz-man and Hoang Lam-phuc, refused to talk to the media about their experience.

Eight of the fugitives face seven months' in prison, but having served four months, it is expected they will be released in March.

However, Tang Kai-yin and Quinn Moon were convicted for organizing the crime of illegally crossing the border. Tang was sentenced to three years, and Quinn -- the only woman in the group -- faces two years in prison.

Reaction from their families and pro-democracy activists was that the sentences were too harsh, while mainland lawyers and pro-Beijing politicians felt the outcome was lenient.

A family-appointed mainland lawyer, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the punishments handed to Tang and Quinn were "too heavy".

The families of the 12 have had no contact

"If their role only involved buying or driving the boat as a group, it shouldn't constitute organizing the crime," he said, in a reference to Tang's role.

Barrister Chow Hang-tung could not understand why the fugitives' offences were categorized as "serious" when they were first-time offenders.

"On the mainland, many illegal border crossing cases were not even treated as criminal cases," she said. "But for a closed-door trial, any sentences is too tough. Everyone knows this wasn't an open and fair trial. This sentences was extremely excessive -- it was meant to deter Hong Kong people from continuing with their [political] movement."

However, Tam Yiu-chung, Hong Kong's sole representative to the National People's Congress Standing Committee said the sentences were understandable.

"Some Hong Kong critics have tried to politicize this, and said mainland authorities will prosecute them on charges related to national security," he said. "But that did not happen... The only message from the court was that if you cross the border illegally, you will bear the consequences. Nothing else."

Judge says Lai is giving his personal opinion

Then in Hong Kong, a High Court judge said Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai Chee-ying has an "arguable" case against a charge of breaking the national security law, in his explanation of why he allowed the tycoon out on bail.

While the prosecution claimed Lai's commentaries proved his collusion with foreign forces by requesting foreign governments impose sanctions on the mainland and Hong Kong, Justice Alex Lee Wan-tang said these purported requests could be seen as mere personal opinion.

The judge added the fraud case against Lai lacked enough evidence to prove he and two co-defendants had intended to deceive the landlord about subleasing space to another firm.

Justice Lee also felt the restrictions on Lai's movements and actions were reasonable, and that he would not flee Hong Kong. 

 

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?

CY Leung's Unrelenting Campaign Against Teachers

Leung Chun-ying is relentless in his bid to punish teachers

 

Former chief executive Leung Chun-ying is adding fuel to the divisive tensions in Hong Kong by publishing the names of 18 teachers who were arrested during last year's anti-government protests on his Facebook page today.

Culled from news reports, the list details as much information possible about the teachers' names, ages, details of their charges and in some cases the names of the schools. 

The Facebook post lists lots of details of teachers

While this information is already publicly available, collating them together seems particularly vindictive, though Leung argues this is the parents' right to know.  

Is that really necessary?

Leung, who is now a vice-chairman of the Chinese People's Consultative Congress, also criticized the Education Bureau, and the Professional Teachers' Union for depriving parents of knowing which teachers are involved in these protests.

Not only that, but his group 803 Funds Limited is seeking a judicial review to force Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung Yun-hung to make public the teachers' details.

Ip Kin-yuen, vice-president of the 100,000 PTU and an opposition lawmaker representing the education sector, on Tuesday slammed Leung's posting of the list as "unnecessary and full of hostility".

"As a public figure, and with the titles that [Leung] carries, how often have we seen people like him target the education sector in such a manner, both in Hong Kong or in mainland China, or even in other parts of the world?" Ip asked.

Leung also criticizes education minister Yeung

"Plus, he said the details he listed have already been made public previously. If they are already in the public domain, why does he need to list them out again?"

However, Wong Kam-leung, chairman of the pro-establishment Federation of Education Workers that has some 35,000 members, said the list made public would not adversely affect schools, but that teachers should act professionally and not let politics override their professionalism.

Nevertheless, Leung lashed out at education minister Yeung on Monday, questioning if teachers were allowed to broach the subject of Hong Kong independence in their classes.

Yeung replied should the topic come up, teachers should guide students to the conclusion that Hong Kong independence was impractical, and added schools should not include discussions about the subject in the curriculum.

Last year's protest by teachers in Central

But pro-Beijing heavyweight Tam Yiu-chung, the only Hong Kong member of the National People's Congress Standing Committee, said Yeung's explanation was "inaccurate", saying that independence should not be touched on at all, as it could put schools in violation of the new national security law. 

Everyone seems to want to dictate how Yeung should do his job. And why isn't his boss Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor defending him? Oh wait she's busy in Shenzhen placating her boss.

Educating young people should be a fulfilling vocation for teachers, but now Leung has made it like possibly stepping on political landmines, something he probably relishes. 

And for the record Leung's two daughters and son studied overseas in Britain.

Defiance Against Further Repression

Saying this slogan is deemed subversive and secessionist

The annual July 1 march was banned by police for coronavirus pandemic reasons, so while there weren't hundreds of thousands of people out in the streets, there were a few thousand who came out to protest against the newly enacted national security law.

One man tried to flee Hong Kong after stabbing a police officer, but was caught as the plane was on the tarmac, while 370 others were arrested.

It remains to be seen if the 10 out of the 370 who were arrested for breaching the national security law will be charged and convicted, but it was enough of a deterrent to prevent most people from coming out.

Tam wonders if the new law isn't harsh enough

However, Tam Yiu-chung, the sole Hong Kong delegate of the National People's Congress Standing Committee that drafted the new law says yesterday's turnout shows the national security law isn't harsh enough.

The pro-Beijing loyalist told a RTHK radio program that if the law, which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment were harsh, no one would dare defy it.

Has Tam underestimated Hongkongers? It seems Beijing has misread the people yet again. While the large numbers didn't come out, there were enough who were willing to test and defy the law because they are very angry that Tam and the Hong Kong government have sacrificed the city without the consent of its residents.

They are worried but they are also defiant. And they will find another way to show their displeasure.

Meanwhile Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma Tao-li issued a rare statement today [Thursday], saying it is the judiciary's mission and constitutional duty to protect its independence and rule of law.

Ma continues to uphold the rule of law

The new law gives the Chief Executive the power to choose a list of judges to handle future cases, which critics say would undermine the judiciary.

Justice Ma stressed judges should only be appointed on the basis of judicial and professional qualities, not politics.

"Judges should not be designated on the basis of any political considerations. This reinforces the principle that in the handling or determination of any legal dispute, only the law and legal principle will be considered," he wrote.

"Judges of foreign nationality are not excluded. They are expressly permitted to be appointed as judges in Hong Kong," Ma said.

He also clarified that appointments of judges under Article 88 of the Basic Law are made by the Chief Executive on the recommendation of the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission, which is chaired by the Chief Justice. "This has always been the position in Hong Kong," the statement said.

It seems Ma is pushing back as much as he can, but will Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor and Beijing listen? How does the new national security law interface with the Basic Law? This question hasn't been clearly addressed yet.

Is this considered art or subversive message?

Yellow shops aren't taking any chances, many of them taking down their "Lennon Walls", a colourful collection of Post-It notes with messages on them, as well as any posters that may be deemed subversive or secessionist.

One restaurant in Shau Kei Wan was warned to remove its Lennon Wall by the police after the force received a complaint about it. If it didn't comply, the restaurant could be prosecuted.

However, in the Hong Kong Museum of Art, there are some whimsical sculptures by Rosanna Li Wei-han that portray everyday life in Hong Kong. One of them features a Lennon Wall, and someone putting up a poster that says. "post no bills".

Does this piece of art need to come down too?

Oh and this just in -- the protest slogan that was chanted regularly during gatherings is now deemed by the government as having a secessionist and subversive meaning...

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.

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...

Plugging Loopholes with More Holes

Hong Kong's constitution is under threat by Beijing

As the National People's Congress moves full speed ahead to pass the national security law that was "tailor-made" for Hong Kong, the city's professional body of barristers says Beijing has no legal authority to enact the law, which it adds has "a number of worrying and problematic features".

HKBA points out holes in the national security law

The Hong Kong Bar Association was also concerned about mainland agencies setting up in the city to safeguard national security, saying it was "entirely unclear" how that arrangement would comply with Article 22 of the Basic Law, that stipulates Beijing departments would not interfere in local affairs.

It adds it was "entirely unclear" how these proposed agencies would operate and be bound by Hong Kong laws, if they would have the power of enforcement and whether such powers would be limited to laws currently in force in the city.

As Martin Lee Chu-ming said in The Guardian, the Hong Kong Bar Association says the national security law does not meet the categories of laws in Annex III of the Basic Law, that are confined to defense, foreign affairs, and matters outside the limits of the city's autonomy.

The Basic Law also says that city itself should enact these laws, not Beijing.

Tam Yiu-chung says people can comment on the new law

In addition, there doesn't seem to be any public consultation on the proposed law, though Tam Yiu-chung, Hong Kong's only representative in the NPC Standing Committee, says there is a website where the public can log in their comments about the national security law.

However, when reporters looked into it, the website only shows the number of comments it has collected, but does not display the comments, or any government feedback.

Ivan Choy Chi-keung, a political academic at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, says the NPC's opinion-collecting mechanism is very outdated.

"It's only a passive way of collecting opinions," he said. "In the colonial period, many consultative committees were set up in Hong Kong, pooling representatives from different groups... In foreign democratic countries, they rely on elections to gain a public mandate."

Antony Dapiran says Beijing is pressing the nuclear option

But we're afraid to tell Choy that we're not in a democratic country, we're a part of China, and it wants us to lose the "one country, two systems" tagline and become further integrated with the mainland starting with this national security law.

Australian author and lawyer Antony Dapiran says Beijing dropping this political bombshell late last week, outlawing secession, subversion, terrorism and foreign influence over the heads of the democratically-elected legislature.

"This is the Nuclear Option: Beijing's ultimate power to impose whatever it wants on Hong Kong, outside and above Hong Kong's constitutional, political and legal structure," he writes in his newsletter.

It is hardly reassuring when Maria Tam Wai-chu vice-chairwoman of the Basic Law Committee says with the new security law, secret agents could come to Hong Kong to investigate cases here with the local police in a "joint effort".

Maria Tam says there's nothing to worry about the new law...

She said police from outside Hong Kong would need "approval" from local authorities to conduct investigations. "And you cannot investigate on your own."

"I'm not worried about anybody being arrested by a police officer from the mainland and then taken back to China for investigation or punishment," Tam added. "It's not, not going to happen."

Errr, right. We'll take your word for it, Maria, like every other pro-Beijing politician in Hong Kong trying to sell the national security law as no big deal...